Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018 03 06 AIS DPW Transportation System Plan ImplementationAGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: 3/6/2018 Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Staff Contact/Dept.: With Lane County (Continued) Emma Newman/DPW Staff Phone No: 541.726.4585 Estimated Time: 45 min S P R I N G F I E L D PLANNING COMMISSION Council Goals: Maintain and Improve Infrastructure and Facilities ITEM TITLE: Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation Project ACTION REQUESTED: Deliberate and make a recommendation to City Council with regards to the proposed TSP Implementation Project materials. ISSUE STATEMENT: The City of Springfield adopted the 2035 Transportation System Plan in 2014. To further implement this Plan, the Planning Commission is considering proposed updates to the Springfield Development Code, adoption of the Conceptual Street Map, and minor changes to the TSP Project List and Figures to further implement the existing, adopted policies. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1: Briefing Memo and Staff Recommendations Attachment 2: Community Feedback Summary 2/6/2018 – 2/13/2018 Attachment 3: Draft Order and Recommendation Exhibit A – Springfield Development Code Amendments Exhibit B – Conceptual Street Map Exhibit C – Local Street Network Map Exhibit D – Transportation System Plan Project List Amendments and Transportation System Plan Figures Amendments Exhibit E – Staff Report and Findings DISCUSSION: City of Springfield Planning Commission reviewed and discussed TSP Implementation Project draft materials on November 21, 2017 during work session. The City and County Planning Commissions met in work session and conducted a joint public hearing on January 23 and February 6, 2018 with an extension of the public record until February 13, 2018. The meeting packets and audio recordings are available on the Planning Commission webpage at http://springfield- or.gov/dpw/PlanningCommission.htm. Attachment 1 Briefing Memo and Staff Recommendation indicates which staff recommended revisions have been incorporated into Attachment 3 and the corresponding exhibits and which revisions will require more time to prepare. Staff recommends starting deliberations on March 6 and having a follow up meeting to complete unfinished business at a later date. In addition to attachments, staff requests Commissioners review public comments received on and since February 6 posted on the project webpage: http://springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm. Attachment 2 Community Feedback Summary supplements summaries provided for and during the January 23 and February 6 meetings. The Springfield and Lane County Planning Commissions will deliberate toward a recommendation, which will be forwarded onto the City Council. COMMUNICATION MEMORANDUM Meeting Date: 3/6/2018 Staff Contact/Dept.: Emma Newman/DPW Staff Phone No: 541.726.4585 S P R I N G F I E L D PLANNING COMMISSION INFORMATION SHARE: There has been a high level of public involvement and a large volume of comments provided in response to the Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation project proposal. Staff has provided a draft recommendation below to help guide the Planning Commission deliberation on March 6, 2018. The recommendation is followed by sections that provide additional details and specific revisions for the different pieces of the project. Staff recommends the Planning Commission follow the sequence of recommendations presented below for deliberation. Staff requests the Planning Commission indicate its level of support for the sections labeled as “(ready for recommendation 3/6/18),” share any additional direction, and continue deliberations at a future meeting before making a full recommendation, including the items still in progress. The March 6 meeting will provide the Planning Commission with an opportunity to provide staff with direction regarding any additional revisions and subsequent findings the Planning Commission would like to see incorporated for the next meeting. This approach will provide time to adequately respond to comments received and incorporate the Planning Commission’s direction for items still in progress. Sections that state (ready for recommendation 3/6/18) have been incorporated into the attached draft materials in Exhibits to Attachment 3. Sections that state (for next meeting) need additional revisions or have not yet been revised and incorporated into the attached draft materials and need additional time to be prepared. Sections that state (information only) provide information that responds to statements and topics discussed during the previous meetings and are for information only. Staff Recommendation Summary Adopt amendments to TSP Project List and Figures with revisions presented below. Adopt Springfield Development Code with revisions presented below. Split Conceptual Street Map into two separate maps and adopt with recommended revisions below. 1. Conceptual Street Map – existing and planned arterials, collectors, and multiuse paths 2. Local Street Network Map – conceptual local streets TSP Project List and Figures Recommended Revisions (ready for recommendation 3/6/18) Staff recommends adopting the TSP Project List and Figures amendments with revisions presented below. See Exhibit D for draft TSP Project List and Figures that incorporates the recommended revisions. Reasoning: Although there was a high volume of public comments, most of the comments referred to planned local streets shown on the 1-12-2018 draft of the Conceptual Street Map. The comments received that related to the TSP Project List and Figures either were commenting on already adopted projects (see section near bottom of briefing memo for more information) or the overall cost and financing of projects. Staff provided responses to these types of comments in the 2/6/2018 Planning Commission ATT1 Memo as well as further below in this memo. Recommended TSP Figure Revisions: Attachment 1, Page 1 of 13 Adjust alignment of PB-32 (McKenzie River Path – McKenzie Levee Path to 52nd Street) to be fully within the Springfield urban growth boundary (UGB) on TSP Figures 4 and 11. Reasoning: Showing Springfield TSP projects within the Springfield UGB will allow for project development and additional Lane County bicycle and pedestrian planning to further determine the project alignment. Remove US-19 (South M Street – South 28th Street to South 26th Street) from the TSP proposed additional projects and rename currently proposed US-20 (Oakdale – Pheasant Blvd to Game Farm Road) as US-19 for list consistency. See Exhibit D (Project List page 7 of 7) for incorporated revision. Reasoning: This project is outside of the current Springfield UGB. Master planning for the UGB expansion area will occur at a later date and this project can be incorporated into the concurrent TSP amendments. End PB-46 (Haul Road Path – South 49th Pl to UGB) and R-47 (Haul Road – Quartz Ave to UGB) at UGB with arrows. Reasoning: This is a typo correction. Instead of showing PB-46 and R-47 extending beyond the UGB, staff recommends ending the projects at the UGB and marking them with arrows to show that they conceptually extend beyond the UGB for regional connectivity. Lane County could provide additional planning for pedestrian and bicycle connections in this area outside of the UGB in their pedestrian and bicycle master planning process that will be starting soon. Add “Project Extent Modified” bubble for R-34 (Centennial Blvd/Industrial Avenue – 28th Street to 35th Street) to Figure 4. Reasoning: This is a typo correction and is for communication purposes only, since the text bubbles are intended to help highlight changes and are not part of the elements being considered for adoption. Figure 4 needs to be updated to match Figure 10 and the project list description for consistency. Springfield Development Code Revisions (recommendation readiness indicated by each item below) Staff recommends adopting Springfield Development Code with revisions presented below. Reasoning: Each recommended revision provided below indicates whether it is ready for recommendation at the 3/6/18 Planning Commission or will be ready for next meeting. The adoption of the proposed Springfield Development Code amendments will help to further implement the Springfield 2035 Transportation System Plan. The sections with proposed amendments that are part of this Springfield Development Code adoption package that received comments are listed under the recommended revisions below. The proposed Springfield Development Code amendments were reviewed, revised, and supported by the project’s Stakeholder Sounding Board during draft development. Sections not listed in the recommended revisions section below either received comments in support and/or did not receive comments in opposition and therefore should be moved forward for recommendation to City Council for adoption. Sections that are included in the amendment package are as follows: Linear Parks / Multi-Use Paths Public Streets and Street Connectivity Standards Minimum Curb-to-Curb Width and Right-of-Way Attachment 1, Page 2 of 13 Block Length and Perimeter Site Access and Driveways Vision Clearance Area Sidewalks and Planter Strips Street Trees Street Lighting Accessways Motor Vehicle Parking Bicycle Parking (including oversized) Definitions Recommended Springfield Development Code Revisions: Continue to evaluate revisions for the arterials section of Table 4.2-1 Minimum Right-of-Way and Curb-to-Curb Widths and approve current table approach that allows various widths based on on-street parking provisions. (arterials for next meeting, parking recommendation ready for 3/6/2018) Reasoning: Based on additional public comments provided by Main Street business and property owners, staff will look at the Minimum Right-of-Way and Curb-to Curb Widths table again and consider additional revisions. Public comment was provided by one household expressing concerns about the possibility of streets with no on street parking (see Ron and Michelle Barth written testimony). However, given that the Stakeholder Sounding Board supported the flexibility provided by indicating the right-of- way and curb-to-curb widths for the various different street layouts (parking both sides, parking one side, no on-street parking), the options provide more context sensitive design flexibility, and more land could be dedicated to additional housing and economically productive uses, staff recommends keeping the “no on-street parking” options in Table 4.2-1. If on-street parking is built and not utilized, the wider street width conditions encourage speeding and unsafe traffic conditions. By providing options for narrower streets, crossing distances for pedestrians could be reduced and safety increased. The recommended revision helps implement TSP Policy 3.3 that states, “Street design standards should be flexible and allow appropriate-sized local, collector, and arterial streets based upon traffic flow, geography, efficient land use, social, economic, and environmental impacts.” It also provides options to further implement TSP Policy 3.3 Action 2 (effects of stormwater) and Action 3 (traffic calming measures). The appropriate standard to use for a given site development is assessed through development review at the time of development. Continue to work on revising the street connectivity standards section of Springfield Development Code (SDC 4.2-105.A.1.a) that correlates with local street approach (see below) until next meeting. (for next meeting) Reasoning: Additional proposed revisions to the street connectivity standards will help ensure we fulfill state planning requirements by providing clear standards. Revisions are also dependent upon direction provided by the Planning Commission about the local street options below. Insert language to ensure coordination with utility providers into street connectivity standards (SDC 4.2-105.A.1.a), multi-use paths (SDC 4.2-150), and accessways (SDC 4.2-160) sections of the code. (for next meeting) Reasoning: Staff met with Springfield Utility Board (SUB) and additional comments were added into the record from SUB requesting that additional language be added to ensure better Attachment 1, Page 3 of 13 coordination with utility providers in these three sections of the code. Additional time is needed to incorporate the additional language. Insert criteria regarding the provision for the continuation or appropriate extension of existing streets into section 5.12-125 of the code. (for next meeting) Reasoning: This revision will help ensure that sites that are partitioned in the UGB outside of the city limits will accommodate future street connections and preserve the planned street network. Split Conceptual Street Map into Two Maps and Adopt with Recommended Revisions Staff recommends splitting the draft Conceptual Street Map into two separate maps for adoption. (ready for recommendation 3/6/18) 1. The first map would be named the “Conceptual Street Map” and would show existing and planned arterials, collectors, and multi-use paths. This Conceptual Street Map would be adopted into the TSP as a new Figure. 2. The second map would be named the “Local Street Network Map” and would reflect the conceptual local streets shown on the draft Conceptual Street Map. This Local Street Network Map would be adopted into the Springfield Development Code. See Exhibits B and C that have incorporated the two map approach and recommended revisions. Reasoning: This approach will provide more clarity as to the purpose of the different elements (i.e. arterials/collectors/multi-use paths vs. local streets) of the draft map, which has created some confusion. The Conceptual Street Map showing the arterials, collectors, and multi-use paths existing and planned projects will fulfill the State Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) Goal 12 requirement (see more below in Conceptual Street Map Recommended Revisions section). ORS 197.307(4)(b)(a) requires the City to approve an application for housing development if it complies with clear and objective standards. OAR 660-008-0015 describes the requirements for clear and objective approval standards for needed housing. Essentially, all housing is now “needed housing.” By adopting the planned local streets (with revision recommended below) as a Local Street Network Map into the Springfield Development Code, the City will provide a more clear and objective route for housing development approval to help fulfill state requirements. The visual representation of the planned local streets makes it easier and clearer to understand the potential connection points for the planned local street network as Springfield develops. The Springfield Development Code (Section 4.2-105.1.a street connectivity standards) provides alternatives from what is visually represented on the map for the alignment of future streets. Through the development review process, the visual representation of a conceptual local street could be adjusted in ways that fulfill the Code requirements. For example, the Osprey Park subdivision conceptual street layout is shown below followed by the actual street network that has been dedicated as right-of-way and built based on adjustments that occurred during the development review process. Attachment 1, Page 4 of 13 Conceptual Street Map Recommended Revisions (ready for recommendation 3/6/18) Staff recommends adopting the draft Conceptual Street Map showing arterials, collectors, and multi-use paths as a new TSP Figure with recommended revisions below. Conceptual local streets are recommended to be shown on a separate map (see local streets section below) that would be adopted into the Springfield Development Code. See Exhibit B that incorporates the two map approach (removed all planned local streets) and recommended revisions (see below). Reasoning: Adopting the Conceptual Street Map showing existing and planned arterials, collectors, and multi-use paths fulfills the TSP content requirements of Oregon state transportation planning rule OAR 660-012-0020(2)(b) as follows: A road plan for a system of arterials and collectors and standards for the layout of local streets and other important non-collector street connections. Functional classifications of roads in regional and local TSP's shall be consistent with functional classifications of roads in state and regional TSPs and shall provide for continuity between adjacent jurisdictions. The standards for the layout of local streets shall provide for safe and convenient bike and pedestrian circulation necessary to carry out OAR 660-012-0045(3)(b). New connections to arterials and state highways shall be consistent with designated access management categories. The intent of this requirement is to provide guidance on the spacing of future extensions and connections along existing and future streets which are needed to provide reasonably direct routes for bicycle and pedestrian travel. The standards for the layout of local streets shall address: (A) Extensions of existing streets (B) Connections to existing or planned streets, including arterials and collectors; and (C) Connections to neighborhood destinations. The Conceptual Street Map demonstrates compliance with this rule since it indicates street classifications (i.e. major/minor arterials and collectors) for planned and proposed projects, which are not indicated in the TSP Project List and Figures. The Conceptual Street Map reflects existing projects that have been already adopted, plus new and modified projects that are being proposed as part of this package, and some additional multi-use path connections to help address bicycle and Attachment 1, Page 5 of 13 pedestrian transportation network deficiencies. This visual representation helps convey the future transportation network and how the lower classification streets feed into the higher classification streets. Adoption of the Conceptual Street Map as described also implements TSP Policy 3.1 that states, “adopt and maintain a Conceptual Street Map” and the direction for adoption of the Conceptual Street Map as described in TSP Chapter 7. Recommended Conceptual Street Map Revisions: Adjust alignment of PB-32 (McKenzie River Path – McKenzie Levee Path to 52nd Street) to be fully within the Springfield UGB. Reasoning: Correlates with change described above under the TSP Project List and Figures recommended revisions section. Add arrow at the northern extent of the S. 26th St planned multi-use path connection. Reasoning: Based on comments received from and a meeting with Springfield Utility Board (SUB), staff recommends showing the multi-use path connection from the existing Middle Fork Path to S. 26th St with a dashed line and upward directional arrow to indicate the conceptual nature of the path connection to the future UGB expansion area. Additional details for the path connection can be further defined through the master planning process for the UGB expansion area, the Lane County pedestrian and bicycle master planning process, and through additional conversations with Willamalane and SUB. Remove planned minor collector along Oakdale Ave from Pheasant Blvd to Game Farm Rd from Conceptual Street Map. Reasoning: Staff recommends maintaining the existing classification of Oakdale Ave from Pheasant Blvd to Game Farm Road as a local street. Staff recommends that the proposed new TSP project US-19, formerly US-20, (Oakdale Ave – Pheasant Blvd and Game Farm Road) still be adopted into the TSP Project List and Figures 4 and 11 to fill sidewalk and bicycle facility gaps, but not be adopted on the Conceptual Street Map as a planned minor collector. Local Street Options to Consider (option choice ready for recommendation 3/6/18, additional public comment response and subsequent recommended revisions for next meeting) Based on public comments as well as statements and questions from Planning Commissioners, staff have thought about the different elements of the draft Conceptual Street Map as presented in the 1-12-2018 version and are proposing to split the required elements (arterials and collectors) apart from the not required elements (visual representation of planned local streets) as two separate maps. Staff has provided the Planning Commission with a variety of options for ways to approach local streets described below. Showing the planned local streets on a map is not required by the state TPR, but showing a planned local street map is one way to help meet the TPR requirements. Having a map that visually and clearly conveys to the community and developers an option for the future street network connections is a helpful customer service and communication tool. Future local streets need to exist and system connectivity is required to fulfill state planning requirements and City policy, but how specific local streets are aligned to provide connectivity is flexible. When a local street connection is implemented, often by development, a more detailed level of analysis is done. This analysis takes into account private developers’ preferences for the layout of their site, current wetland conditions, and other factors that may change over time. The draft map was developed with the planned Attachment 1, Page 6 of 13 local streets shown to provide a starting point that can be adjusted as long as the street connectivity and other development code requirements are met. Staff is seeking direction from the Planning Commission regarding how to respond to the public comments. Staff will prepare the Planning Commission’s final order and recommendation in accordance with direction received. Option 1 (staff recommendation): Adopt Local Street Network Map, showing all planned local streets shown on 1-12-2018 draft Conceptual Street Map, into the Springfield Development Code with recommended revisions below. See Exhibit C that incorporates the two map approach and recommended revisions. The Conceptual Street Map (arterials, collectors, and multi-use paths) have been shown as a faded base layer for context. Reasoning: This approach with the recommended revisions below responds to public comments and additional information received regarding several local street locations while maintaining future local street connections that are necessary according the street connectivity, dead-end street, block length and perimeter standards in the Springfield Development Code as well as Oregon Fire Code requirements. It also provides visual representation of the envisioned Springfield transportation system connectivity, which helps create a clearer, more objective, and efficient development process. People can easily look at a map and understand it, but they typically do not look through the Code in as much detail and piece together the various different requirements to envision a future street network with as much clarity as a visual map provides. Adopting the Local Street Network Map supports reaching housing and development density goals set by the City in accordance with state requirements and ensures that local street connections are built as part of development. This approach furthers implementation of the TSP policies in a timely manner. Recommended Option 1 Local Street Network Map Revisions: Fairhaven Street: Remove the two proposed conceptual local streets connecting with Fairhaven Street. Reasoning: The public comments provided to the Planning Commission highlighted the communal ownership of the green space as well as a reserve strip of property located directly in front of the northern fence. The comments also included a copy of the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for Fairhaven Subdivision that defines the common areas, decision making process, and property rights that would be in effect if a change of use of either piece of property in question were to be considered. Initially the two local conceptual streets were shown to indicate options that would increase connectivity and further implement TSP policies. However, based on the comments received that highlighted the development agreement and reserve strip property, staff recommends removing the two proposed conceptual local streets from the map. Any future development in the area would evaluate connectivity and be reviewed at time of development. Don Street / Lochaven Avenue intersection: Remove local conceptual street connection and add TSP study project S-17 with description “Study street connectivity and traffic calming improvements in I-5/Harlow Rd/Laura St/Hwy 126 area.” Reasoning: Public comments indicated that connecting Don Street and Lochaven Avenue has been brought up previously. Many of the 30 comments received about this topic have expressed concern about speeding and safety if the barrier at Don St and Lochaven Ave were to be removed. This study project would also be able to evaluate and further engage community members with Attachment 1, Page 7 of 13 discussing the potential Clear Vue Ln street connection, which was presented in the staff memo handed out at the February 6, 2018 public hearing. Given that street connectivity in this area has been brought up at least two times in the past, adding the study project described above to conduct a comprehensive study of the neighborhood could address some of the concerns expressed. This study would provide an identified process to help achieve TSP policy goals, including system connectivity, direct travel routes, and safety in the area with additional community involvement to identify potential future connections and projects. The study would be added to the TSP study list, but timing of the study would depend on City resources and priorities. 31st Street / Yolanda Avenue area: Revise planned local streets to align as shown below. Reasoning: This proposed alignment of the planned local streets in the area is based on public comment from Earl McElhany that was provided at the February 6, 2018 public hearing that was supported by a couple of other neighbors in the area. McElhany provided additional information regarding the wetlands in the area and worked with staff to provide an alternative layout of local streets to reduce impacts to wetlands. Staff further revised McElhany’s suggested revision to fulfill the Springfield Development Code block length and other standards. The planned local street alignment shown above also incorporates feedback from Jim Branch, who owns property in the area and has been speaking with City staff to provide input on his preferred depiction of planned local streets in the area. Both Earl McElhany and Jim Branch have confirmed that they prefer the alignment shown above and it responds to the wetland concerns expressed by Paul Bedortha and Brian Jones at the February 6, 2018 public hearing. Aaron Lane: Revise Aaron Lane and 65th St portion of Conceptual Street Map and Local Street Network Map for City Council review based on collaborative meetings with SUB. Reasoning: Staff met with Springfield Utility Board to learn more about the planned water treatment facility at the north end of 65th Street that was raised in their comments. SUB is in the process of reworking the conceptual design for the site in order to fulfill secondary emergency access requirements and provide increased pedestrian and bicycle connectivity to and from Thurston Middle School. This planned alternative neighborhood route would provide a multi-use path and local street option for students traveling to and from school from the neighborhood that does not require using Thurston Road, which has higher traffic volumes and speeds than neighborhood streets. SUB plans to share the revised proposal with staff in March in order to bring the proposed revisions forward in time for City Council consideration. Staff also plans to share the revised proposal when it is available with the property owners adjacent to SUB’s property (Chris Davidson Attachment 1, Page 8 of 13 and Dawn Craig, property owners of 918 66th St) in order to receive additional feedback since they also provided phone comments to staff requesting a shift in alignment and would be affected by the revisions. Local Street Network Map Header: Language in the map header states, “The Springfield Local Street Network Map is adopted as a land use regulation that depicts connection points of planned local streets. The alignment of the planned local streets shown can be adjusted consistent with Springfield Development Code street connectivity standards and other code requirements, see Code Chapter 4.2.” Springfield Development Code consistency edits: Adjust the Springfield Development Code references of “Conceptual Street Map” to include or state “Local Street Network Map” instead where appropriate. Staff Report and Findings: The additional findings that were provided in Attachment 3: Additional Street Supplement of the February 6, 2018 Planning Commission packet that are still relevant have been incorporated into Exhibit E (pp. 43 – 59) to support the recommendation. Findings regarding Kalmia Street have also been added in response to comments received (see Exhibit E pp. 60-61). Option 2: Remove planned local streets from the Conceptual Street Map and defer to Springfield Development Code requirements. Continue refining street connectivity standards section of Springfield Development Code. Reasoning: Responds to public comments wanting planned local streets removed. State planning requirements would be met through code language alone rather than a combination of a map and code language. Although the streets would no longer be shown on a map visually, street connections would be built over time as development occurs based on the Springfield Development Code text requirements to further implement TSP policies and direction. This approach would simplify the TSP Implementation Project approval process but could prompt feelings of distrust among community members later if they perceived a street was “removed,” but it ended up being built. Option 3: Adopt Local Street Network Map into the Springfield Development Code showing planned local streets that received no public comments in opposition, with ordinance, map header, and Springfield Development Code consistency revisions shown below. Option 3a: Slow down and conduct additional neighborhood meetings to further discuss the planned local streets that received opposition and bring a staff recommendation to Planning Commission later this year. Option 3b: Adopt Local Street Network Map with local streets that did not receive opposition and remove all local streets that received comments, including streets that are being revised based on collaborative efforts between staff and stakeholders. Reasoning: Responds to public comments received and provides visual representation of the envisioned Springfield transportation system connectivity, which helps create a clearer, more objective, and efficient development process. Option 3a would take more time and resources. Option 3b could remove local streets that have support with recommended revisions incorporated based on collaborative efforts underway and would be beneficial to represent visually. Recommended Option 2 Local Street Network Map Revisions: Local Street Network Map Header: Language in the map header states, “The Springfield Local Street Network Map is adopted as a land use regulation that depicts connection points of planned local streets. The alignment of the planned local streets shown can be adjusted consistent with Attachment 1, Page 9 of 13 Springfield Development Code street connectivity standards and other code requirements, see Code Chapter 4.2.” Springfield Development Code consistency edits: Adjust the Springfield Development Code references of “Conceptual Street Map” to include or state “Local Street Network Map” instead where appropriate. Locations that received opposition: o Don Street and Lochaven Avenue o Clear Vue Ln o Fairhaven Street o Prescott Lane/Riverview Boulevard/Edgemont Way o A and B Streets west of Water Street o Delrose Drive o 31st Street/Yolanda Ave area resolved through collaboration with property owners o Tyson Park and 35th Street o Kintzley Avenue and Osage Street o Garden Avenue/S. 34th Place/Dondea Street/Kintzley Avenue o Long Ridge Drive o Kalmia Street east of South 42nd Street o Jasper Road/Clearwater area, Mt. Vernon Road and Jasper Road area comment was very general, would need more specific direction if directed to remove the planned local streets from being visually depicted o Thurston Hills Natural Area Trailhead/S. A Street resolved with annexation agreement o Aaron Lane / 65th Street in the process of resolving with SUB Public Comments Regarding Already Adopted Projects (ready for recommendation 3/6/18) Staff recommends not removing already adopted TSP projects and adding additional project development language as shown below. Additional text to add to bottom of the TSP Transportation Project Development section on page 3 that would state the following: The Springfield Development Code states, “The Director shall provide mailed notice to the property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the property being reviewed” for both Type II Applications (Administrative) and Type III Applications (Quasi-Judicial) (Springfield Development Code Section 5.1-130). These code requirements ensure additional community involvement at time of development. See Exhibit D for draft TSP Project List and Figures that have incorporated the recommended revisions for new and modified projects. No adopted projects have been removed. Reasoning: Rather than only showing the proposed amendments, the TSP Project List and Figures and Conceptual Street Map include projects that were previously adopted in 2014 as part of the Springfield 2035 Transportation System Plan. Community members have commented on previously adopted projects. Consideration of removal of already adopted projects was not incorporated into the original direction and scope of this project. The charge of the TSP Implementation project is to further Attachment 1, Page 10 of 13 implement the adopted policies and guidance provided in the TSP. The Springfield 2035 Transportation System Plan existing planned transportation projects were adopted through a public process and there will be more opportunities for public involvement for specific projects at time of project development. If the Planning Commission recommends removal of any already adopted projects, the Planning Commission should also recommend findings to the City Council to justify removing these projects from the TSP under the criteria of approval for a Metro Plan amendment, including compliance with the Transportation Planning Rule, State Planning Goal 12. Removing a project would be a significant undertaking that would likely require additional public notice and may or may not meet the applicable criteria. . Most of the public concerns regarding these already adopted projects pertained to property impacts which are better addressed in a subsequent public involvement process as part of project development (design and construction). The Planning Commission and public expressed concern with the lack of specificity of the projects to determine property impacts and the “broad brush” approach to the TSP. The TPR which outlines the expectations for TSPs distinguishes between Project Planning and Project Development: As described in [the TPR], transportation planning shall be divided into two phases: transportation system planning and transportation project development. Transportation system planning establishes land use controls and a network of facilities and services to meet overall transportation needs. Transportation project development implements the TSP by determining the precise location, alignment, and preliminary design of improvements included in the TSP. (OAR 660-012-0010) Additionally, the TSP currently states on page 3: Transportation project development This Plan includes projects that will support expected growth in the City. While the Plan does not prioritize projects, the City will prioritize investments through annual updates to the Capital Improvement Program. Once the City identifies a project for implementation through the Capital Improvement Program and project development begins, the City will conduct project level planning, public involvement, and engineering to confirm the need, define the project limits and develop a design for the project. As staff affirmed in the public hearing, project development would involve public outreach to include affected properties and consider design alternatives to minimize property impacts while still meeting the transportation needs. Context Sensitive Design (information only) County Planning Commissioner Hledik asked a question regarding context sensitive design during the February 6, 2018 meeting. Page 41 of the Springfield 2035 Transportation System Plan under the “Street design standards” section states: Context sensitive variation: The street sections should vary depending on whether they are located in a mixed use, higher density, or more suburban part of Springfield. Some variation may be allowed, subject to City Traffic engineer and City Engineer approval, depending on case specific issues such as topography and environmental constraints. Attachment 1, Page 11 of 13 Additionally, the City of Springfield plans to do a street standards update project that will consist of a more comprehensive review and update recommendation to provide additional context sensitive design standards direction as a separate, future project. Traffic Calming (information only) City Planning Commissioner Landen asked about traffic calming during the February 6, 2018 meeting. Michael Liebler, City Transportation Planning Engineer, provided additional information regarding the transportation impact analysis process that occurs during development review. In addition to the information provided, the following sections of the TSP provide more information regarding the City’s traffic calming policy direction and approach. Policy 3.2, Action 5 states, “Install shared-roadway facilities, markings, and/or signage for bicyclists along roadways with slow vehicular traffic. On-street pavement marking and traffic calming measures should be considered along such routes. Policy 3.3, Action 3 states, “Incorporate traffic calming measures into street designs and standards where appropriate, considering the needs of emergency services vehicles. Traffic calming measures should reduce vehicular speeds and bypass traffic while encouraging safe bicycle and pedestrian travel.” The Neighborhood Traffic Management section of the TSP (pp. 31 – 32) provides additional information regarding traffic calming, including a variety of design elements that can be used as tools for traffic calming. Additionally, in the Connectivity Guidelines section of the TSP (p. 46) it states, “The City should consider using traffic calming strategies in existing residential areas to minimize traffic impacts.” Community Feedback (information only) Please read Attachment 2: Community Feedback Summary 2/6/2018 – 2/13/2018 and additional public comments received (see project webpage). Below is a high level summary of the total quantity and type of feedback received prior to February 13, 2018 when the Planning Commission project public record was closed. 210 phone calls 142 contacts via email correspondence >100 walk-in conversations with staff at City Hall >100 open house participants 32 Fairhaven Street petition signatures 28 written comments >220 public hearing attendees, 36 public comment testimonies (January 23, 2018 public hearing) 80 public hearing attendees, 26 public comment testimonies (February 6, 2018 public hearing) Decision Making Considerations (information only) The Planning Commission’s role in this legislative land use process is to review the information in the record, including the staff recommendations and public testimony, and make a recommendation to the City Council whether to approve, approve with modifications, or not approve the proposal. 1. Approval. A recommendation to approve the amendments must be consistent with the approval criteria. The Attachment 1, Page 12 of 13 1/23/2018 Planning Commission agenda packet Attachment 7 and the 2/6/2018 Planning Commission agenda packet Attachment 3 contains findings of compliance with the applicable approval criteria. In addition to criteria, the Planning Commission can consider public comments that included opposition to the amendments. Option 2 below provides modifications to the proposed materials to respond to public comments received while still fulfilling the approval criteria and project guidance. 2. Approve with Modifications (staff recommendation). The Planning Commission can recommend revisions to the amendment package. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: Adopt Springfield Development Code with revisions presented above. Adopt TSP Project List and Figures amendments with revisions presented above. Split Conceptual Street Map into two separate maps and adopt with recommended revisions above. 1. Conceptual Street Map – existing and planned arterials, collectors, and multiuse paths 2. Local Street Network Map – planned local streets (local street process option 1) 3. Denial. The Planning Commission can recommend that the City Council not approve amendments for policy reasons not directly related to the criteria of approval as this decision is entirely legislative and not quasi-judicial. The City has an obligation under the TPR to implement the TSP through the adoption of land use regulations, but the City is not bound to adopting any particular set of regulations that meet those policies. There is no requirement to adopt any particular provision in the Springfield Development Code. If the Planning Commission finds that implementation of the TSP can be met without adopting a particular regulation, no specific finding would be needed to remove that regulation from the recommendation to the City Council. Next Steps Staff will incorporate direction from the Planning Commission into the draft TSP Implementation project materials and bring revised versions back to the Planning Commission at a future meeting that is held either jointly with or separately from the Lane County Planning Commission. The date of the future meeting will be determined by staff dependent upon the level of revisions requested, posted to the project and Planning Commission webpages, and emailed or mailed to interested parties. Attachment 1, Page 13 of 13 Attachment 2: Springfield Transportation System Plan Implementation Public Notice Comment Log (Emails, Letters, Phone Calls, Written Public Comment, Walk-In Comments) 2/6/2018 - 2/13/2018 See copies of all emails, letters, open house comment cards, and written public comment submitted on project website at http://springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Citizen Contact Date Staff Contact Date Format of Comment Address First Name Last Name Email PDF Action Taken/Comment or Question Received 2/6/2018 2/8/2018 Letter 1049 Quinalt St Jenny Vinyard Jenny requested hard copies of the materials at the 2/6 Planning Commission public hearing. Staff mailed Jenny copies of the FAQ sheet, conceptual street map, and zoomed in Conceptual Street Map for areas surrounding 1049 Quinalt St and 1263 F St. 2/9/2018 Meeting SUB Jeff Nelson Staff met with Jeff Nelson, Tamara Pitman, Bart McKee, and Greg Miller regarding their testimony submitted in writing at the 1/23/2018 public hearing. SUB is working on a revised site plan concept for the 65th St water treatment facility in order to propose an alternate solution for the draft Conceptual Street Map that would achieve the secondary emergency access and bicycle and pedestrian neighborhood school access. Staff also briefly discussed the other locations and items submitted in the written testimony. 2/9/2018 Meeting 2600 31st St Earl McElhany Staff met with Earl McElhany and discussed the local conceptual street network in the area to the northwest of 31st and Yolanda. Earl is interested in development in the area, with avoiding impacts to the wetland area that is located in the middle. Staff explained that the details would be further decided at time of development, but also explained that adjustments can be proposed to the draft Conceptual Street Map that achieve the various code requirements. Staff provided Earl with a copy of the proposed Springfield Development Code changes, including highlighting street connectivity standards, dead-end street standards, and block length and perimeter standards. 2/14/2018 Meeting 800 Willamette St.Phil Farrington Staff met on-site at the Chambers Island Park property to discuss the proposed project pieces. 2/14/2018 Phone Call Dean Burkhart Staff called Dean back and confirmed his written comments were submitted into the record and the next meeting date. 2/7/2018 2/7/2018 Phone Call 31st St.Earl McElhany RE_ Conceptual street plan - Yolanda & 31st Sts..pdf Requests to meet about the 31st area on the conceptual street map and wetlands. Set a meeting. 2/7/2018 2/7/2018 Phone Call Jenny Vinyard Inquired about the date of the next meeting and whether it was open to the public. 2/7/2018 2/8/2018 Phone Call Leela Trope Attended the 2/6 hearing. Wants to obtain large copies of the conceptual street map. 2/8/2018 2/8/2018 Phone Call 12th and N st Larone Hamlin Asked about whether there are bus changes. Explained they were not part of the package. Talked about development. 2/8/2018 2/8/2018 Phone Call SUB Jeff Nelson Meeting Friday.pdf Asking about meeting content to discuss with staff. Mostly 65th water facility information. 2/9/2018 2/14/2018 Phone Call 1244 Delrose dr.Dean Barkhart Wanted to talk about the conceptual street map and local Delrose connection. Asked about the process and next steps. 2/13/2018 2/13/2018 Walk In 738 Scotts Colen Dr.Holly Harrington Opposed to the removed of theDon/ Lochaven barrier. Dropped off written testimony. 2/16/2018 2/16/2018 Phone Call 2284 Clear Vue Dr.Robert Foster Opposed to the removed of theDon/ Lochaven barrier 2/13/2018 2/15/2018 Phone Call Adam Harter Opposed to the removed of theDon/ Lochaven barrier. Emailed alternative ideas and wanted confirmation of reciept. 2/15/2018 2/16/2018 Phone Call 103 T st.Alice Scheck Asked if there was more to the process. Concerns about the conceptual street map and health of citizens from traffic fumes. 2/6/2018 email 800 Willamette St.Phil Farrington Language proposed in SDC 4.2-105.A.1.a..pdf Clarified specific language and wording within the draft updates. Attachment 2, Page 1 of 4 Attachment 2: Springfield Transportation System Plan Implementation Public Notice Comment Log (Emails, Letters, Phone Calls, Written Public Comment, Walk-In Comments) 2/6/2018 - 2/13/2018 See copies of all emails, letters, open house comment cards, and written public comment submitted on project website at http://springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 2/8/2018 2/8/2018 Walk In/email Mark Re_ Added to Main Street interest list for email updates.pdf Wanted to be added to the Main St. Interest list. 2/7/2018 2/8/2018 meeting 945 S.43rd St Don Cole Springfield TSP & Code Amendments.pdf Opposed to the extension of Kalmia St on the Conceptual Street Map. 2/12/2018 2/13/2018 email 800 Willamette St.Phil Farrington Re_ TSP-new project R-51 1.pdf Inquired about project R-51 2/1/2018 letter Matt Olmos Fairhaven Matt Olmos Written Comment 2.12.2018 .pdf Opposed to the removed of theDon/ Lochaven barrier 2/13/2018 letter 831 West 5th Ave Bree Nicolello RE_ TSP Comments for Public Record ATT written comments 2.13.2018.pdf Supports the TSP code updates, the amendment to table 4.2-1, and streamlining parking requirements. 2/13/2018 letter 250 A St.Jeff Nelson 2018_02_13 SUB Supplemental Comments on Trans Plan.pdf On behalf of SUB: currently opposed to the plan and is requesting clarifying language. Specifically concerned with 65th area on the conceptual street map. 2/9/2018 2/14/2018 email Adam Harter RE_ Sorry, Ms. Newman..pdf Clarified that last email was sent to an incorrect city staff. Staff responded to email. 2/13/2018 letter 2284 Clear Vue Dr.Bob Foster Bob Foster 2.13.2018.pdf Opposed to the removed of theDon/ Lochaven barrier 2/13/2018 letter Robert McPherson Robert McPherson 2.13.2018.pdf Opposed to the TSP. Would like copies of testimony, notes, and board member votes. 2/9/2018 letter 1244 Delrose dr.Dean Burkhart Dean Burkhart Delrose Comment 2.9.2018.pdf Opposed to conceptual street map regarding the Yolanda and Delrose connection. 2/13/2018 letter 551 Mallard Ave.Susan Kelley Susan Kelley Mallard Comment 2.13.2018.pdf Opposed to conceptual street map regarding mallard ave. 2/13/2018 letter 738 Scotts Glen Dr.Holly Harrington Holly Harrington Don-Lochaven Comment 2.13.2018.pdf Opposed to the removed of the Don/ Lochaven barrier 2/12/2018 letter 2284 Clear Vue Lane Robert, Caroline Foster, Stern Robert Foster and Carol Stern Don-Lochaven Letter 2.12.2018.pdf Opposed to the removed of the Don/ Lochaven barrier 2/6/2018 2/14/2018 email 4343 Main St.Craig Corliss RE_ Transportation System Plan1.pdf Opposed to the TSP updates and has concerns regarding Main St. 2/14/2018 2/14/2018 email 250 S. 32nd St.Eric Adams RE_ Thank you!.pdf Thanked staff for meeting. 2/14/2018 2/14/2018 email Bree Nicolello RE_ TSP Comments for Public Record.pdf Asked attached written comments to be included in the public record. 2/13/2018 2/14/2018 email and letter Phil Farrington CDC ltr to PCs re Conceptual Street Map 021318.docx Opposed to the connection proposed between A and B streets and Water St. 2/9/2018 2/15/2018 email 966 Nancy Ave Adam Harter RE_ Barrier at Lochaven and Don Sts..pdf Opposed to the removed of the Don/ Lochaven barrier 2/9/2018 2/15/2018 email Lochaven ave Vicki Fowler RE_ Barricade removal.pdf Opposed to the removed of the Don/ Lochaven barrier 2/9/2018 2/15/2018 email Rebecca Fowler RE_ Barrier removal 1.pdf Opposed to the removed of the Don/ Lochaven barrier 2/9/2018 2/15/2018 email Dustin Fowler RE_ .pdf Opposed to the removed of the Don/ Lochaven barrier 2/9/2018 2/15/2018 email Ryan Fowler RE_ Don street barrier.pdf Opposed to the removed of the Don/ Lochaven barrier 2/9/2018 2/15/2018 email Rebecca Fowler RE_ Barrier on Lochaven and Don.pdf Opposed to the removed of the Don/ Lochaven barrier 2/10/2018 2/15/2018 email Lola Fowler RE_ Lochaven barrier .pdf Opposed to the removed of the Don/ Lochaven barrier 2/9/2018 2/15/2018 email 1049 Nancy Ave Greg Harwood RE_ Gate removal plan at Don and Lochaven.pdf Opposed to the removed of the Don/ Lochaven barrier 2/9/2018 letter 935 Lochaven Ave.Jeffrey Gordon Final Comments Jeffrey Gordon on Don-Lochaven 2.9.2018.docx Opposed to the removed of the Don/ Lochaven barrier 2/9/2018 2/15/2018 email 901 Prescott Ln.Ed Weston RE_ Don St..pdf Opposed to the removed of the Don/ Lochaven barrier 2/9/2018 2/15/2018 email 936 Lochaven ave.Steve Reay RE_ Safety barrier at Don and Lochaven..pdf Opposed to the removed of the Don/ Lochaven barrier 2/11/2018 2/15/2018 email 964 Lochaven Ave.Kathy Hill RE_ Barrier Removal at Don & Lochaven.pdf Opposed to the removed of the Don/ Lochaven barrier 2/12/2018 2/15/2018 email 936 Lochaven Ave.Kathy Reay RE_ Public comment in opposition to the barrier removal at Don St. and Lochaven Ave..pdf Opposed to the removed of the Don/ Lochaven barrier. The Mayor also expressed she is against the removal. 2/11/2018 2/15/2018 email Beverly Park Troy Landers RE_ Barrier.pdf Opposed to the removed of the Don/ Lochaven barrier 2/12/2018 2/15/2018 email 978 Lochaven ave Barbara Cook RE_ barricade at Don Street and Lochaven Avenue.pdf Opposed to the removed of the Don/ Lochaven barrier Attachment 2, Page 2 of 4 Attachment 2: Springfield Transportation System Plan Implementation Public Notice Comment Log (Emails, Letters, Phone Calls, Written Public Comment, Walk-In Comments) 2/6/2018 - 2/13/2018 See copies of all emails, letters, open house comment cards, and written public comment submitted on project website at http://springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 2/13/2018 2/15/2018 email 950 Lochaven Ave Michael Reed RE_ Barrier Removal at Don & Lochaven1.pdf Opposed to the removed of the Don/ Lochaven barrier 2/13/2018 2/21/2018 email 1072 Nancy Avenue Marceil Carmen RE_ Proposed Barrier Removal at Don & Lochaven.pdf Opposed to the removed of the Don/ Lochaven barrier 2/15/2018;2/16/2 018 2/16/2018 email Dani Wright Public Comment - AFTER PC 2.13.2018 RECORD DEADLINE\RE_ Lines on the map design .pdf Question about public record submission. 2/13/2018;2/15/2 018 2/15/2018 email Scotts Glen Dr.Dena Hadley Public Comment - AFTER PC 2.13.2018 RECORD DEADLINE\Re_ Lochaven road block2.pdf Opposed to the removed of the Don/ Lochaven barrier;inquiry about whether the next meeting is open to the public 2/13/2018 2/15/2018 email Jacque Reed Public Comment - AFTER PC 2.13.2018 RECORD DEADLINE\RE_ DON & LOCHAVEN GATE.pdf Opposed to the removed of the Don/ Lochaven barrier Attachment 2, Page 3 of 4 Attachment 2: Springfield Transportation System Plan Implementation Public Notice Walk-In Counts As of 2/26/2018 Date Number of People City Hall re: Public Notice 12/20/2017 9 12/21/2017 11 12/22/2017 13 12/26/2017 2 12/27/2017 3 12/28/2017 1 12/29/2017 0 1/2/2018 2 1/3/2018 5 1/4/2018 5 1/5/2018 3 1/8/2018 2 1/9/2018 6 1/10/2018 3 1/11/2018 3 1/12/2018 2 1/16/2018 4 1/17/2018 2 1/18/2018 1 1/19/2018 2 1/22/2018 4 1/23/2018 2 1/25/2018 5 1/30/2018 2 2/1/2018 1 2/2/2018 1 2/5/2018 3 2/8/2018 2 2/23/2018 1 TOTAL:100 Attachment 2, Page 4 of 4 BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON ORDER AND RECOMMENDATION FOR: AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD 2035 TRANSPORTATION ] 811-17-000165-TYP4 SYSTEM PLAN AND TRANSPORTATION ELEMENTS OF THE ] 811-17-000166-TYP4 SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE. NATURE OF THE PROPOSAL Request that the Springfield Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the Springfield City Council regarding amendments to Springfield Transportation System Plan and sections of the Springfield Development Code as shown in Exhibits A, B, C, and D: Springfield Transportation System Plan: Conceptual Street Map (Exhibit B) Project List and Figures 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, and 11 (Exhibit D) Springfield Development Code (Exhibit A): Chapter 3 Land Use Districts Chapter 4 Development Standards Section 5.12-100 Land Divisions – Partitions and Subdivision Section 6.1-100 Definitions of the Springfield Development Code Local Street Network Map (Exhibit C) Notice was sent to the Department of Land Conservation and Development on December 19, 2017, not less than 35 days prior to the first evidentiary hearing in compliance with OAR 660-018-0020. Timely and sufficient notice of the public hearing has been provided, pursuant to Springfield Development Code Section 5.2-115. On January 23, 2018 and February 6, 2018, the Springfield Planning Commission held a duly noticed joint public hearing with Lane County Planning Commission on the proposed amendments. The Commission left the public record open until 5pm on February 13 and the staff record open until February 20. The public hearing was conducted in accordance with Springfield Development Code Sections 5.2-120 through 5.2-145. After review of the staff report, evidence in the record, written comments, and testimony of those who spoke at the public hearing, the Planning Commission determined that the amendments to the Transportation System Plan and the code amendments meet the approval criteria. CONCLUSION On the basis of the Staff Report and Findings (Exhibit E) and evidence in the record, the proposed code amendments (Exhibits A and C), and Transportation System Plan amendments (Exhibits B and D) meet the approval criteria of Springfield Development Code Section 5.14-135 and Section 5.6-115 with the following changes: 1. Springfield Development Code – insert language to ensure coordination with utility providers into street connectivity standards (SDC 4.2-105.A.1.a), multi-use paths (SDC 4.2-150), and accessways (SDC 4.2-160) sections of the code. 2. Springfield Development Code – incorporate more clear standards into street connectivity standards (SDC 4.2-105.A.1.a) section of the code and add criteria regarding the provision for the continuation or appropriate extension of existing streets that would be applicable for the urban fringe overlay area (SDC 5.12-125 Tentative Plan Criteria). Attachment 3, Page 1 of 164 3. Springfield Development Code – adjust the Springfield Development Code amendments (Exhibit A) references of “Conceptual Street Map” to include or state “Local Street Network Map” instead where appropriate. 4. Exhibit E Staff Report and Findings – add or exchange “Local Street Network Map” for “Conceptual Street Map” where appropriate to reflect the two map approach. ORDER/RECOMMENDATION It is ORDERED by the Springfield Planning Commission that a RECOMMENDATION for approval of 811-17-000165- TYP4 and 811-17-000166-TYP4 as amended be forwarded to the Springfield City Council for consideration at an upcoming public hearing. ____________________________ ____________________ Planning Commission Chairperson Date ATTEST AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Attachment 3, Page 2 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 1 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm PROPOSED SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE (SDC) AMENDMENTS 2/26/2018 Incorporates Table 4.2-1 footnote 5 revisions as presented at 2/6/2018 Planning Commission meeting. Introduction The 2035 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) reflects a community vision for Springfield’s future transportation system by establishing goals, policies, and action items, as well as specific project lists for a 20-year planning horizon. The TSP was adopted by the City Council in 2014 as a functional plan refining the Eugene-Springfield Area Metropolitan Plan (Metro Plan), and fulfilling the City’s requirements under statewide planning Goal 12 (Transportation). TSP policies “provide high-level direction for the City’s policy and decision-makers and for City staff.” Action items “offer direction to the City about steps needed to implement recommended policies.” Appendix I of the TSP provided an outline of sections of the Springfield Development Code (SDC) that may need to be amended to implement the TSP. The following offers for review draft language to amend portions of the SDC furthering TSP implementation. Existing language in relevant sections of the SDC is presented below with proposed new text underlined. Suggested deleted text is shown in strikethrough format. All text changes are highlighted in yellow. Relevant TSP policies and implementation actions applicable to proposed Code changes are cited at the beginning of each Code section, along with explanatory Staff commentary. 1. Proposed Changes to Use Tables (SDC Chapter 3) Relevant TSP Policies/Actions: Policy 1.4: Strive to increase the percentage of bicycle and pedestrian system users by planning, designing, and managing systems to support the needs of diverse populations and types of users, including meeting Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) needs. Action 1: Create a network of bicycle and pedestrian routes and way-finding signage that guides users to destination points. Policy 2.4: Maintain and preserve a safe and efficient bike and pedestrian system in Springfield. Action 1: Coordinate with Willamalane Park and Recreation District to maintain and preserve the off-street path system. Policy 3.2: Expand and enhance Springfield’s bikeway system and provide bicycle system support facilities for both new development and redevelopment/expansion. Action 4: Require bike lanes and paths to connect new development with nearby neighborhood activity centers and major destinations. Connectivity should include connecting bike facilities to each other as well as to major destinations. Action 7: Design bike transportation routes that separate bicycle traffic from large volumes of fast-moving automobile traffic. Exhibit A, Page 1 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 3 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 2 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Policy 3.8: Coordinate the design of Springfield’s transportation system with relevant local, regional, and state agencies. Action 5: Coordinate with Willamalane Park and Recreation District to address bicycle and pedestrian system deficiencies and address new transportation system goals and policies in the Willamalane Park and Recreation District Comprehensive Plan, including providing improved connectivity to parks and open space areas. Staff Commentary: The following revisions add “Linear Parks” to the list of Primary Uses allowed in various zoning districts. Although all three terms are defined in Code, currently “multi-use path” is allowed only in the Glenwood Riverfront Mixed-Use Plan District as a permitted use, and “bike paths” are permitted in the Campus Industrial District only as a secondary use. Staff interpretations of “low impact facilities” have authorized the Middle Fork and Millrace multi-use pathways in several zoning districts, absent clearly having the use enumerated in Code. The additions proposed would legitimize the use, eliminate the need for interpretation, and further the objectives behind the above policies and implementation actions. A definition for “Linear Park” is proposed to be added to Section 6.1-110. Chapter 3 – Land Use Districts 3.2-200 Residential Zoning Districts 3.2-210 Schedule of Use Categories Residential Districts Use Categories/Uses LDR SLR MDR HDR Public and Institutional Uses Churches (Section 4.7-130) D* D* D* D* Educational facilities: public/private elementary/middle schools (Section 4.7-195) 1 to 5 students in a private home (in a 24-hour period) P* P* P* P* 6 or more students (Section 4.7-195) D* D* D* D* Parks: neighborhood and private (Section 4.7-200) P/D* P/D* D* D* Linear Park P P P P ********** 3.2-300 Commercial Zoning Districts 3.2-310 Schedule of Use Categories Commercial Districts Use Categories/Uses NC CC MRC GO Transportation Facilities (Section 4.7-240): Bus terminals N S S N Dock, boat ramps and marinas N D N N Heliports N S S N Helistops N S S N Exhibit A, Page 2 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 4 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 3 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Linear Park P P P P ********** 3.2-400 Industrial Zoning Districts 3.2-410 Schedule of Light-Medium, Heavy and Special Heavy Industrial Use Categories Industrial Districts Use Categories/Uses LMI HI SHI Other Uses Agricultural cultivation of undeveloped land P P P Business, labor, scientific and professional organizations and headquarters P P S Public utility facilities: High impact facilities (Section 4.7-160) Low impact facilities S P S P S S Private/public Elementary and Middle Schools (Section 4.7-195) D* N N Certain Wireless Telecommunications Systems Facilities See Section 4.3-145 See Section 4.3-145 See Section 4.3-145 Linear Park P P P 3.2-415 Schedule of Campus Industrial Use Categories Use Categories/Uses CI District Primary Uses(3) Advertising, marketing, and public relations P Agricultural cultivation is permitted as an interim use on undeveloped land, provided that spraying, dust, odors, and other side effects of the use do not interfere with the operation of permitted uses in the CI District (7) P Blueprinting and photocopying P Business Parks (2) P Call centers that process predominantly inbound telephone calls P Computer systems design services P Corporate headquarters, regional headquarters, and administrative offices (4) P Data processing and related services P E (electronic)-commerce including mail order houses P Educational facilities in business parks including, but not limited to, professional, vocational and business schools; and job training and vocational rehabilitation services P Graphic art services P High Impact Public Facilities (10) P Internet and web site and web search portal (includes services and technical support center) P Laboratories, including medical, dental and x-ray P Large- and medium-scale research and development complexes (6) P Exhibit A, Page 3 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 5 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 4 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Light industrial manufacturing involving the secondary processing of previously prepared materials into components or the assembly of components into finished products (1) P Mail distribution facilities (5) P Management, consulting, and public relations offices P Media productions, including, but not limited to: TV and radio broadcasting studios as well as cable and other program distribution and motion picture production P Linear Park P Non-profit organization office P Printing and publishing P Professional membership and union offices P Satellite telecommunications P Software development (includes services and technical support center) and publishing P Wired or wireless telecommunications carrier offices P ********** 3.2-600 Mixed-Use Zoning Districts 3.2-610 Schedule of Use Categories Mixed-Use Districts Use Categories/Uses MUC MUE MUR Transportation Facilities Heliports N P N Helistops N P N Public transit station, without park and ride lot P P P Linear Park P P P ********** 3.2-700 Public Land and Open Space Zoning District 3.2-710 Schedule of Use Categories Use Categories/Uses PLO District Primary Uses (Section 4.7-203) Parks and Open Spaces Public and private parks and recreational facilities: Linear Park P Neighborhood Parks P Community Parks S Regional Parks S Private areas of greater than 1 acre reserved for open space as part of a cluster or hillside development P Exhibit A, Page 4 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 6 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 5 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Publicly and privately owned golf courses and cemeteries D R.V. parks and campgrounds within a regional park S R.V. parks and campgrounds outside of a regional park and without sanitary sewer service as a temporary use subject to termination when within 1,000 feet of sanitary sewer D ********** 3.2-800 Quarry and Mining Operations Zoning District 3.2-810 Schedule of Use Categories Uses/Use Categories/Uses QMO District Extracting and storing of rocks and minerals, including equipment and materials necessary to carry out these functions P Plants for the processing of minerals from quarry and mining extraction operations P Sale of products generated form the quarrying and mining operation P Activities permitted as part of the reclamation process P Structures and buildings used in conjunction with the extracting and storing of mineral P Parking facilities for employees and customers P Tree felling necessary to prepare a site for mining or as a quarry activity as specified in Section 5.19-100 P Low impact public facilities P High impact public facilities P Certain Wireless Telecommunications Systems Facilities (Section 4.3-145) P Night watchperson’s quarters P Linear Park P ********* 3.3-800 Urbanizable Fringe Overlay District 3.3-815 Schedule of Use Categories when there is an Underlying Residential, Commercial, or Industrial District Underlying Zoning District Use Categoryies/Uses Residential Commercial Industrial Agricultural uses and structures P P P Child care facility (Section 4.7-125) S N N Detached single-family dwellings and manufactured homes (Section 3.3-825) P N N Home Occupations (Section 4.7-165) S S S Neighborhood parks that do not require urban services (Section 4.7- 200) S* N N Partitions (Section 3.3-825E.) P N N Property Line Adjustments P N N High Impact Facilities (Section 4.7-160) S* S* S* Exhibit A, Page 5 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 7 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 6 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Low Impact Facilities P P P Temporary sales/display of produce, the majority of which is grown on the premises (Section 4.8-125) P P P Tree felling (Section 5.19-100) P P P R.V. parks and campgrounds (Section 4.7-220D.) S* N N RV parks and campgrounds that do not require urban services (Section 4.7-220D.) N D* D* Expansion of non-conforming uses existing on the effective date of Lane County’s application (on either the /ICU or I/U District to the property (Section 3.3-825F.) N D* D* Expansion or replacement of lawful uses permitted in the underlying commercial or industrial district (Section 3.3-825F.) N P* P* Expansion or replacement of lawful Discretionary Uses in the underlying zoning district (Section 3.3-825F.) N D* D* New Permitted and Specific Development Standards in the underlying zoning district within existing structures (Section 3.3- 825F.) N P* P* Manufactured home (night watch person) or manufactured unit (office) in an industrial district (Sections 4.7-185 and 4.7-170) N N S* Certain Wireless Telecommunications Systems Facilities See Section 4.3-145 See Section 4.3-145 See Section 4.3-145 Linear Park P P P ********** 3.4-300 Booth-Kelly Mixed-Use Plan District 3.4-320 Schedule of Use Categories Use Categories/Uses BKMU District Transportation Facilities (Section 4.7-240): Bus terminals D Docks and marinas D Heliports S Helistops S Linear Park P Train Stations S ********** 2. Proposed Changes to Development Standards (SDC Chapter 4) Exhibit A, Page 6 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 8 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 7 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Relevant TSP Policies/Actions: Policy 1.2: Consider environmental impacts of the overall transportation system and strive to mitigate negative effects and enhance positive features. Policy 1.4: Strive to increase the percentage of bicycle and pedestrian system users by planning, designing, and managing systems to support the needs of diverse populations and types of users, including meeting Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) needs. Policy 2.1: Manage the roadway system to preserve safety, longevity, and operational efficiency. Action 1: Evaluate, update, and implement access management regulations for new or modified access to the roadway system. Policy 3.2: Expand and enhance Springfield’s bikeway system and provide bicycle system support facilities for both new development and redevelopment/expansion. Action 1: Require bike lanes and/or adjacent paths along new and reconstructed arterial and major collector streets. Action 4: Require bike lanes and paths to connect new development with nearby neighborhood activity centers and major destinations. Connectivity should include connecting bike facilities to each other as well as to major destinations. Action 7: Design bike transportation routes that separate bicycle traffic from large volumes of fast-moving automobile traffic. Policy 3.3: Street design standards should be flexible and allow appropriate-sized local, collector, and arterial streets based upon traffic flow, geography, efficient land use, social, economic and environmental impacts. Action 1: Conduct a comprehensive review and update of Springfield street standards, and develop code to address transportation system deficiencies, adopted goals, and policies. Action 2: Consider effects of stormwater runoff in street design and reduce runoff through environmentally sensitive street designs for new and reconstructed streets. Action 3: Incorporate traffic calming measures into street designs and standards where appropriate, considering the needs of emergency services vehicles. Traffic calming measures should reduce vehicular speeds and bypass traffic while encouraging safe bicycle and pedestrian travel. Action 4: Integrate pedestrian amenities into street designs that create pedestrian refuges and allow safe and continuous pedestrian travel. Policy 3.4: Provide for a continuous transportation network with reasonably direct travel routes to destination points for all modes of travel. Action 1: Design new streets to provide a connected grid network, including alleyways, when technically feasible. Action 2: Construct sidewalks or other suitable pedestrian facilities along local streets and along urban area arterial and collector roadways, except freeways. … Policy 3.5: Address the mobility and safety needs of motorists, transit users, bicyclists, pedestrians, freight, and the needs of emergency vehicles when planning and constructing roadway system improvements. Exhibit A, Page 7 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 9 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 8 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Action 1: Ensure that current design standards address mobility needs and meet ADA standards. Policy 3.7: Provide for a pedestrian environment that supports adjacent land uses and is designed to enhance the safety, comfort, and convenience of walking by providing direct routes and removing barriers when possible. Staff Commentary: The following two sections include clarifying language, updates to plans referenced, and the addition of multi-use paths and bikeways to be consistent with adopted TSP policies and the Willamalane Park and Recreation District Comprehensive Plan. Chapter 4 – Development Standards 4.1-105 Purpose These regulations provide standards for the location, alignment, design and construction of the following public and private infrastructure: transportation and facilities, including streets, sidewalks, multi-use paths, and bikeways (Section 4.2-100); and utilities, including sanitary sewer, stormwater management, electricity, water service and wireless telecommunications systems facilities (Section 4.3-100). 4.1-110 Applicable Documents A. Planning references for public and private improvements. This Section ensures that public and private improvements within the city limits and the City’s urbanizable area are installed and to implement plan policies by providing logical and efficient connected systems serving all lots/parcels, buildings or structures as specified in applicable Metro Plan comprehensive plan policies, including the Transportation System Plan, and Auxiliary Map #1, TransPlan,other functional plans,; the Conceptual Local Street Map,; applicable Refinement Plans, Plan Districts, and City-adopted Master Plans,; the Willamalane Park and Recreation Comprehensive Plan,; and Conceptual Development Plans; this Code,; and any other applicable regulations. B. Construction and design references for public improvements under City jurisdiction. Specifications for the design, construction, reconstruction or repair of streets, alleys, sidewalks, multi-use paths, bikeways, bus turnouts, accessways, curbs, gutters, street lights, traffic signals, street signs, sanitary sewers, stormwater management systems, street trees and planter strips within the public right-of-way, medians, round-abouts and other public improvements within the city limits and the City’s urbanizable area are as specified in this Code, the Springfield Municipal Code, 1997, the Stormwater Management Plan, the City’s Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual, and the Public Works Standard Construction Specifications. The Public Works Director retains the right to modify the cited references on a case-by-case basis without the need of a Variance when existing conditions make their strict application impractical. Exhibit A, Page 8 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 10 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 9 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm C. Construction and design references for other public agency improvements. Each public agency, including but not limited to, the provider of water, electricity, parks and public transit service that have specific construction standards shall submit correspondence during the Development Review process that addresses their construction requirements. D. Construction design references for private improvements. 1. Specifications for private street improvements within the city limits and the City’s urbanizable area shall be approved by the Public Works Director as specified in Section 4.2- 110 and the City’s Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual and any other applicable regulations. 2. Other private improvements within the city limits and the City’s urbanizable area are as specified in this Code and/or approved by the Building Official. E. Americans with Disabilities Act. All applicable public and private improvements shall meet current applicable standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act. ********** Staff Commentary: As part of updating street design standards per TSP Policy 3.3, Action1, revisions are proposed to SDC 4.2-105C., Table 4.2-1. Existing Code makes no reference to certain street or intersection typologies (i.e., multi-way boulevard and roundabout, respectively), which have unique right-of-way and design needs. The proposed Code language allows for engineering standards for roundabouts and multi-way boulevards to be applied in a site-specific manner, rather than “one size fits all” specific numerical standards for minimum right-of-way and street widths in Table 4.2-1. The revision to minimum curb-to- curb width for local streets allows for possible modification of certain standards (i.e., right-of-way width for on-street parking, setback sidewalks, park strip width, etc.) to allow for more efficient use of land, provide more land for housing needs, and greater ability to meet the City’s standards for density, frontage and lot requirements. There are several examples in the City currently that have a 28’-wide curb-to-curb width (i.e. E St east of 58th St). Some streets, such as N St north of Centennial between 13th and Mohawk and Ethan Ct are even narrower at 25 ft wide. The proposed change legitimizes this as a minimum standard, while still accommodating pedestrian movement as called for in the above TSP policies. Some housekeeping text amendments are also included among the changes proposed below. The proposed revision to SDC 4.2-105G. establishes that bonding or other financial surety is a specific requirement prior to issuance of occupancy permits or final plat approval when improvements are required by a development agreement but may not be constructed prior to final plat approval or occupancy. This requirement ensures that required public improvements are completed while providing some developer flexibility for timing/phasing of improvements. The Fairfield Inn & Suites currently under construction in Glenwood is an example of how SDC 4.2-105G may be applied. The hotel is the second of three proposed buildings on the development site. As part of this second phase, the developer proposed Exhibit A, Page 9 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 11 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 10 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm to construct parking that would eventually serve the third hotel. A bond was required to allow this parking lot development to occur at this early stage of development, to ensure that necessary improvements to screen the parking lot can be constructed if the third hotel is not eventually constructed on site. Since roundabouts may be applied as a traffic control device in certain instances – rather than a stop sign or traffic signal – changes to SDC 4.2-105I. are proposed below to update street standards. Language below in a new subsection SDC 4.2-105L. allows the Director to require traffic calming measures, consistent to implement TSP Policy 3.3, Action 3. Other changes included below are housekeeping measures, or revisions to align with language used in the TSP (e.g., “Conceptual Street Map” will be used in all references). Section H. Medians has been added. It was located in the Engineering Design Specifications and Procedures Manual, but should also be located in the Development Code and adopted by ordinance. 4.2-100 Infrastructure Standards – Transportation 4.2-105 Public Streets A. General Provisions. 1. The location, width and grade of streets shall be considered in their relation to existing and planned streets, to topographical conditions, and to the planned use of land to be served by the streets. The street system shall assure efficient traffic circulation that is convenient and safe. Grades, tangents, curves and intersection angles shall be appropriate for the traffic to be carried, considering the terrain. Street location and design shall consider solar access to building sites as may be required to comply with the need for utility locations, and the preservation of natural and historic inventoried resources. Streets shall ordinarily conform to alignments depicted in the Springfield Transportation System Plan TransPlan, the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), applicable Refinement Plans, Plan Districts, Master Plans, Conceptual Development Plans, or the Conceptual Local Street Map. The arrangement of public streets shall provide for the continuation or appropriate projectionextension of existing streets in the surrounding area, unless topographical or other conditions make continuance or conformance to existing street alignments impractical, subject to the requirements of this subsection. a. The following street connection standards shall be used in evaluating street alignment proposals not shown in or different from an adopted plan or that are different from the Conceptual Local Street Map:The location of local streets must conform with the location shown in an adopted plan or on the Conceptual Street Map, subject to the following street connectivity standards and all other applicable provisions of this code. Where the location of a local street is not shown on an adopted plan or on the Conceptual Street Map, local streets must meet the following street connectivity standards: Exhibit A, Page 10 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 12 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 11 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm i. Streets shall be designed tomust efficiently and safely accommodate all modes of travel including emergency fire and medical service vehicles. ii. The layout of streets shallmust not create excessive travel lengths, particularly for pedestrians and cyclists. iii. Streets shallmust be interconnected to provide for the efficient provision of public facilities and for more even dispersal of traffic. iv. New sStreets shall be designed tomust accommodate pedestrians and bicycles safely. v. The street circulation pattern shallmust provide connections to and from activity centers for example, schools, commercial areas, parks, employment centers, and other major attractors. vi. Street design shallalignment must minimize impacts to waterways and wetlands, and shallmust follow slope contours where possible. vii. Street design shall alignment must enhance the efficiency of the regional collector and arterial street system by providing relatively uniform volumes of traffic to provide for optimum dispersal. viii. New connections to arterials and state highways must be consistent with any designated access management category. viii. Streets identified, as future transit routes shall be designed to safely, efficiently and physically accommodate transit vehicles. ix. Streets shall meet all design standards in this Code, the City’s Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual, the Public Works Standard Construction Specifications, and the Springfield Municipal Code. x. Streets shallmust provide logical and efficient extensions of the public street system to adjoining properties. b. When existing conditions make application of the Conceptual Street Map to local streets impractical or inconsistent with accepted transportation planning or engineering principles, the location of a local street may be modified when the proposed location is consistent with the street connectivity standards in Subsection 1.a. above and other applicable provisions of this code. The Director, in consultation with the Public Works Director, may modify the Conceptual Local Street Map when a proposed alignment is consistent with the street connection standards in Subsection 1.a., above or when existing conditions make application of the Conceptual Local Street Map impractical or inconsistent with accepted transportation planning principles. c. Subject to the standards of this code, the location of collectors and arterials must comply with the Transportation System Plan and Conceptual Street Map. 2. All public streets and alleys shall be dedicated and improved as specified in this Code. 3. Development Approval shall not be granted where a proposed application would create unsafe traffic conditions. Exhibit A, Page 11 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 13 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 12 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 4. An applicant may be required to prepare a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) to identify potential traffic impacts from proposed development and needed mitigation measures. A TIS is required if any of the following criteria are met: a. Peak Hour Threshold. If a change in land use or intensification of an existing use generates 100 or more trips during any peak hour as determined by procedures contained in the most recent edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, a TIS shall be performed by a registered professional engineer. b. Average Daily Traffic Threshold. If a change in land use or intensification of an existing use generates 1,000 or more trips per day as determined by procedures contained in the most recent edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, a TIS shall be performed by a registered professional engineer. c. Variance and Known Issues Threshold. The Public Works Director may determine that a TIS is necessary to support a request for a Variance from the transportation provisions of this code or where traffic safety, street capacity, future planned facility, or multimodal concerns may be associated with the proposed development. d. The nature and extent of the TIS scope shall be determined by the Public Works Director based upon a trip distribution and assignment prepared by the Applicant. At a minimum, locations impacted by more than 20 trips during the identified peak hour shall be included in the trip distribution and assignment. e. The Director, with the approval of the Public Works Director, may modify TIS requirements consistent with applicable local and regional transportation system plans and the intent of this Code when existing conditions make their strict application impractical or inconsistent with accepted site planning or transportation planning principles. B. Public sStreets shall be dedicated through the approval of a subdivision plat, or by acceptance of a deed when approved by the City for general traffic circulation, as specified in the Metro Plan or Springfield Comprehensive Plan and the TransPlan Springfield Transportation System Plan. C. Minimum street curb-to-curb widths and minimum Sstreet right-of-way widths are as specified in Table 4.2- 1, unless otherwise indicated in TransPlan the Springfield Transportation System Plan, an applicable Refinement Plan, Plan District, Master Plan, Conceptual Development Plan, the Conceptual Local Street Plan Map, or the adopted bicycle and pedestrian plan;, or where necessary to achieve right-of-way and street alignment; or as needed to meet site-specific engineering standards, including but not limited to requirements for multi-way boulevard and/or modern roundabout designs. Example street layouts meeting minimum street standards are provided in Figures 4.2-B through 4.2-P for illustrative purposes only. These Figures are intended to demonstrate potential street configurations that meet the requirements. Table 4.2-1 Minimum Street Right-of-Way and Curb-to-Curb Width SpecificationsStandards Type of Street Minimum Right-of-Way Minimum Curb-to-Curb Major Arterial 100’ 76’ Minor Arterial 70’ 48’ Exhibit A, Page 12 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 14 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 13 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Collector 60’ 36’ (3) Local Street <15 percent slope (1) 50’ 57’ 36’ >15 percent slope (1) 40’ 28’ (2) <1,200’ length and <1,000 vehicle trips/day 40’ 28’ Cul-de-Sac Bulb 83’ 70’ Alley 20’ 20’ (4) (1) i.e. the average slope of the development area. (2) 20’ streets are allowed with approved parking bays of 8’ x 24’ per vehicle (3) Additional right-of-way may be required to accommodate a center turn lane where significant volumes of left-turn traffic occur (4) Alleys do not have curbs, 20’ is entire paving width Fig. No. Street Classification Right-of- Way (1) Curb-to-Curb Width (1) Travel Lanes Travel Lanes Width Turn Lane Width (2) Bicycle Lanes (3) Planting Strip and Curb (4) Sidewalk 4.2 B-D Major Arterial (5) 100’/92’/ 84’ 76’/69’/60’ 4 12’ 14’ where required 6’ both sides 5’ 7’ both sides 4.2 E-G Minor Arterial (5) 76’/68’/60’ 52’/44’/36’ 2 12’ 14’ where required 6’ both sides 5’ 7’ both sides 4.2 H-J Major Collector 72’/64’/56’ 52’/44’/36’ 2 12’ 14’ where required 6’ both sides 5’ 5’ both sides 4.2 K-M Minor Collector 70’/62’/58’ 50’/42’/34’ 2 11’ 13’ where required 6’ both sides 5’ 5’ both sides 4.2 N-P Local Street <15 percent slope (6) 57’/49’/41’ 36’/28’/20’ 2 10’ N/A Not required 5’ 5’ both sides 4.2 Q-S Local percent slope (6) 48’/40’/32’ 36’/28’/20’ 2 10’ N/A Not required 6” curbs only 5’ both sides Cul-de-sac Bulb 83’ diameter 70’ diameter N/A N/A N/A N/A 5’ around bulb 5’ around bulb Alley 20’ No curbs, 18’ paving width N/A N/A N/A Not required Not required (1) Minimum right-of-way widths and curb-to-curb widths are listed in this order: Streets with parking on both sides of street/Streets with parking on one side of street/Streets with no on-street parking. Where indicated, parking width is 8’ per side of street. Minimum right-of-way widths and curb-to-curb widths listed above do not include additional right-of-way width and curb-to-curb width required to accommodate a center turn lane or center median. (2) When a center turn lane or center median is required to address a significant volume of left-turn traffic or other safety or site-specific engineering concerns, additional right-of-way width and curb-to-curb width is required to accommodate the turn lane and/or center median. Width of the turn lane will be not less than the standard provided in Table 4.2-1 above. (3) Bike lanes on one-way streets must be on the right side of the street, except in the case where a left-side bike lane would cause fewer conflicts, and people riding bicycles can return to the right safely. Exhibit A, Page 13 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 15 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 14 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm (4) The planting strip and curb includes 4.5’ planting strip and 6” curb on both sides of the street, unless otherwise indicated in Table 4.2-1. (5) Arterials that are Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) facilities are not subject to the standards in Table 4.2-1, but must meet ODOT design standards. (6) Slope is the average slope of the development area per the calculation in SDC 3.3-520.A. Minimum curb-to- curb width for local streets includes 6” behind the sidewalk for property pins. D. Functional Classification of Streets. The City’s street system consists of streets that are classified as Major Arterial; Minor Arterial; Major and Minor Collector; and Local, consistent with the Springfield Transportation System Plan (Figure 2) and the Federally Designated Roadway Functional Classification map, contained in the Regional Transportation Plan. Local Streets include all streets not classified as Arterial or Collector streets. E. Dead-End Streets. 1. Dead-end streets shall must terminate in a cul-de-sac bulb, “hammerhead,” or other design that provides an adequate vehicular turn-around areas, Public Works access, and pedestrian and bicycle connections as may be approved by the Public Works Director and the Fire Marshal. 2. A dead-end street, excluding the bulb or other approved vehicular turn-around area, shallmust have a minimum length of 65 feet and shallmust have a maximum length of 400 feet as measured from the nearest curb line of the intersecting street. The right-of-way and paving requirements for cul-de- sacs, including the bulb or other approved vehicular turn-around area, are as specified in Table 4.2-1 of this Code, the Development & Public Works Standard Construction Specifications and the City’s Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual. EXCEPTION: Where streets that are planned to be through streets are partially constructed during phased development, temporary dead-end streets with temporary vehicular turn-around areas will be permitted as specified in the City’s Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual. In this case, the 400-foot maximum length standard shall not apply temporary dead-end street with temporary vehicular turn-around area will have a maximum length of 600 feet as measured from the nearest curb line of the intersecting street. 3. Where there is an existing dead-end street without a turn-around at the time of development that generates additional vehicular trips, the property owner shall provide for a turn-around area to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director and the Fire Marshall. Permitted vehicular turn-around areas may include, but are not limited to hammerheads, and partial cul-de-sac bulbs and private driveways. F. Where necessary to ensure that adequate access will be feasible for the orderly development and/or division of adjacent land or to provide for the transportation and access needs of the City as determined by the Public Works Director, streets shallmust be connected or extended to the appropriate boundary of the property proposed to be developed, partitioned or subdivided. The developer must provide at their expense required signs, markings, and A City standard barricades, and/or signs and markings as may be necessary to adequately warn traffic approaching the end of the street shall be constructed at the developer's expense. Exhibit A, Page 14 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 16 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 15 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm G. Additional Right-of-Way and Street Improvements 1. Whenever an existing street of inadequate width is abutting or within a development area requiring Development Approval, dedication of additional right-of-way is required. Whenever street dedication results in right-of-way that does not connect with the City street system, a deed restriction shall be recorded with the Lane County Recording OfficerDeeds and Records stating that the property shall not be built upon until a fully improved street is constructed to serve the property, and connect with the City street system. 2. Whenever a proposed land division or development will increase traffic on the City street system and the development site has unimproved street frontage, that street frontage shall be fully improved to City specifications in accordance with the following criteria: a. When fully improved street right-of-way abuts the property line of the subject property, street improvements shall be constructed across the entire property frontage. b. When there is a fully improved partial-width street opposite the frontage of the subject property, street improvements shall be constructed across the entire property frontage to provide a full-width street. c. Where property has frontage on unpaved street right-of-way, or where unpaved street right-of-way extends to a side property boundary, the minimum level of street improvements necessary to provide for the safe and efficient movement of vehicles and pedestrians from/to the proposed development shall be constructed. d. Where there is multifamily residential, commercial or industrial development at the intersection of a fully improved street and an unimproved street, if access is taken from the unimproved street, the unimproved street frontage shall be improved. EXCEPTIONS: i. In all other cases of unimproved streets, an Improvement Agreement shall be required as a condition of Development Approval, postponing improvements until the time that a City street improvement project is initiated. ii. In the case of siting accessory structures and other structures not occupied by humans, and changes of use which do not increase parking requirements shall not be considered development which increases traffic on the City street system; full street improvement or an Improvement Agreement shall not be required. 3. In subdivisions, an An approved performance bond or suitable substitute in a sufficient amount to ensure the completion of all required improvements, including the installation of sidewalks and accessways is required prior to occupancy or Final Plat approval may be required when necessary to ensure compliance with a development agreement. 4. Partial-width streets shall be permitted only if both of the following approval criteria are met: a. There is inadequate right-of-way to install a full-width street improvement without changing street alignments; and Exhibit A, Page 15 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 17 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 16 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm b. The partial-width street is adequate to carry anticipated traffic loads until adjacent properties are developed and the street is fully improved. 5. If the developer bears the full cost of dedicating the necessary right-of-way for and/or constructing partial-width street improvements, the developer may retain a reserve strip subject to the following terms and conditions: a. The retention of this strip does not constitute either an express or implied agreement by the City: i. To require an abutting property owner to take access to the street across the reserve strip; ii. To withhold approval of development and building on abutting property unless the abutting property owner takes access to the street across the reserve strip; iii. That it will not or cannot prohibit access from abutting properties to the street across the reserve strip. b. Abutting property owners may purchase access rights across the reserve strip by paying to the developer a prorated share of the developer's costs of the fully improved street. The developer shall submit actual development costs to the City within 6 months following street construction. The cost of purchasing access rights across the reserve strip shall include the actual construction cost per lineal foot, plus inflation, at a rate not to exceed 5 percent per year. It shall not be the City's responsibility to record legal documents. H. Medians 1. General. a. A raised median physically deters vehicles from crossing or entering a median area by way of a raised curb or concrete barrier. Raised medians help avoid crashes caused by crossover traffic, reduce headlight glare distraction, prevent traffic turning left from through lanes, provide refuge for pedestrians crossing the street, and remove turning traffic from through lanes, thereby maintaining efficient and safe traffic flow. Median design and installation must follow the standards in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and AASHTO 6th edition “A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets.” 2. Raised Median Width and Size. a. In addition to the minimum street curb-to-curb and right-of-way standards specified in Section 4.2-105.C, extra right-of-way width for medians may be required to address known safety issues or fulfill safety and operational needs as specified in this Code or identified in an engineering study. b. Elongated Median. i. An elongated median intended to deter turning movements must be a minimum of four (4) feet wide and no less than 150 square feet in area. Where a raised median is required on a facility with an existing median area between opposing travel lanes, the new raised median must be the same width as the existing Exhibit A, Page 16 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 18 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 17 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm median area minus the distance from the edge line striping required in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. In special circumstances where the necessary right-of-way cannot be provided or obtained, medians intended to deter turning movements may be as narrow as two (2) feet wide as approved by the Director. ii. An elongated median intended as a pedestrian refuge must be a minimum of eight (8) feet wide, and no less than 150 square feet in area. In special circumstances where the necessary right-of-way cannot be provided or obtained, pedestrian refuge medians may be as narrow as six (6) feet wide as approved by the Director. 3. Length of a Raised Median. a. Where medians are required to prohibit turns into a specific access, the median must fully cover the access location plus an additional twenty (20) feet on either end. Modifications to median length given site specific needs may be approved by the Director. b. The length of raised medians not intended for pedestrian refuge is determined based on the storage length requirements of a turn lane as determined in a Traffic Impact Study (TIS), or based on safety and operational needs of the street first and access second. HI. Where a development would result in the need to improve a railroad crossing, or an approach to a railroad crossing, the developer shallmust bear the cost for the permitting and improvements. When other property owners are benefited, other equitable means of cost distribution may be approved by the City. IJ. Signs and SignalsTraffic Control Devices. 1. All traffic control signs, traffic signals pavement markings, and street name signs, and other traffic control devices must be in conformance with the U.S. Department of Transportation's Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (including Oregon supplements), the City’s Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual, and the Development & Public Works Standard Construction Specifications and this Code. 2. Unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Director: a. The developer is responsible for providing and installing all traffic control devices and street name signs as necessary to support the proposed development. b. Where a proposed street intersection will result in an immediate need for a traffic signal control device, the developer shall bear the cost for the improvements. When other property owners are benefited, other equitable means of cost distribution may be approved by the City. JK. Bus turn out lanes shallmust be consistent with current standards in the City’s Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual.adopted Lane Transit District construction and design standards and location policies. KL. Street names are assigned as specified in the Springfield Municipal Code, 1997. Exhibit A, Page 17 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 19 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 18 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm LM. The Director may require a developer to install traffic calming measures, including, but not limited to, speed tables and mini-roundabouts to address public safety considerations on roadways. Figure 4.2-B Figure 4.2-C MAJOR ARTERIAL WITH PARKING ON BOTH SIDES Ref. Section 4.2-105.C. ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY MAJOR ARTERIAL WITH PARKING ON ONE SIDE Ref. Section 4.2-105.C. ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY MAJOR ARTERIAL WITH PARKING ON BOTH SIDES Ref. Section 4.2-105.C. ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY Exhibit A, Page 18 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 20 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 19 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Figure 4.2-D Figure 4.2-E MAJOR ARTERIAL WITH NO ON-STREET PARKING Ref. Section 4.2-105.C. ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY MINOR ARTERIAL WITH PARKING ON BOTH SIDES Ref. Section 4.2-105.C. ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY Exhibit A, Page 19 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 21 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 20 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Figure 4.2-F Figure 4.2-G MINOR ARTERIAL WITH PARKING ON ONE SIDE Ref. Section 4.2-105.C. ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY MINOR ARTERIAL WITH NO ON-STREET PARKING Ref. Section 4.2-105.C. ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY Exhibit A, Page 20 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 22 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 21 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Figure 4.2-H Figure 4.2-I MAJOR COLLECTOR WITH PARKING ON BOTH SIDES Ref. Section 4.2-105.C. ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY MAJOR COLLECTOR WITH PARKING ON ONE SIDE Ref. Section 4.2-105.C. ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY Exhibit A, Page 21 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 23 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 22 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Figure 4.2-J Figure 4.2-K MAJOR COLLECTOR WITH NO ON-STREET PARKING Ref. Section 4.2-105.C. ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY MINOR COLLECTOR WITH PARKING ON BOTH SIDES Ref. Section 4.2-105.C. ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY Exhibit A, Page 22 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 24 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 23 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Figure 4.2-L Figure 4.2-M MINOR COLLECTOR WITH PARKING ON ONE SIDE Ref. Section 4.2-105.C. ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY MINOR COLLECTOR WITH NO PARKING Ref. Section 4.2-105.C. ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY Exhibit A, Page 23 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 25 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 24 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Figure 4.2-N Figure 4.2-O LOCAL STREET <15 PERCENT SLOPE WITH PARKING ON ONE SIDE Ref. Section 4.2-105.C. ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY LOCAL STREET <15 PERCENT SLOPE WITH PARKING ON BOTH SIDES Ref. Section 4.2-105.C. ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY Exhibit A, Page 24 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 26 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 25 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Figure 4.2-P Figure 4.2-Q LOCAL STREET <15 PERCENT SLOPE WITH NO ON-STREET PARKING Ref. Section 4.2-105.C. ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY LOCAL STREET 15 PERCENT SLOPE WITH PARKING ON BOTH SIDES Ref. Section 4.2-105.C. ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY Exhibit A, Page 25 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 27 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 26 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Figure 4.2-R Figure 4.2-S 4.2-105 4.2-110 Private Streets A. Private streets are permitted within Mobile Home/Manufactured Dwelling Parks and singularly owned developments of sufficient size to permit interior circulation. Construction specifications for private streets shall be the same as for public streets. WITH PARKING ON ONE SIDE Ref. Section 4.2-105.C. ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY WITH NO ON-STREET PARKING Ref. Section 4.2-105.C. ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY Exhibit A, Page 26 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 28 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 27 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm EXCEPTION: During the Site Plan Review, Partition or Subdivision processes involving private streets, the Public Works Director may allow alternative construction materials and methods to be used. B. The Approval Authority shall require a Homeowner's Agreement or other legal assurances acceptable to the City Attorney for the continued maintenance of private streets. ********** Staff Commentary: Revisions to block length standards in SDC 4.2-115 proposed below help implement Policy 3.4, Action 1 and Policy 3.5, Action 1. The changes further development of an interconnected street grid with safe, efficient movement for all travel modes, including emergency access, and provide more clarity regarding requirements and exceptions to standards. Relevant TSP Policies/Actions: Policy 3.4: Provide for a continuous transportation network with reasonably direct travel routes to destination points for all modes of travel. Action 1: Design new streets to provide a connected grid network, including alleyways, when technically feasible. Policy 3.5: Address the mobility and safety needs of motorists, transit users, bicyclists, pedestrians, freight, and the needs of emergency vehicles when planning and constructing roadway system improvements. Action 1: Ensure that current design standards address mobility needs and meet ADA standards. 4.2-115 Block Length A. Block perimeter for all street classifications must not exceed the following maximums: 1. 1,400 feet in Mixed-Use Districts consistent with standards in Section 3.2-625E.; 2. 2,600 feet in industrial zoning districts; 3. 1,600 feet in other zoning districts. B. Block length for local streets not in industrial zones or that do not serve industrial non-conforming uses mustshall not exceed 600 feet ,or the maximum block length established in an applicable Refinement Plan or Plan District, whichever is less. unless the developer demonstrates that a block length shall be greater than 600 feet because of the existence of one or more of the following conditions: C. Block length for individual local streets in industrial zones or that serve industrial non-conforming uses must not exceed 1,000 feet or the maximum block length established in an applicable adopted Refinement Plan or Plan District, whichever is less. D. EXCEPTION: The Director may authorize a block length or block perimeter that exceeds the applicable maximum specified in this section. In authorizing a block length or block perimeter that exceeds the above maximum lengths, the Director may establish requirements for interim street connectivity and/or pedestrian accessways consistent with standards in Section 4.2-160. Where the extension of a public street into the Exhibit A, Page 27 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 29 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 28 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm proposed development would create a block length or block perimeter that exceeds the applicable maximum exceeding 600 feet, the total block length and block perimeter shallmust be as close to 600 feet as possible to the applicable maximum.The Director will authorize an exception only if the applicant/developer demonstrates that the existence of any of the following conditions justifies the exception: A. 1. Physical conditions preclude a block length of 600 feet or less that cannot be mitigated necessitate a block length or block perimeter that is longer than the applicable maximum. These conditions may include topography or the existence of physical features, including, but not limited to: wetlands, ponds, streams, channels, rivers, lakes, or steep grades, or a resource under protection by State or Federal law; or B. 2. Buildings or other existing development on adjacent lands, including previously subdivided but vacant lots/parcels that physically preclude a block length 600 feet or less necessitate a block length or block perimeter that is longer than the applicable maximum, considering the potential for redevelopment; or 3. Industrial development areas greater than 25 acres pursuant to an adopted master plan. C. Where the extension of a public street into the proposed development would create a block length exceeding 600 feet, the total block length shall be as close to 600 feet as possible. ********** Staff Commentary: Revisions proposed below to site access, driveway, and vision clearance standards in SDC 4.2- 120 and 4.2-130, respectively, implement TSP Policy 2.1 and Action 1, TSP Policy 2.4, and TSP Policy 3.5 by ensuring access while managing the roadway capacity and enhancing safety. These changes are intended to encourage connecting parking lots between sites so that people can move from one to another without needing to enter and exit the main roadway. Some housekeeping revisions are included within proposed Code language below. Relevant TSP Policies/Actions: Policy 2.1: Manage the roadway system to preserve safety, longevity, and operational efficiency. Action 1: Evaluate, update, and implement access management regulations for new and modified access to the roadway system. Policy 2.4: Maintain and preserve a safe and efficient bike and pedestrian system in Springfield. Policy 3.5: Address the mobility and safety needs of motorists, transit users, bicyclists, pedestrians, freight, and the needs of emergency vehicles when planning and constructing roadway system improvements. Action 1: Ensure that current design standards address mobility needs and meet ADA standards. 4.2-120 Site Access and Driveways A. Site Access and Driveways – General. Exhibit A, Page 28 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 30 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 29 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 1. All developed lots/parcels shall have an are entitled to one approved driveway access provided by either direct access to a: a. Public street or alley along the frontage of the property; or b. Private street that connects to the public street system. The private street shall be constructed as specified in Section 4.2-110 (private streets shall not be permitted in lieu of public streets shown on the City’s adopted Conceptual Local Street Plan Map or TransPlan the Springfield Transportation System Plan); or c. Public street by an irrevocable joint use/access easement serving the subject property that has been approved by the City Attorney, where: i. A private driveway is required in lieu of a panhandle driveway, as specified in Section 3.2-220B.; or ii. Combined access for 2 or more lots/parcels is required to reduce the number of driveways along a street, as determined by the Public Works Director. 2. Driveway access to designated State Highways is subject to the provisions of this Section in addition to requirements of the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) Highway Division. Where City and ODOT regulations conflict, the more restrictive regulations shall apply. 3. As determined by the Director, sites with abutting parking areas within the same zoning district may be required to provide driveway connections or pedestrian connections internal to the sites and joint access agreements to provide efficient connectivity and preserve public street functions and capacity. B. Driveways must take access from lower classification streets when development sites abut more than one street and streets are of differing classification as identified in the Springfield Transportation System Plan access to local streets is generally encouraged in preference to access to streets of higher classification. EXCEPTION: Driveway access to or from a higher classification arterial and collector streets may be permitted if no reasonable alternative street access exists or where heavy use of local streets is in-appropriate due to traffic impacts in residential areas. 1. Where a proposed development abuts an existing or proposed arterial or collector street, the development design and off-street improvements shall minimize the traffic conflicts. 2. Additional improvements or design modifications necessary to resolve identified transportation conflicts may be required on a case by case basis. C. Driveways shall be designed to allow safe and efficient vehicular ingress and egress as specified in Tables 4.2- 2 through 4.2-5 and the City’s Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual and the Development & Public Works Standard Construction Specifications. Table 4.2-2 Exhibit A, Page 29 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 31 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 30 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Driveway Design Specifications 1-Way Driveway Width 2-Way Driveway Width Transition Width Driveway Throat Depth Land Use Min./Max. Min./Max. Min./Max. Single-family and Duplexes (3) (4) 12’/16’ 12’/24’(1) 3’/3’ N.A. Multifamily Residential 24’/35’(1) 5’/8’ 18’(2) Commercial/Public Land (4)(5) 12’/18’ 24’/35’(1) 8’/N.A. 18’(2) Industrial (6) 12’/18’ 24’/35’(1) 8’/N.A. 18’(2) (1) Driveway widths and throat depths may be varied if no other reasonable alternative exists to accommodate on-site development needs and traffic safety is not impaired. (2) Measured from the face of curb to the first stall. (3) Single dDriveways serving a single-family orand duplex dwellings shall must be paved for the first 18 feet whenfrom the edge of existing street pavement to the property line and for a distance of at least 18 feet from the property line into the property when abutting a curb and gutterpaved street; these driveways may be graveled surfaced for the remainder of their length. A residential Ddriveways abutting an unimproved gravel streets shall be may have a graveled surface until the abutting street is paved. Permeable pavement is allowed on a residential driveway consistent with standards in the City’s Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual. (4) Off-street vehicle parking is restricted to approved driveways and parking lots, and is not otherwise allowed between the street and primary building, consistent with Springfield Municipal Code 5.002(11). (5) Driveways for commercial uses must be paved for their entire length. (6) Driveways for industrial uses must be paved at least up to any employee or customer parking areas. Table 4.2-3 Curb Return Driveway Design Specifications Driveway Throat Depth Minimum(3) Driveway Width(1) Radius of Curb(2) Land Use Min. Max. Min. Max. Single-family and Duplexes N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. Multifamily Residential 24 feet 30 feet 10 feet 20 feet 60 feet Commercial/ Public Land 24 feet 35 feet 15 feet 35 feet 60 feet Industrial 24 feet 35 feet 15 feet 35 feet 60 feet (1) Wider driveways may be permitted to accommodate traffic demands and/or to improve traffic safety. (2) Greater curb radii may be permitted where high volumes of large trucks are anticipated. Exhibit A, Page 30 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 32 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 31 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm (3) Measured from the face of the curb to the first stall or aisle. Table 4.2-4 Minimum Separations Between a Driveway and the Nearest Intersection Curb Return on the Same Side of the Street.(1) Street Type Land Use Arterial Collector Local Single-family Residential and Duplexes 200 feet 50 feet 30 feet Multifamily Residential 200 feet 100 feet 75 feet Commercial/ Public Land 200 feet 100 feet 75 feet Industrial 200 feet 200 feet 150 feet (1) Each category of street is considered separately. Distances may be reduced in the following circumstances: (a) Access is from a one-way street. (b) The driveway is marked for "right-in-right-out only." (c) The driveway is marked "exit only" and is designed to prevent left turns. (d) In cases where an existing lot/parcel and/or use make compliance with these specifications unreasonable, a new driveway or an existing driveway required to be relocated by this Code shall be placed at the furthest point from the intersection curb return, considering both safety and internal circulation requirements of the development. ********** 4.2-130 Vision Clearance Area A. All corner lots or/parcels shall must maintain a clear Vision Clearance Aarea at each access to a public street and on each corner of property at the intersection of 2 streets or a street and an alley in order to provide adequate sight distance for approaching traffic. Vision clearance areas must be shown on Site Plans for applicable land use applications. B. No screens, plantings, or other physical obstructions areis permitted between 2 ½ and 8 feet above the established height of the curb in the triangular Vision Clearance Aarea (see Figure 4.2-A). Exhibit A, Page 31 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 33 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 32 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm EXCEPTION: Items associated with utilities or publicly-owned structures – for example, poles, and signs, and existing street trees – may be permitted. C. The clear Vvision Clearance Aarea shallmust be in the shape of a triangle. Two sides of the triangle shall must be property lines for a distance specified in this Subsection. Where the property lines have rounded corners, they are measured by extending them in a straight line to a point of intersection. The third side of the triangle is a line across the corner of the lot or /parcel joining the non-intersecting ends of the other 2 sides. The following measurements shall establish the clear vision Vision Clearance Aareas: Table 4.2-5 Type of Intersection Measurement Along Each Property Line Any Street 20 5 feet(1) Any Alley 15 feet(1) Any Driveway 10 feet(1) (1) Note: These standards may be increased if warranted for safety reasons by the Public Works Director. EXCEPTION: The Director may require that the Vision Clearance Area be increased to be consistent with the sight distance standards and requirements in the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Green Book when safety concerns warrant the increase. Figure 4.2-A Exhibit A, Page 32 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 34 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 33 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm ********** Staff Commentary: Changes to sidewalk standards in SDC 4.2-135 implement TSP Policies 1.2, 1.4 and 3.7; Policy 3.3, Actions 1, 2, and 4; and Policy 3.4, Action 2 by establishing setback sidewalks as the default standard, thereby promoting enhanced pedestrian access and improving street design. Additional language that is proposed to be added to this section is being brought from the Engineering Design Specifications and Procedures Manual into the Code in order to be adopted by ordinance. 4.2-135 Sidewalks A. Sidewalks and planter strips abutting public streets shall be located wholly within the public street right-of- way, unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Director. B. Sidewalks shall be designed, constructed, replaced or repaired as specified in the City’s Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual, the Development & Public Works Standard Construction Specifications and the Springfield Municipal Code. New sidewalk design shall be consistent with existing sidewalk design in the same block in relation to width and type. C. Concrete sidewalks must be provided according to Section 4.2-105.C., Table 4.2-1, and the following criteria: 1. Sidewalks must conform to the existing or planned street grades. 2. Sidewalks must conform to current ADA standards. 3. Sidewalks must be separated from the curb by the planting strip, except when necessary for connectivity, safety, or to comply with street design requirements, and subject to approval by the Director. 4. New sidewalk width and type must be consistent with existing sidewalk design in the same block, but must physically transition to comply with current sidewalk standards as determined by the Director. When replacing damaged sidewalk, new sidewalk must be located in the same position as the existing sidewalk. 5. Obstructions including, but not limited to, mail boxes, water meters, valves, junction boxes, manholes, utility poles, trees, benches, fire hydrants, signs, and bus stops must not be located within the sidewalk, and must be removed or relocated prior to the construction or reconstruction of the sidewalk, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. If obstructions remain, there must be at least 5 feet of unobstructed width on arterial class streets and 4 feet on all other streets. C. D. Planter strips are may be required as part of sidewalk construction. Planter strips shallmust be at least 4.5 feet wide (as measured from the back of curb to the edge of the sidewalk) and long enough to allow the Exhibit A, Page 33 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 35 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 34 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm street tree to survive. Planter strips must have approved landscaping consisting of street trees and ground cover allowed per the City’s Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual. Tree wells set in concrete or sidewalk areas must be a minimum of four (4) feet by four (4) feet. Concrete, asphalt or other impermeable pavement are not allowed to substitute for landscaping within planter strips. EXCEPTION: Planter strips less than 4.5 feet wide may be permitted when necessary for connectivity, safety, or to comply with street design requirements, subject to approval by the Director. D. E. Maintenance of sidewalks is the continuing obligation of the abutting property owner. ********** Staff Commentary: Implementing updated street design standards per Policy 3.3, Action 1, changes to SDC 4.2-140 clarify that street trees on private property cannot be removed without prior approval, that street trees cannot be removed to accommodate proposed driveways, and that street tree removal requires prior City authorization. Other housekeeping-related text changes are included below. 4.2-140 Street Trees Street trees are those trees required within the public right-of-way. The primary purpose of street trees is to create a streetscape that benefits from the aesthetic and environmental qualities of an extensive tree canopy along the public street system. Street trees are attractive amenities that improve the appearance of the community, providing provide shade and visual interest, and enhance the pedestrian environment. Street trees also improve air quality, reduce stormwater runoff, and moderate the micro-climate impacts of heat absorbed by paved surfaces. Street trees may be located within a planter strips, inor within individual tree wells within a sidewalk, round-abouts, or medians. EXCEPTION: In order to meet street tree requirements where there is no planter strip and street trees cannot be planted within the public right-of-way, trees shall be planted in the required front yard or street side yard setback of private property as specified in the applicable zoning district. A. New Street Trees. New street trees shall be at least 2 inches in caliper. New street trees shall be selected from the City Street Tree List and installed as specified in the City’s Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual. The Public Works Director shall determine which species are permitted or prohibited street trees. B. Existing Street Trees. 1. Street Tree Retention Standards. Existing trees may meet the requirement for street trees ( i.e., trees on the City Street Tree List specified in the City’s Engineering and Design Standards and Procedures Manual with a minimum calipber of 2 inches) if excavation or filling for proposed development is minimized within the dripline of the tree. Sidewalks of variable width, elevation, and direction may be used to save existing trees, subject to approval by the Director and Public Works Director. Exhibit A, Page 34 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 36 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 35 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Existing street trees shall be retained as specified in the Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual, unless approved for removal as a condition of Development Approval or in conjunction with a street construction project. 2. Street Tree Removal Standards. a. Any City removal of existing street trees within the public right-of-way is proposed to be removed by the City exempt from the tree felling regulations specified in Section 5.19-100. b. Any eExisting street trees on private property cannot proposed to be removed shall require without prior authorization by notification of the Public Works Director prior to removal. Removal of 5 or more street trees on private property shall beis subject to the tree felling standards specified in Section 5.19-100. c. Existing street trees on private property must not be removed to accommodate additional or expanded driveways. 3. Street Tree Replacement Standards. Where possible, any street tree proposed to be removed shall be replaced with a tree at least 2 inches in caliper. a. It is the responsibility of the City to plant any replacement tree within the public right-of- way. b. It is the responsibility of the property owner to plant any replacement street tree on private property, either as a condition of a Tree Felling Permit or when the property owner removes a street tree on private property without the City’s authorization. Any replacement street tree shall meet the standards specified in Subsection A, above. c. Whenever the property owner removes a street tree within the public right-of-way without the City’s authorization, that person is responsible for reimbursing the City for the full value of the removed tree, to include replanting and watering during the 2-year tree establishment period. C. Street Tree Maintenance Responsibility. 1. Maintenance of street trees in the public right-of-way shall be performed by the City. 2. Maintenance of street trees on private property shall be performed by the property owner. 3. Removal of street trees on private or public property does not constitute maintenance. Any removal of street trees on private property is subject to prior approval by the City as specified in Section 4.2- 140B.2.b. above. Exhibit A, Page 35 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 37 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 36 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm ********** Staff Commentary: As part of implementing updated street design standards per Policy 3.3, Action 1, changes to SDC 4.2-145 clarify that installation of decorative street lighting may be requested, but requires prior City authorization. Other housekeeping-related text changes are included below. Additional language that is proposed to be added to this section is being brought from the Engineering Design Specifications and Procedures Manual into the Code in order to be adopted by ordinance. 4.2-145 Street Lighting Standards Public street lLighting design and placement for streets, paths, and accessways must conform to the following design standards and is specified in the City’s Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual and the Development & Public Works Standard Construction Specifications and is approved by the Public Works Director. A. Street lLighting shall must be included with all new developments or redevelopment. Existing street lightings shall must be upgraded to current standards with all new developments or redevelopment as determined by the Public Works Director. The developer is responsible for street lighting material and installation costs. B. Upon approval by the Director, Aa developer may install decorative streetlights, as may be permitted belowin the City’s Engineering and Design Standards and Procedures Manual and in the Development & Public Works Standard Construction Specifications. C. Design Standards. 1. Lighting must comply with Illuminating Engineering Society, American National Standards Practice for Roadway Lighting – RP-8-14 and applicable National Electrical Safety Code (NESC) and National Electrical Code (NEC) standards. 2. Intersections must be illuminated to a level equal to the sum of the average required illuminance of the two intersecting streets. 3. Mid-block crosswalks that are approved by the City Traffic Engineer must have two times the illumination required for the street. 4. Decorative poles with City-approved LED fixtures and lighting controls must be used on all streets within the Nodal Development Overlay District and where any refinement plan or plan district requires decorative lighting. Decorative poles may be used on streets, paths, and accessways in any other zone at the option of the developer as approved by the Director. Exhibit A, Page 36 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 38 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 37 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 5. City-approved LED fixtures and lighting controls must be used when lighting is required along multi-use paths and accessways. 6. Roadway style poles and “cobra head” fixtures with City-approved LED fixtures and lighting controls must be used along streets in all other locations. 7. When roadway style poles are used on arterial and collector streets in any zone other than residential, they must be steel or aluminum. When roadway style poles are used on local and collector streets in residential zones, they must be fiberglass, steel, or aluminum. 8. Where lot frontages are 80 feet or less, poles must be located at property lines unless approved by the Director. 9. The weak point illumination must not be less than 0.1 foot candles. 10. Roadway style poles set behind sidewalks must have eight (8) foot arm length. Roadway style poles set between curb and sidewalk or where no sidewalk exists must have six (6) foot arm length. 11. Pole handholes must be used instead of junction boxes where feasible. Junction boxes for street lighting must only be utilized for street crossings or where necessary to comply with electrical code standards cited above. 12. Pole Height. a. Lights on arterial and collector streets outside of a residential zone must have a 35-foot fixture mounting height. b. Lights on local streets with a curb-to-curb width of 28 feet or greater and collectors within residential zones must have a 30-foot fixture mounting height. c. Lights on local streets with a curb-to-curb width of less than 28 feet must have a 20-foot fixture mounting height. d. Decorative poles must be 12 feet tall, except that 16-foot tall decorative poles may be approved by the Director when the required illumination levels cannot be achieved with 12- foot tall decorative poles. e. Lighting on local streets must be installed on the same side of the street and on the side of the street first constructed, except where necessary to be consistent with the existing lighting design and placement. f. Light poles must not be placed on the outside of curves with less than a 1000-foot radius. ********** Exhibit A, Page 37 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 39 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 38 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Staff Commentary: The following text revisions clarify that paved bikeways and multi-use paths are subject to the City’s Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual standards, and are referenced in the TSP or City bike/ped plan (which has yet to be developed). In making this change, it distinguishes unpaved bike facilities, such as single-track mountain bike trails for recreational use, which are not considered part of the City’s transportation network. These changes support TSP Policy 1.4; Policy 3.2, Actions 1, 4 and 7; Policy 3.4, Action 2; and Policy 3.7. Additional language that is proposed to be added to this section is being brought from the Engineering Design Specifications and Procedures Manual into the Code in order to be adopted by ordinance. 4.2-150 BikewaysMulti-Use Paths A. Bikeways. Development abutting an existing or proposed bikeways multi-use path identified in TransPlan the Springfield Transportation System Plan, or Springfield Bicycle Plan City-adopted bicycle and pedestrian plan, or shown on the Conceptual Street Map must shall include provisions for the extension of these facilitiesthe multi-use path through the development area by the dedication of public easements or rights-of-way. The developer shall bears the cost of bikeway multi-use path improvements. unless additional property owners are benefitted. In this case, other equitable means of cost distribution may be approved by the City. B. Multi-use paths that are dedicated as right-of-way or in a public easement shall must conform to the Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, the Oregon Bike and Pedestrian Design Guidelines, the Springfield Bicycle Plan, TransPlan, the Regional Transportation System Plan, AASHTO guidelines, this Code, and Bikeways shall be designed and constructed as specified in the City’s Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual. C. The right-of-way or easement area for a multi-use path must include a minimum paved area of 10 feet, a minimum clear zone of 2 feet on both sides of the path, and any additional width necessary to accommodate lighting required under this section. D. Where a multi-use path runs parallel and adjacent to a public street, the multi-use path must be separated from the edge of the street by a width of at least 5 feet or by a physical barrier that meets the standards in the Oregon Bike and Pedestrian Design Guidelines, AASHTO guidelines, or the National Association of City Transportation Officials Urban Bikeway Design Guide. E. Lighting for multi-use paths must be installed according to the standards in Section 4.2-145. Lighting must not obstruct the paved surface or 2-foot clear area on either side. All lighting must be installed within the right-of-way or public easement area. ********** Staff Commentary: The following section proposes to remove Pedestrian Trails from the Springfield Development Code since there are no planned unpaved “pedestrian trails” in the Springfield 2035 Transportation System Plan and the current 25 feet wide public right of way exceeds what is Exhibit A, Page 38 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 40 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 39 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm proposed for a multi-use path facility. If this change is implemented, the Code will still be consistent with the Willamalane Parks and Recreation District’s Comprehensive Plan since the plan distinguishes between “multi-use paths” and “pedestrian trail” and does not provide standards for these facilities. The planned pedestrian trails in the Willamalane Comprehensive Plan are primarily within Willamalane owned property, such as Thurston Hills and Dorris Ranch. 4.2-155 Pedestrian Trails A. Developments abutting existing or proposed pedestrian trails identified on the adopted Willamalane Park and Recreation District Comprehensive Plan shall provide for the future extension of the pedestrian trails through the dedication of easements or right-of-way. The developer is responsible for trail surfacing, as approved by the Willamalane Parks and Recreation District and/or the City. Trails shall be constructed to allow for adequate drainage and erosion control. B. In dedicating an easement or right-of-way for public trails, the owner shall demonstrate compliance with the following criteria: 1. Trail easements or right-of-way shall: a. Be 25 feet wide as and paved as specified in the ODOT Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan and/or with the City’s Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual. The width standard may be reduced if the Director finds this standard to be impractical due to physical constraints. b. Be located within a site: i. To allow the trail to be buffered from existing and proposed dwellings on the site and on adjacent properties; ii. To maintain the maximum feasible privacy for residents; and ii. Ensure that future trail construction will avoid parking and driveway areas and other activity areas which might conflict with pedestrian movements. c. Allow for future construction of trails. 2. Site area included within a trail easement or right-of-way shall be counted as a portion of the landscaped and open space area required for the proposed development. ********** Staff Commentary: The following revision provides more flexibility for establishing accessways and directs people to the City’s Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual for pedestrian scale lighting Exhibit A, Page 39 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 41 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 40 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm requirements, in order to provide more options for context sensitive lighting based on current technology and each project’s needs. 4.2-160 Accessways A. Accessways allow pedestrians and bicyclists convenient linkages to adjacent streets, residential areas, neighborhood activity centers, industrial or commercial centers, transit facilities, parks, schools, open space, or trails and paths where no public street access exists. Accessways may also be used as a secondary emergency access. Accessways shallmust be dedicated as public right-of-way during the development review process. EXCEPTIONS: 1. There is an existing building or conditions on an abutting property that makes the accessway impractical; or 2. There are slopes in excess of 30 percent. 3. When site constraints preclude the ability to dedicate right-of-way without impacting setback requirements or other development standards, the Director may authorize dedication of a public easement or may otherwise modify the stnadards in this section. B. Accessways shall must comply with the following design standards: 1. Where an accessway is proposed for only bicycle and/or pedestrian travel, the right-of-way shall must be paved a minimum of 12 feet wide, with a 10-foot wide paved surface of either asphalt concrete or Portland Cement concrete. Any necessary lLight standards shallmay be installed within outside of the 12-foot travelway, as long as a minimum 8-foot wide clear path is maintainedbut within the public right-of-way. 2. Where an accessway is proposed as a secondary access for emergency vehicles or in combination with bicycle and/or pedestrian travel, the right-of-way shall must be a minimum of 2420 feet wide; consisting of a 1012-foot wide area paved with either asphalt concrete or Portland Cement concrete and two2 additional 45-foot wide areas on both sides that aremay be turf block, grass-crete, or other similar permeable material approved by the Public Works Director on a base of gravel capable of supporting fire equipment weighing 80,000 pounds. Any necessary lLight standards shall must be installed outside the 20-foot travel pathway, but within the public right-of-way. 3. Illumination for accessways must be installed in accordance with Section 4.2-145. In addition to the locational standards accessway lighting specified in Subsections 1. and 2., above any street light installed in an accessway shall be a City-approved decorative streetlight. C. The Director may require improvements to existing unimproved accessways on properties abutting and adjacent to the property proposed to be developed. Where possible, the improvements to unimproved accessways shall continue to the closest public -street or developed accessway. The developer shall bear the cost of accessway improvements, unless other property owners are benefited. In this case, other equitable Exhibit A, Page 40 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 42 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 41 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm means of cost distribution may be approved by the City. Where possible, accessways may also be employed to accommodate public utilities. 3. Proposed Changes to Parking Standards (SDC Chapter 4) Relevant TSP Policies/Actions: Policy 2.7: Manage the off-street parking system to assure major activity centers meet their parking demand through a combination of shared, leased, and new off-street parking facilities and TDM programs. Action 1: Modify parking requirements to assure that they are appropriate for land uses. The purpose of this action is to reduce parking requirements to utilize land for economic development. Policy 3.8: Coordinate the design of Springfield’s transportation system with relevant local, regional, and state agencies. Action 3: Partner with LTD to provide frequent transit network connections along major corridors. The frequent transit network should connect to local neighborhood bus service and major activity centers to provide viable alternatives to vehicle trips. Staff Commentary: The proposed changes to the parking standards in SDC 4.6-110 implement the above TSP policies and action items by providing more options to reduce parking requirements. The standards reduce minimum parking required for development sites on, or proximate to, high frequency transit corridors, allowing developers to take advantage high frequency transit and to put more area of a site into an economically productive use. Reducing parking requirements provides more flexibility in site design and can serve as a cost-saving incentive for needed development of housing and employment uses. The proposed standards cap the total parking reduction a developer can obtain for all sites outside the Downtown Exception Area (where there is no minimum parking requirement) to maintain a minimum level of off-street vehicle parking. The bike parking credit was moved from Section 4.6-120I to 4.6-110H and was reduced from 5 bike spaces for every vehicle space to 2 bike spaces per vehicle space to incentivize developers to take advantage of the bike parking reduction credit. Staff believe that the existing 5-bike-space standard was adopted to conform to the number of spaces provided by a single wave rack (the previously accepted bike parking standard). Because the new, proposed bike parking standard requires a high quality rack (i.e. “staple rack”) that has space for 2 bikes per rack, it makes sense to adjust the requirement. A standard vehicle parking space can fit 4-5 staple racks (or up to 10 bike parking spaces). Under the proposed bike parking reduction credit, a developer could convert an existing vehicle parking space to up to 10 bike parking spaces, resulting in a maximum net reduction of 4 vehicle parking spaces for every existing vehicle parking space that is converted to bike parking. The new language also clarifies that bike parking may substitute for a Exhibit A, Page 41 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 43 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 42 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm percentage of vehicle parking only when additional bike parking provided is above minimum quantity of bike parking otherwise required. 4.6-100 Vehicle Parking, Loading and Bicycle Parking Standards 4.6-110 Motor Vehicle Parking—General A. Off-street parking spaces shall be provided, for: consistent with requirements in Section 4.6-125, Table 4.6-2, unless excepted as allowed herein, for: 1. All new construction and expansion of multiple family residential, commercial, industrial and public and semi-public uses. If an existing development is expanded, new parking spaces shall be provided in proportion to the increase only. 2. Changes in use or the use category of an existing building or structure. 3. The Director may authorize a reduction in the number of required parking spaces without a Variance: a. Based on an approved Parking Study, prepared by a Transportation Engineer; and/or b. When the location of a building on a site makes it impractical to provide the number of required spaces without demolishing all or part of the building, and no alternative parking arrangements are reasonably available; and c. Based on an affirmative finding by the Director that the exception will have no negative impacts on neighboring properties; and d. All installed parking shall confirm to the design standards of this Section and Section 4.6- 115 and 4.6-120. B. If parking has been provided to serve an existing use, the number of parking spaces shallcannot be reduced if the result would be fewer spaces than required by this Section, except as parking reductions are allowed below and under Special Provisions to Table 4.6-2. C. Parking reductions under Sections 4.6-110.H-L and Special Provisions to Table 4.6-2 shall not reduce the number of ADA parking spaces required in accordance with the minimum parking in Table 4.6-2 or under Section 4.6-110.M. DC. Required parking spaces shall be available for the parking of passenger automobiles vehicles of residents, customers, patrons, visitors, and employees only, and shall not be used for outdoor displays, storage of vehicles, equipment, or materials. Parking for company motor vehicles that remain on the premises overnight, or enclosures designed for the temporary collection of shopping carts, must shall be provided in addition to the number of parking spaces required by this Section. Exhibit A, Page 42 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 44 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 43 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm ED. Unless joint use of parking facilities is requested as may be permitted in Subsection E. below, the total requirement for off-street parking spaces is the sum of the requirements for all uses. If the total number of required parking spaces results in a fraction, the fraction shall be rounded up to the next whole number. Off- street parking facilities for one 1 use shall not be considered as providing parking facilities for any other use, unless as may be permitted in Subsection F., below. FE. The Director, upon application by all involved property owners, may authorize joint use of parking facilities, provided that: 1. The applicant shall demonstrate that there is no substantial conflict in the principal operating hours of the buildings or uses for which the joint use of parking facilities is proposed; and 2. The parties concerned in the joint use of off-street parking facilities shall provide evidence of agreement for the joint use by a legal instrument approved by the City Attorney. An agreement for joint use of parking facilities shall provide for continuing maintenance of jointly used parking facilities; 3. The agreement shall be recorded at Lane County Deeds and Records at the applicant’s expense. GF. When on-street parking is planned and provided, pParking spaces in a public right-of-way directly abutting the development area may be counted as fulfilling a part of the parking requirements for a development as follows: For each 18 feet of available on-street parking, there will be 1/2 space credit toward the required amount of off-street parking spaces. The developer is responsible for marking any on-street spaces. HG. Motor Vehicle Parking Space Reduction Credit for Additional Bicycle Parking. Additional bBicycle parking beyond the minimum amount required in Table 4.6-3 that complies with the bike parking standards in Sections 4.6-145 and 4.6-150 may substitute for up to 1525 percent of required off-street motor vehicle parking otherwise required in Table 4.6-2. For every 5two (2) non-required bicycle parking spaces that meet the short or long term bicycle parking standards specified in Table 4.6-3, the motor vehicle parking requirement is reduced by one (1) space. When existing parking converted to bicycle parking under this subsection results in surplus motor vehicle parking spaces, the surplus parking may be converted to another use in conformance with the requirements of this Code. Existing parking may be converted to take advantage of this provision. IH. Motor Vehicle Parking Space Reduction Credit for Frequent Transit Corridors – Abutting Sites. Development sites abutting an existing or proposed Frequent Transit Corridor may request a reduction of up to 15 percent from minimum off-street motor vehicle parking required in Table 4.6-2. JI. Motor Vehicle Parking Space Reduction Credit for Frequent Transit Corridors – Nearby Sites. Development sites not abutting but within 1/4-mile of an existing or proposed Frequent Transit Corridor may request a reduction of up to 10 percent from minimum off-street motor vehicle parking required in Table 4.6-2. K. Reduction Credit for ADA Improvements for Frequent Transit Corridors. Development sites abutting or within ¼-mile of an existing or proposed Frequent Transit Corridor may receive a reduction of up to 10 percent from the minimum off-street motor vehicle parking required in Table 4.6-2 in exchange for Exhibit A, Page 43 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 45 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 44 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm contribution to the City for ADA improvements in the public right-of-way. The required contribution will be equal to the Base Curb Ramp Fee multiplied by each set of four parking spaces to be reduced, rounded up to the next whole number (e.g. one Base Curb Ramp Fee for 1-4 parking spaces reduced, double the Base Curb Ramp Fee for 5-8 parking spaces reduced, etc.). The Base Curb Ramp Fee must be set by Council resolution and must be approximately the cost of constructing one ADA-compliant curb ramp. Nothing in this subsection waives or alters any requirement for a developer to construct or provide on-site or off-site ADA improvements. L. Outside of the Downtown Exception Area and Glenwood Riverfront Mixed-Use Plan District, a cumulative maximum reduction of 25 percent of the minimum off-street parking required in Table 4.6-2 may be applied using the credits, allowances, and exceptions to minimum parking requirements established in this Code. M. EXCEPTION: The Director may authorize reductions to the minimum number of parking spaces required in Table 4.6-2, including reductions in excess of the cumulative maximum reduction specified in Section 4.6- 110.K. above, based on substantial evidence that less than the minimum required parking spaces would be utilized. Substantial evidence includes, but is not limited to, the parking requirements based upon the current version of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parking Manual, an approved Parking Generation Study prepared by a licensed engineer, evidence regarding specific use characteristics, or evidence regarding site proximity to multi-modal improvements that are likely to reduce on-site parking demand. 4.6-115 Motor Vehicle Parking—Parking Lot Design All off-street parking areas shall comply with the following dimensional standards: Table 4.6-1 Dimensional Feature (all dimensions in feet) Diagram Parking Angle 0 45 60 90 Stall width, standard A 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 Stall width, compact A 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Stall length, standard B 24.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 Stall length, compact B 22.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 Aisle width between stall lines C 12.0 12.0 16.0 24.0 Exhibit A, Page 44 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 46 of 164 Exhibit A: Springfield Development Code Amendments 02262018 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 45 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Dimensional Feature (all dimensions in feet) Diagram Parking Angle 0 45 60 90 Bumper overhang (typical) D 0.0 1.5 1.8 2.0 Cross-aisle, 1-way E 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 Cross-aisle, 2-way F 24.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 Figure 4.6A Parking Lot Design x xWALL BAC E/F CURB D= STALL NOT ACCESSIBLE IN CERTAIN LAYOUTSx Exhibit A, Page 45 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 47 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 46 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Figure 4.6A 1 Parking Lot Design 2 3 4 5 ********** 6 7 8 Staff Commentary: Changes in SDC 4.6-120 relocate the parking reduction currently allowed under Subsection I to group it with 9 other parking reduction options in SDC 4.6-110. Revision to SDC 4.6-120.A. to allow for permeable pavement is proposed 10 following review of City standards called for in Policy 3.3, Action 1. The added language permits the Director to authorize 11 permeable paving in parking areas and driveways, providing stormwater and environmental benefits from an alternative 12 to standard paving. 13 14 Section F shown as strikethrough has been moved to Section 4.2-120.A.3. and amended. 15 16 4.6-120 Motor Vehicle Parking – Parking Lot Improvements 17 18 All parking areas shall conform to the setback, vision clearance, planting and screening provisions of this Code and shall be completed 19 prior to occupancy. Required parking spaces shall be improved as follows: 20 21 A. All parking areas lots, bays, and spaces shallmust have a durable, dust free surfacing of Asphaltic concrete, Portland cement 22 concrete or other materials as specified in the Building Safety Codes and approved by the City Engineer. the Building 23 Exhibit A, Page 46 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 48 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 47 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm OfficialPermeable pavement meeting standards in the City’s Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual may be 24 allowed by the City Engineer for parking areas and driveways. Parking lot surfacing shall not encroach upon the public right-of-25 way. 26 27 B. Adequate drainage improvements shall be provided to dispose ofmanage all on-site run-off. Provisions shall be made for the 28 on-site collection of drainage waters to eliminate sheet flow onto sidewalks, public rights-of-way, and abutting private 29 property. All drainage systems shall be approved by the City Engineer. the Building Official and shall be constructed in 30 conformance with the Building Safety Codes. 31 32 C. All parking stalls spaces fronting a sidewalk, alley, street, landscaped area or structure shall be provided with a secured wheel 33 bumper or linear curb not less than 6 inches in height to be set back from the front of the stall a minimum of 2 feet to allow 34 for vehicle encroachment. Wheel bumpers shall be a minimum of 6 feet in length. Curbs shall be constructed in conformance 35 with the Standard Construction Specifications. 36 37 EXCEPTION: As an option, the sidewalk or landscaped area may be widened 2 feet beyond the minimum dimension required 38 to allow for vehicle encroachment. A curb not less than 6 inches in height shall protect the widened sidewalks and planter 39 areas. 40 41 D. Backing into the public right-of-way, other than alleys is prohibited. 42 43 EXCEPTION: Parking areas of less than 4 spaces on a residentially zoned lot/parcel may back into the public right-of-way. 44 45 E. All spaces shall be permanently and clearly marked unless the Director determines that the spaces should not be marked for 46 safety considerations. Old striping shall not be visible after being replaced by new striping. 47 48 F. Parking areas shall be designed to connect with parking areas on abutting sites within the same zoning district to eliminate the 49 use of the street for cross movements. 50 51 FG. Not more than 30 percent of the total parking spaces in a parking lot may be designated for compact cars, unless a greater 52 percentage is authorized by the Director based on substantial evidence that greater than 30 percent of the total parking 53 spaces is appropriate for the use. These spaces shall be signed and/or the space painted with the words “Compact Car Only.” 54 55 GH. Parking Spaces Ffor Disabled PersonsPeople with Disabilities. 56 57 1. Parking spaces for disabled personspeople with disabilities and accessible passenger loading zones that serve a 58 particular building shall be located as close as possible to a building entrance. 59 2. The number and dimensions of parking spaces for disabled personspeople with disabilities shall be as specified in 60 Section 11064 of the Oregon Structural Specialty Code. 61 62 I. Motor Vehicle Parking Space Reduction Credit. Bicycle parking may substitute for up to 25 percent of required vehicle parking. 63 For every 5 non-required bicycle parking spaces that meet the short or long term bicycle parking standards specified in Table 64 4.6-3, the motor vehicle requirement is reduced by 1 space. Existing parking may be converted to take advantage of this 65 provision. 66 67 68 ********** 69 70 71 Exhibit A, Page 47 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 49 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 48 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Staff Commentary: Text proposed below in SDC 4.6-125 furthers TSP Policy 2.7, Action 1 to foster economic development by 72 establishing maximum quantities of off-street parking, based on 125% of the minimum parking required. Establishing a 73 parking maximum, with allowances for exceeding that percentage, supports better site utilization for productive, 74 revenue-generating use and has precedent in other communities. For example, Eugene limits parking for non-residential 75 uses to 125% of the minimum required. Corvallis limits parking for any site to 130% of the minimum required, and Bend 76 limits surface parking to 150% of the minimum required. Under the existing Springfield Development Code, a maximum 77 parking limitation is provided only for non-residential uses in Mixed Use Districts (i.e., 120% of the minimum required in 78 SDC 4.6-125G.1.b.) and the Glenwood Riverfront Mixed-Use Plan District area. 79 The proposed language allows the Director to approve an alternative parking quantity for a particular use based upon 80 evaluation of parking demands in the ITE Parking Manual or a parking study without applying for a variance. Proposed 81 new text also permits the Director to allow an exceedance of the parking maximum based on a parking study and 82 approved TDM plan. 83 Language changes to parking requirements Table 4.6-2 for schools are provided for clarity. 84 It is common for development applications to have difficulties reaching the parking minimum requirements as the current 85 Springfield Development Code applies. Very rarely do our development applications greatly exceed the minimums 86 required. Staff does not foresee the proposed parking maximum (125% of the minimum parking required) to be a 87 detriment to development in Springfield. The proposed parking maximum helps implement Policy 2.7, Action 1, “Modify 88 parking requirements to assure that they are appropriate for land uses. The purpose of this action is to reduce parking 89 requirements to utilize land for economic development.” 90 Under Special Provisions in SDC 4.6-125G.1.a., the existing 20% limitation on parking reduction for nonresidential uses in 91 Mixed Use Districts is proposed to be deleted, given the proposed text in SDC 4.6-110 allows for a higher percentage 92 parking reduction. Text in SDC 4.6-125G.2. is modified to reflect that residential mixed uses – like non-residential mixed 93 uses – are required to comply with the minimum parking requirements only for off-street surface parking. This helps 94 distinguish, and provide support, for provision of structured parking to help meet parking demands, particularly within 95 Mixed Use zoning districts. The exception language in SDC 4.6-125G.3. is proposed to be deleted since the proposed new 96 Code text allows parking reductions for development sites on, and proximate to, frequent transit corridors irrespective of 97 the use. 98 99 100 4.6-125 Motor Vehicle Parking – Parking Space Requirements 101 102 Table 4.6-2 103 Use Minimum Parking Requirements (1) Dwellings-single-family, duplexes and manufactured 2 for each dwelling 1 for each dwelling when on-street parking is planned and provided; or 2 for each dwelling when no on-street parking is provided, or when provided on-street parking is planned to be eliminated or repurposed Dwellings-cluster subdivisions See applicable dwelling unit Dwellings-multiple family other than quads or quints 1.5 for each dwelling unit 1 for each dwelling unit Dwellings-quads or quints 0.75 for each bedroom Exhibit A, Page 48 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 50 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 49 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 104 Use Minimum and Maximum Parking Requirements (1) (2) Child Care Centers 1 drop-off space for each 700 square feet of gross floor area, plus 1 long-term space for each 350 square feet of gross floor area Education Facilities Public/Private 2 for each classroom, plus 1 elementary/middle school for each 100 square feet of 6 or more student’s the largest public assembly area. Group Care Facilities 0.25 for each bedroom or dwelling unit plus 1 per full time employee on the busiest shift. Public Utility Facilities None, unless utility vehicles will be parked overnight. Transient Accommodations Bed and breakfast facilities, boarding and rooming houses and hotels 1 plus 1 for each guest bedroom Emergency shelter homes None Youth hostels 0.3 for each guest bedroom Eating and drinking establishments 1 for each 100 square feet of gross floor area. Recreational facilities and religious, social and public institutions 1 for each 100 square feet of floor area in the primary assembly area and 1 for each 200 square feet of gross floor area for the remainder of the building. Retail sales, personal service, including small scale repair and maintenance and offices 1 for each 300 square feet of gross floor area. Shopping centers and malls 1 for each 250 square feet of gross floor area, exclusive of covered pedestrian walkways. Once a shopping center or mall has been approved, no additional parking shall be required, unless there is new construction Transportation facilities 1 for each 300 square feet of gross floor area not including vehicle storage areas. Warehouse commercial sales 1 for each 600 square feet of gross floor area. Manufacture and assembly, and other primary industrial uses 1 for each 500 square feet industrial of gross floor area (manufacture and assembly) for each 1000 square feet of gross floor area (warehousing) Secondary industrial uses See applicable use in this table (1) Table 4.6-2 establishes minimum off-street parking required for various uses except as may be reduced in accordance with the 105 provisions of Section 4.6-110. 106 (2) Table 4.6-2 establishes maximum off-street parking requirements for all uses except residential dwelling units. Maximum off-107 street parking is 125 percent of the minimum off-street parking required above in Table 4.6-2, except as may be increased by the 108 Director based upon an approved Parking Generation Study prepared by a professional Transportation Engineer licensed by the 109 State of Oregon and an approved Transportation Demand Management Plan. 110 Special Provisions: 111 A. Downtown Exception Area. Within the Downtown Exception Area, all lots/parcels and uses areshall be exempt from the 112 minimum off-street parking space requirements of this Section. However, if the Director determines there is a need for off-113 street parking, the Director may require an Institute of Transportation Engineering (ITE) Parking Generation Report to 114 determine the off-street parking requirements. In any case, any voluntarily installed parking shall conform to the design 115 standards of this Section. 116 Exhibit A, Page 49 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 51 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 50 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 117 B. Commercial Districts. 118 119 1. Parking lots in the Neighborhood Commerical (NC) District shall be designed so that every seventh space is developed 120 as a landscaped separator between spaces. NC developments that require more than 25 parking spaces shall locate 121 half of all the required spaces over 25 behind proposed buildings. 122 123 2. Parking lots shall be used exclusively for the parking of vehicles. 124 EXCEPTION: Parking spaces in excess of the number required by this Code may be used for temporary sales or display 125 of merchandise where the activity does not create a hazard for automobile or pedestrian traffic or where otherwise 126 allowed under this Code or the Springfield Municipal Code. 127 3. A minimum of 4 off-street parking spaces shall be required for all sites in commercial zoning districtsuses that require 128 parking, unless reduced under Section 4.6-110M. 129 130 C. Light-Medium Industrial (LMI), Heavy Industrial (HI), and Special Heavy Industrial (SHI) Districts. In addition to reductions 131 permitted in accordance with the provisions of Section 4.6-110, pParking spaces may be reduced in LMI, HI, or SHI zoning 132 districts on a 1-for-1 basis when the number of spaces required is more than the number of employees working on the busiest 133 shift, provided that a landscaped area equal to the total number of spaces reduced shall be held in reserve for future use. 134 135 D. Campus Industrial (CI) District. 136 1. To the greatest extent practicable, parking shall be located behind buildings, internal to development or to the side 137 of a building. 138 139 EXCEPTIONS: 140 a. The number of required parking spaces for uses not shown in Table 4.6-2 shall be determined based upon 141 standards for similar uses. 142 b. Parking spaces may be reduced on a 1-for-1 basis when the number of spaces required is more than the shift 143 with the largest number of employees, provided that a landscaped area equal to the total number of spaces 144 reduced is held in reserve for future use. 145 146 2. An additional 5 percent of impermeable surface may be allowed in cases where all parking on a lot/parcel is screened 147 by earthen berms with an average height of 3 feet (measured from the finished grade of the edge of the parking lot), 148 sunken below grade an average depth of 3 feet (measured from the finished grade of the edge of the parking lot to 149 the finished grade of the adjacent berm or landscaped area), or both. 150 151 3. Truck parking for vehicles necessary for the operation of the facility may be located either: 152 153 a. Within an enclosed building; or 154 b. Outside of a building if the following standards are met and shall: 155 156 i. Be prohibited in all front and street-side yards; 157 158 ii. Meet the building setback standards specified in Section 3.2-420; and 159 160 161 Exhibit A, Page 50 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 52 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 51 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm iii. Be screened as specified in Section 3.2-445. 162 163 E. Medical Services District. Motor vehicle parking standards shall be determined based upon standards for similar uses in Table 164 4.6-2 and upon the required Traffic Study. 165 F. Public Land and Open Space District. Motor vehicle parking standards shall be determined based upon standards for similar 166 uses in Table 4.6-2. Uses not listed shall require a Parking Study. 167 168 G. Mixed Use Districts. 169 1. Nonresidential Requirements. 170 a. Off-street surface parking shallmust meet the minimum parking requirement for the various commercial and 171 industrial uses in Table 4.6-2 unless reduced under applicable provisions in this Code. The Director may 172 reduce the minimum number of parking spaces required, based on a parking generation study, without the 173 need for a Variance. The study shall demonstrate how a proposal to reduce parking is justified by estimated 174 peak use, easy pedestrian access, availability of transit service, and adjacent on-street parking. This 175 reduction shall be limited to 20 percent of the established standard. 176 177 b. The maximum number of parking spaces allowed shall not exceed 120 percent of the minimum parking requirement for 178 commercial and industrial uses in Table 4.6-2. The Director may increase the allowed number of parking spaces based 179 on a parking generation study, using statistical analysis from the Institute of Transportation Engineering (ITE) Parking 180 Generation Report without the need for a Variance. The study shall demonstrate how a proposal to increase parking is 181 justified by estimated peak use, and how parking demand management techniques to reduce the needed number of 182 parking spaces would be ineffective for the development. 183 184 2. Residential Requirements. Minimum off-street parking standards for residential uses shallmust comply with the 185 standards specified in Table 4.6-2 unless reduced under applicable provisions in this Code. 186 187 3. EXCEPTION: The Director may reduce the minimum residential parking standard when it is demonstrated that 188 proposed housing is along a frequent service transit line, or is otherwise provided for by this Code. 189 190 ********** 191 192 193 194 Exhibit A, Page 51 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 53 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 52 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 4. Proposed Changes to Bicycle Parking Standards (SDC Chapters 3 & 4) 195 196 Relevant TSP Policies/Actions: 197 Policy 2.7: Manage the off-street parking system to assure major activity centers meet their parking demand through a combination 198 of shared, leased, and new off-street parking facilities and TDM programs. 199 Action 2: Consider bike parking recommendations from the 2013 Regional Bike Parking Study when updating 200 Springfield’s bike parking standards. 201 Policy 3.2: Expand and enhance Springfield’s bikeway system and provide bicycle system support facilities for both new development 202 and redevelopment/expansion. 203 Action 6: Create city-wide bike parking stations in strategic locations such as along major transit routes and in 204 Springfield’s central business district. 205 Policy 3.8: Coordinate the design of Springfield’s transportation system with relevant local, regional, and state agencies. 206 Action 1: Work with ODOT, Lane County, and LTD to improve pedestrian and bicycle facilities along state 207 highways and major transit routes where appropriate. 208 Action 2: Coordinate with Springfield Public Schools to provide key bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities 209 near schools to ensure safe, convenient, and well-connected routes to schools. 210 211 Staff Commentary: The following revisions recommend increasing the minimum number of bicycle parking spaces required from 3 212 spaces to 4 spaces because high-quality “staple” or “inverted-U” style bike racks typically hold two bicycles each. Changes 213 are intended to update the bicycle parking standards to modern recommended rack type and installation standards to 214 provide better quality facilities than the previous version of the Code. Figure 4.6-B is also updated to align with current 215 best practices for bike parking installation. 216 217 Section D that is shown as strikethrough has been relocated to Section 4.6-150.A.7. 218 219 .6-135 220 4.6-140 Bicycle Parking—Purpose and Applicability 221 222 A. Safe and convenient bicycle parking is required in most zoning districts and land use categories to encourage the use of 223 bicycles as a mode of transportation. The required number of spaces is lower for uses that do not tend to attract bicycle riders 224 and higher for those that do. Additionally, some bicycle parking is required on the basis of specifically encouraging employee, 225 student or customer related bicycle use. The following standards ensure that bicycle parking is convenient to the cyclist in its 226 location and provides sufficient security from theft and damage. Long-term bicycle parking space requirements accommodate 227 employees, commuters, students, residents and other persons who expect to leave their bicycles for more than 2 hours. 228 Short-term bicycle parking spaces accommodate visitors, customers, messengers, and other persons expected to depart 229 within approximately 2 hours. 230 231 B. Unless exempted elsewhere in this Code, all development shall comply with the bicycle parking provisions of this Section. 232 233 4.6-145 Bicycle Parking—Facility Design 234 235 A. The required minimum number of bicycle parking spaces for each principal use is 3 spaces. Specific requirements per use are 236 given in Section 4.6-155. Additional bicycle parking spaces may be required at common use areas. Fractional numbers of 237 spaces shall be rounded up to the next whole space. 238 Exhibit A, Page 52 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 54 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 53 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm A. Required bicycle parking spaces and facilities must be a powder coated staple or inverted-U rack as shown in Figure 4.6-B. 239 Alternatively, the required bicycle parking spaces must fulfill the criteria for quality bicycle parking, which are as follows: 240 241 1. Supports the bicycle frame in a stable position without damage to wheels, frames, or components and provides two 242 points of contact; and 243 2. Allows locking of the frame and one or both wheels with a U-lock; and 244 3. Is securely anchored to the ground or to a structure; and 245 4. Resists cutting, rusting, bending, or deformation, both from natural causes and from human abuse; and 246 5. Powder coated or durable, non-scratching surface; and 247 6. Works well for a variety of bicycle frame types (e.g. should work for step-through frame as well as diamond frame, 248 children’s bicycles as well as adult bicycles, recumbent as well as other styles of adaptive bicycles). 249 250 B. Each bicycle parking space shall be at least 2 by 6 feet with an overhead clearance of 7 feet, and with a 5-foot access aisle 251 beside or between each row of bicycle parking, and between parked bicycles and a wall or structure (the dimensions for 252 commonly used bicycle racks are shown in Figure 4.6-B.). Bicycles may be tipped vertically for storage but not hung above the 253 floor. Required bicycle parking spaces and facilities must be constructed and installed in accordance with Section 4.6-150 and 254 Figures 4.6-B and 4.6-C. Bicycle parking shall must be provided at ground level unless an elevator with clear bicycle wayfinding 255 signage is easily accessible and directs users to an approved bicycle storage area. Each required bicycle parking space shall 256 must be accessible without removing another bicycle. 257 258 C. All required long-term bicycle parking spaces shall must be sheltered from precipitation and include lighting. Short-term 259 bicycle parking is not required to be sheltered. 260 261 D. Short-term bicycle parking must be sheltered as follows: 262 1. If 10 or fewer short-term bicycle parking spaces are required, no shelter is required for short-term bicycle parking. 263 264 2. If more than 10 short-term bicycle parking spaces are required, at least 50 percent of the short-term bicycle parking 265 spaces in excess of 10 must be sheltered. 266 267 3. Shelters must have a minimum 7-foot overhead clearance and must completely cover the bicycle parking rack and any 268 bicycles that are parked in the way the rack was designed to be used. 269 270 E. Bicycle parking that accommodates oversized bicycles and alternative bicycle types must be provided as follows: 271 272 1. Each oversized bicycle parking space must provide minimum clear area of 4 feet by 8 feet as shown in Figure 4.6-C. 273 274 2. At least 10% of the long-term bicycle parking spaces for commercial uses and residential uses must be oversized 275 bicycle parking spaces. 276 277 3. At least 10% of the short-term bicycle parking spaces for schools (elementary through high school) must be oversized 278 bicycle parking spaces. 279 280 D. Direct access from bicycle parking spaces to the public right-of-way shall be provided with access ramps, if necessary, and 281 pedestrian access from the bicycle parking area to the building entrance. 282 283 Figure 4.6-B 284 Exhibit A, Page 53 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 55 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 54 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 285 286 287 288 Exhibit A, Page 54 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 56 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 55 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 289 290 Exhibit A, Page 55 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 57 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 56 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 291 Figure 4.6-C 292 293 294 Exhibit A, Page 56 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 58 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 57 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 295 ********** 296 297 Staff Commentary: The following section proposes establishing requirements for rack type that align with current high quality 298 standards for bicycle racks. 299 300 4.6-150 Bicycle Parking—Facility Improvements 301 302 A. Bicycle Parking Location and Security. 303 304 1. Bicycle parking shall consist of a securely fixed structure that supports the bicycle frame in a stable position without 305 damage to wheels, frames or components and that allow the frame and both wheels to be locked to the rack by the 306 bicyclist's own locking device; and be provided within a convenient distance of, and clearly visible from, the main 307 entrance to the building or point of entry to the use as determined by the City. Bicycle parking racks, shelters, or lockers 308 shallmust be securely anchored to the ground or to a structure. 309 310 2. Exterior long-term bicycle parking must be located within 200 feet from the main building entrance, primary point of 311 entry to the use, or employee entrance. 312 313 3. Exterior short-term bicycle parking must: 314 315 a. Be located no further than fifty (50) feet from the main building entrance or primary point of entry to the use, as 316 determined by the City, but not further away than the closest on-site automobile parking space excluding 317 designated accessible parking spaces, whichever distance is less; 318 b. Be clearly visible from the main building entrance or primary point of entry to the use; and 319 c. Not require a person to cross a driveway, loading space, or other area intended for motor vehicle circulation to 320 access the main building entrance or primary point of entry to the use. 321 322 4. 2.Bicycle parking shall be separated from motor vehicle parking by a barrier, curb, or sufficient distance to prevent 323 damage to parked bicycles. 324 325 5. 3.Where bicycle parking facilities are not directly visible and obvious from the public right-of-way, signs shall be provided 326 to direct bicyclists to the parking. Directions to sheltered facilities inside a structure may be signed or supplied by the 327 employer, as appropriate. Short-term parking shall be made available to the general public. 328 329 6. 4.Bicycle parking may be located inside a building on a floor, which has an outdoor entrance open for use, and which does 330 not require stairs to access the space; 331 332 EXCEPTION: The Director may allow bicycle parking on upper stories within multi-story residential buildings. 333 334 7. 5.Bicycle parking and bicycle racks shallmust be located to avoid conflict with pedestrian movement and access. Direct 335 access from bicycle parking spaces to the public right-of-way must be provided by at-grade or ramp access. Pedestrian 336 access must be provided from the bicycle parking area to the building entrance. Bicycle parking may be located in the 337 public sidewalk or right-of-way where there is a minimum 5 feet between the parked bicycle and the storefront and does 338 not conflict with pedestrian accessibility. 339 Exhibit A, Page 57 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 59 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 58 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 8. 6.For multifamily dwellings with required bike parking, requirements may be met through the provision of individual 340 garages or storage units. For housing relying on a common garage and without storage units, bicycle racks shall be 341 provided in the garage. 342 343 B. Businesses Employers with changing rooms and shower facilities or other additional amenities that encourage bicycling or 344 other alternative active modes of transportation by employees or patrons may be eligible for a 10 percent reduction of 345 Transportation System Development Charges if the Director determines that those facilities encourage bicycling or other 346 alternative active modes of transportation by employees or patrons if the City Engineer determined a decrease in vehicle trips 347 will result. 348 349 Figure 4.6-B 350 351 352 Exhibit A, Page 58 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 60 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 59 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm ********** 353 354 Staff Commentary: The following table is intended to entirely replace existing Table 4.6-3 in order to make it more concise. 355 The existing table 4.6-3 is shown in strikethrough, highlighted formatting. Below the existing strike through table, the 356 proposed table from the Regional Bike Parking Study was used as the base table and changes that have been made to 357 that proposal are marked by underlined or strikedthrough text. 358 359 4.6-155 Bicycle Parking—Number of Spaces Required 360 361 A. The required minimum number of bicycle parking spaces for each principal use is four (4) spaces, unless otherwise specified in 362 Table 4.6-3. Additional bicycle parking spaces may be required at common use areas. When the number of required spaces 363 results in a fractional number, the total number of required spaces will be rounded up to the next whole number. When 364 application of the long and short term bicycle parking percentages results in a fractional number of long and short term 365 spaces, the number of long term spaces required will be rounded up to the next whole number; the remaining number of 366 required spaces will be designated as short term bicycle parking. 367 368 B. The following parking standards have been established according to land use and apply to that use in any zoning district. 369 370 Table 4.6-3 371 372 Land Use Minimum Parking Requirements (Minimum 3 spaces required) Type and % of Bike Parking Residential Uses Tri-plexes, 4-plexes, and multifamily (3 or more dwellings on same lot/parcel) 1 per dwelling unit 100% long term Manufactured dwelling park 1 per 400 square feet for common use buildings N.A. Day care centers where 13 people or more are served 1 per 10 employees 100% long term Group care facilities with 6 or more people living at the facility 1 per 10 employees N.A. Transient accommodations Bed and breakfast facilities 1 per 10 guest bedrooms. 100% long term Bedroom, boarding and rooming houses 1 per guest room. 100% long term Emergency shelter homes/homeless shelters 1 per 10 beds. 75% long term 25% short term Exhibit A, Page 59 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 61 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 60 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Land Use Minimum Parking Requirements (Minimum 3 spaces required) Type and % of Bike Parking Campus living organizations, including fraternities and sororities 1 for each 2 occupants for which sleeping facilities are provided. 100% long term University and college dormitories 1 for each 2 occupants for which sleeping facilities are provided. 100% long term Commercial Uses Agricultural and animal sales and service 1 per each 4000 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Amusement centers (including, but not limited to: arcades, pool tables, bowling alleys) 1 per each 1000 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Arenas (indoor and outdoor) 1 per 20 seats. 25% long term 75% short term Artists galleries/studios 1 per each 500 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Athletic facilities and sports clubs Viewing areas 1 per each 280 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Locker rooms, saunas whirlpools, weight rooms, or gymnasiums 1 per each 750 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Lounge or snack bar areas 1 per each 600 square feet of floor area 25% long term 75% short term Pro shops or sales areas 1 per each 3000 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Playing courts 10% of auto spaces (minimum of 4). 25% long term 75% short term Swimming pools 1 per each 2000 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Exhibit A, Page 60 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 62 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 61 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Land Use Minimum Parking Requirements (Minimum 3 spaces required) Type and % of Bike Parking Automotive, marine, appliance, service and repair 1 per each 6000 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Automotive parts stores 1 per each 3000 square feet of floor area. 100% short term Ballet, dance, and gymnastic schools/academies/studios 1 per each 400 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Banks, savings and loan offices, credit unions 1 per each 3000 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Business and professional offices and services, personal services (except as noted below) 1 per each 3000 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Barber, beauty, nail, tanning shops, and self- service laundromats 1 per each 2000 square feet of floor area 25% long term 75% short term Convenience stores, liquor stores, general merchandise stores, including supermarkets, department stores, and specialty stores (computer, gift, or video, for example) 1 per each 3000 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Eating and drinking establishments 1 per each 600 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Equipment, heavy and light, rental/sales/service. Includes truck and tractor sales 1 per each 4000 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Furniture and home furnishing stores, hardware/home improvement stores, including building material and supplies 1 per each 6000 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Garden supply/nurseries, including fee and seed stores 1 per each 6000 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Hotels, motels, youth hostels, and similar businesses providing overnight accommodations 1 per 10 guest bedrooms. 25% long term 75% short term Manufactured dwelling Sales/service/repair 1 per each 3000 square feet of floor area. 25% long term Exhibit A, Page 61 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 63 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 62 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Land Use Minimum Parking Requirements (Minimum 3 spaces required) Type and % of Bike Parking 75% short term Motor vehicle and tire sales, service stations, including quick servicing 1 per each 6000 square feet of floor area. 100% short term Mortuaries and cemeteries 1 per each 3000 square feet of floor area. 100% short term Office or medical equipment and supplies 1 per each 3000 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Photographer’s studios, picture framing and glazing 1 per each 3000 square feet of floor area. 100% short term Public utility facilities not containing employees in commercial districts Recreational vehicles and heavy truck sales, service, and repair 1 per each 4000 square feet of floor area. 100% short term Shopping centers and malls 1 per each 3000 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Theaters, live entertainment and motion picture 1 per 40 seats. 25% long term 75% short term Transportation facilities 1 per each 3000 square feet of floor area. 75% long term 25% short term Warehouse commercial sales, regional distribution center 1 per each 6000 square feet of floor area 25% long term 75% short term Industrial Uses Agricultural, resource production and extraction 1 per each 600 square feet of floor area. 100% short term Manufacture and assembly 1 per 3000 square feet of floor area 25% long term 75% short term Retail trade when secondary, directly related, and limited to products manufactured, repaired, or assembled on the development 1 per each 3000 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Exhibit A, Page 62 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 64 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 63 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Land Use Minimum Parking Requirements (Minimum 3 spaces required) Type and % of Bike Parking site Education Universities or colleges, schools, business or specialized educational training 1 per 5 full-time students 25% long term 75% short term Schools, driving (including use of motor vehicles) 1 per each 3000 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Schools, public or private (elementary through high school) 1 per 8 students. 25% long term 75% short term Universities or colleges 1 per 5 full-time students. 25% long term 75% short term Government Libraries 1 per each 1500 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Museum 1 per each 500 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Government services, not specifically listed in this or any other uses and permits table 1 per each 3000 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Correctional facilities, excluding residential treatment centers 1 per 20 beds. 25% long term 75% short term Medical and Health Services Blood banks 1 per each 3000 square feet of floor area. 100% short term Hospitals, clinics, or other medical health treatment facilities (including mental health) in excess of 10,000 square feet of floor area 1 per each 3000 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Laboratories--medical, dental, x-ray. 1 per each 3000 square feet of floor area 25% long term 75% short term Exhibit A, Page 63 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 65 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 64 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Land Use Minimum Parking Requirements (Minimum 3 spaces required) Type and % of Bike Parking Nursing homes, plasma center, residential treatment centers. 1 per 15 beds 75% long term 25% short term Veterinary and wildlife care centers 1 per each 3000 square feet of floor area 100% short term Other uses Civic, social, fraternal organizations, including clubs and lodges of national organization 1 per each 3000 square feet of floor area. 100% short term Community and neighborhood centers 1 per each 1000 square feet of floor area. 25% long term 75% short term Park, community or regional Minimum of 4 plus additional spaces if the 100% short term park is developed with the following improvements: Playing court: 2 spaces Picnic Shelter: 2 spaces Playground: 2 spaces Athletic/Playing Field: 4 spaces Skateboard Park: 2 spaces Restroom: 2 spaces Parking garages 10% of auto spaces. 100% long term Race tracks, including drag strips and go-cart tracks 1 per 40 seats. 25% long term 75% short term Religious, social and public institutions 1 per 40 fixed seats or 60 feet of bench length or every 200 square feet where no permanent seats or benches are maintained in main auditorium (sanctuary or place of worship). 100% short term Transit park and ride, transit station Minimum 10 spaces, 10% of auto spaces, whichever is greater. 25% long term 75% short term 373 374 Exhibit A, Page 64 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 66 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 65 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 375 Table 4.6-3 Minimum Required Bicycle Parking Spaces Use Category Specific Uses Number of Required Spaces Long and Short Term Bicycle Parking Percentages Residential Single-family and duplexes -0 NA Triplex, four-plex, and multi-family 1 per dwelling unit 75% long term 25% short term Dormitories 1 space per every three3 occupants 50% long term 50% short term Assisted care and day cares 1 per 5 employees 75% long term 25% short term Other Residential Uses 1 per dwelling unit 100% long term 50% long term 50% short term Commercial General Retail 1 per 3000 square feet of floor area 25% long term 75% short term Eating and Drinking Establishments 1 per 600 square feet of floor area 25% long term 75% short term Service Establishments 1 per 2000 square feet of floor area 25% long term 75% short term Art Institution/Gallery 1 per 1500 square feet of floor area 25% long term 75% short term Exhibit A, Page 65 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 67 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 66 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 376 ********** 377 Table 4.6-3 Minimum Required Bicycle Parking Spaces Use Category Specific Uses Number of Required Spaces Long and Short Term Bicycle Parking Percentages Drive-through Only Establishments 2 for employee parking (minimum of 4 does not apply) 100% long term Lodging 1 per 10 rentable rooms 75% long term 25% short term Office, including Medical Offices and Clinics 0.75 per 5000 square feet of floor area 75% long term 25% short term Industrial and Wholesale 0.25 per employee OR 1 per 3000-4000 square feet of floor area, whichever is less 7525% long term 2575% short term Institutional Government related uses 1 per 3000 square feet of floor area 25% long term 75% short term Schools (elementary through high school) 1 per 10 students based on planned capacity 25% long term 75% short term Parks and playgrounds 8 per park or playground 100% short term Recreation, Amusement, and Entertainment Facilities 1 per 1000 square feet of floor area 25% long term 75% short term Universities/Colleges 1 per 5 full time students 25% long term 75% short term Hospitals and Medical Centers 1 per 40000 square feet of floor area 7525% long term 2575% short term Religious Institutions and Places of Worship 1 per 20 seats or 40 feet of bench length (fixed seating) or 1 per 500 square feet of floor area (no fixed seating) 100% short term Transportation- Related Structured Parking 10% of the number of vehicle parking spaces provided 75% long term 25% short term Transit Station 10% of the number of vehicle parking spaces provided (if no vehicle parking is provided, the minimum of 4 applies) 50% long term 50% short term Transit Park & Ride 10% of the number of vehicle parking spaces provided 50% long term 50% short term Exhibit A, Page 66 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 68 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 67 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Staff Commentary: Changes to Section 3.4-270 are intended to align the Glenwood Riverfront Mixed-Use Plan District 378 Bike Parking standards with the proposed changes to the general bike parking Section 4.6-150. 379 380 Section 3.4-200 GLENWOOD RIVERFRONT MIXED-USE PLAN DISTRICT 381 382 3.4-270 Public and Private Development Standards 383 384 ********** 385 G. Vehicle/Bicycle Parking and Loading Standards. 386 387 13. Bicycle Parking. Safe and convenient bicycle parking shall be provided for residents, visitors, employees and patrons. 388 In mixed-use developments, the required bicycle parking for each use shall be provided. Required off-street bicycle 389 parking spaces shall be as specified in Table 3.4-2. The requirements in Table 3.4-2 supersede any conflicting 390 requirements in Section 4.6-155. The required minimum number of parking spaces for each listed use is 4 spaces. 391 392 Bicycle Parking Standards Table 3.4-2 393 Use Category Use Sub-Category Number of Required Spaces Long and Short Term Bicycle Parking Percentages Commercial Eating and Drinking Establishments 1 per 600 sq. ft. of floor area 25% long term 75% short term Hospitality 1 per 20 rentable rooms 75% long term 25% short term Personal Services 1 per 2000 sq. ft. of floor area 25% long term 75% short term Professional, Scientific and Technical Services 1 per 3000 sq. ft. of floor area 75% long term 25% short term Retail Sales and Services 1 per 3000 sq. ft. of floor area 25% long term 75% short term Employment Office Employment 1 per 3000 sq. ft. of floor area 75% long term 25% short term Light Manufacturing 1 per 10,000 sq. ft. of floor area 75% long term 25% short term Light Manufacturing Storage 1 per 10,000 sq. ft. of floor area 75% long term 25% short term Warehousing 1 per 40,000 sq. ft. of floor area 75% long term 25% short term Recreation Park Blocks or Riverfront Linear Park Recreational Facilities 8 per each park block and 4 per each mile of riverfront linear park 100% short term Residential Senior and Congregate Care 1 per 4 rooms 75% long term 25% short term Dormitories 1 per every 3 beds 75% long term 25% short term High-Density Residential Housing 1 per 2 dwelling units 75% long term 25% short term Vehicle Related Uses Structured Parking Public or Private 5% of the number of vehicle spaces provided or 105% of the demand 75% long term 25% short term Exhibit A, Page 67 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 69 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 68 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 394 14. Bicycle Parking Design, Location and Security. 395 396 a. Required bicycle parking spaces and facilities must be constructed and installed in accordance with Sections 397 4.6-145 and 4.6-150. Long term bicycle parking required in association with a commercial or employment 398 use shall be provided in a well-lighted, secure location within a convenient distance of a main entrance and 399 any secondary entrance. A secure location is defined as one in which the bicycle parking is a bicycle locker, a 400 lockable bicycle enclosure, or provided within a lockable room. 401 402 b. Long term bicycle parking provided in outdoor locations shall not be farther away than the closest on-site 403 automobile parking space, excluding designated accessible parking spaces. 404 405 c. Long term bicycle parking required in association with high-density residential use shall be provided in a 406 well-lighted, secure ground-level or underground location within a convenient distance of an entrance to the 407 residential unit. A secure location is defined as one in which the bicycle parking is provided outside the 408 residential unit within a protected garage, a lockable room, a lockable bicycle enclosure, or a bicycle locker. 409 410 d. Short term bicycle parking shall consist of a securely fixed structure that supports the bicycle frame in a 411 stable position without damage to wheels, frame, or components and that allows the frame and both 412 wheels to be attached to the rack by the bicyclist’s own locking device. Innovative bicycle racks that 413 incorporate street art shall be encouraged. Short term bicycle parking shall be provided within a convenient 414 distance of and clearly visible from, the main entrance and/or any secondary entrance to the building, but it 415 shall not be farther away than the closest on-site automobile parking space, excluding designated accessible 416 parking spaces. 417 418 ********** 419 420 Staff Commentary: Definitions for “block,” “block length,” and “block perimeter” are added based on the proposed 421 amendments to SDC 4.2-115, establishing new maximum block perimeters. Although a maximum block length is already 422 included in the 4.2-115, the term “block length” is not currently defined in the development code. The definition for a 423 “block” is proposed to be amended to provide better clarity. The new definition for Frequent Transit Corridor relates to 424 TSP Policy 3.8, Action 3, and to changes in parking requirements and allowed reductions proposed for SDC 4.6-110 and 425 4.6-125. The revised definition for “vision clearance area” reflects that a vision clearance area may not always be a 426 triangular area, and adds that vision clearance areas are also required for driveway/street intersections. If the proposed 427 changes are impmlemented, the term “bikeway” no longer will appear in the Springfield Development Code, and 428 therefore the definition should be removed. 429 430 Section 6.1-100 Definitions 431 432 6.1-110 Meaning of Specific Words and Terms 433 434 AASHTO. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. 435 436 Bikeway. Any street, path or way which in some manner is specifically designated for bicycle travel, regardless of whether the facilities 437 are designated for the exclusive use of bicycles or are to be shared with other transportation modes. 438 Block. An area of land containing one or more lots/parcels surrounded by public or private streets, railroad and/or un-subdivided 439 acreage. 440 Exhibit A, Page 68 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 70 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 69 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Block Length. The distance along a public or private street between the centerline of two intersecting streets, including “T” 441 intersections but excluding cul-de-sacs. 442 443 Block Perimeter. The sum of all block lengths for a given block, also measured as the distance to travel once completely around the 444 block, ending at the starting point as measured from the centerline of the street. 445 Development Services and Public Works Department. The department responsible for the administration of this Code and the 446 implementation of the Metro Plan within Springfield’s Urban Growth Boundary. 447 448 Director. The Development Services and Public Works Director or the duly authorized representative who is responsible for the 449 administration and interpretation of this Code. 450 451 Frequent Transit Corridor. Arterial and collector roadways forming a Frequent Transit Network, as identified in the adopted 452 Springfield Transportation System Plan, representing the highest order of transit service along major thoroughfares within the city. 453 Characteristics of Frequent Transit Network corridors include, but are not limited to: 10-15 minute transit frequency during peak travel 454 times, a well-connected street and transit network providing circulation integrated with pedestrian and bicycle connections, support 455 and compatibility with urban design goals for development along the corridors, geographically equitable coverage serving populations 456 protected by Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and high-quality transit station amenities. 457 Future Development Plan. A line drawing (required for some land division proposals, or building permits in the City’s urbanizable area) 458 that includes the following information: the location of future right-of-way dedications based on TransPlan the Springfield 459 Transportation System Plan, the Conceptual Local Street Plan Map; or block length and lot/parcel size standards of the SDC; a re-460 division plan at a minimum urban density established in this Code based on the existing Metro Plan designation of the property for any 461 lot/parcel that is large enough to further divide; and the location of hillsides, riparian areas, drainage ways, jurisdictional wetlands and 462 wooded areas showing how future development will address preservation, protection or removal. 463 464 Public Works Director. The Director of Public Works or a duly authorized representative. The City Engineer, the Environmental Services 465 Manager and the Transportation Manager routinely serve as representatives of the Public Works Director. 466 467 Linear Park. A public or private park that provides public access to trail-oriented activities, which may include walking, running, biking, 468 or skating, and preserves open space. A linear park consists of a multi-use path, pedestrian trail, or bikeway, and related facilities. 469 470 Vision Clearance Area. A triangular shaped portion of land established at street, alley, or driveway intersections or driveways in which 471 nothing over 2 1/2 feet is erected, placed, planted or allowed to grow to may obstruct the sight distance of motorists entering or 472 leaving the intersection, unless specifically exempted by this Code. 473 ********** 474 475 476 Exhibit A, Page 69 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 71 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 70 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 5. Proposed Changes to Various Standards for Code Administration (SDC Chapters 3, 4, and 5) 477 478 Relevant TSP Policies/Actions: 479 Policy 3.3: Street design standards should be flexible and allow appropriate-sized local, collector, and arterial streets based upon 480 traffic flow, geography, efficient land use, social, economic and environmental impacts. 481 Action 1: Conduct a comprehensive review and update of Springfield street standards, and develop code to 482 address transportation system deficiencies, adopted goals, and policies. 483 Action 2: Consider effects of stormwater runoff in street design and reduce runoff through environmentally 484 sensitive street designs for new and reconstructed streets. 485 Policy 3.4: Provide for a continuous transportation network with reasonably direct travel routes to destination points for all modes 486 of travel. 487 488 Staff Commentary: The following Code revisions are proposed to address ambiguity in the existing Code, to help clarify application 489 of Code standards, and/or to reconcile site-related development standards with street design standard modifications 490 called for in TSP Policy 3.3 and in Policy 3.3 Actions 1 and 2, and Policy 3.4. 491 The new text proposed in SDC 3.2-220A.6. provides a maximum length for a panhandle driveway where none exists 492 currently in Code. Absent having any standard, panhandle driveway lengths can meet or exceed the minimum block 493 length for public streets and maximum length for dead end streets. Establishing a maximum driveway length for new 494 panhandle lots ensures suitable fire access, and encourages connectivity and enhances pedestrian access. 495 496 3.2-220 Additional Panhandle Lot/Parcel Development Standards 497 498 A. Special provisions for lots/parcels with panhandle driveways: 499 500 1. Panhandle driveways are permitted where dedication of public right-of-way is impractical or to comply with the 501 density standards in the applicable zoning district. Panhandle driveways shall not be permitted in lieu of a public 502 street, as determined by the Director. 503 504 2. Panhandle driveways shall not encroach upon or cross a watercourse, other body of water or other topographic 505 feature unless approved by the Director and the City Engineer. 506 507 3. The area of the pan portion does not include the area in the “panhandle” driveway. 508 509 4. No more than 4 lots/parcels or 8 dwelling units shall take primary access from 1 multiple panhandle driveway. 510 511 5. The paving standards for panhandle driveways are: 512 513 a. Twelve feet wide for a single panhandle driveway from the front property line to a distance of 18 feet, 514 where there is an unimproved street; and from the front property line to the pan of the rear lot/parcel, 515 where there is an improved street; and 516 b. Eighteen feet wide for a multiple panhandle driveway from the front property line to the pan of the last 517 lot/parcel. This latter standard takes precedence over the driveway width standard for multiple-family 518 driveways specified in Table 4.2-2. 519 520 Exhibit A, Page 70 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 72 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 71 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 6. New panhandle driveways must not exceed 250 feet in length as measured from the front property line to the pan of the 521 rear lot/parcel. 522 523 524 B. The Director may waive the requirement that buildable lots/parcels have frontage on a public street when access 525 has been guaranteed via a private street, or driveway with an irrevocable joint use/access easement as specified in 526 Section 4.2-120A. In the residential districts, when a proposed land division includes single or multiple panhandle 527 lots/parcels and the front lot/parcel contains an existing primary or secondary structure, the Director may allow an 528 irrevocable joint use/access easement in lieu of the panhandles when there is not enough area to meet both the 529 applicable panhandle street frontage standard and the required 5-foot wide side yard setback standard for the 530 existing structure. In this case, the irrevocable access easement width standard shall be: 531 532 1. Fourteen feet wide for a single panhandle lot/parcel in the LDR District. 533 534 2. Twenty feet wide for a single panhandle in the MDR and HDR District, or where multiple panhandles are 535 proposed in any residential district. 536 537 538 ********** 539 540 Staff Commentary: Changes to SDC 4.7-140 and SDC 5.12-120 relate to the review of City standards called for in Policy 3.3, 541 Action 1. These changes more clearly link new residential driveway siting and lot layout with safety-based roadway 542 standards for minimum driveway separation and location. Other housekeeping text amendments are also included below. 543 544 4.7-140 Siting Duplexes in All Residential Districts 545 546 A. New Duplexes in the LDR and SLR Districts. A single duplex may be located on corner lots/parcels as specified in Section 3.2-547 215. The design standards specified in Section 4.7-142 shall only apply to duplexes in the SLR District. Corner lots/parcels 548 proposed for new duplexes must demonstrate that lot/parcel configuration, lot/parcel size, driveway locations, and driveway 549 distances from street intersections are adequate to ensure traffic and pedestrian safety. 550 551 B. Pre-existing Duplexes in the LDR District. Prior to the adoption of this Code: 552 553 1. Duplexes on interior lots/parcels approved as part of a Planned Unit Development shall not be considered to be 554 nonconforming uses. 555 556 2. Duplexes on interior lots/parcels approved on property previously zoned RGesidential Garden (RG) Apartments shall 557 not be considered to be a nonconforming use. 558 559 3. Duplexes on interior lots/parcels that meet the density requirements of this zoning district shall not be considered a 560 nonconforming use. 561 562 C. New Duplexes in the MDR and HDR Districts. 563 564 1. A single duplex shall be permitted on corner lots/parcels as specified in Section 3.2-210. The design standards of 565 Section 4.7-142 shall apply to this category of duplexes. 566 567 Exhibit A, Page 71 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 73 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 72 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 2. Where more than 1 duplex is proposed on lots/parcels that are less than 1/2 acre in size and the minimum MDR or 568 HDR density standard for the entire development area can be met, the design standards specified in Section 4.7-142 569 shall apply to this category of duplexes. 570 571 3. Where more than 1 duplex is proposed on lots/parcels that are 1/2 acre or more and the minimum MDR or HDR 572 density standard for the entire development area can be met, the multifamily design standards specified in Section 573 3.2-240 shall apply to this category of duplexes. 574 575 D. Partitioning Corner Duplex Lots. A proposed or existing duplex on a corner lot/parcel in any residential district may be 576 partitioned for the purpose of allowing independent ownership of each dwelling unit, providing the 2 platted parcels meet the 577 minimum area standards for corner duplex parcels specified in Section 3.2-215 and the minimum separation of driveways 578 from the nearest street intersection as specified in Section 4.2-120, Table 4.2-4. In this case, the partition shall meet the land 579 division standards specified in Section 5.12-100 and the following: 580 581 1. Utility service to each unit shall be separate. 582 583 2. All walls connecting abutting units shall be fire resistive walls as specified in the Oregon Residential Specialty Code. 584 585 3. The property line separating the 2 units shall have not more than 2 angle points. The angle points shall not occur 586 within the wall between abutting units. 587 588 ********** 589 590 5.12-100 Land Divisions – Partitions and Subdivisions 591 592 5.12-120 Tentative Plan Submittal Requirements 593 594 A Tentative Plan application shall contain the elements necessary to demonstrate that the provisions of this Code are being fulfilled. 595 596 EXCEPTION: In the case of Partition applications with the sole intent to donate land to a public agency, the Director, during the Pre-597 Submittal Meeting, may waive any submittal requirements that can be addressed as part of a future development application. 598 599 A. General Requirements. 600 601 1. The Tentative Plan, including any required Future Development Plan, shall be prepared by an Oregon Licensed 602 Professional Land Surveyor on standard sheets of 18” x 24”. The services of an Oregon Licensed Professional Engineer 603 may also be required by the City in order to resolve utility issues (especially stormwater management, street design 604 and transportation issues), and site constraint and/or water quality issues. 605 606 2. The scale of the Tentative Plan shall be appropriate to the area involved and the amount of detail and data, 607 normally 1 = 50 , 1 = 100 , or 1 = 200 . 608 609 3. A north arrow and the date the Tentative Plan was prepared. 610 611 4. The name and address of the owner, applicant, if different, and the Land Surveyor and/or Engineer who 612 prepared the Partition Tentative Plan. 613 614 Exhibit A, Page 72 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 74 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 73 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 5. A drawing of the boundaries of the entire area owned by the partitioner or subdivider of which the proposed 615 land division is a part. 616 617 6. City boundaries, the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and any special service district boundaries or railroad 618 right-of-way, which cross or abut the proposed land division. 619 620 7. Applicable zoning districts and the Metro Plan designation of the proposed land division and of properties 621 within 100 feet of the boundary of the subject property. 622 623 8. The dimensions (in feet) and size (either in square feet or acres) of each lot/parcel and the approximate 624 dimensions of each building site, where applicable, and the top and toe of cut and fill slopes to scale. 625 626 9. The location, outline to scale and present use of all existing structures to remain on the property after 627 platting and their required setbacks from the proposed new property lines. 628 629 10. The location and size of existing and proposed utilities and necessary easements and dedications on and 630 adjacent to the site, including but not limited to sanitary sewer mains, stormwater management systems, 631 water mains, power, gas, telephone, and cable TV. Indicate the proposed connection points. 632 633 11. The locations widths and purpose of all existing or proposed easements on and abutting the proposed land 634 division; the location of any existing or proposed reserve strips. 635 636 12. The locations of all areas to be dedicated or reserved for public use, with the purpose, condition or 637 limitations of the reservations clearly indicated. 638 639 B. A Site Assessment of the Entire Development Area. The Site Assessment shall be prepared by an Oregon Licensed Landscape 640 Architect or Engineer and drawn to scale with existing contours at 1-foot intervals and percent of slope that precisely maps 641 and delineates the areas described below. Proposed modifications to physical features shall be clearly indicated. The Director 642 may waive portions of this requirement if there is a finding that the proposed development will not have an adverse impact 643 on physical features or water quality, either on the site or adjacent to the site. Information required for adjacent properties 644 may be generalized to show the connections to physical features. A Site Assessment shall contain the following information. 645 646 1. The name, location, dimensions, direction of flow and top of bank of all watercourses that are shown on the Water 647 Quality Limited Watercourses (WLQWWQLW) Map on file in the Development Services and Public Works 648 Department; 649 650 2. The 100-year floodplain and floodway boundaries on the site, as specified in the latest adopted FEMA Flood 651 Insurance Maps or FEMA approved Letter of Map Amendment or Letter of Map Revision; 652 653 3. The Time of Travel Zones, as specified in Section 3.3-200 and delineated on the Wellhead Protection Areas Map on 654 file in the Development Services and Public Works Department; 655 656 4. Physical features including, but not limited to significant clusters of trees and shrubs, watercourses shown on the 657 (WLQWWQLW) Map and their riparian areas, wetlands, and rock outcroppings; 658 659 5. Soil types and water table information as mapped and specified in the Soils Survey of Lane Count; and 660 661 6. Natural resource protection areas as specified in Section 4.3-117. 662 Exhibit A, Page 73 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 75 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 74 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 663 C. A Stormwater Management Plan drawn to scale with existing contours at 1-foot intervals and percent of slope that precisely 664 maps and addresses the information described below. In areas where the percent of slope is 10 percent or more, contours 665 may be shown at 5-foot intervals. This plan shall show the stormwater management system for the entire development area. 666 Unless exempt by the Public Works Director, the City shall require that an Oregon licensed Civil Engineer prepare the plan. 667 Where plants are proposed as part of the stormwater management system, an Oregon Llicensed Landscape Architect may 668 also be required. The plan shall include the following components: 669 670 1. Roof drainage patterns and discharge locations; 671 672 2. Pervious and impervious area drainage patterns; 673 674 3. The size and location of stormwater management systems components, including but not limited to: drain lines, 675 catch basins, dry wells and/or detention ponds; stormwater quality measures; and natural drainageways to be 676 retained; 677 678 4. Existing and proposed site elevations, grades and contours; and 679 680 5. A stormwater management system plan with supporting calculations and documentation as required in Section 4.3-681 110 shall be submitted supporting the proposed system. The plan, calculations and documentation shall be 682 consistent with the Engineering Designs Standards and Procedures Manual to allow staff to determine if the 683 proposed stormwater management system will accomplish its purposes. 684 685 D. A Rresponse to Ttransportation issues complying with the provisions of this Code. 686 1. The locations, condition, e.g., fully improved with curb, gutter and sidewalk, AC mat, or gravel, widths and names of 687 all existing streets, alleys, or other rights-of-way within or adjacent to the proposed land division; 688 689 2. The locations, widths and names of all proposed streets and other rights-of-way to include the approximate radius of 690 curves and grades. The relationship of all proposed streets to any projected streets as shown on the Metro Plan or 691 Springfield Comprehensive Plan, including the TransPlan Springfield Transportation System Plan, any approved 692 Conceptual Development Plan and the latest version of the Conceptual Local Street Map; 693 694 3. The locations and widths of all existing and proposed sidewalks, multi-use paths, pedestrian trails and accessways, 695 including the location, size and type of plantings and street trees in any required planter strip; 696 697 4. The location of existing and proposed traffic control devices, fire hydrants, power poles, transformers, neighborhood 698 mailbox units and similar public facilities, where applicable; 699 700 5. The location and dimensions of existing and proposed driveways demonstrating conformance with lot/parcel 701 dimensions and frontage requirements for single-family and duplex lots/parcels established in Section 3.2-215, and 702 driveway width and separation specifications established in Section 4.2-120, where applicable; 703 704 6. The location of existing and proposed street trees, associated utilities along street frontage(s), and street lighting: 705 including the type, height and area of illumination; 706 707 7. The location of existing and proposed transit facilities; 708 709 Exhibit A, Page 74 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 76 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 75 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 8. A copy of a Right-of-way Approach Permit application where the property has frontage on an Oregon Department of 710 Transportation (ODOT) facility; and 711 712 9. A Traffic Impact Study prepared by a Oregon Licensed Traffic Engineer, where necessary, as specified in Section 4.2-713 105A.4. 714 715 E. A Future Development Plan. Where phasing and/or lots/parcels that are more than twice the minimum lot/parcel size are 716 proposed, the Tentative Plan shall include a Future Development Plan that: 717 718 1. Indicates the proposed redivision, including the boundaries, lot/parcel dimensions and sequencing of each proposed 719 redivision in any residential district, and shall include a plot plan showing building footprints for compliance with the 720 minimum residential densities specified in Section 3.2-205. 721 722 2. Addresses street connectivity between the various phases of the proposed development based upon compliance 723 with TransPlan the Springfield Transportation System Plan, the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), applicable 724 Refinement Plans, Plan Districts, Master Plans, Conceptual Development Plans, or the Conceptual Local Street Map 725 and this Code; 726 727 3. Accommodates other required public improvements, including, but not limited to, sanitary sewer, stormwater 728 management, water and electricity; 729 730 4. Addresses physical features, including, but not limited to, significant clusters of trees and shrubs, watercourses 731 shown on the Water Quality Limited Watercourse Map and their associated riparian areas, wetlands, rock 732 outcroppings and historic features; and 733 734 5. Discusses the timing and financial provisions relating to phasing. 735 736 737 F. Additional information and/or applications required at the time of Tentative Plan application submittal shall include the 738 following items, where applicable: 739 740 1. A brief narrative explaining the purpose of the proposed land division and the existing use of the property; 741 742 2. If the applicant is not the property owner, written permission from the property owner is required; 743 744 3. A Vicinity Map drawn to scale showing bus stops, streets, driveways, pedestrian connections, fire hydrants and other 745 transportation/fire access issues within 200 feet of the proposed land division and all existing Partitions or 746 Subdivisions immediately adjacent to the proposed land division; 747 4. How the Tentative Plan addresses the standards of any applicable overlay district; 748 749 5. How the Tentative Plan addresses Discretionary Use criteria, where applicable; 750 751 6. A Tree Felling Permit as specified in Section 5.19-100; 752 753 7. A Geotechnical Report for slopes of 15 percent or greater and as specified in Section 3.3-500, and/or if the required 754 Site Assessment in Section 5.12-120B. indicates the proposed development area has unstable soils and/or high water 755 table as specified in the Soils Survey of Lane County; 756 Exhibit A, Page 75 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 77 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 76 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 757 8. An Annexation application as specified in Section 5.7-100 where a development is proposed outside of the city limits 758 but within City’s urban growth boundary and can be serviced by sanitary sewer; 759 760 9. A wetland delineation approved by the Department of State Lands shall be submitted concurrently where there is a 761 wetland on the property; 762 763 10. Evidence that any required Federal or State permit has been applied for or approved shall be submitted concurrently; 764 765 11. All public improvements proposed to be installed and to include the approximate time of installation and method of 766 financing; 767 768 12. Proposed deed restrictions and a draft of a Homeowner’s Association Agreement, where appropriate; 769 770 13. Cluster Subdivisions shall also address the design standards specified in Section 3.2-230; 771 772 14. Where the Subdivision of a manufactured dwelling park or mobile home park is proposed, the Director may waive 773 certain submittal requirements specified in Subsections A. through M. However, the Tentative Plan shall address the 774 applicable standards listed under the park Subdivision approval criteria specified in Section 5.12-125. 775 ********** 776 777 778 Exhibit A, Page 76 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 78 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 77 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 7. Other Proposed Code Housekeeping Changes 779 780 Staff Commentary: The following amendments to the Code are principally for housekeeping purposes, and proposed in addition to 781 certain housekeeping changes proposed above with more substantive Code amendments implementing TSP policies. The 782 proposed changes help standardize terminology (e.g., current Code has numerous variations in referring to the 783 Conceptual Street Map), address out-of-date references (e.g., department and Director citations below reflect the current 784 Development and Public Works Department naming conventions), and correct certain scriveners errors. 785 786 3.2-200 Residential Zoning Districts 787 788 3.2-215 Base Zone Development Standards 789 790 (8) When additional right-of-way is required, whether by City engineering standards, the Metro Plan or Springfield 791 Comprehensive Plan (including the TransPlan Springfield Transportation System Plan), or the City’s Conceptual Local Street 792 Plan Map, setbacks are based on future right-of-way locations. Right-of-way shall be dedicated prior to the issuance of any 793 building permit that increases parking requirements. 794 795 ********** 796 3.2-300 Commercial Zoning Districts 797 798 3.2-315 Base Zone Development Standards 799 800 (4) When additional right-of-way is required, whether by City engineering standards, the Metro Plan or Springfield 801 Comprehensive Plan (including the TransPlan Springfield Transportation System Plan), or the City’s Conceptual Local Street 802 Plan Map, setbacks are based on future right-of-way locations. Right-of-way shall be dedicated prior to the issuance of any 803 building permit that increases parking requirements. 804 805 ********** 806 3.2-400 Industrial Zoning Districts 807 808 3.2-420 Base Zone Development Standards 809 810 (4) Setback Exceptions: 811 (b) When additional right-of-way is required, whether by City Engineering standards, the Metro Plan or Springfield 812 Comprehensive Plan (including the TransPlan Springfield Transportation System Plan), or the City’s Conceptual Local Street 813 Plan Map, setbacks are based on future right-of-way locations. Right-of-way shall be dedicated prior to the issuance of any 814 building permit that increases required parking. 815 816 ********** 817 3.2-600 Mixed-Use Zoning Districts 818 819 3.2-615 Base Zone Development Standards 820 821 (4) When additional right-of-way is required, whether by City engineering standards, the Metro Plan or Springfield 822 Comprehensive Plan (including the TransPlan Springfield Transportation System Plan), or the City’s Conceptual Local Street 823 Plan Map, setbacks are based on future right-of-way locations. Right-of-way shall be dedicated prior to the issuance of any 824 building permit that increases required parking. 825 826 Exhibit A, Page 77 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 79 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 78 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 3.2-635 Phased Development 827 828 (A) If development is planned to occur in phases, a phased development plan shall be submitted concurrently with the Site Plan 829 application specified in Section 5.17-100. In addition to the phasing requirements specified in Section 5.17-115, the phasing 830 plan shall include the following information: 831 1. Existing buildings and dimensions with distances from property lines and other buildings. 832 2. The location of future right-of-way dedications based on TransPlan the Springfield Transportation System Plan, the adopted 833 City’s Conceptual Local Street Network Plan Map and the block length and size standards specified in Section 3.2-625E. 834 835 ********* 836 Section 3.2-900 Agriculture – Urban Holding Area (AG) Zoning District 837 838 3.2-925 Standards for Interim Development 839 840 These regulations apply to the development of interim uses as specified in Subsections 3.2-915 and 3.2.920 in the AG District. 841 842 A. Receive certification from the Lane County Sanitarian that any proposed wastewater disposal system meets Oregon 843 Department of Environmental Quality (D.E.Q.) standards prior to Development Approval. 844 845 B. Interim uses may not be placed on a site in a manner that would impede future development of land designated Urban 846 Holding Area-Employment with urban employment uses. 847 848 C. Interim uses may not be placed on a site in manner that would impede extension of infrastructure to serve land 849 designated Urban Holding Area-Employment from developing with urban employment uses. 850 851 D. To demonstrate compliance with this provision, and in addition to the special provisions listed in Table A, the Applicant 852 shall submit a Future Development Plan that: 853 854 1. Includes a brief narrative explaining the existing and proposed use of the property; 855 856 2. Indicates the proposed development footprint on a scaled plot plan of the property; 857 858 3. Limits the proposed new development footprint to 1/2 acre or less of the site; 859 860 4. Addresses future street connectivity as shown in the Springfield Transportation System Plan, Regional 861 Transportation System Plan, Local Street Network PlanConceptual Street Map, Springfield Comprehensive Plan, 862 applicable Refinement Plans and this Code; 863 864 5. Addresses the number and type of vehicle trips to be generated by the proposed use; 865 866 6. Addresses the applicable Natural Resources protection, Water Quality Limited Watercourses protection, 867 Floodplain Overlay Development Standards, and Drinking Water Protection Overlay Development Standards of this 868 Code. 869 870 E. Development shall utilize the following base zone development standards: 871 872 Minimum Lot/Parcel Sizes A 50-acre minimum lot/parcel size is applied to lots/parcels 50 acres or larger. A 20- acre minimum lot/parcel size is applied to lots/parcels less than 50 acres in size. Exhibit A, Page 78 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 80 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 79 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm Lots/parcels less than 20 acres in size may not be further divided. (1) Main Building Height 35 feet Accessory Building Height 35 feet (2) Building/Structure Setbacks: UHA-E designated parcels 20 acres and larger 20 feet from State, County, City roads, streets and local access roads. At least 100 feet from the adjoining lines of property zoned EFU; and in a location that does not impede future development of urban employment use or extension of urban infrastructure as shown in transportation plans, public facilities plans or master plans. Building/Structure Setbacks: UHA-E designated parcels smaller than 20 acres 20 feet from State, County, City roads, streets and local access roads. 10 feet from other property lines. Minimum Lot/Parcel Frontage None Minimum Lot/Parcel Depth None 873 (1) Exemption: Land divisions that create lots/parcels for the purpose of establishing a Natural Resource or Public/Semi-Public Parks 874 and Open Space designation within the floodway, wetland or riparian resource portions of the site may create lots/parcels less than 875 20 acres within the Natural Resource or Public/Semi-Public Parks and Open Space designation portion of the parent lot/parcel. 876 (2) Water tanks, silos, granaries, barns and similar accessory structures or necessary mechanical appurtenances may exceed the 877 minimum height standard. 878 879 ********* 880 881 Section 3.3-1000 Nodal Development Overlay District 882 883 3.3-1005 Purpose, Applicability and Review 884 885 A. Purpose. The Nodal Development (ND) Overlay District is established to work in conjunction with underlying zoning districts to 886 implement transportation-related land use policies found in TransPlan Springfield Transportation System Plan and in the 887 Metro Plan. The ND Overlay District also supports “pedestrian-friendly, mixed-use development” as outlined in the State 888 Transportation Planning Rule. 889 890 891 3.3-1015 Location Standards 892 893 When establishing the location and boundaries of a ND Overlay District, the following criteria shall be considered: 894 895 A. The ND Overlay District shall be applied to the mixed-use centers or “nodes” identified by the City in response to its 896 responsibility under TransPlan the Springfield Transportation System Plan. 897 898 ********** 899 900 3.4-200 Glenwood Riverfront Mixed-Use Plan District 901 902 3.4-265 Base Zone Development Standards 903 904 (5) When additional right-of-way is required, whether by City engineering standards, the Metro Plan or Springfield 905 Comprehensive Plan (including the TransPlan Springfield Transportation System Plan), or the City’s Conceptual Local Street 906 Plan Map, setbacks are based on future right-of-way locations. Right-of-way shall be dedicated prior to the issuance of any 907 building permit that proposes parking spaces. 908 909 Exhibit A, Page 79 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 81 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 80 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 3.4-270 Public and Private Development Standards 910 911 A. Public Streets, Alleys and Sidewalks 912 913 1. Public streets, alleys and sidewalks in the Glenwood Riverfront shall be as described in the Glenwood Refinement 914 Plan Transportation Chapter and designed and constructed as specified in the Springfield Engineering Design 915 Standards and Procedures Manual. 916 917 2. Applicable Glenwood Refinement Plan Transportation Plan Policies and Implementation Strategies shall be as 918 specified in Appendix 3 of this Code. The following is an overview of the Glenwood Riverfront street network: 919 920 ********** 921 B. Street Trees and Curbside Planter Strips. Applicable Glenwood Refinement Plan Transportation Plan Policies and 922 Implementation Strategies shall be as specified in Appendix 3 of this Code. 923 924 ********** 925 C. Lighting 926 927 1. Applicable Glenwood Refinement Plan Transportation Plan Policies and Implementation Strategies shall be as 928 specified in Appendix 3 of this Code. 929 ********** 930 931 D. Bicycle Facilities. Bicycle facilities shall be required: off-street as part of the multi-use path specified in Subsection 3.4-270E.; 932 on-street; or as part of a mid-block connector. 933 934 1. Bicycle facilities in the Glenwood Riverfront shall be as described in the Glenwood Refinement Plan Transportation 935 and Open Space Chapters. 936 937 2. Applicable Glenwood Refinement Plan Transportation Plan Policies and Implementation Strategies shall be as 938 specified in Appendix 3 of this Code. 939 940 E. Multi-Use Path. The multi-use path shall be part of the riverfront linear park along the entire length of the Willamette River in 941 the Glenwood Riverfront. The multi-use path shall provide opportunities for active and passive recreation activities, including 942 but not limited to, walking, jogging, running, cycling, inline skating, and nature watching. The multi-use path shall be located 943 at the outermost edge of the 75-foot-wide Greenway Setback Line/Riparian Setback to the maximum extent practicable. 944 945 1. The multi-use path shall be as described in the Glenwood Refinement Plan Transportation and Open Space Chapters. 946 947 2. Applicable Glenwood Refinement Plan Transportation Plan and Open Space Chapter policies and implementation 948 strategies shall be as specified in Appendix 3 of this Code. 949 950 ********** 951 G. Vehicle/Bicycle Parking and Loading Standards. 952 953 1. Vehicle/bicycle parking standards shall be as described in the Glenwood Refinement Plan Transportation and the 954 Housing and Economic Development Chapters. 955 956 2. Applicable Glenwood Refinement Plan Vehicle/Bicycle Parking Policies and Implementation Strategies shall be as 957 specified in Appendix 3 of this Code. 958 Exhibit A, Page 80 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 82 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 81 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 959 3. Vehicle/bicycle parking and loading standards shall be designed and constructed as specified in this Subsection. 960 961 4. Vehicle Parking – General. Adequate vehicle parking shall be provided to support new development and 962 redevelopment in the Glenwood Riverfront, while minimizing adverse visual, environmental, and financial impacts on 963 the public. In line with the land use vision for compact development and a walkable, pedestrian-friendly 964 environment, on-street parking, aboveground and underground off-street parking structures, and parking located 965 within or under buildings shall be encouraged. Locating and designing all required vehicle parking to minimize the 966 visibility of parked cars to pedestrians from street frontages and light and noise impacts of parking lots strengthens 967 the character of the Glenwood Riverfront, reinforces the emphasis on pedestrian, bike, and transit for travel, and 968 minimizes the potential for vehicle/pedestrian conflicts. The Director may require a parking study to determine 969 adequacy of parking to support a given use or proposed development, but parking must not exceed the maximum 970 number of spaces established in Table 3.4-1 except as provided in Section 3.4-270G.8. 971 972 ********* 973 4.2-100 Infrastructure Standards – Transportation 974 975 4.2-110 Private Streets 976 977 A. Private streets are permitted 978 ********** 979 EXCEPTION: During the Site Plan Review, Partition or Subdivision processes involving private streets, the Public Works 980 Director may allow 981 ********** 982 Section 4.7-100 Specific Special Development Standards 983 984 4.7-120 Bed and Breakfast Facilities 985 986 A. Bed and Breakfast facilities shall may be located on local, collector, or arterial streets. All Bed and Breakfast facilities proposed 987 to be located on local streets are subject to Discretionary Use approval as specified in Section 5.9-100. 988 EXCEPTIONS: 989 1. In the Washburne Historic District, Bed and Breakfast facilities may be located on any classification of street. 990 991 2. Outside of the Washburne Historic District, Bed and Breakfast Facilities may be located on local streets. 992 993 3. All Bed and Breakfast facilities proposed to be placed on local streets shall require Discretionary Use approval as specified in 994 Section 5.9-100. 995 996 B. The facility shall be owner-occupied. 997 998 C. There shall be no more than 4 guest bedrooms. 999 1000 D. No guest parking is permitted within the front yard setback. Required guest parking shall be screened from public view 1001 Exhibit A, Page 81 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 83 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 82 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 1002 E. For structures on the Springfield Historic Inventory, any external modification shall be fully compatible with the original 1003 design. 1004 1005 F. A minimum of 25 percent of the lot/parcel shall be landscaped. 1006 1007 1008 ********** 1009 1010 4.7-195 Public/Private Elementary/Middle Schools 1011 1012 A. Schools are identified in the Metro Plan or Springfield Comprehensive Plan as key urban services, which shall be provided in 1013 an efficient and logical manner to keep pace with demand. 1014 ********** 1015 1016 8. Parking is limited to 2 spaces for each teaching station in the school plus 1 parking space for each 100 square feet of 1017 public indoor assembly area. All parking lots and driveways shall be designated to separate bus and passenger vehicle 1018 traffic. All parking lots shall have sidewalks raised a minimum of 6 inches above grade where pedestrians have to 1019 cross parking lots to enter or leave the school grounds. The Director may require wider sidewalks at major 1020 approaches to schools as deemed necessary for pedestrian safety and capacity. 1021 ********** 1022 1023 4.7-240 Transportation Facilities-Bus TerminalsTransit Stations, Heliports, and Helistops 1024 1025 New transit stations, hHeliports and helistops shall not be located within 200 feet of any residential district. Noise attenuating barriers 1026 shall be constructed where necessary to mitigate land use conflicts. 1027 New transit stations abutting residential districts may be required to provide noise attenuating barriers. 1028 EXCEPTION: In the BKMU district, transit stations are exempt from the setback requirement. 1029 1030 ********** 1031 Section 5.12-100 Land Divisions – Partitions and Subdivisions 1032 1033 5.12-130 Tentative Plan Conditions 1034 1035 A. Dedication of right-of-way and/or utility easements. 1036 1. Right-of-way, when shown in: TransPlan the Springfield Transportation System Plan; transportation elements of 1037 refinement plans; or on the most recent Conceptual Local Street Plan Map; and as specified in Table 4.2-1. 1038 ********** 1039 5.17-100 Site Plan Review 1040 1041 Exhibit A, Page 82 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 84 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 83 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 5.17-130 Conditions 1042 1043 A. Dedication of right-of-way and/or utility easements. 1044 1. Right-of-way, when shown in: TransPlan the Springfield Transportation System Plan, transportation elements of 1045 refinement plans; or on the most recently adopted Conceptual Local Street Plan Map; and as specified in Table 4.2-1. 1046 ********** 1047 1048 5.20-100 Vacations of Rights-of-Way and Easements 1049 1050 5.20-130 Criteria 1051 1052 A. For the Vacation of public utility easements, the Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application. The 1053 application will be approved if the Vacation is found to be consistent with the following criteria: 1054 1055 1. There are no present or future services, facilities, or utilities deemed to be necessary by a utility provider and the 1056 easement is not necessary; or 1057 1058 2. If the utility provider deems the easement to be necessary, public services, facilities, or utilities can be extended in an 1059 orderly and efficient manner in an alternate location. 1060 1061 B. Where the proposed Vacation of public rights-of-way, other city property, or Partition or Subdivision Plats is reviewed under 1062 Type IV procedure, the City Council shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the Vacation application. The application 1063 will be approved if the Vacation is found to be consistent with the following approval criteria. 1064 1. The Vacation shall be in conformance with the Metro Plan, TransPlan Springfield Transportation System Plan, the 1065 Conceptual Local Street Map and adopted Functional Plans, and applicable Refinement Plan diagram, Plan District 1066 map, or Conceptual Development Plan. 1067 3. The Vacation shall not conflict with the provisions of Springfield Municipal Code, 1997; and this Code, including but 1068 not limited to, street connectivity standards and block lengths; and 1069 1070 3. There shall be no negative effects on access, traffic circulation, emergency service protection or any other benefit 1071 derived from the public right-of-way, publicly owned land or Partition or Subdivision Plat. 1072 1073 C. Notwithstanding the provisions of Subsection B., above where the land affected by the proposed Vacation of public right-of-1074 way, other public land as specified in ORS 271.080, or public easement will remain in public ownership and will continue to be 1075 used for a public purpose, the request shall be reviewed under the Type IV procedure. The City Council may approve the 1076 Vacation application if it is found to be consistent with the following criteria: 1077 1078 1. The Vacation was initiated by the City Council pursuant to ORS 271.130(1); 1079 1080 2. Notice has been given pursuant to ORS 271.110(1); 1081 1082 3. Approval of the vacation would be consistent with provision of safe, convenient and reasonably direct routes for 1083 cyclists, pedestrians and vehicles as provided in OAR 660-012-00045(3); 1084 1085 Exhibit A, Page 83 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 85 of 164 12152017 DRAFT Code Changes – TSP Code Implementation Project Page 84 Visit project website for more information: http://www.springfield-or.gov/dpw/TSP.htm 4. Whether a greater public benefit would be obtained from the vacation than from retaining the right of way in its 1086 present status; and 1087 1088 5. Whether provisions have been made to ensure that the vacated property will remain in public ownership. 1089 1090 ********** 1091 Exhibit A, Page 84 of 84 Attachment 3, Page 86 of 164 Exhibit B, Page 1 of 1 Attachment 3, Page 87 of 164 Exhibit C, Page 1 of 1 Attachment 3, Page 88 of 164 PB = Ped-Bike, R = Roadway, S = Study, T = Transit, US = Urban Standards PINK TEXT = Proposed changes since TSP adopted in 2014 Project ID Project Name Project Description Cost List Project Type PB-1 McKenzie Gateway Path - Existing Path to Maple Island Road Construct a new multi-use 12-foot wide path from the end of the existing Riverbend Hospital path to Maple Island Road $3,000,000 20-year projects: As development occurs Pedestrian/bike PB-2 Flamingo Avenue to Gateway Street Construct a 12-foot wide path west from Flamingo Avenue to Gateway Street south of Game Bird Park $70,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Pedestrian/bike PB-3 Oakdale Street/Pheasant Street/et.al. - Game Farm Road to Gateway Road Add signing and striping for bicycle facilities $80,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-4 Wayside Lane/Ann Court to Riverbend Path Construct a new multi-use 12-foot wide path from Wayside Lane/Ann Court to the existing Sacred Heart Medical Center-Riverbend path $80,000 20-year projects: As development occurs Pedestrian/bike PB-5 Hartman Lane/Don Street - south of Harlow Road to OR 126 Add signing and striping for bicycle facilities and construct sidewalks to fill gaps $180,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-6 Springfield Christian School Channel Path - Dornoch Street to Laura Street Construct a new multi-use 12-foot wide path from Dornoch Street to Laura Street N/A Beyond 20 year projects Pedestrian/bike PB-7 Extend EWEB Trail - Pioneer Parkway to Don Street Construct a new multi-use 12-foot wide path in the EWEB powerline corridor from Pioneer Parkway to Don Street with a crossing of Pioneer Parkway and Laura Street N/A Beyond 20 year projects Pedestrian/bike PB-8 Hayden Bridge Way/Grovedale Drive, Hayden Bridge Way/3rd Street, Hayden Bridge Way/Castle Drive Add a crosswalk with a rapid rectangular flashing beacon $260,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-9 EWEB Path crossings of 2nd Street, 9th Street, 11th Street, Rose Blossom Drive, Debra Street, 15th Street, 33rd Street, and 35th Street Improve path crossings to emphasize path priority and to improve safety $50,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-10 2nd Street/Q Street Add a crosswalk with a rapid rectangular flashing beacon $90,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-11 By-Gully Path Extension - Pioneer Parkway to 5th Street Construct a new multi-use 12-foot wide path from the existing By- Gully path at Pioneer Parkway to 5th Street N/A Beyond 20 year projects Pedestrian/bike PB-12 I-5 Path – Willamette River Area Path to By-Gully Path Construct a new multi-use 12-foot wide path parallel to I-5 from Willamette River area path/Eastgate Woodlands to the end of the By- Gully path N/A Beyond 20 year projects Pedestrian/bike PB-13 Anderson Lane - By-Gully path to Centennial Boulevard Add signing and striping on Anderson Street and West Quinalt Street for bicycle facilities and construct 12-foot wide multi-use path between Anderson Lane and Quinalt Street $90,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-14 Rainbow Drive - Centennial Boulevard to West D Street Restripe for bicycle facilities with signing $60,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-15 West D - Mill Street to D Street Path Add bicycle facility signing and striping $10,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-16 West D - Aspen Street to D Street Path Add bicycle facility signing and striping; construct sidewalks to fill gaps $190,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-17 Glenwood Area Willamette River Path – I- 5 to Willamette River bridges Construct a new multi-use 12-foot wide path from the end of the existing path, east of I-5 to the Willamette River bridges $2,500,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Pedestrian/bike PB-18 Glenwood Area Willamette River Path – Willamette River Bridges to UGB Construct a new multi-use 12-foot wide path from the Willamette River bridges to the UGB $2,900,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Pedestrian/bike Draft TSP Project List Amendments (2-26-2018) Page 1 of 7 Exhibit D 3-6-2018 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Exhibit D, Page 1 of 14 Attachment 3, Page 89 of 164 Project ID Project Name Project Description Cost List Project Type PB-19 Bridge between Downtown and Glenwood or modify Willamette River Bridges Construct a new pedestrian and bicycle bridge between Downtown Springfield and Glenwood, or modify the existing Willamette River bridges $10,300,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Pedestrian/bike PB-20 Mill Street - Centennial to Main Street, south of Main Street to Mill Race Park Restripe for bicycle facilities with signing $90,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-21 Pioneer Parkway at D, E, and F Streets Add crosswalks on Pioneer Parkway with signage $80,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-22 5th Street/Centennial Boulevard Intersection Add bicycle facilities through the intersection area $560,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-23 5th Street - Centennial Boulevard to A Street Add bicycle facility signing and striping $50,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-24 D, E, or F Streets from 5th Street to 28th Street Add bicycle facility signing and striping $190,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-25 5th Street/D Street Add bicycle facility signing and striping to improve visibility $10,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-26 A Street - 5th Street to 10th Street Restripe for bicycle facilities with signing $40,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-27 South 2nd Street to Island Park Construct a new multi-use 12-foot wide path along the Mill Race from South 2nd Street to Mill Street at Island Park $3,100,000 20-year projects: As development occurs Pedestrian/bike PB-28 South 3rd 2nd Street to South 5th B Street Construct a new multi-use 12-foot wide path from South 3rd Street to South 5th Street N/A $600,000 Beyond 20 year projects 20-year projects: As development occurs Pedestrian/bike PB-29 Mill Race Path Construct a new multi-use 12-foot wide path from South 2nd B Street to South 32nd Street/UGB $7,100,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Pedestrian/bike PB-30 33rd Street - V Street to EWEB Path Add shared-use signing and striping $10,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-31 Moe Mountain Path - Quarry Ridge Lane River Heights Drive to Marcola Road Construct a new multi-use 12-foot wide path Quarry Ridge Lane River Heights Drive to Marcola Road N/A Beyond 20 year projects 20-year projects: Priority projects Pedestrian/bike PB-32 McKenzie River Path - McKenzie Levee Path to 52nd Street Construct a new multi-use 12-foot wide path from the existing McKenzie Levee path at 42nd Street to 52nd Street $3,700,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Pedestrian/bike PB-33 Main Street - 34th Street to 35th Street Add a mid-block crosswalk with a rapid rectangular flashing beacon $90,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-34 Pedestrian crossing improvement on Main Street/38th Street Add a mid-block crosswalk with a rapid rectangular flashing beacon $90,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-35 Main Street/ 41st Street Add a mid-block crosswalk with a rapid rectangular flashing beacon $90,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-36 Virginia Avenue and Daisy Street - South 32nd Street to Bob Straub Parkway Add bicycle facility signing and striping $130,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-37 Booth Kelly Road - South 28th Street to South 49th Place Construct a new multi-use 12-foot wide path from South 28th Street to South 49th Place $2,817,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Pedestrian/bike PB-38 Haul Road - Daisy Street to Booth Kelly Road Construct a new multi-use 12-foot wide path in the Haul Road right-of- way from Daisy Street to Booth Kelly Road N/A Beyond 20 year projects Pedestrian/bike PB-39 Main Street - 48th Street to 49th Street Add a mid-block crosswalk with a rapid rectangular flashing beacon $90,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-40 Main Street/ 51st Street Add a mid-block crosswalk with signing a rapid rectangular flashing beacon $10,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-41 Main Street /Chapman Lane Add a mid-block crosswalk with a rapid rectangular flashing beacon $90,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-42 Main Street /57th Street 66th Street to 67th Street Add a mid-block crosswalk with a pedestrian hybrid rapid rectangular flashing beacon $90,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-43 Bob Straub Parkway/Daisy Street Add a pedestrian/bicycle signal and crossing, coordinate with R-44 $90,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-44 Mountaingate Drive - Mountaingate Entrance to Dogwood Street Add shared-use signing and striping; construct sidewalks and drainage improvements to fill gaps $260,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-45 Mt. Vernon Road/Bob Straub Parkway Add crosswalks at three or four approaches with signing and striping and install pedestrian hybrid beacon on the north-south leg $390,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike Page 2 of 7 Exhibit D 3-6-2018 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Exhibit D, Page 2 of 14 Attachment 3, Page 90 of 164 Project ID Project Name Project Description Cost List Project Type PB-46 Haul Road path - South 49th Place to UGB Construct a new multi-use 12-foot wide path from South 49th Place to the UGB $3,600,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Pedestrian/bike PB-47 Thurston Road/ 66th Street Add a crosswalk with a rapid rectangular flashing beacon $90,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-48 Thurston Road/ 69th Street Add a crosswalk with a rapid rectangular flashing beacon $90,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-49 South 67th Street - Ivy Street to Main Street Add shared-use signing and striping and construct sidewalks to fill gaps $160,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-50 Ivy Street - South 67th Street to South 70th Street Add shared-use signing and striping $20,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-51 South 70th Street - Main Street to Ivy Street Add shared-use signing and striping $50,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-52 City-wide Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons Install mid-block crossings City-wide with rapid rectangular flashing beacons $4,400,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-53 66th Street - Thurston Road to Main Street Add bicycle lanes $75,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-54 G Street - 5th Street to 28th Street Add bicycle lanes or route $75,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Pedestrian/bike PB-55 48th/G/52nd - High Banks Road to Aster Street Construct a new multi-use 12-foot wide path from High Banks Road to Aster Street $1,600,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Pedestrian/bike PB-56 Holly Street to Rocky Road Construct a multi-use bridge $2,200,000 Beyond 20 year projects Pedestrian/bike R-1 North Gateway Collector - Maple Island Road/Royal Caribbean Way to International Way Construct a new collector with a three-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities $4,300,000 20-year projects: As development occurs Roadway R-2 Gateway Road/International Way to UGB Construct five-lane cross-section consistent with 2003 Revised Environmental Assessment $950,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Roadway R-3 New Collector - Game Farm Road - East to International Way Construct a new collector with a three-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities $6,300,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Roadway R-4 Maple Island Road – Game Farm Road/Deadmond Ferry Road to Beltline Road Extend Maple Island Road with a two-lane cross-section with sidewalk, bicycle facilities, and an intersection at Beltline $3,100,000 20-year projects: As development occurs Roadway R-5 Extend Riverbend Drive to International Way (Northeast Link) Extend Riverbend Drive with a three-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities $1,600,000 20-year projects: As development occurs Roadway R-6 Improvements to serve Riverbend Hospital Area Improve Baldy View Lane, construct a McKenzie-Gateway Loop connector/new collector and construct off-street path connections $10,200,000 20-year projects: As development occurs Roadway R-7 South of Kruse Way and east of Gateway Road Construct a new roadway to improve local connectivity south of Kruse Way/east of Gateway Road area N/A Beyond 20 year projects Roadway R-8 Mallard Avenue - Gateway Street to Game Farm Road Change Mallard Avenue to a two-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities and extend Mallard Avenue to Gateway Street with a two-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities $4,530,000 20-year projects: As development occurs Roadway R-9 Laura Street to Pioneer Parkway Construct a new collector with a three-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities in or near the EWEB powerline corridor with a right-in/right-out intersection at Pioneer Parkway; coordinate with PB-7 is required to serve as sidewalk and bikeway $3,300,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Roadway R-10 Q Street/Laura Street and Laura Street Interchange Area Construct traffic controls at Laura Street/Q Street intersection, extend the second westbound through-lane through the Laura Street intersection, and construct a westbound right-turn lane; coordinate with S-3 and PB-7; conduct study [S-3] prior to implementing project $1,600,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Roadway Page 3 of 7 Exhibit D 3-6-2018 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Exhibit D, Page 3 of 14 Attachment 3, Page 91 of 164 Project ID Project Name Project Description Cost List Project Type R-11 5th Street/Q Street Construct right-turn lanes to the eastbound and northbound approaches or a roundabout $550,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Roadway R-12 Franklin Boulevard Riverfront Collector Construct a new collector as shown in the Glenwood Plan; two travel lanes with on-street parking, sidewalks, and bicycle facilities $7,700,000 20-year projects: As development occurs Roadway R-13 Franklin Boulevard Multi-modal Improvements Construct multi-modal improvements on Franklin Boulevard, from I-5 to the railroad tracks south of the Franklin Boulevard/McVay Highway intersection, and construct a roundabout at the Franklin Boulevard/Glenwood Boulevard intersection 350000001 $35,000,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Roadway R-14 Franklin Boulevard/McVay Highway Multi- lane Roundabout Construct a multi-lane roundabout $7,000,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Roadway R-15 Glenwood Boulevard - I-5 to Franklin Boulevard Convert Glenwood Boulevard from three-lane to five-lane cross- section N/A Beyond 20 year projects Roadway R-16 East 17th Avenue - Glenwood Boulevard to Henderson Avenue Change East 17th Avenue to a three-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities $1,900,000 20-year projects: As development occurs Roadway R-17 Henderson Avenue - Franklin Boulevard to East 19th Avenue Modify Henderson Avenue with a three-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities $3,400,000 20-year projects: As development occurs Roadway R-18 East 19th Avenue - Henderson Avenue to Franklin Boulevard Change East 19th Avenue to a three-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities $3,500,000 20-year projects: As development occurs Roadway R-19 McVay Highway and East 19th Avenue Construct a two-lane roundabout $2,500,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Roadway R-20 McVay Highway - East 19th Avenue to I-5 Construct a two- or three-lane cross-section as needed with sidewalks, bicycle facilities, and transit facilities consistent with Main Street/McVay Highway Transit Feasibility study and project T-3 $47,000,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Roadway R-21 Pioneer Parkway to South 2nd Street Construct a new collector between Pioneer Parkway and South 2nd Street N/A Beyond 20 year projects Roadway R-22 Extend South 14th Street South of Railroad Tracks Extend South 14th Street south of the Union Pacific Railroad mainline with a three-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities N/A Beyond 20 year projects Roadway R-23 South B Street - South 5th to South B Street 14th Street Extend South B Street with a three-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities N/A Beyond 20 year projects Roadway R-24 19th Street - Hayden Bridge to Yolanda Avenue Extend 19th Street with a two-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities $2,400,000 20-year projects: As development occurs Roadway R-25 Hayden Bridge Road - 19th Street to Marcola Road Change Hayden Bridge Road to a two-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities $12,000,000 20-year projects: As development occurs Roadway R-26 Yolanda Avenue - 23rd Street to 31st Street Modify Yolanda Avenue to a two-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities $460,000 20-year projects: As development occurs Roadway R-27 Yolanda Avenue to 33rd 35th Street Construct Yolanda Avenue from 31st to 33rd Street with sidewalks and bicycle facilities, add sidewalks and bicycle facilities from 33rd Street to 35th Street 9400000 $9,900,000 20-year projects: As development occurs Roadway R-28 Marcola Road to 31st Street Construct a new collector with a three-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities $9,000,000 20-year projects: As development occurs Roadway R-29 31st Street - Hayden Bridge to U Street Change 31st Street to a two-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities $3,800,000 20-year projects: As development occurs Roadway R-30 Marcola Road/19th Street Construct right-turn lane on westbound approach or a roundabout $320,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Roadway R-31 28th Street/Marcola Road Construct a roundabout $1,900,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Roadway Page 4 of 7 Exhibit D 3-6-2018 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Exhibit D, Page 4 of 14 Attachment 3, Page 92 of 164 Project ID Project Name Project Description Cost List Project Type R-32 42nd Street/Marcola Road Construct a roundabout $2,800,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Roadway R-33 Centennial Boulevard/28th Street Construct a roundabout $1,800,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Roadway R-34 Centennial Boulevard/Industrial Avenue - 28th Street to 35th Street Extend Centennial Boulevard/Industrial Avenue with a three-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities $9,500,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Roadway R-35 OR 126/42nd Street Interchange Improvements OR 126/42nd Street interchange improvements N/A Beyond 20 year projects Roadway R-36 42nd Street - Marcola Road to Railroad Tracks Modify 42nd Street to a three-lane cross-section and traffic controls at Marcola Road and the OR 126 westbound ramps $6,000,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Roadway R-37 Commercial Avenue - 42nd Street to 48th Street, north of Main Street and North- South Connection Extend Commercial Street and add a north-south connection; three- lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities $19,000,000 20-year projects: As development occurs Roadway R-38 South 42nd Street/Daisy Street Construct a traffic signal or a roundabout $1,800,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Roadway R-39 Extend South 48th Street to Daisy Street Extend South 48th Street with a threetwo-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities a parallel multi-use 12-foot wide path and roundabout intersection treatment at Daisy and South 48th Street $3,200,000 20-year projects: Priority projects 20-year projects: As development occurs Roadway R-40 OR 126/52nd Street Interchange Improvements Construct a grade-separated interchange on OR 126 at 52nd Street with ramps and traffic controls at ramp terminals on 52nd Street consistent with the Interchange Area Management Plan 400000002 $40,000,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Roadway R-41 South 54th Street - Main Street to Daisy Street Construct a new two-lane collector with sidewalks and bicycle facilities $960,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Beyond 20 year projects Roadway R-42 Glacier Drive - 48th Street/Holly to South 55th Street Holly Street - South 48th Street to South 57th Street Construct a new collector with a two-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities $6,300,000 20-year projects: As development occurs Roadway R-43 OR 126/Main Street Interchange Improvements Construct a grade-separated interchange with ramps and traffic control at ramp terminals on Main Street consistent with the Interchange Area Management Plan; needs further study 500000002 $50,000,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Roadway R-44 Daisy Street crossing of Bob Straub Parkway Construct an at-grade crossing traffic control improvements or undercrossing of Bob Straub Parkway N/A Beyond 20 year projects 20-year projects: Priority projects Roadway R-45 Improvements within the Jasper-Natron Area Construct multiple roadways in the Jasper-Natron area between Bob Straub Parkway, Jasper Road, and Mt. Vernon Road $67,000,000 20-year projects: As development occurs Roadway R-46 Bob Straub Parkway to Mountaingate Drive and Future Local Construct a new collector with a three-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities 2500000 $4,300,000 20-year projects: As development occurs Roadway R-47 Haul Road - Mt. Vernon Road Quartz Ave to UGB Construct a two-lane green street in the Haul Road right-of-way; coordinate with PB-46 $11,000,000 20-year projects: As development occurs Roadway R-48 Mountaingate Drive/Main Street Install a new traffic signal $900,000 20-year projects: Opportunity projects Roadway R-49 79th Street - Main Street to Thurston Road Extend 79th Street with a two-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities $8,200,000 20-year projects: As development occurs Roadway R-50 Gateway/Beltline Phase 2 Project As defined in the 2003 Revised Environmental Assessment including Kruse/Hutton couplet, Gateway Road improvements $12,000,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Roadway R-51 Gateway Street/Harlow Road Construct traffic control improvements $2,910,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Roadway R-52 Main Street/48th Street Construct traffic control improvements $2,400,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Roadway S-1 Phase 2 of Beltline/Gateway improvements N/A Study projects Study projects S-2 OR 126 Expressway Management Plan (I- 5 to Main Street) N/A Study projects Study projects Page 5 of 7 Exhibit D 3-6-2018 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Exhibit D, Page 5 of 14 Attachment 3, Page 93 of 164 Project ID Project Name Project Description Cost List Project Type S-3 Pioneer Parkway/Q Street/Laura Street circulation study to improve Q Street/Laura Street/Ramp safety, access, and capacity N/A Study projects Study projects S-4 Study a new crossing of OR 126 between 5th and 15th Streets N/A Study projects Study projects S-5 Centennial Boulevard - Prescott Lane to Mill Street operational improvements study N/A Study projects Study projects S-6 Pioneer Parkway/Centennial Boulevard intersection study to improve pedestrian safety N/A Study projects Study projects S-7 Centennial Boulevard - Mohawk Boulevard to Pioneer Parkway operational improvements study N/A Study projects Study projects S-8 Study safety and operational improvements in Mohawk Boulevard/Olympic Street/ 18th Street/Centennial triangle N/A Study projects Study projects S-9 Study a new bridge - Walnut Road/West D Street to Glenwood Boulevard/Franklin Boulevard intersection N/A Study projects Study projects S-10 Study Main Street/South A Street improvements - Mill Street to 21st Street N/A Study projects Study projects S-11 Refinement study for Glenwood industrial area N/A Study projects Study projects S-12 Pedestrian/bicycle bridge study between Glenwood and Dorris Ranch N/A Study projects Study projects S-13 Access plan study on Main Street between 21st Street and 48th Street N/A Study projects Study projects S-14 Study east-west connectivity between 28th Street and 32nd Street N/A Study projects Study projects S-15 Study a new crossing of OR 126 near Thurston High School N/A Study projects Study projects S-16 Connectivity study south of OR 126 and Jessica Street N/A Study projects Study projects T-1 Transit on Centennial Boulevard - I-5 to Mohawk Boulevard N/A Transit projects Transit projects T-2 Transit on Franklin Boulevard/Main Street/South A Street to OR 126/Main Street (east-west) N/A Transit projects Transit projects T-3 Transit on Franklin Boulevard and McVay Highway to 30th Avenue (north-south) N/A Transit projects Transit projects Page 6 of 7 Exhibit D 3-6-2018 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Exhibit D, Page 6 of 14 Attachment 3, Page 94 of 164 Project ID Project Name Project Description Cost List Project Type T-4 Transit on Mohawk Boulevard - Centennial Boulevard to 19th Street/Marcola Road to 28th StreetOlympic Street to Mohawk Boulevard N/A Transit projects Transit projects US-1 Game Farm Road South - Mallard Avenue to Harlow Road Modify and expand Game Farm Road South with a cross-section to include sidewalks and bicycle facilities 4100000 $2,200,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Urban standards US-2 Laura Street - EWEB powerline corridor to Game Farm Road Change Laura Street to a three-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities N/A Beyond 20 year projects Urban standards US-3 Aspen Street - Centennial Boulevard to West D Street Change Aspen Street to a three-lane two-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities 2800000 $2,200,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Urban standards US-4 21st Street - D Street to Main Street Modify 21st Street to a three-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities $2,300,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Urban standards US-5 28th Street - Centennial Boulevard to Main Street Change 28th Street to include sidewalks and bicycle facilities $4,300,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Urban standards US-6 South 28th Street - Main Street to South F Street Modify South 28th Street to a three-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities $6,000,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Urban standards US-7 South 28th Street - South F Street to UGB South M Street Modify South 28th Street to a three-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities N/A Beyond 20 year projects Urban standards US-8 35th Street - Olympic to Commercial Avenue Change South 35th Street to a three-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities N/A Beyond 20 year projects 20-year projects: Priority projects Urban standards US-9 Commercial Avenue - 35th to 42nd Street Modify Commercial Avenue to a three-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities N/A Beyond 20 year projects 20-year projects: Priority projects Urban standards US-10 36th Street - Commercial Avenue to Main Street Change 36th Street to a three-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities N/A Beyond 20 year projects 20-year projects: Priority projects Urban standards US-11 Clearwater Lane - south of Jasper Road within UGB Modify and expand Clearwater Lane with a cross-section to include sidewalks and bicycle facilities $470,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Urban standards US-12 Jasper Road - South 42nd Street to northwest of Mt. Vernon Road Modify Jasper Road to a three-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities N/A Beyond 20 year projects Urban standards US-13 Bob Straub Parkway - Mt. Vernon Road to UGB Change Bob Straub Parkway to a three-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities N/A Beyond 20 year projects Urban standards US-14 Thurston Road - Weaver Road to UGB Change Thurston Road to a three-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities $4,800,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Urban standards US-15 Main Street east of 72nd Street to UGB Modify Main Street to a three-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities N/A Beyond 20 year projects Urban standards US-16 48th Street - Main Street to G Street Upgrade to a two-lane urban facility. PB-55 is required to serve as sidewalk and bikeway. 1040000 $600,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Urban standards US-17 G Street - 48th Street to 52nd Street Upgrade to a two-lane urban facility. PB-55 is required to serve as sidewalk and bikeway. 670000 $370,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Urban standards US-18 52nd Street - OR 126 to G Street Upgrade to a two-lane urban facility. PB-55 is required to serve as sidewalk and bikeway. 430000 $250,000 20-year projects: Priority projects Urban standards US-19 Oakdale Ave - Pheasant Blvd to Game Farm Road Modify Oakdale Ave to a two-lane cross-section with sidewalks and bicycle facilities N/A Beyond 20 year projects Urban standards Page 7 of 7 Exhibit D 3-6-2018 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Exhibit D, Page 7 of 14 Attachment 3, Page 95 of 164 CENTENNIAL BLVD A ST W D STGATEWAY ST5TH STQ ST S 42ND ST28TH STFAIRVIEW DR DAISY STVIRGINIA AVE19TH STS 57TH STS 70TH STYOLANDA AVE MAIN ST COMMERCIA L A V E BOB STRAUB PKWY31ST ST7TH ST36TH STHIGH BANKS RD 66TH STMT VERNON RD42ND STE ST 58TH STS 28TH STS A ST G ST 14TH STMILL ST W CE N T E N NIAL BLVD S 67TH STMARCOLA RD HARLOW RD 48TH STS 2 N D STHAYDEN BRIDGE RD THURSTON R D OLYMPIC ST MCKENZIE HW Y B ST J ASPER RDASPEN STGLENWOOD BLVDMCVAY HWYLAURA ST21ST ST69TH STS 32ND STMOU NTAINGATE D R O R 12 635TH ST30TH ST126 126 5 Springfield, Oregon Springfield TSP Functional ClassificationFIGURE 2 Miles 0 0.25 0.5 1 N Note: All new alignments are conceptual.Actual alignments will be determined during project development. Willamalane Park &Recreation Property City Limits Urban Growth Boundary Water Body Legend Functional Classification Major Arterial Minor Arterial Major Collector Minor Collector Local Road/Alley KlamathDouglas Coos LinnBenton Lincoln Lane Vicinity Map Project(s) timeline shifted Project scope altered New project(s) added TSP 2018 Project UpdatesDRAFT 01-12-1 8 Project ExtentModied Project ExtentModied Project ExtentModied Exhibit D 3-6-2018 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Exhibit D, Page 8 of 14 Attachment 3, Page 96 of 164 126 126 5 CENTENNIAL BLVD A ST W D STGATEWAY ST5TH STQ ST S42ND ST28TH STFAIRVIEW DR DAISY STVIRGINIA AVE19TH STS 57TH STS 70TH STYOLANDA AVE MAIN ST COMMERCIA L A V E BOB STRAUB PKWY31ST ST7TH ST36TH STHIGH BANKS RD 66TH STMT VERNON RD42ND STE ST 58TH STS 28TH STS A ST G ST 14TH STMILL ST W CE N T E N NIAL BLVD S 67TH STMARCOLA RD HARLOW RD 48TH STS 2 N D STHAYDEN BRIDGE RD THURSTON R D OLYMPIC ST MCKENZIE HW Y B ST J ASPER RDASPEN STGLENWOOD BLVDMCVAY HWYLAURA ST21ST ST69TH STS 32ND STMOU NTAINGATE D R O R 1 2635TH ST30TH STSpringfield, Oregon Springfield TSP 20-Year Improvement Projects:Priority Projects FIGURE 4 Miles 0 0.25 0.5 1 N Note: All new alignments are conceptual.Actual alignments will be determined during project development. Willamalane Park &Recreation Property Arterial Collector City Limits Urban Growth Boundary Water Body Legend Roadway Project Roadway Project Roadway Project Urban Standards Project Pedestrian/Bike Off-Street Path Project KlamathDouglas Coos LinnBenton Lincoln Lane Vicinity Map R-44 R-9R-3R-34R-50R-10 R-13 R -3 6 R-20R-51 R-19 R-14 R-40 R-43 US-11US-4US-6US-3US-8US-10US-1US-5U S-9 U S -1 4 US-16US-17 US-18PB- 4 6PB-37 PB-32 PB-29 PB-2 PB-19 PB-18PB-17 PB-55PB-55 PB-31PB-31 R-52 Moved from Beyond 20-yrto Priority Project Moved from Beyond 20-yr to Priority Projects Moved from Beyond 20-yr to Priority Project Project ExtentModied New Projects New Projects New Project Project(s) timeline shifted Project scope altered New project(s) added TSP 2018 Project UpdatesDRAFT 02-26-1 8 Project ExtentModied Project AlignmentModied Project Extent Modied Exhibit D 3-6-2018 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Exhibit D, Page 9 of 14 Attachment 3, Page 97 of 164 CENTENNIAL BLVD A ST W D STGATEWAY ST5TH STQ ST S 42ND ST28TH STFAIRVIEW DR DAISY STVIRGINIA AVE19TH STS 57TH STS 70TH STYOLANDA AVE MAIN ST COMMERCIA L A V E BOB STRAUB PKWY31ST ST7TH ST36TH STHIGH BANKS RD 66TH STMT VERNON RD42ND STE ST 58TH STS 28TH STS A ST G ST 14TH STMILL ST W CE N T E N NIAL BLVD S 67TH STMARCOLA RD HARLOW RD 48TH STS 2 N D STHAYDEN BRIDGE RD THURSTON R D OLYMPIC ST MCKENZIE HW Y B ST J ASPER RDASPEN STGLENWOOD BLVDMCVAY HWYLAURA ST21ST ST69TH STS 32ND STMOU NTAINGATE D R O R 1 2 635TH ST30TH ST126 126 5 Springfield, Oregon Springfield TSP 20-Year Improvement Projects:Opportunity Projects FIGURE 5 Miles 0 0.25 0.5 1 N Note: All new alignments are conceptual.Actual alignments will be determined during project development. Willamalane Park &Recreation Property Legend Arterial Collector City Limits Urban Growth Boundary Water Body Roadway Project Roadway Project Pedestrian/Bike Project Pedestrian/Bike Project Pedestrian/Bike - Alternative Project KlamathDouglas Coos LinnBenton Lincoln Lane Vicinity Map PB-24 PB-30PB-50PB-13PB-26 PB-15PB-14PB-16PB-5PB-49PB-51PB-23PB-24 PB-44PB-20PB-24 PB-3 PB-36 PB-33 PB-34 PB-35 PB-40 PB-39 PB-41 PB-42 PB-25PB-21PB-45 PB-8 PB-22 PB-47 PB-10 PB-48 PB-9 PB-9 PB-9PB-9 PB-9 PB-9 PB-9 PB-9 PB-43 PB-53PB-54 R-2 R-11 R-30 R-32 R-31 R-33 R-38 R-48 Project(s) timeline shifted Project scope altered New project(s) added TSP 2018 Project UpdatesDRAFT 12-07-1 7 Project ExtentModied New Project Project Extent Modied New Project Exhibit D 3-6-2018 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Exhibit D, Page 10 of 14 Attachment 3, Page 98 of 164 CENTENNIAL BLVD A ST W D STGATEWAY ST5TH STQ ST S 42ND ST28TH STFAIRVIEW DR DAISY STVIRGINIA AVE19TH STS 57TH STS 70TH STYOLANDA AVE MAIN ST COMMERCIA L A V E BOB STRAUB PKWY31ST ST7TH ST36TH STHIGH BANKS RD 66TH STMT VERNON RD42ND STE ST 58TH STS 28TH STS A ST G ST 14TH STMILL ST W CE N T E N NIAL BLVD S 67TH STMARCOLA RD HARLOW RD 48TH STS 2 N D STHAYDEN BRIDGE RD THURSTON R D OLYMPIC ST MCKENZIE HW Y B ST J ASPER RDASPEN STGLENWOOD BLVDMCVAY HWYLAURA ST21ST ST69TH STS 32ND STMOU NTAINGATE D R O R 1 2 635TH ST30TH ST126 126 5 Springfield, Oregon Springfield TSP 20-Year Improvement Projects:As Development Occurs FIGURE 6 Miles 0 0.25 0.5 1 N Note: All new alignments are conceptual.Actual alignments will be determined during project development. Willamalane Park &Recreation Property Legend Arterial Collector City Limits Urban Growth Boundary Water Body Conceptual Roadway Project Conceptual Pedestrian/Bike Off-Street Path Project KlamathDouglas Coos LinnBenton Lincoln Lane Vicinity Map PB-4PB-27 PB-1 PB-28R-4R-5R-45 R-45R-27R-24R-45 R-45 R -45R- 6 R-37R-46 R-45R-49R-45R-17R-45R-1 R -1 8 R-26 R-8 R-45R-6 R-29R-28 R-37 R-42 R-12 R-45 R-45R-25 R-47 R-16 R-39Project(s) timeline shifted Project scope altered New project(s) added TSP 2018 Project UpdatesDRAFT 02-26-1 8 Project ExtentModied Moved from Beyond 20-yrto Priority Project Project ExtentModied Project ExtentModied Project Extent Modied Project ExtentModied Project ExtentModied Project ExtentModied Exhibit D 3-6-2018 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Exhibit D, Page 11 of 14 Attachment 3, Page 99 of 164 CENTENNIAL BLVD A ST W D STGATEWAY ST5TH STQ ST S 42ND ST28TH STFAIRVIEW DR DAISY STVIRGINIA AVE19TH STS 57TH STS 70TH STYOLANDA AVE MAIN ST COMMERCIA L A V E BOB STRAUB PKWY31ST ST7TH ST36TH STHIGH BANKS RD 66TH STMT VERNON RD42ND STE ST 58TH STS 28TH STS A ST G ST 14TH STMILL ST W CE N T E N NIAL BLVD S 67TH STMARCOLA RD HARLOW RD 48TH STS 2 N D STHAYDEN BRIDGE RD THURSTON R D OLYMPIC ST MCKENZIE HW Y B ST J ASPER RDASPEN STGLENWOOD BLVDMCVAY HWYLAURA ST21ST ST69TH STS 32ND STMOU NTAINGATE D R O R 12 635TH ST30TH ST126 126 5 Springfield, Oregon Springfield TSP Beyond 20-YearImprovement Projects FIGURE 7 Miles 0 0.25 0.5 1 N Note: All new alignments are conceptual.Actual alignments will be determined during project development. Willamalane Park &Recreation Property Arterial Collector City Limits Urban Growth Boundary Water Body Legend Roadway Project Roadway Project Urban Standards Project Pedestrian/Bike Off-Street Path Project KlamathDouglas Coos LinnBenton Lincoln Lane Vicinity Map US-2US-7U S-15 US-12 US-13US-19 R-22R-23 R-15R-7 R-35 R-21R-41P B-3 8 PB-11 PB-7 PB-6 PB-12PB-56 Project(s) timeline shifted Project scope altered New project(s) added TSP 2018 Project UpdatesDRAFT 02-26-1 8 New Project New ProjectProject ExtentModied Project ExtentModied Moved from Priority Project to Beyond 20-yr Exhibit D 3-6-2018 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Exhibit D, Page 12 of 14 Attachment 3, Page 100 of 164 CENTENNIAL BLVD A ST W D STGATEWAY ST5TH STQ ST S 42ND ST28TH STFAIRVIEW DR DAISY STVIRGINIA AVE19TH STS 57TH STS 70TH STYOLANDA AVE MAIN ST COMMERCIA L A V E BOB STRAUB PKWY31ST ST7TH ST36TH STHIGH BANKS RD 66TH STMT VERNON RD42ND STE ST 58TH STS 28TH STS A ST G ST 14TH STMILL ST W CE N T E N NIAL BLVD S 67TH STMARCOLA RD HARLOW RD 48TH STS 2 N D STHAYDEN BRIDGE RD THURSTON R D OLYMPIC ST MCKENZIE HW Y B ST J ASPER RDASPEN STGLENWOOD BLVDMCVAY HWYLAURA ST21ST ST69TH STS 32ND STMOU NTAINGATE D R O R 12 635TH ST30TH ST126 126 5 Springfield, Oregon Springfield TSP Recommended RoadwayNetwork FIGURE 10 Miles 0 0.25 0.5 1 N Note: All new alignments are conceptual.Actual alignments will be determined during project development. Willamalane Park &Recreation Property Arterial Collector City Limits Urban Growth Boundary Water Body Legend Roadway Project Roadway Project Conceptual Roadway Project Roadway Project Urban Standards Project KlamathDouglas Coos LinnBenton Lincoln Lane Vicinity Map R-44R-22R-21R-9 R-2 R-3R-39R-34R-50R-41R-23 R-15R-10 R-13 R -36 R-20R-45R-4R-5R-16 R-45R-27R-24R-4 5 R-45 R-45R- 6 R-37R-46 R-45R-49R-45R-17R-45R-1 R -1 8 R-26 R-51 R-8 R-45R-6 R-29R -2 8 R-37 R-42 R-12 R-45 R-45R-25 R-47 R-11 R-19 R-30 R-32 R-31 R-33 R-35 R-38 R-48 R-52 R-14 R-40 R-43 R-7 US-11US-4US-2US-6US-3US-8UUS-16S-10US-17 US-19 US-18US-1US-7US-5U S-9 US -1 5 U S -1 4 US-12 US-13Project(s) timeline shifted Project scope altered New project(s) added TSP 2018 Project UpdatesDRAFT 02-26-1 8 New Projects Project Extent Modied Project Extent Modied Project ExtentModied Project ExtentModied Moved from Beyond 20-yr to Priority Projects New Projects New Projects Moved from Beyond 20-yrto Priority Project Project ExtentModied New Project Moved from Priority Projectto Beyond 20-yr Exhibit D 3-6-2018 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Exhibit D, Page 13 of 14 Attachment 3, Page 101 of 164 CENTENNIAL BLVD A ST W D STGATEWAY ST5TH STQ ST S 42ND ST28TH STFAIRVIEW DR DAISY STVIRGINIA AVE19TH STS 57TH STS 70TH STYOLANDA AVE MAIN ST COMMERCIA L A V E BOB STRAUB PKWY31ST ST7TH ST36TH STHIGH BANKS RD 66TH STMT VERNON RD42ND STE ST 58TH STS 28TH STS A ST G ST 14TH STMILL ST W CE N T E N NIAL BLVD S 67TH STMARCOLA RD HARLOW RD 48TH STS 2 N D STHAYDEN BRIDGE RD THURSTON R D OLYMPIC ST MCKENZIE HW Y B ST J ASPER RDASPEN STGLENWOOD BLVDMCVAY HWYLAURA ST21ST ST69TH STS 32ND STMOU NTAINGATE D R O R 12 635TH ST30TH ST126 126 5 Springfield, Oregon Springfield TSP Recommended Pedestrianand Bicycle Network FIGURE 11 Miles 0 0.25 0.5 1 N Note: All new alignments are conceptual.Actual alignments will be determined during project development. Willamalane Park &Recreation Property Arterial Collector City Limits Urban Growth Boundary Water Body Legend Pedestrian/Bike Project Pedestrian/Bike Project Pedestrian/Bike - Alternative Project Pedestrian/Bike - Off-Street Path Project Conceptual Pedestrian/Bike -Off-Street Path Project KlamathDouglas Coos LinnBenton Lincoln Lane Vicinity Map PB-56 -2PB-4PB 7 PB-1 PB-31 PB-38 PB-28 PB-19 PB-2 PB-11 PB-7 PB-6 PB-12PB-17 PB-18PB-32 PB-37 PB-29 PB- 4 6PB-24 PB-30PB-50PB-13PB-26 PB-15PB-14PB-16PB-5PB-49PB-51PB-23PB-44PB-20PB-24 PB-3 PB-36 PB-33 PB-34 PB-35 PB-40 PB-39 PB-41 PB-42 PB-25PB-21PB-45 PB-8 PB-22 PB-47 PB-10 PB-48 PB-9 PB-9 PB-9 PB-9 PB-9 PB-9 PB-9 PB-9 PB-43 PB-54 PB-55PB-55 PB-53DRAFT 02-26-1 8 Project(s) timeline shifted Project scope altered New project(s) added TSP 2018 Project Updates Project Extent Modied Project AlignmentModied New ProjectNew Project New Project New Project New Project Project Extent Modied Project ExtentModied Project Extent Modied Moved from Beyond 20-yrto Priority Project Moved from Beyond 20-yr to Priority Project Exhibit D 3-6-2018 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Exhibit D, Page 14 of 14 Attachment 3, Page 102 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 1 of 62 Staff Report and Findings Metro Plan Type II Amendment- Type IV (Legislative) Procedure Springfield Transportation System Plan Implementation Project Name: Springfield 2035 Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation Project Proposal: Amend the Metro Plan and the Springfield TSP to add a Conceptual Street Map (CSM); Amend the Springfield TSP project list and descriptions; and Amend the Springfield Development Code (SDC) to implement the policies in the TSP. City of Springfield Case Number: 811-17-000165-TYP4 Development Code Amend. 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan Amend. Lane County Case Number: PA 1359 DLCD Notification Date: December 19, 2017 Joint City of Springfield and Lane County Planning Commissions Hearing: January 23 and February 6, 2018 Lane County Board 1st Reading: March 6, 2018 Joint City Council and Board of County Commissioners Hearing: TBA I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND COMPONENTS 1. Conceptual Street Map (CSM) – TSP Amendment and Land Use Regulation 2. Update TSP project list and figures – TSP Amendment 3. Code amendments to implement TSP – Development Code Amendment The Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) was jointly adopted by the City of Springfield and Lane County in March of 2014. Through that process the City of Springfield determined how the transportation system is currently used and how it should change to meet the long-term (20-year) needs of Springfield’s residents, businesses, and visitors. Through coordination with community members and affected public agencies, the City of Springfield developed a TSP for improvements of all modes of transportation in Springfield, including the roadway, bicycle and pedestrian, transit, and rail networks. The plan also includes a transportation improvement and financing plan. Since the TSP has been adopted, the Springfield Development Code (SDC) must be updated to implement the TSP policies. Exhibit E, Page 1 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 103 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 2 of 62 Chapter 2 of the TSP contains Goals, Policies, and Action Items to provide direction for the next 20 years. The TSP Goals reflect the community’s vision for Springfield’s future transportation system and offer a framework for policies and action items. The policies, organized by goal, provide high-level direction for the City’s policy and decision-makers and for City staff. The policies will be implemented over the life of the Plan. Specifically, many of these policies are implemented through the Springfield Development Code. These newly updated policies provide baseline direction for the revisions and updates to the Springfield Development Code (SDC) and the Springfield Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual (EDSPM). Appendix I of the TSP provides a proposed outline of sections of the Springfield Development Code (SDC) to be amended to implement the TSP. This list has guided the development of the proposed changes. The draft SDC revisions offer language to amend portions of the SDC furthering TSP implementation. In the attached draft code language (Exhibit __), existing language in relevant sections of the SDC is presented with proposed new text underlined. Suggested deleted text is shown in strikethrough format. All text changes are highlighted in yellow. Relevant TSP policies and implementation actions applicable to proposed Code changes are cited at the beginning of each Code section, along with explanatory staff commentary. II. BACKGROUND The progress of this proposed update was guided by the Project Management Team (PMT) made up of City of Springfield staff, under the direction of the project Oversight Team. The project Oversight Team is comprised of managers from various divisions within the Development and Public Works Department. The project was also guided by a Technical Review Team (TRT), Stakeholder Sounding Board (SSB), the City Council, and the Planning Commission. The TRT provided guidance on technical aspects and consisted of representatives from affected governmental entities and regional partners. The SSB ensured that the needs of people in the community of Springfield were incorporated in the process. The SSB consisted of Springfield residents and other community stakeholders who provided input throughout the process. After a thorough planning process involving the general public, stakeholders, other agency staff, and local and regional appointed and elected officials, staff prepared this report evaluating the proposed changes. The report includes findings which address relevant approval criteria as described in this report. These findings provide a basis for concluding that the adoption of the proposed changes meets the approval criteria found in SDC Sections 5.6-115 and 5.14-135 (as described below) and Lane County Code Section 12.225. III. FINDINGS Procedural Requirements Finding: The Metro Plan describes itself as a framework plan that is intended to be supplemented by more detailed city-specific plans, programs, and policies (Metro Plan p. I-6). Exhibit E, Page 2 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 104 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 3 of 62 Finding: The proposal includes amendments to the TSP and amendments to the Springfield Development Code (SDC). The TSP is a single subject plan that is a type of functional plan of the Metro Plan. The procedural requirements for amending the Metro Plan are provided in Metro Plan Chapter IV and SDC 5.14-100. Because the proposed amendments apply only within Lane County and the City of Springfield, this Metro Plan amendment is a “Type II” amendment under SDC 5.14-115, requiring approval by the governing bodies of the City of Springfield and Lane County. Springfield is the “home city” for this amendment. Lane County is included because the proposed amendments may apply to unincorporated land within the Springfield UGB. Finding: The proposed Metro Plan and code amendments were initiated by the City of Springfield Development and Public Works Director (Director). The amendments are not site-specific and therefore are a legislative action. Finding: SDC 5.14-130.A requires the City to provide notice to other relevant governing bodies. Notice was given to the City of Eugene and Lane County on December 9, 2017. Finding: SDC Section 5.2-115 and Lane County Code Section 12.040 require legislative land use decisions be advertised in a newspaper of general circulation, providing information about the legislative action and the time, place, and location of the hearing. Notice of the public hearing concerning this matter was published on Friday, January 12, 2018 in the Eugene Register Guard, advertising the first evidentiary hearing before the joint City of Springfield and Lane County Planning Commissions on January 23, 2018, a continued joint Planning Commission hearing on Tuesday February 6, 2018, followed by a joint hearing before the Springfield City Council and Lane County Board of Commissioners on March 19, 2018. The content of the notice complied with the requirements in SDC Section 5.2-115 and Lane County Code 12.040 for legislative actions. Finding: The Director is required to send notice to the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) as specified in OAR 660-18-0020. A “DLCD Notice of Proposed Amendment” was submitted in accordance with DLCD submission guidelines via the FTP website to the DLCD on December 19, 2017 alerting the agency to the City’s proposal to amend the Metro Plan by amending the Springfield 2035 TSP, to adopt the Conceptual Street Map, and to amend the Springfield Development Code. The notice was mailed more than 35 days in advance of the first evidentiary hearing as required by ORS 197.610 (1). Finding: ORS 227.186 requires the local government to mail a notice to every landowner whose property is proposed to be “rezoned” as a result of adoption or amendment of a proposed ordinance (also known as “Ballot Measure 56” notice.). Property is “rezoned” under ORS 227.186 when a city adopts or amends an ordinance in a manner that limits or prohibits land uses previously allowed in the affected zone. The proposed TSP and development code amendments may physically reduce the amount of land available for private uses in some circumstances and therefore may “rezone” property under ORS 227.186. The City mailed a notice complying with ORS 227.186 to every land owner within the City of Springfield urban growth boundary on December 14, 2017. METRO PLAN AMENDMENT – APPROVAL CRITERIA Springfield Development Code Section 5.14-135 and Lane County Code Section 12.225 list the criteria to be used in approving or denying the proposed Metro Plan amendment, which consists of amendments to Exhibit E, Page 3 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 105 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 4 of 62 the TSP project lists and figures and adopting the Conceptual Street Map as a component of the TSP with regard to arterials, collectors, and multi-use paths. The Lane County Board of Commissioners and the Springfield City Council must each adopt findings that demonstrate conformance to the applicable criteria: (1) The amendment shall be consistent with the relevant Statewide planning goals; and (2) Adoption of the amendment shall not make the Metro Plan internally inconsistent. METRO PLAN AMENDMENT CRITERION #1: SDC 5.14-135 A., and LANE CODE 12.225 (1); CONSISTENCY WITH RELEVANT STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS Statewide Planning Goal 1 – Citizen Involvement: This goal outlines the citizen involvement requirement for adoption of Comprehensive Plans and changes to the Comprehensive Plan and implementing documents. Finding: An extensive and significant public outreach process occurred during the TSP update project that contributed to the Goals and Policies which were eventually adopted in the TSP and are now being used for the basis of this implementation process. For this implementation process this goal has been met through additional public outreach and an involvement process. A Public Involvement Program for the implementation of the TSP was developed in preparation of the Project. This Program was reviewed and endorsed by the Committee for Citizen Involvement (i.e. the Springfield Planning Commission). The Program outlined the information, outreach methods, and involvement opportunities available to the citizens during the process. The outreach and public involvement process included the following engagement opportunities: Involvement on the Stakeholder Sounding Board Involvement of the Springfield Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee Information conveyed through the project website Mailed notice to every property owner in the Springfield UGB Public open house for stakeholders to see proposed changes, learn more, and provide feedback Published notice in the newspaper Public hearing process at the Planning Commission Public hearing process at the City Council As a result of this public involvement process, the proposed amendments meet the requirements of Goal 1. Statewide Planning Goal 2 – Land Use Planning: This goal outlines the land use planning process and policy framework. The Metro Plan and TSP have been acknowledged by DLCD as being consistent with the statewide planning goals. Finding: The proposed Metro Plan amendment is being undertaken to amend the TSP project lists and adopt the Conceptual Street Map in a manner consistent with adopted policies and citizen values that were established through the adoption of the TSP in 2014. The amendments are being processed through Exhibit E, Page 4 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 106 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 5 of 62 as a Type II Metro Plan amendment, which requires any applicable statewide planning goals, federal or state statutes or regulations, Metro Plan regulations, comprehensive plan policies, and City's implementing ordinances be addressed as part of the decision-making process. All noticing requirements have been met. All applicable review criteria have been addressed within this staff report. The process of the development of these amendments followed the mandates of Goal 2 by identifying the issues to be addressed – implementation of adopted, acknowledged transportation plan policies; collecting and analyzing data and records of past measures and strategies designed to implement the Regional Transportation System Plan; crafting alternative proposals based on this record and research to determine feasibility and practicable application of alternative implementation measures; selecting the most efficient and effective proposals that also maintained plan continuity and compliance with the Metro Plan and TSP. Therefore, the requirements of Goal 2 have been met. Statewide Planning Goals 3 & 4: Agricultural Lands and Forest Lands Finding: These statewide planning goals relate to agricultural and forest lands in Oregon and are not applicable to this proposed amendment. Statewide Planning Goal 5 – Natural Resources This goal requires the inventory and protection of natural resources, open spaces, historic areas, and sites. Finding: The City is currently in compliance with the State’s Goal 5. The proposed amendments do not alter the City’s acknowledged Goal 5 inventories or land use programs. No changes will occur to current natural resource protections. Individual transportation project impacts are required to conduct a Goal 5 analysis during each project development phase. As a result, the proposed amendments are in compliance with Goal 5 process requirements. Statewide Planning Goal 6: Air, Water, and Land Resources Quality To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water, and land resources of the state. Finding: The City is currently in compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 6. The proposed amendments do not alter the City’s acknowledged land use programs regarding water quality and flood management protections. The Springfield 2035 Transportation System Plan was developed following the rules and guidance found in Oregon Revised Statute 660-012 and the Central Lane MPO Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). Both outline strategies for decreasing vehicle miles traveled and single-occupancy vehicle trips, which are intended to help improve air quality in the Central Lane MPO Area. The proposed amendments do not alter these policies within the TSP. As a result, the proposed amendments are in compliance with Goal 6. Statewide Planning Goal 7 – Areas Subject to Natural Hazards To protect people and property from natural hazards. Finding: The City is currently in compliance with Goal 7. The proposed amendments do not alter the City’s acknowledged land use programs regarding potential landslide areas and flood management protections. The City is currently a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The proposed amendments do not alter the City’s participation. As a result, the proposed amendments meet the requirements of Goal 7. Exhibit E, Page 5 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 107 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 6 of 62 Statewide Planning Goal 8 – Recreational Needs This goal requires the satisfaction of 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. Finding: The City is currently in compliance with Goal 8. The proposed TSP amendments include facility improvements, both on-street and off-street, intended to provide improved connectivity for pedestrians and bicyclists. The anticipated off-street improvements were coordinated with Willamalane Park and Recreation District’s updated Parks Master Plan and will provide improved access to a variety of destinations within the planning area. The TSP amendments and Conceptual Street Map include some individual off-street path projects, such as the Glenwood Riverfront Path, that meet a recreational need in addition to a transportation need. The proposed TSP amendments are consistent with Goal 8. Statewide Planning 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. Finding: The City is currently in compliance with Goal 9. The adoption of the Springfield 2035 Transportation System Plan did not alter the City’s compliance with Goal 9. The proposed amendments do not alter adopted TSP policies to provide a multi-modal transportation system to meet the needs of the community into the future, including accommodating economic growth. The proposed amendments are consistent with this goal. Statewide Planning Goal 10: Housing To provide adequate housing for the needs of the community, region, and state. Finding: The City is currently in compliance with Goal 10. The adoption of the Springfield 2035 Transportation System Plan did not alter the City’s compliance with Goal 10. The proposed amendments do not alter the adopted TSP policies to provide a multi-modal transportation system to meet the needs of the community into the future, including accommodating its housing needs. The proposed amendments are consistent with Goal 10. Statewide Planning 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. Finding: The City is currently in compliance with Goal 11 through its acknowledged Comprehensive Plan. This includes an adopted Transportation System Plan, the Springfield 2035 Transportation System Plan. The proposed amendments do not alter the policies in the adopted TSP for providing timely, orderly, and efficient public facilities and services. Additionally, adoption of the Conceptual Street Map enables infrastructure planning and construction to proceed as identified in the PFSP project lists as these as-yet dedicated and constructed streets also provide infrastructure corridors for planned stormwater, sanitary sewer, water and electricity facilities. As a result, the proposed amendments are in compliance with Goal 11. Exhibit E, Page 6 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 108 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 7 of 62 Statewide Planning Goal 12: Transportation To provide and encourage a safe, convenient, and economic transportation system. Finding: The City is currently in compliance with Goal 12 and the Central Lane Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) through its acknowledged Comprehensive Plan (i.e. Metro Plan) and the Central Lane Regional Transportation System Plan as required by Oregon Administrative Rule 660-012 (Transportation Planning Rule). The proposed amendments to the Springfield 2035 Transportation System Plan add a Conceptual Street Map and update the TSP project list and figures, which is being amended following the requirements of the Transportation Planning Rule. As a result, the proposed amendments are in compliance with Goal 12. The table below provides specific findings discussing compliance with individual sections of the TPR. TPR Requirements Springfield TSP Compliance 660-012-0015 Preparation and Coordination of TSPs (3) Cities and counties shall prepare, adopt and amend local TSPs for lands within their planning jurisdiction in compliance with this division: (a) Local TSPs shall establish a system of transportation facilities and services adequate to meet identified local transportation needs and shall be consistent with regional TSPs and adopted elements of the state TSP; The Transportation planning toolbox (Chapter 4) and the Transportation Plan (Chapter 5) include facilities and services to meet identified transportation needs. Needs are identified in Volume 3 Appendix C, No Build Analyses and Volume 3 Appendix D, 20-year Needs Analysis. The proposed amendments update the project lists in Chapter 5 of the adopted TSP consistently with the needs identified in Volume 3. (5) The preparation of TSPs shall be coordinated with affected state and federal agencies, local governments, special districts, and private providers of transportation services. The Stakeholder Sounding Board (SSB) and Technical Review Team (TRT) included a wide range of stakeholders and representatives from City of Springfield, ODOT, LCOG, LTD, Willamalane Park and Recreation District, Springfield Utility Board, University of Oregon, City of Eugene, and Lane County. (6) Mass transit, transportation, airport, and port districts shall participate in the development of TSPs for those transportation facilities and services they provide. These districts shall prepare and adopt plans for transportation facilities and services they provide. Such plans shall be consistent with and adequate to carry out relevant portions of applicable regional and local TSPs. Cooperative agreements executed under ORS 197.185(2) shall include The TRT included representatives from Lane Transit District (LTD). Exhibit E, Page 7 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 109 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 8 of 62 the requirement that mass transit, transportation, airport and port districts adopt a plan consistent with the requirements of this section. 660-012-0016 Coordination with Federally- Required Regional Transportation Plans in Metropolitan Areas (1) In metropolitan areas, local governments shall prepare, adopt, amend and update transportation system plans required by this division in coordination with regional transportation plans (RTPs) prepared by MPOs required by federal law. Insofar as possible, regional transportation system plans for metropolitan areas shall be accomplished through a single coordinated process that complies with the applicable requirements of federal law and this division. Nothing in this rule is intended to make adoption or amendment of a regional transportation plan by a metropolitan planning organization a land use decision under Oregon law. The City of Springfield has been a part of LCOG’s Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Process. The proposed amendments are consistent with the 2040 RTP adopted in 2016. 660-012-0020 Elements of TSPs (2) The TSP Shall include the following elements (a) A determination of transportation needs as provided in OAR 660-012-0030 The proposed amendments to do not alter and are consistent with the transportation needs included in Appendix C, No Build Analysis and Appendix D, 20-year Needs Analyses. (b) A road plan for a system of arterials and collectors and standards for the layout of local streets and other important non- collector street connections. Functional classifications of roads in regional and local TSP's shall be consistent with functional classifications of roads in state and regional TSPs and shall provide for continuity between adjacent jurisdictions. The standards for the layout of local streets shall provide for safe and convenient bike and pedestrian circulation necessary to carry out OAR 660-012- 0045(3)(b). New connections to arterials and state highways shall be consistent with designated access management categories. The intent of this requirement The Conceptual Street Map is being adopted as the TSP’s road plan for arterials and collectors and is consistent with the functional classifications in the RTP. The Conceptual Street Map also includes off- street multiuse path projects to provide for safe and convenient bike and pedestrian circulation. The proposed TSP project list amendments do not alter the adopted TSP policies that provide standards for the layout of local streets including extensions of existing streets, connections to existing or planned streets, or connections to neighborhood destinations planned within the 20- year TSP timeline. The Conceptual Street Map’s depiction of local streets and associated development code amendments will implement these standards. Exhibit E, Page 8 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 110 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 9 of 62 is to provide guidance on the spacing of future extensions and connections along existing and future streets which are needed to provide reasonably direct routes for bicycle and pedestrian travel. The standards for the layout of local streets shall address: (A) Extensions of existing streets (B) Connections to existing or planned streets, including arterials and collectors; and (C) Connections to neighborhood destinations. (c) A public transportation plan which: (A) Describes public transportation services for the transportation disadvantaged and identifies service inadequacies; (B) Describes intercity bus and passenger rail service and identifies the location of terminals; (C) For areas within an urban growth boundary which have public transit service, identifies existing and planned transit trunk routes, exclusive transit ways, terminals and major transfer stations, major transit stops, and park- and-ride stations. Designation of stop or station locations may allow for minor adjustments in the location of stops to provide for efficient transit or traffic operation or to provide convenient pedestrian access to adjacent or nearby uses. The proposed amendments do not alter the adopted multimodal improvement projects in Chapter 5 that include planned transit lines and stops. (d) A bicycle and pedestrian plan for a network of bicycle and pedestrian routes throughout the planning area. The network and list of facility improvements shall be consistent with the requirements The proposed amendments do not alter the adopted transportation planning toolbox in Chapter 4 that provides for enhancing and increasing non-auto travel modes for bicycle and pedestrian route networks. The proposed Exhibit E, Page 9 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 111 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 10 of 62 of ORS 366.514; amendments include amendments to multi-modal improvement projects in Chapter 5 to enhance the bicycle and pedestrian network routes in the City. (e) An air, rail, water and pipeline transportation plan which identifies where public use airports, mainline and branchline railroads and railroad facilities, port facilities, and major regional pipelines and terminals are located or planned within the planning area. For airports, the planning area shall include all areas within airport imaginary surfaces and other areas covered by state or federal regulations; The proposed amendments do not alter the adopted projects in Chapter 5 that include rail, air, pipeline, and surface water transportation plans. (f) For areas within an urban area containing a population greater than 25,000 persons a plan for transportation system management and demand management; The proposed amendments do not alter the Chapter 4 Transportation Planning Toolbox that includes Transportation System Management and Demand Management sections. (g) A parking plan in MPO areas as provided in OAR 660-012-0045(5)(c) The proposed amendments do not alter the adopted TSP Goals and Policies regarding parking in chapter 2. (h) Policies and land use regulations for implementing the TSP as provided in OAR 660-012-0045; The proposed TSP amendments do not alter the adopted TSP Implementation and Policy language. (i) For areas within an urban growth boundary containing a population greater than 2,500 persons, a transportation financing program as provided in OAR 660-012-0040. Chapter 6, Funding and Implementation includes the estimated revenue stream and a comparison of the cost of the 20 year needs, along with potential funding sources. The proposed TSP project list amendments update the project cost estimates, but do not alter the estimated revenue stream of potential funding sources. (3) Each element identified in subsections (2)(b)–(d) of this rule shall contain: (a) An inventory and general assessment of existing and committed transportation facilities and services by function, type, capacity and condition: (A) The transportation capacity analysis shall include information on: (i) The capacities of existing and committed facilities; (ii) The degree to which those capacities have The proposed amendments do not alter the adopted inventory and general assessment of existing and committed transportation facilities and services in Volume 3, Appendices B and C. Exhibit E, Page 10 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 112 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 11 of 62 been reached or surpassed on existing facilities; and (iii) The assumptions upon which these capacities are based. (B) For state and regional facilities, the transportation capacity analysis shall be consistent with standards of facility performance considered acceptable by the affected state or regional transportation agency; (C) The transportation facility condition analysis shall describe the general physical and operational condition of each transportation facility (e.g., very good, good, fair, poor, very poor). (3)(b) A system of planned transportation facilities, services and major improvements. The system shall include a description of the type or functional classification of planned facilities and services and their planned capacities and performance standards; The proposed amendments to the project lists in Chapter 5 include descriptions of the projects to be amended. (3)(c) A description of the location of planned facilities, services and major improvements, establishing the general corridor within which the facilities, services or improvements may be sited. This shall include a map showing the general location of proposed transportation improvements, a description of facility parameters such as minimum and maximum road right of way width and the number and size of lanes, and any other additional description that is appropriate The proposed amendments to the project lists and figures in Chapter 5 and the Conceptual Street Map show general locations of proposed roadways and other transportation improvements. Facility parameters are provided in the project description or will be determined through application of the Springfield Development Code’s minimum standards for right of way and paving width by functional classification that are proposed in this application to implement the TSP. (3)(d) Identification of the provider of each transportation facility or service. Chapter 5 of the TSP identifies the provider of each type of planned facility or service. 660-012-0025 Complying with the Goals in Preparing TSPs (1) Except as provided in section (3) of this rule, adoption of a TSP shall constitute the land use decision regarding the need for transportation facilities, services and major improvements and their function, mode, and general location. The proposed amendments are being processed by the City as a Type IV legislative land use decision. Exhibit E, Page 11 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 113 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 12 of 62 (2) Findings of compliance with applicable statewide planning goals and acknowledged comprehensive plan policies and land use regulations shall be developed in conjunction with the adoption of the TSP. Specific findings are contained in this Staff Report. 660-012-0030 Determination of Transportation Needs (1) The TSP shall identify transportation needs relevant to the planning area and the scale of the transportation network being planned including: (a) State, regional, and local transportation needs; (b) Needs of the transportation disadvantaged; (c) Needs for movement of goods and services to support industrial and commercial development planned for pursuant to OAR chapter 660, division 9 and Goal 9 (Economic Development). (2) Counties or MPO's preparing regional TSP's shall rely on the analysis of state transportation needs in adopted elements of the state TSP. Local governments preparing local TSP's shall rely on the analyses of state and regional transportation needs in adopted elements of the state TSP and adopted regional TSP's. (3) Within urban growth boundaries, the determination of local and regional transportation needs shall be based upon: (a) Population and employment forecasts and distributions that are consistent with the acknowledged comprehensive plan, including those policies that implement Goal 14. Forecasts and distributions shall be for 20 years and, if desired, for longer periods; and (b) Measures adopted pursuant to OAR 660-012- 0045 to encourage reduced reliance on the automobile. (4) In MPO areas, calculation of local and regional transportation needs also shall be based upon The proposed amendments do not alter the determination of transportation needs adopted in Volume 3, Appendices B, C, and D. The proposed amendments do not alter the TSP’s acknowledged compliance with this rule. Exhibit E, Page 12 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 114 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 13 of 62 accomplishment of the requirement in OAR 660- 012-0035(4) to reduce reliance on the automobile. 660-012-0035 Evaluation and Selection of Transportation System Alternatives (1) The TSP shall be based upon evaluation of potential impacts of system alternatives that can reasonably be expected to meet the identified transportation needs in a safe manner and at a reasonable cost with available technology. The following shall be evaluated as components of system alternatives: The proposed amendments are consistent with and do not alter the adopted Alternatives Evaluation Process in Volume 3, Appendix E, that includes consideration and evaluation of potential impacts of system alternatives. (a) Improvements to existing facilities or services; Improvements to existing facilities and services were considered before new facilities, and are high priorities in this TSP for all modal elements. (b) New facilities and services, including different modes or combinations of modes that could reasonably meet identified transportation needs; New facilities proposed in these amendments and changes to new facilities already adopted in the TSP were evaluated based on their ability to include all modes or combinations of travel modes to meet identified transportation needs. (c) Transportation system management measures; The proposed amendments do not alter the adopted Transportation System Management measures in the Chapter 4 Transportation Planning Toolbox. (d) Demand management measures The proposed amendments do not alter the adopted Transportation Demand Management measures in Chapter 4 Transportation Planning Toolbox. (e) A no-build system alternative required by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 or other laws. The proposed amendments do not alter the adopted No Build Analyses in Volume 3, Appendix C. (3) The following standards shall be used to evaluate and select alternatives: (a) The transportation system shall support urban and rural development by providing types and levels of transportation facilities and services appropriate to serve the land uses identified in the acknowledged comprehensive plan; The proposed amendments do not alter the No Build Analyses in Volume 3, Appendix C or the 20-year needs analyses in Appendix D, which document the anticipated land uses and the TSP projects including consideration of these land uses in determining an appropriate transportation system. (b) The transportation system shall be consistent with state and federal standards for protection of air, land and water quality The proposed amendments do not alter adopted TSP policies that support modes other than the single-occupancy vehicle to help Exhibit E, Page 13 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 115 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 14 of 62 including the State Implementation Plan under the Federal Clean Air Act and the State Water Quality Management Plan; reduce transportation related air-quality impacts. The proposed TSP amendments and Conceptual Street Map include consideration for environmental and ecological impacts, such as nearby wetlands, which informed facility type and alignment decisions. (c) The transportation system shall minimize adverse economic, social, environmental and energy consequences; The proposed TSP amendments and Conceptual Street Map include consideration for minimizing economic, social, environmental, and energy consequences. (d) The transportation system shall minimize conflicts and facilitate connections between modes of transportation; and The proposed TSP amendments and Conceptual Street Map include an evaluation of projects for ability to minimize conflicts and facilitate connections between transportation modes. (e) The transportation system shall avoid principal reliance on any one mode of transportation by increasing transportation choices to reduce principal reliance on the automobile. In MPO areas this shall be accomplished by selecting transportation alternatives which meet the requirements in section (4) of this rule. The proposed TSP amendments do not alter the adopted multimodal transit projects, and increase the bicycle and pedestrian multi- modal project ideas to further increase transportation choices and reduce reliance on the automobile. (4) In MPO areas, regional and local TSPs shall be designed to achieve adopted standards for increasing transportation choices and reducing reliance on the automobile. Adopted standards are intended as means of measuring progress of metropolitan areas towards developing and implementing transportation systems and land use plans that increase transportation choices and reduce reliance on the automobile. It is anticipated that metropolitan areas will accomplish reduced reliance by changing land use patterns and transportation systems so that walking, cycling, and use of transit are highly convenient and so that, on balance, people need to and are likely to drive less than they do today. The proposed amendments do not alter the adopted TSP or RTP standards for increasing transportation choices and reducing reliance on the automobile. The proposed amendments to the TSP project lists include amendments to multimodal projects to further increase transportation choices to reduce reliance on the automobile. (7) Regional and local TSPs shall include benchmarks to assure satisfactory progress towards meeting the approved standard or standards adopted pursuant to this rule at regular intervals over the planning period. MPOs and local governments shall evaluate progress in meeting benchmarks at each The proposed amendments do not alter any benchmarks adopted in the TSP or the RTP. Exhibit E, Page 14 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 116 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 15 of 62 update of the regional transportation plan. Where benchmarks are not met, the relevant TSP shall be amended to include new or additional efforts adequate to meet the requirements of this rule. 660-012-0040 Transportation Financing Program (1) For areas within an urban growth boundary containing a population greater than 2,500 persons, the TSP shall include a transportation financing program. The proposed TSP project list amendments update the cost estimates for amended projects but do not significantly alter the financing plan included in Volume 2, Detailed Cost Estimates and Funding Analyses. (2) A transportation financing program shall include the items listed in (a)-(d): (a) A list of planned transportation facilities and major improvements; The proposed TSP amendments include updates to the list of planned transportation facilities and major improvements in the multimodal improvement projects section in Chapter 5. (b) A general estimate of the timing for planned transportation facilities and major improvements; The proposed TSP amendments to Chapter 5 continue to organize the multimodal improvements into general time frames. (c) A determination of rough cost estimates for the transportation facilities and major improvements identified in the TSP; and The proposed TSP project list amendments to Chapter 5 include updates to the rough cost estimates for new or amended projects. (d) In metropolitan areas, policies to guide selection of transportation facility and improvement projects for funding in the short- term to meet the standards and benchmarks established pursuant to 0035(4)-(6). Such policies shall consider, and shall include among the priorities, facilities and improvements that support mixed-use, pedestrian friendly development and increased use of alternative modes. Per the findings in 660-012-0035(4) and (7), the proposed amendments do not alter and are consistent with the adopted needs, projects, and policies in the Springfield TSP. (3) The determination of rough cost estimates is intended to provide an estimate of the fiscal requirements to support the land uses in the acknowledged comprehensive plan and allow jurisdictions to assess the adequacy of existing and possible alternative funding mechanisms. In addition to including rough cost estimates The proposed TSP amendments do not alter the 20-year estimated revenue stream or potential funding sources identified in Chapter 6. Exhibit E, Page 15 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 117 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 16 of 62 for each transportation facility and major improvement, the transportation financing plan shall include a discussion of the facility provider's existing funding mechanisms and the ability of these and possible new mechanisms to fund the development of each transportation facility and major improvement. These funding mechanisms may also be described in terms of general guidelines or local policies. (5) The transportation financing program shall provide for phasing of major improvements to encourage infill and redevelopment of urban lands prior to facilities and improvements which would cause premature development of urbanizable lands or conversion of rural lands to urban uses. The proposed TSP amendments include the ability to phase, and are consistent with the evaluation criteria used to select future transportation projects provided in Volume II, Appendix E. Statewide Planning Goal 13: Energy Conservation Land and uses developed on the land shall be managed and controlled so as to maximize the conservation of all forms of energy, based on sound economic principles. Findings: The City is currently in compliance with Goal 13 through its acknowledged Comprehensive Plan. The proposed amendments to the City of Springfield 2035 Transportation System Plan do not alter the City’s compliance with Goal 13. The TSP provides direction for the City regarding transportation improvements, including strategies to reduce vehicle miles traveled and single occupancy vehicle trips. Included in the TSP is direction to plan, fund, and develop a multi-modal transportation system that meets the needs of the community and region. The proposed TSP amendments include facility improvements, both on-street and off-street, intended to provide improved connectivity for pedestrians and bicyclists. The facilities will provide improved access to a variety of destinations within the planning area. The Springfield 2035 Transportation System Plan also includes policy direction and facility improvements intended to provide improved high frequency public transit efficiency and connectivity. All of these improvements and strategies are intended to reduce energy consumption associated with the transportation system. As a result, the proposed amendments are consistent with this goal. Statewide Planning Goal 14: Urbanization To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use, to accommodate urban population and urban employment inside urban growth boundaries, to ensure efficient use of land, and to provide for livable communities. Findings: On December 5, 2016, the City adopted Ordinance 6361, amending the Springfield urban growth boundary to include additional land for industrial and commercial employment and for parks and open space, but has yet to be acknowledged by LCDC. If acknowledged, the TSP will be revised at a later date to provide for transportation system improvements intended to serve these expansion areas. The proposed TSP amendments and Conceptual Street Map only affect the acknowledged urban growth boundary at the Exhibit E, Page 16 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 118 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 17 of 62 time the project was initiated and is therefore consistent. [Finding to be updated following the 1/26 LCDC hearing on the UGB Expansion.] Statewide Planning 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. Finding: Nearly all of projects in the Springfield 2035 Transportation System Plan are located outside of the Willamette River Greenway area. As required by Goal 15 and implemented through the City’s adopted and acknowledged Willamette Greenway Overlay District standards, individual transportation projects that are located in the Willamette River Greenway are required to conduct an individual analysis of Goal 15 compliance during the project development phase of work. The proposed amendments implement and are consistent with the adopted TSP and therefore are consistent with this goal. Statewide Planning Goals 16 - 19: Estuarine Resources, Coastal Shorelands, Beaches and Dunes and Ocean Resources. Finding: These statewide planning goals relate to coastal lands in Oregon and are not applicable to the proposed amendments. CONCLUSION: Based on the analysis above, the proposed Metro Plan amendment is consistent with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals. SDC 5.14-135 Criteria A is met. METRO PLAN AMENDMENT CRITERION #2: SDC 5.14-135 B., and LANE CODE 12.225 (2); Adoption of the amendment shall not make the Metro Plan internally inconsistent Finding: The Springfield TSP element of the Metro Plan is being amended to adopt the Conceptual Street Map and update the project list and figures in Chapter 5. Both these items are consistent with the Metro Plan. The proposed amendments to the TSP project lists and figures are consistent with the adopted goals and policies in the TSP. Chapter 2, Policy 3.1 of the TSP directs the City to adopt and maintain the Conceptual Street Map. The street alignments and classifications depicted on the Conceptual Street Map are consistent with the TSP projects identified in Chapter 5, or amendments are proposed to the project list to provide consistency. Finding: Chapter III of the Metro Plan contains eleven specific elements that address a comprehensive list of topics, including: (A) Residential Land Use and Housing Element; (B) Economic Element; (C) Environmental Resources Element; (D) Willamette River Greenway, River Corridors, and Waterways Element; (E) Environmental Design Element; (F) Transportation Element; (G) Public Facilities and Services Element; (H) Parks and Recreation Facilities Element; (I) Historic Preservation Element; (J) Energy Element; and (K) Citizen Involvement Element. The goals and policies of the TSP were found to be consistent with the policies of the Metro Plan and Springfield Comprehensive Plan for each element noted above when the TSP was adopted in 2014. The proposed amendments to the TSP project lists and figures do not alter these adopted TSP goals and policies. Exhibit E, Page 17 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 119 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 18 of 62 Finding: A. Metro Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element On June 20th 2011, the City of Springfield Council adopted Ordinance 6268 amending the Eugene- Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) to adopt the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element and the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis. This Residential Land Use and Housing Element and Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis contains the following relevant housing policies related to the Springfield 2035 Springfield TSP: H.3, H.5, H.10, H.13. H.3 – 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. H.5 Develop additional incentives to encourage and facilitate development of high density housing in areas designated for Mixed Use Nodal Development. H.10 Through the updating of development of each neighborhood refinement plan, district plans or specific area plan, amend land use plans to increase development opportunities for quality affordable housing in locations served by existing and planned frequent transit service that provides access to employment centers, shopping, health care, civic, recreational and cultural services. H.13 Promote housing development and affordability in coordination with transit plans and in proximity to transit stations. In addition to the above stated Metro Plan housing policies, the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element and the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis contains land use efficiency measures which were considered and incorporated early and often into the buildable lands analyses. Some examples of these efficiency measures include, but are not limited to: Encourage more infill and redevelopment; Encourage more development of urban centers and urban villages (Nodal Development); Allow more mixed-use development; Encourage more transit-oriented design; Continue efforts to revitalize Downtown. The Springfield 2035 TSP contains multiple goals and polices which support the above stated housing policies and land use efficiency measures. These TSP policies include, but are not limited to: Goal 1: Community Development – Provide an efficient, sustainable, diverse, and environmentally sound transportation system that supports and enhances Springfield’s economy and land use patterns. Exhibit E, Page 18 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 120 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 19 of 62 Policy 1.3: Provide a multi-modal transportation system that supports mixed-use areas, major employment centers, recreation, commercial, residential, and public developments, to reduce reliance on single-occupancy vehicles (SOVs). Goal 3: System Design: Enhance and expand Springfield’s transportation system design to provide a complete range of transportation mode choices. Policy 3.2: Expand and enhance Springfield’s bikeway system and provide bicycle system support facilities to both new development and redevelopment/expansion. Policy 3.3: Street design standards should be flexible and allow appropriate-sized local, collector, and arterial streets based upon traffic flow, geography, efficient land use, social, economic, and environmental impacts. Policy 3.7: Provide for a pedestrian environment that supports adjacent land uses and is designed to enhance the safety, comfort, and convenience of walking by providing direct routes and removing barriers when possible. Policy 3.8: Coordinate the design of Springfield’s transportation system with relevant local, regional, and state agencies. The above stated TSP goals and policies are examples of consistency between the Springfield 2035 TSP and relevant Metro Plan policies. The proposed amendments to the TSP project list and the adoption of the Conceptual Street Map will further support and enhance the Metro Plan’s Residential Land Use and Housing Element through strengthening multi-modal connections, enhancing bike, pedestrian and transit facilities and target multi-modal infrastructure in higher density, mixed use areas throughout Springfield. The proposed amendments are consistent with this Metro Plan Element. Finding: B. Metro Plan Economic Element On December 5, 2016, the City of Springfield Council adopted Ordinance 6361 amending the Eugene- Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) to adopt the Springfield 2030 Economic policy element. This Element is still pending acknowledgement by LCDC. This Economic Element contains the following relevant policies and implementation strategies related to implementing the Springfield 2035 TSP: Goal EG-1: Broaden, improve, and diversify the state and regional economy, and the Springfield economy in particular, while maintaining or enhancing environmental quality and Springfield’s natural heritage. Policy E.4: Expand industrial site opportunities by evaluating and rezoning commercial, residential, and industrial land for the best economic return for the community through the process of City refinement planning, review of owner-initiated land use proposals, expanding the urban growth boundary, and other means. Exhibit E, Page 19 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 121 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 20 of 62 Implementation Strategy 4.6: Increase opportunities for siting employment centers where they can be efficiently served by multiple modes of transportation. Goal EG-3: Strengthen and maintain strong, connected employment centers and economic corridors to support small, medium, and large businesses. Policy E.18: Coordinate transportation and land use corridor planning to include design elements that support Springfield’s economic and community development policies and contribute to community diversity and inclusivity. Implementation Strategy 18.3: Establish preferred design concepts for key intersections along the corridor that integrate vehicle, pedestrian, bicycle and transit needs. Goal EG-5d: Be prepared—Contribute to development of the region’s physical, social, educational, and workforce infrastructure to meet the needs of tomorrow. Policy E.38: Strengthen the coordination between infrastructure, planning and investments, land use, and economic development goals to prepare land and physical infrastructure, in a timely fashion, that is necessary to support business development and stimulate quality job creation. Policy E.39: Provide adequate infrastructure efficiently and distribute cost fairly. Policy E.40: Provide the services, infrastructure, and land needed to attract the identified industry clusters, especially where they can increase economic connectivity among businesses. Implementation Strategy 40.1: Coordinate capital improvement planning with land use and transportation planning to coincide with Springfield’s Economic Element. Implementation Strategy 40.2: Provide the necessary public facilities and services as funds become available to foster economic development. Implementation Strategy 40.4: Ensure that public private development agreements are in effect prior to financing public improvements to ensure cost recovery. Implementation Strategy 40.5: Explore alternative funding mechanisms in addition to debt service that provide timely completion of ‘connecting’ public facilities (e.g. an unpaved block of a street or missing sections of sewer line). Implementation Strategy 40.7: Continue to seek funding opportunities and public-private partnerships to construct key urban infrastructure elements that support pedestrian and transit-friendly redevelopment in Glenwood and Downtown, such as the Franklin multiway boulevard in Glenwood and enhancements to the Main Street/South A couplet through Downtown. Policy E.43: Promote and build on the region’s transportation, distribution, and logistics advantages. Exhibit E, Page 20 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 122 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 21 of 62 Goal E-7: Make development decisions predictable, fair, and cost-effective. Policy E.47: Enhance, maintain, and market Springfield’s reputation for: rapid processing of permits and applications, maintaining City agreements and commitments, and providing developers with certainty and flexibility in the development process. Implementation Strategy 47.1: Continually improve development permitting processes to remove regulatory impediments to redevelopment as practical, provide efficient streamlining of permitting processes, create incentives for redevelopment, and provide flexible design standards (clear and objective track plus discretionary track) to build on the community’s strong reputation as a friendly, welcoming and business-friendly city. Aside from the new Economic Element discussed above, the preexisting Economic Element of the Metro Plan also addresses the economic needs of current and future residents of the metropolitan area. The overarching economic goal of the Metro Plan Element is to, “Broaden, improve, and diversify the metropolitan economy while maintaining or enhancing the environment.” The Economic Element of the Metro Plan contains the following relevant economic policies related to the Springfield 2035 Springfield TSP: B.17, B.18, and B.19. B.17 Improve land availability for industries dependent on rail access. B.18 Encourage the development of transportation facilities which would improve access to industrial and commercial areas and improve freight movement capabilities by implementing the policies and projects in the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area Transportation Plan (TransPlan) and the Eugene Airport Master Plan. B.19 Local jurisdictions will encourage the allocation of funds to improve transportation access to key industrial sites or areas through capital budgets and priorities. The Springfield 2035 TSP contains multiple goals and polices which support these economic policies. These TSP policies include, but are not limited to: Goal 1: Community Development – Provide an efficient, sustainable, diverse, and environmentally sound transportation system that supports and enhances Springfield’s economy and land use patterns. Policy 1.1: Manage Springfield’s street, bike, pedestrian, rail, and transit system to facilitate economic growth of existing and future businesses in Springfield (NOTE Action #1 – When evaluating needed roadway improvements, consider the economic viability of existing commercial and industrial areas). Policy 2.2: Manage traffic operation systems for efficient freight and goods movement along designated freight, truck, and rail routes in Springfield (NOTE Action #2 – Coordinate with rail providers to improve at-grade rail crossing treatments to improve traffic flow and manage conflict points; create grade-separated rail crossings when possible). Policy 2.6: Manage the on-street parking system to preserve adequate capacity and turnover for surrounding land uses. Exhibit E, Page 21 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 123 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 22 of 62 Policy 2.7 manage the off-street parking system to assure major activity centers meet their parking demand through a combination of shared, leased, and new off-street parking facilities and TDM programs. Goal 3: System Design – Enhance and expand Springfield’s transportation system design to provide a complete range of transportation mode choices. Policy 3.2: Expand and enhance Springfield’s bikeway system and provide bicycle system support facilities to both new development and redevelopment / expansion. Policy 3.3: Street design standards should be flexible and allow appropriate-sized local, collector, and arterial streets based upon traffic flow, geography, efficient land use, social, economic, and environmental impacts. Policy 3.9: Support provision of rail-related infrastructure improvements as part of the Cascadia High-Speed Rail Corridor project. Policy 4.1: Support development of a stable and flexible transportation finance system that provides adequate resources for transportation needs identified in the Springfield 2035 TSP. The above stated TSP goals and policies are examples of consistency between the Springfield 2035 TSP and relevant Metro Plan economic policies. The proposed amendments to the TSP project list and the adoption of the Conceptual Street Map are consistent with these adopted policies and will further support and enhance the Economic Element through strengthening freight mobility and further supporting freight infrastructure. The implementation of the TSP will help provide a greater range of transportation options for businesses and employees. Implementation of the supporting policies listed above will enhance the on and off-street parking system to promote economic development. The proposed amendments are consistent with this Metro Plan Element. Finding: C. Environmental Resources Element The Environmental Resources Element addresses the natural assets and hazards in the metropolitan area. The policies of this element emphasize reducing urban impacts on wetlands throughout the metropolitan area and planning for the natural assets and constraints on undeveloped lands on the urban fringe. The Environmental Resources Element of the Metro Plan contains the following relevant policies related to the implementation of the Springfield 2035 Springfield TSP: C.8, C.22, C.23 and C.24. C.8 Local governments shall develop plans and programs which carefully manage development on hillsides and in water bodies, and restrict development in wetlands in order to prevent erosion and protect the scenic quality, surface water and groundwater quality, forest values, vegetation, and wildlife values of those areas. C.22 Design of new street, highway, and transit facilities shall consider noise mitigation measures where appropriate. C.23 Design and construction of new noise-sensitive development in the vicinity of existing and future streets and highways with potential to exceed general highway noise levels shall include consideration of mitigating measures, such as acoustical building modifications, noise barriers, and acoustical site planning. The application of these mitigating measures must be balanced with other design considerations and housing costs. Exhibit E, Page 22 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 124 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 23 of 62 C.24 Local governments shall continue to monitor, to plan for, and to enforce applicable noise standards and shall cooperate in meeting applicable federal and state noise standards. The Springfield 2035 TSP contains goals and polices which support these economic policies. These include, but are not limited to: Goal 1: Community Development – Provide an efficient, sustainable, diverse, and environmentally sound transportation system that supports and enhances Springfield’s economy and land use patterns. Policy 1.2: Consider environmental impacts of the overall transportation system and strive to mitigate negative effects and enhance positive features. (NOTE Action #1 – Strive to reduce vehicle-related greenhouse gas emissions and congestion through more sustainable street, bike, pedestrian, transit, and rail network design, location, and management. Action #2 – Coordinate the transportation network with new alternative energy infrastructure such as electric vehicle charging stations, natural gas, and hydrogen cell fueling stations). The above stated TSP goals and policies are examples of consistency between the Springfield 2035 TSP and relevant Metro Plan environmental policies. The proposed amendments to the TSP project list and the adoption of the Conceptual Street Map are consistent with these adopted policies and will further support and enhance the Metro Plan’s Environmental Resources Element through strengthening environmentally sound transportation options and an overall more sustainable transportation system. The proposed amendments are consistent with this Metro Plan Element. Finding: D. Willamette River Greenway, River Corridors, and Waterways Element The Willamette River Greenway, River Corridors, and Waterways Element address these specific natural assets in the metropolitan area. The policies of this element emphasize reducing urban impacts on these resources throughout the metropolitan area. The Willamette River Greenway, River Corridors, and Waterways Element of the Metro Plan contain the following relevant policies related to the Springfield 2035 Springfield TSP: D.2, D.3, D.9, and D.11. D.2 Land use regulations and acquisition programs along river corridors and waterways shall take into account all the concerns and needs of the community, including recreation, resource, and wildlife protection; enhancement of river corridor and waterway environments; potential for supporting non- automobile transportation; opportunities for residential development; and other compatible uses. D.3 Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County shall continue to cooperate in expanding water related parks and other facilities, where appropriate, that allow access to and enjoyment of river and waterway corridors. D.9 Local and state governments shall continue to provide adequate public access to the Willamette River Greenway. Exhibit E, Page 23 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 125 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 24 of 62 D.11 The taking of an exception shall be required if a non-water-dependent transportation facility requires placing of fill within the Willamette River Greenway setback. The Springfield 2035 TSP contains goals and polices which support these Willamette River Greenway, River Corridors, and Waterways policies. These include, but are not limited to: Goal 1: Community Development – Provide an efficient, sustainable, diverse, and environmentally sound transportation system that supports and enhances Springfield’s economy and land use patterns. Policy 1.2: Consider environmental impacts of the overall transportation system and strive to mitigate negative effects and enhance positive features. The above stated TSP goals and policies are examples of consistency between the Springfield 2035 TSP and relevant Metro Plan Willamette River Greenway, River Corridors, and Waterways policies. The proposed amendments to the TSP project list and the adoption of the Conceptual Street Map are consistent with these adopted policies and will further support and enhance the Metro Plan’s Willamette River Greenway, River Corridors, and Waterways Element by providing improved access to waterways. The proposed amendments are consistent with this Metro Plan Element. Finding: E. Environmental Design Element The Environmental Design Element is concerned with that broad process which molds the various components of the urban area into a distinctive, livable form that promotes a high quality of life. This Element is concerned with how people perceive and interact with their surroundings. The Environmental Design Element of the Metro Plan contains the following relevant policies related to the Springfield 2035 Springfield TSP: E.3 and E.4. E.3 The planting of street trees shall be strongly encouraged, especially for all new developments and redeveloping areas (where feasible) and new streets and reconstruction of major arterials within the UGB. E.4 Public and private facilities shall be designed and located in a manner that preserves and enhances desirable features of local and neighborhood areas and promotes their sense of identity. The Springfield 2035 TSP contains goals and polices which support these Environmental Design policies. These include, but are not limited to: Goal 3: System Design – Enhance and expand Springfield’s transportation system design to provide a complete range of transportation mode choices. Policy 3.3: Street design standards should be flexible and allow appropriate-sized local, collector, and arterial streets based upon traffic flow, geography, efficient land use, social, economic, and environmental impacts. Exhibit E, Page 24 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 126 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 25 of 62 Policy 3.7: Provide for a pedestrian environment that supports adjacent land uses and is designed to enhance the safety, comfort, and convenience of walking by providing direct routes and removing barriers when possible. The above stated TSP goals and policies are examples of consistency between the Springfield 2035 TSP and relevant Environmental Design policies. The proposed amendments to the TSP project list and the adoption of the Conceptual Street Map are consistent with these adopted policies and will enhance the pedestrian environment for new and redeveloped properties, creating a more livable community. The proposed amendments are consistent with this Metro Plan Element. Finding: F. Transportation Element The Metro Plan Transportation Element addresses surface and air transportation in the metropolitan area. The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area Transportation Plan (TransPlan) provides the basis for surface transportation. The goals and policies in the Metro Plan Transportation Element are identical to those in TransPlan, as TransPlan serves as the functional plan for transportation issues in the Metro Area. As previously noted in this report, this Springfield 2035 TSP will replace TransPlan (amended 2002) as Springfield’s local TSP. Until now, TransPlan has served as the adopted TSP for both Eugene and Springfield. In 2006, House Bill 3337 passed requiring the two cities to develop separate UGBs. With separate UGBs, the State of Oregon’s Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) required that Springfield and Eugene develop city-specific TSPs. While the Springfield 2035 TSP is an “update” of TransPlan, it is the City’s first independent TSP. Policies in the Metro Plan Transportation Element are organized by the following four topics related to transportation: Land Use, Transportation Demand Management, Transportation System Improvements, and Finance. The Springfield 2035 TSP used the TransPlan goals, policies, and objectives as a starting point for updating the policy set in the new TSP. Similar to TransPlan, the structure of the Springfield 2035 TSP includes four overarching categories. The TSP goals have subsequent policies and action items categorized beneath them. The four goals found in the Springfield 2035 TSP are: Goal 1: Community Development – Provide an efficient, sustainable, diverse and environmentally sound transportation system that supports and enhances Springfield’s economy and land use patterns. Goal 2: System Management – Preserve, maintain, and enhance Springfield’s transportation system through safe, efficient, and cost-effective transportation system operations and maintenance techniques for all modes. Goal 3: System Design – Enhance and expand Springfield’s transportation system design to provide a complete range of transportation mode choices. Goal 4: System Financing – Create and maintain a sustainable transportation funding plan that provides implementable steps towards meeting Springfield’s vision. Exhibit E, Page 25 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 127 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 26 of 62 Some specific TransPlan policies are highlighted in this Finding to illustrate consistency between TransPlan policies and those of the Springfield 2035 TSP. These include F.4, F.8, F.11, F.14, F.18, F.22, F.26, and F.34. Metro Plan / TransPlan Land Use Policy F.4: Require improvements that encourage transit, bicycles, and pedestrians in new commercial, public, mixed use, and multi-unit residential development. Metro Plan / TransPlan TDM Policy F.8: Implement TDM strategies to manage demand at congested locations. Metro Plan / TransPlan Transportation System Improvement, System Wide Policy F.11: Develop or promote intermodal linkages for connectivity and ease of transfer among all transportation modes. Metro Plan / TransPlan Transportation System Improvement, Roadway System F.14: Address the mobility and safety needs of motorists, transit users, bicyclists, pedestrians, and the needs of emergency vehicles when planning and constructing roadway system improvements. Metro Plan / TransPlan Transportation System Improvement, Transit System F.18: Improve transit service and facilities to increase the system’s accessibility, attractiveness, and convenience for all users, including the transportation disadvantaged population. Metro Plan / TransPlan Transportation System Improvement, Bicycle System F.22: Construct and improve the region’s bikeway system and provide bicycle system support facilities for both new development and redevelopment/expansion. Metro Plan / TransPlan Transit System Improvement, Pedestrian System F.26: Provide for a pedestrian environment that is well integrated with adjacent land uses and is designed to enhance the safety, comfort, and convenience of walking. Metro Plan / TransPlan Finance Policy F.34: Operate and maintain transportation facilities in a way that reduces the need for more expensive future repair. The Springfield 2035 TSP contains multiple goals and polices which are being implemented through the proposed amendments. These TSP policies include, but are not limited to: Policy 1.3: Policy 1.3: Provide a multi-modal transportation system that supports mixed-use areas, major employment centers, recreation, commercial, residential, and public developments, to reduce reliance on single-occupancy vehicles (SOVs). Policy 3.8: Coordinate the design of Springfield’s transportation system with relevant local, regional, and state agencies. (NOTE Action #3 – Partner with LTD to provide frequent transit network connections along major corridors. Frequent transit network should connect to local neighborhood bus service and major activity center to provide viable alternatives to vehicle trips). The above stated TSP goals, policies and implementation measures show consistency between the Springfield 2035 TSP and the Metro Plan / TransPlan Transportation Element policies. The proposed amendments to the TSP project list and the adoption of the Conceptual Street Map are consistent with these adopted policies and will further support multi-modal transportation and its nexus to mixed use development. The proposed amendments are consistent with this Metro Plan Element. Finding: G. Public Facilities and Services Element Exhibit E, Page 26 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 128 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 27 of 62 This element incorporates the findings and policies in the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area Public Facilities and Services Plan (Public Facilities and Services Plan), adopted as a refinement to the Metro Plan. The Public Facilities and Services Plan provide guidance for public facilities and services, including planned water, wastewater, stormwater, and electrical facilities. Transportation findings and policies are not part of the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area Public Facilities and Services Plan, but rather are located in the TSP and TransPlan. Relevant Metro Plan policies are discussed in the previous Transportation Element section. Finding: H. Parks and Recreation Facilities Element This Metro Plan Element addresses Parks and Recreation Facilities in the Metro Area. In Springfield, Willamalane Park and Recreation District is responsible for parks and recreation facilities and planning. There are no transportation specific Parks and Recreation Facilities Element policies in the Metro Plan the directly relate to the 2035 Springfield Transportation System Plan. However, some TSP multiuse path projects overlap with those in the Willamalane Parks Comprehensive Plan. The proposed amendments to the TSP project lists include amendments for consistency with the Willamalane Parks Comprehensive Plan and Willamalane facilities as constructed, including updating the name of the Moe Mountain Path and amending the project extent of the Mill Race Path. The planning for these and other similar projects have been closely coordinated with Willamalane staff. One example of consistency between this 2035 Springfield TSP and the Willamalane Park and Recreation Comprehensive Plan is TSP Policy 2.4 and its supporting Action #1. They state: Policy 2.4 - Maintain and preserve a safe and efficient bike and pedestrian system in Springfield. Action #1 – Coordinate with Willamalane Park and Recreation District to maintain and preserve the off-street path system. The proposed amendments to the TSP project list and the adoption of the Conceptual Street Map are consistent with these adopted policies and do not alter compliance with the Parks and Recreation Facilities Element of the Metro Plan, and are consistent with this Metro Plan Element. Finding: I. Historic Preservation Element This Element of the Metro Plan is written to preserve historic structures in the Metro area. There are no transportation specific Historic preservation Element policies in the Metro Plan that directly relate to the 2035 Springfield Transportation System Plan. However, individual projects in the TSP that use Federal funding must go through a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process during project development. The NEPA process includes requirements for historic preservation which the City will adhere to. These proposed amendments do not alter compliance with the Historic Preservation Element of the Metro Plan, and are consistent with this Metro Plan Element. J. Energy Element Exhibit E, Page 27 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 129 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 28 of 62 The Energy Element of the Metro Plan deals with the conservation and efficient use of energy in the metropolitan area and is meant to provide a long-range guide to energy-related decisions concerning physical development and land uses. The Energy Element of the Metro Plan contains the following relevant policies related to the Springfield 2035 Springfield TSP: J.2, J.7, and J.8. J.2 Carefully control, through the use of operating techniques and other methods, energy related actions, such as automobile use, in order to minimize adverse air quality impacts. Trade-offs between air quality and energy actions shall be made with the best possible understanding of how one process affects the other. J.7 Encourage medium- and high-density residential uses when balanced with other planning policies in order to maximize the efficient utilization of all forms of energy. The greatest energy savings can be made in the areas of space heating and cooling and transportation. For example, the highest relative densities of residential development shall be concentrated to the greatest extent possible in areas that are or can be well served by mass transit, paratransit, and foot and bicycle paths. J.8 Commercial, residential, and recreational land uses shall be integrated to the greatest extent possible, balanced with all planning policies to reduce travel distances, optimize reuse of waste heat, and optimize potential on-site energy generation. The Springfield 2035 TSP contains goals and polices which support these Energy Element policies. These include, but are not limited to: Goal 1: Community Development – Provide an efficient, sustainable, diverse, and environmentally sound transportation system that supports and enhances Springfield’s economy and land use patterns. Policy 1.2: Consider environmental impacts of the overall transportation system and strive to mitigate negative effects and enhance positive features. (NOTE Action #1 – Strive to reduce vehicle-related greenhouse gas emissions and congestion through more sustainable street, bike, pedestrian, transit, and rail network design, location, and management, and Action #2 – Coordinate the transportation network with new alternative energy infrastructure such as electric vehicle charging stations, natural gas, and hydrogen cell fueling stations. Policy 1.3: Provide a multi-modal transportation system that supports mixed-use areas, major employment centers, recreation, commercial, residential, and public developments, to reduce reliance on single-occupancy vehicles (SOVs). The above stated TSP goals and policies are examples of consistency between the Springfield 2035 TSP and relevant Energy policies. The proposed amendments to the TSP project list and the adoption of the Conceptual Street Map are consistent with these adopted policies and will further support and enhance the Metro Plan’s Energy Element by considering environmental impacts and energy usage when planning and implementing Springfield’s transportation system. The proposed amendments will also enhance the pedestrian environment for new and redeveloped properties, create a more livable community and Exhibit E, Page 28 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 130 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 29 of 62 support mixed uses with high frequency transit. The proposed amendments are consistent with this Metro Plan Element. K. Citizen Involvement Element The Citizen Involvement Element of the Metro Plan recognizes that active, on-going, and meaningful citizen involvement is an essential ingredient to the development and implementation of any successful planning program. A Public Involvement Program for the update of the 2035 Springfield Transportation System Plan was developed in preparation of the Project. This Program was reviewed and endorsed by the Committee for Citizen Involvement ( i. e. the Springfield Planning Commission). The Program outlined the information, outreach methods, and involvement opportunities available to the citizens during the process. Details of the process are included in the Statewide Planning Goal 1 finding of this report. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Metro Plan Element. CONCLUSION: Based on the findings above, the proposed TSP amendments do not make the Metro Plan internally inconsistent. SDC Section 5.14-135 Criterion B is met. DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS – APPROVAL CRITERIA The applicable approval criteria for the proposed development code amendments to implement the TSP are provided in SDC 5.6-115: In reaching a decision to adopt or amend the Springfield Development Code, the Council must adopt findings that demonstrate conformance to the following: (1) The Metro Plan; (2) Applicable State statutes; and (3) Applicable State-wide Planning Goals and Administrative Rules. CODE AMENDMENT CRITERION #1: SDC 5.6-115 A.1 CONFORMANCE WITH THE METRO PLAN Finding: The Metro Plan is the DLCD acknowledged long range comprehensive plan for the City of Springfield. The 2035 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) was adopted by Ordinance 6314 on March 13, 2014, and is the acknowledged Transportation Element of the Metro Plan for the City of Springfield. Finding: Chapter 7 of the TSP addresses future amendments to the Springfield Development Code needed to implement the TSP. The specific changes are provided in the TSP Volume 2, Appendix I. The changes address the following: Needs of the transportation dependent and disadvantaged; System connectivity; Ways of supporting and promoting walking, biking, and taking transit; Exhibit E, Page 29 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 131 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 30 of 62 Treatment of transportation facilities in the land use planning and permitting process; and Update and adopt the Conceptual Street Map. Finding: The TSP policies and implementation actions that are applicable to the proposed code changes are cited at the beginning of each Code section in the Proposed Springfield Development Code (SDC) Amendments, along with staff commentary that provide the specific findings for each set of proposed code amendments. CONCLUSION: Based on the findings above, including the staff commentary in the attached Proposed Springfield Development Code Amendments, the proposed Code amendments are consistent with the Metro Plan. SDC 5.6-115 Criterion B is met. CODE AMENDMENT CRITERION #2: SDC 5.6-115 A.2. CONFORMANCE WITH STATE STATUTES Finding: ORS 197.610 requires local jurisdictions to submit proposed comprehensive plan or land use regulation changes to Department of Land Conservation and Development. As noted in the Procedural Findings on page 3 of this staff report, notice of the proposed implementing amendments to the Springfield Development Code was provided to DLCD more than 35 days in advance of the first evidentiary hearing concerning the amendments. Finding: ORS 227.186 requires the local government to mail a notice to every landowner whose property would is proposed to be “rezoned” as a result of adoption or amendment of a proposed ordinance (also known as “Ballot Measure 56” notice.) As noted in the Procedural Findings on page 3 of this staff report, notice complying with ORS 227.186 was mailed to every property owner within the Springfield UGB. CONCLUSION: Based on the findings above, the proposed Code amendments are consistent with applicable state statutes. SDC 5.6-115 Criterion B has been met. CODE AMENDMENT CRITERION #2: SDC 5.6-115 C. CONFORMANCE WITH STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RULES Statewide Planning Goal 1 – Citizen Involvement: This goal outlines the citizen involvement requirement for adoption of Comprehensive Plans and changes to the Comprehensive Plan and implementing documents. Finding: The City’s Goal 1 compliance for this decision is discussed above under the findings for the Metro Plan amendment criteria, SDC 5.14-135 A., incorporated by reference herein. Statewide Planning Goal 2 – Land Use Planning: This goal outlines the land use planning process and policy framework. The Metro Plan and TSP have been acknowledged by DLCD as being consistent with the statewide planning goals. Statewide Planning Goals 3 & 4: Agricultural Lands and Forest Lands Exhibit E, Page 30 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 132 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 31 of 62 Finding: These statewide planning goals relate to agricultural and forest lands in Oregon and are not applicable to this proposed amendment. Statewide Planning Goal 5 – Natural Resources This goal requires the inventory and protection of natural resources, open spaces, historic areas and sites. Finding: The City is currently in compliance with the State’s Goal 5. The proposed amendments do not alter the City’s acknowledged Goal 5 inventories or land use programs. No changes will occur to current natural resource protections. Individual transportation project impacts are required to conduct a Goal 5 analysis during each project development phase. As a result, the proposed amendments are in compliance with Goal 5 process requirements. Statewide Planning Goal 6: Air, Water, and Land Resources Quality To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water, and land resources of the state. Finding: The City is currently in compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 6. The proposed amendments do not alter the City’s acknowledged land use programs regarding water quality and flood management protections. As noted in the Goal 7 findings for the TSP amendments on page 6 of this staff report, the TSP contains strategies for decreasing vehicle miles traveled and single-occupancy vehicle trips, which are intended to help improve air quality in the Central Lane MPO Area. The proposed code amendments implement these policies within the TSP. As a result, the proposed amendments are in compliance with Goal 6. Statewide Planning Goal 7 – Areas Subject to Natural Hazards To protect people and property from natural hazards. Finding: The City is currently in compliance with Goal 7. The proposed amendments do not alter the City’s acknowledged land use programs regarding potential landslide areas and flood protection. Statewide Planning Goal 8 – Recreational Needs This goal requires the satisfaction of 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. Finding: The City is currently in compliance with Goal 8. The TSP includes some individual off-street path projects and multi-use paths that meet a recreational need in addition to a transportation need. As further explained in the staff commentary to the Proposed Springfield Development Code (SDC) Amendments, the proposed code amendments address these facilities by specifically permitting linear parks as a permitted use in various zoning districts and by establishing new improvement standards for multi-use paths in SDC 4.2-150. The proposed code amendments are consistent with Goal 8. Statewide Planning 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. Exhibit E, Page 31 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 133 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 32 of 62 Finding: The proposed code amendments implement acknowledged TSP policies to provide a multi-modal transportation system to meet the needs of the community into the future, including accommodating economic growth. The proposed code amendments are consistent with this goal. Statewide Planning Goal 10: Housing To provide adequate housing for the needs of the community, region, and state. Finding: The proposed amendments implement acknowledged TSP policies to provide a multi-modal transportation system to meet the needs of the community into the future, including accommodating its housing needs. Finding: Goal 10, OAR 660-008-0015, generally requires clear and objective approval standards regulating the development of needed housing on buildable land, or the provision for an alternative discretionary review procedure that complies with the rule. The proposed code amendments that affect needed housing are written in clear and objective terms, including the requirements for motor vehicle parking SDC 4.6-110 and 4.6-125, requirements for bicycle parking in SDC 4.6-145 through 4.6-155 that apply to residential uses. The proposed code amendments are therefore consistent with Goal 10. Statewide Planning 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. Finding: The proposed amendments do not reduce any requirements for the extension or provision of public facilities or services during development review procedures and will have no effect on adopted and acknowledged public facilities plans. The proposed code amendments are therefore consistent with Goal 11. Statewide Planning Goal 12: Transportation To provide and encourage a safe, convenient, and economic transportation system. TPR Requirements Springfield TSP Implementation 660-012-0045 Implementation of the Transportation System Plan (1) Each local government shall amend its land use regulations to implement the TSP. The proposed amendments implement the TSP in compliance with this section. (2) Local governments shall adopt land use or subdivision ordinance regulations, consistent with applicable federal and state requirements, to protect transportation facilities, corridors and sites for their identified functions. Such regulations shall include: With the proposed changes, the City of Springfield is proposing to adopt land use regulations to meet these standards. Exhibit E, Page 32 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 134 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 33 of 62 TPR Requirements Springfield TSP Implementation (a) Access control measures, for example, driveway and public road spacing, median control and signal spacing standards, which are consistent with the functional classification of roads and consistent with limiting development on rural lands to rural uses and densities; New or revised provisions are proposed addressing the public road spacing through block perimeter requirements (SDC 4.2-115), medians (SDC 4.2-105 H), and other measures in conformance with this provision. (b) Standards to protect future operation of roads, transitways and major transit corridors; New or revised provisions are proposed to address street connectivity and minimum right-of-way and paving requirements (SDC 4.2-105), minimum block length and block perimeter (SDC 4.2-115), and other measures consistent with this provision. (c) Measures to protect public use airports by controlling land uses within airport noise corridors and imaginary surfaces, and by limiting physical hazards to air navigation; There are no airports existing or planned within the City of Springfield; therefore this provision is not applicable. (d) A process for coordinated review of future land use decisions affecting transportation facilities, corridors or sites; SDC 5.1-130 through SDC 5.1-140 require all Administrative, Quasi-Judicial, and Legislative land use decisions to be forwarded to a Development Review Committee for review and input. For applications that impact transportation facilities and services, the Development Review Committee includes outside transportation and transit agencies such as Lane Transit District and the State Highway Division. No changes to these provisions are proposed. (e) A process to apply conditions to development proposals in order to minimize impacts and protect transportation facilities, corridors or sites; The city has existing processes built into the Springfield Development Code to address impacts to and protect transportation facilities. These processes are contained in Chapter 5 of the SDC and include Ministerial, Administrative, and Quasi- Judicial review processes that provide for review of Land Division, Site Plan review, and other application types. Exhibit E, Page 33 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 135 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 34 of 62 TPR Requirements Springfield TSP Implementation (f) Regulations to provide notice to public agencies providing transportation facilities and services, MPOs, and ODOT of: (A) Land use applications that require public hearings; (B) Subdivision and partition applications; (C) Other applications which affect private access to roads; and (D) Other applications within airport noise corridors and imaginary surfaces which affect airport operations; and SDC 5.1-130 through SDC 5.1-140 require all Administrative, Quasi-Judicial, and Legislative land use decisions to be forwarded to a Development Review Committee for review and input. For applications that impact transportation facilities and services, the Development Review Committee includes outside transportation and transit agencies such as Lane Transit District and the State Highway Division. No changes to these provisions are proposed. (g) Regulations assuring that amendments to land use designations, densities, and design standards are consistent with the functions, capacities and performance standards of facilities identified in the TSP. Consistency with the Metro Plan is a criteria of approval for all development code amendments (SDC 5.6-115.A), zoning map amendments (SDC 5.22-115.C), and Metro Plan diagram amendments (SDC 5.14-135.B). The TSP is a component of the Metro Plan, and therefore these criteria comply with this provision of the TPR. No changes to these criteria are proposed. (3) Local governments shall adopt land use or subdivision regulations for urban areas and rural communities as set forth below. The purposes of this section are to provide for safe and convenient pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular circulation consistent with access management standards and the function of affected streets, to ensure that new development provides on-site streets and accessways that provide reasonably direct routes for pedestrian and bicycle travel in areas where pedestrian and bicycle travel is likely if connections are provided, and which avoids wherever possible levels of automobile traffic which might interfere with or discourage pedestrian or bicycle travel. The existing connectivity standards in SDC 4.2-105 together with the proposed Conceptual Street Map implement this section of the rule, in addition to the proposed amendments to the infrastructure standards in SDC section 4.2 outlined below. (a) Bicycle parking facilities as part of new multi-family residential developments of four units or more, new retail, office and institutional developments, and all transit transfer stations and park-and-ride lots; The proposed bicycle parking requirements in SDC 4.6-155 Table 4.6-3 require bike parking facilities for all the identified uses. Exhibit E, Page 34 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 136 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 35 of 62 TPR Requirements Springfield TSP Implementation (b) On-site facilities shall be provided which accommodate safe and convenient pedestrian and bicycle access from within new subdivisions, multi-family developments, planned developments, shopping centers, and commercial districts to adjacent residential areas and transit stops, and to neighborhood activity centers within one-half mile of the development. Single-family residential developments shall generally include streets and accessways. Pedestrian circulation through parking lots should generally be provided in the form of accessways. (A) "Neighborhood activity centers" includes, but is not limited to, existing or planned schools, parks, shopping areas, transit stops or employment centers; The proposed amendments to SDC 4.6-145 through 155 require bicycle parking facilities for the uses described in this section of the rule. SDC 4.2-160 already provides for pedestrian accessways to allow pedestrians and bicyclists convenient linkages to adjacent streets, residential areas, neighborhood activity centers, industrial or commercial centers, transit facilities, parks, schools, open space, or trails and paths where no public street access exists; these requirements are not proposed to be repealed or replaced. Proposed amendments to SDC 4.2-115 allow pedestrian accessways to be required when block lengths or block perimeters for new development exceed the applicable maximum. (B) Bikeways shall be required along arterials and major collectors. Sidewalks shall be required along arterials, collectors and most local streets in urban areas, except that sidewalks are not required along controlled access roadways, such as freeways; Proposed amendments to SDC 4.2-105 and Table 4.2-1 clarify that bike lanes are required on all arterials and collectors, and setback sidewalks on both sides of the street for all arterials, collectors and local streets <15 slope, except where specific facility plans identify another requirement. (C) Cul-de-sacs and other dead-end streets may be used as part of a development plan, consistent with the purposes set forth in this section; The proposed amendments to SDC 4.2-105 require dead end streets to provide adequate bike and pedestrian connections. (D) Local governments shall establish their own standards or criteria for providing streets and accessways consistent with the purposes of this section. Such measures may include but are not limited to: standards for spacing of streets or accessways; and standards for excessive out-of-direction travel; The proposed street connectivity standards in SDC 4.2-105 together with the conceptual local streets shown on the Conceptual Street Map implement the TSP policies regarding connectivity and comply with this section of the rule. Exhibit E, Page 35 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 137 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 36 of 62 TPR Requirements Springfield TSP Implementation (E) Streets and accessways need not be required where one or more of the following conditions exist: (i) Physical or topographic conditions make a street or accessway connection impracticable. Such conditions include but are not limited to freeways, railroads, steep slopes, wetlands or other bodies of water where a connection could not reasonably be provided; (ii) Buildings or other existing development on adjacent lands physically preclude a connection now or in the future considering the potential for redevelopment; or (iii) Where streets or accessways would violate provisions of leases, easements, covenants, restrictions or other agreements existing as of May 1, 1995, which preclude a required street or accessway connection. The proposed street connectivity standards in SDC 4.2-105 together with the conceptual local streets shown on the Conceptual Street Map implement the TSP policies regarding connectivity and comply with this section of the rule. (c) Where off-site road improvements are otherwise required as a condition of development approval, they shall include facilities accommodating convenient pedestrian and bicycle travel, including bicycle ways along arterials and major collectors; Proposed amendments to SDC 4.2-105 and Table 4.2-1 clarify that on-street bike lanes are required on all arterials and collectors, unless otherwise provided in a specific facility plan for those improvements (such as inclusion of an off-street multi-use path as part of a planned project identified in the TSP). (e) Internal pedestrian circulation within new office parks and commercial developments shall be provided through clustering of buildings, construction of accessways, walkways and similar techniques. Standards for internal pedestrian circulation and access for new developments is provided in SDC 5.15-100 Minimum Development Standards and SDC 5.17-100 Site Plan Review for new commercial development. The proposed code amendments do not include substantive changes to these provisions. Exhibit E, Page 36 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 138 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 37 of 62 TPR Requirements Springfield TSP Implementation (4) To support transit in urban areas containing a population greater than 25,000, where the area is already served by a public transit system or where a determination has been made that a public transit system is feasible, local governments shall adopt land use and subdivision regulations as provided in (a)– (g) [of this rule] The City of Springfield is served by Lane Transit District. The transit and pedestrian-oriented regulations required by this rule are implemented through the Springfield Development Code Nodal Overlay District in SDC 3.3-1000 and specific mixed-use development standards by zoning district. The proposed code amendments do not include proposed changes to these standards. (5) In MPO areas, local governments shall adopt land use and subdivision regulations to reduce reliance on the automobile which: (a) Allow transit-oriented developments (TODs) on lands along transit routes; The Springfield Development Code implements transit-oriented development through the mixed- use plan districts and nodal overlay development standards. The proposed code amendments do not contain substantive changes to these provisions. (b) Implements a demand management program to meet the measurable standards set in the TSP in response to OAR 660-012-0035(4); As outlined in the staff commentary to the Proposed Springfield Development Code Amendments, the proposed amendments implement TSP policies that adopt standards for increasing transportation choices and reducing reliance on the automobile. (c) Implements a parking plan which [meets standards (A)-(D) identified in the rule]: (d) As an alternative to (c) above, local governments in an MPO may instead revise ordinance requirements for parking as follows: The proposed code amendments implement subsection (5)(d) of this rule as outlined below. Exhibit E, Page 37 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 139 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 38 of 62 TPR Requirements Springfield TSP Implementation (A) Reduce minimum off-street parking requirements for all non-residential uses from 1990 levels; The proposed amendments to SDC 4.6-110 include new motor vehicle parking space reduction credits for bike parking, proximity to identified Frequent Transit Corridors, and for contributions to ADA facilities not otherwise required for a particular development. SDC 4.6-110.M. is proposed to allow reductions based upon an approved parking study or evidence of specific use characteristics that are likely to reduce on-site parking demand. These proposed reductions apply to any non-residential development outside of the Downtown Exception Area and Glenwood Mixed-Use Plan District (where there are no adopted parking minimums), and effectively reduce the minimum off-street parking requirements to below 1990 levels. (B) Allow provision of on-street parking, long-term lease parking, and shared parking to meet minimum off-street parking requirements; SDC 4.6-110 currently allows shared parking and a ½ space credit for on-street parking to meet minimum parking requirements; these provisions are not proposed to be replaced or repealed. (C) Establish off-street parking maximums in appropriate locations, such as downtowns, designated regional or community centers, and transit- oriented developments; The proposed changes to SDC 4.6-125 include an off-street parking maximum of 125% of the identified minimum parking requirement for all non-residential uses unless increased pursuant to a parking study. (D) Exempt structured parking and on- street parking from parking maximums; The proposed parking maximum in SDC 4.6-125 is not applicable to on-street parking. Structured parking may be exempt from the maximum parking standard pursuant to a parking study to determine the parking demand. (E) Require that parking lots over 3 acres in size provide street-like features along major driveways (including curbs, sidewalks, and street trees or planting strips); and Adopted parking lot landscaping standards in SDC 4.4-105.F already comply with this subsection, and no changes to these requirements are proposed. (F) Provide for designation of residential parking districts. The proposed amendments to the parking standards in SDC 4.6-125 establish standards for residential uses that are separate from the requirements for non-residential districts and uses. Exhibit E, Page 38 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 140 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 39 of 62 TPR Requirements Springfield TSP Implementation (e) Existing development shall be allowed to redevelop a portion of existing parking areas for transit-oriented uses, including bus stops and pullouts, bus shelters, park and ride stations, transit-oriented developments, and similar facilities, where appropriate; SDC 4.6-110.B currently allows redevelopment of existing excess parking for any permitted use, which includes transit-oriented uses. No changes are proposed to this provision, except to authorize additional motor vehicle parking reduction credits that may further decrease the parking requirements for existing uses. (f) Road systems for new development shall be provided that can be adequately served by transit, including provision of pedestrian access to existing and identified future transit routes. This shall include, where appropriate, separate accessways to minimize travel distances; SDC 4.2-160 currently provides for pedestrian accessways for new development to provide convenient linkage to transit facilities (among other uses and facilities). The proposed amendments to SDC 4.2-115 block length standards also provide for pedestrian accessways when block lengths exceed the identified maximums, to minimize pedestrian travel distances in all new development. (g) Along existing or planned transit routes, designation of types and densities of land uses adequate to support transit. As outlined in the staff commentary to the Proposed Springfield Development Code Amendments, the proposed amendments implement adopted TSP policies to support transit-oriented uses. (e) Require all major industrial, institutional, retail and office developments to provide either a transit stop on site or connection to a transit stop along a transit trunk route when the transit operator requires such an improvement. Existing standards that apply to Site Plan Review (SDC 5.17-100) and Master Plan Review (SDC 5.13- 100) comply with this section of the rule, and the proposed code amendments do not substantively alter these requirements. Exhibit E, Page 39 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 141 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 40 of 62 TPR Requirements Springfield TSP Implementation (6) In developing a bicycle and pedestrian circulation plan as required by OAR 660- 012-0020(2)(d), local governments shall identify improvements to facilitate bicycle and pedestrian trips to meet local travel needs in developed areas. Appropriate improvements should provide for more direct, convenient and safer bicycle or pedestrian travel within and between residential areas and neighborhood activity centers (i.e., schools, shopping, transit stops). Specific measures include, for example, constructing walkways between cul-de-sacs and adjacent roads, providing walkways between buildings, and providing direct access between adjacent uses. Proposed amendments to provide for more direct, convenient, and safer bike and pedestrian travel include: Addition of linear parks are permitted uses in various zones; Amendments to the connectivity standards in SDC 4.2-105 in conjunction with adoption of conceptual local street system through the Conceptual Street Map; Amendments to the minimum street standards in SDC 4.2-105 to clarify standards for pedestrian and bicycle facilities as required elements of certain street classifications (e.g. setback sidewalks and bike lanes); Amendments to SDC 4.2-105 to require dead end streets to provide adequate bike and pedestrian connections; Amendments to SDC 4.2-115 block length standards to allow the Director to require pedestrian accessways when a block length or perimeter would exceed the applicable maximum; Amendments to infrastructure standards for sidewalks (SDC 4.2-135), lighting (SDC 4.2-145), multi-use paths (SDC 4.2-150), accessways (SDC 4.2-160), and bicycle parking (SDC 4.6-145 and 4.6- 150). Exhibit E, Page 40 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 142 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 41 of 62 TPR Requirements Springfield TSP Implementation (7) Local governments shall establish standards for local streets and accessways that minimize pavement width and total right-of-way consistent with the operational needs of the facility. The intent of this requirement is that local governments consider and reduce excessive standards for local streets and accessways in order to reduce the cost of construction, provide for more efficient use of urban land, provide for emergency vehicle access while discouraging inappropriate traffic volumes and speeds, and which accommodate convenient pedestrian and bicycle circulation. Not withstanding section (1) or (3) of this rule, local street standards adopted to meet this requirement need not be adopted as land use regulations. The proposed amendments to SDC 4.2- 105 and Table 4.2-1 regarding minimum right-of-way and paving widths are intended to allow more flexibility for certain design elements that reduce paving width. For example, the current minimum right-of-way and paving width requirements do not distinguish between streets that provide on-street parking and those that do not. The proposed changes permit narrower streets than currently permitted when no on-street parking is planned or when planned for only one side of the street. 660-012-0060 Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments (1) 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 as provided in section (2) of this rule, unless the amendment is allowed under section (3), (9) or (10) of this rule. A plan or land use regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation facility if it would: As outlined below, the proposed code amendments merely implement the adopted TSP and do not significantly affect a transportation facility as defined by this rule. (a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility (exclusive of correction of map errors in an adopted plan); The proposed code amendments and conceptual streets shown on the Conceptual Street Map do not alter the functional classification of any existing or planned facilities. (b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or The proposed code amendments implement, but do not alter, the TSP’s adopted standards for implementing the functional classification system. Exhibit E, Page 41 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 143 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 42 of 62 TPR Requirements Springfield TSP Implementation (c) Result in any of the effects listed in paragraphs (A) through (C) of this subsection based on projected conditions measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP. As part of evaluating projected conditions, the amount of traffic projected to be generated within the area of the amendment may be reduced if the amendment includes an enforceable, ongoing requirement that would demonstrably limit traffic generation, including, but not limited to, transportation demand management. This reduction may diminish or completely eliminate the significant effect of the amendment. (A) Types or levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility; (B) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility such that it would not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan; or (C) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise projected to not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan. The proposed code amendments implement TSP policies. They do not alter the performance standards for any existing or planned facilities identified in the TSP. The following findings support the indicated local street connections. Exhibit E, Page 42 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 144 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 43 of 62 Delrose Drive Findings: 2680 Harvest Ln house is not located in alignment with the logical extension of right-of-way. Exhibit E, Page 43 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 145 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 44 of 62 Delrose Dr is too long without a turnaround to meet current dead-end street standards. The Delrose Dr dead-end was built without a turnaround, which would have been required if this were a planned dead- end street. No sidewalk connects at the current end of the street, anticipating a connection to Yolanda Ave in the future to complete the sidewalk network. The Delrose Dr to Yolanda Ave street connection would support TSP Policy 3.4 which states, “Provide for a continuous transportation network with reasonable direct travel routes to destination points for all modes of travel.” Additionally, TSP Policy 3.7 states, “Provide for pedestrian environment that supports adjacent land uses and is designed to enhance the safety, comfort, and convenience of walking by providing direct routes and removing barriers when possible.” TSP Chapter 7 states that the implementation measures for the TSP need to address system connectivity (page 83, Springfield 2035 TSP). Exhibit E, Page 44 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 146 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 45 of 62 Garden Avenue Findings: Right-of-way has already been dedicated at both ends of Garden Ave and the western extent of Richland St in preparation for the conceptual local street connections shown below. Exhibit E, Page 45 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 147 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 46 of 62 The conceptual local street connections could be accommodated without removing any approved structures. The roof shown to the western extent of the area indicated above is a barn. The conceptual local street connections between Kintzley Ave, 34th Pl, Dondea St, and Garden Ave provide the connectivity necessary to avoid dead-end streets that exceed permitted design standards for secondary emergency access, and achieve the smallest block length given the already built environment. The connectivity would provide residents with more direct routes to the 32nd and Jasper Middle Fork Path Trailhead, primarily along low volume, low speed, local streets as opposed to a higher volume, higher speed major collector. This supports TSP Policy 3.7 which states, “Provide for pedestrian environment that supports adjacent land uses and is designed to enhance the safety, comfort, and convenience of walking by providing direct routes and removing barriers when possible.” The street connections would support TSP Policy 3.4 which states, “Provide for a continuous transportation network with reasonably direct travel routes to destination points for all modes of travel.” TSP Chapter 7 also states that the implementation measures for the TSP need to address system connectivity (page 83, Springfield 2035 TSP). Exhibit E, Page 46 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 148 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 47 of 62 Kintzley Avenue and Osage Street Findings: Exhibit E, Page 47 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 149 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 48 of 62 The Osage St to Kintzley Ave connection could be built without removal of the existing Douglas House. The conceptual local street could be adjusted to flatten out the corner to more clearly show that the house may remain if the property owner chooses to develop. Kintzley Ave currently is built anticipating extension to the north. The street light to illuminate the intersection already exists and sidewalk was not built, anticipating the future connection. The current Osage St dead-end was built without a turnaround, which would have been required if this were a planned dead-end street. No sidewalk connects at the current end of the street, anticipating a connection to Kintzley in the future to complete the sidewalk network. Osage Street was also named as “Street” instead of “Court” to indicate the future connection. The street connection would support TSP Policy 3.4 which states, “Provide for a continuous transportation network with reasonable direct travel routes to destination points for all modes of travel.” TSP Chapter 7 states that the implementation measures for the TSP need to address system connectivity (page 83, Springfield 2035 TSP). Exhibit E, Page 48 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 150 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 49 of 62 Aaron Lane Findings: 42 homes are currently built fronting 65th St north of Thurston Rd; only 30 single family homes can be located off of a single access without planned secondary emergency access. 2014 Oregon Fire Code Appendix D Section D107.1 states, “One- or two-family dwelling residential developments. Developments of one- or two-family dwellings where the number of dwelling units exceeds 30 shall be provided with two separate and approved fire apparatus access roads, and shall meet the requirements of Section D104.3 Exception… 2. The number of dwelling units on a single fire apparatus access road shall not be increased unless fire apparatus access roads will connect with future development, as determined by the fire code official.” Exhibit E, Page 49 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 151 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 50 of 62 Even with the conceptual local street shown, the block length that would be achieved would exceed the proposed maximum block length standards by more than double. This connection is necessary to connect neighborhoods to the backside of the school so that people accessing the school on foot or bicycle from the neighborhood can avoid the only east-west major collector in the area. The street and accessway connection would support TSP Policy 3.4 which states, “Provide for a continuous transportation network with reasonable direct travel routes to destination points for all modes of travel.” Additionally, TSP Policy 3.7 states, “Provide for pedestrian environment that supports adjacent land uses and is designed to enhance the safety, comfort, and convenience of walking by providing direct routes and removing barriers when possible.” The connections shown above would also help implement Policy 2.3, Action 2, which states, “Coordinate with Springfield Public Schools to implement the solutions outlined in Safe Routes to School Action Plans.” TSP Chapter 7 states that the implementation measures for the TSP need to address system connectivity (page 83, Springfield 2035 TSP). Exhibit E, Page 50 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 152 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 51 of 62 Prescott Lane / Riverview Boulevard / Edgemont Way Findings: As shown above, the right-of-way has already been dedicated from Riverview Blvd to Prescott Ln and partially from Riverview Blvd to Edgemont Way. The conceptual local street connection between Edgemont Way and Prescott Ln would only occur if the property owner of 500 Edgemont Way chose to develop the property. Exhibit E, Page 51 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 153 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 52 of 62 Edgemont Way is a non-conforming dead-end street that was planned, as shown by the lack of sidewalk connectivity and the current dead-end having no turnaround. The street connections between Prescott Ln, Riverview Blvd, and Edgemont Way would support TSP Policy 3.4 which states, “Provide for a continuous transportation network with reasonable direct travel routes to destination points for all modes of travel.” Additionally, TSP Policy 3.7 states, “Provide for pedestrian environment that supports adjacent land uses and is designed to enhance the safety, comfort, and convenience of walking by providing direct routes and removing barriers when possible.” TSP Chapter 7 states that the implementation measures for the TSP need to address system connectivity (page 83, Springfield 2035 TSP). Exhibit E, Page 52 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 154 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 53 of 62 A and B Streets west of Water Street Findings: Exhibit E, Page 53 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 155 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 54 of 62 Future development which blocks the conceptual local street connection shown between A St and B St would eliminate the only secondary emergency access to the main entrance of Island Park, which is a park that consistently accommodates large public events. Analysis and determination of wetland areas has not been performed and is typically performed at the time of development and is the responsibility of the developer to delineate on the land use application. Given analysis and delineation through the development review process, adjustments to the street connection alignment could be provided based on findings to correlate with the proposed street connectivity standards provided in the Springfield Development Code Amendments, Section 4.2-105 Public Streets. Exhibit E, Page 54 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 156 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 55 of 62 Even if the local street connection was not depicted on the draft Conceptual Street Map, the development code street connectivity standards and block length would still apply. The block length standards would not be fulfilled without a connection between A St and B St. The appropriate time to address previous agreements, wetland issues, and traffic analysis in accordance with Section 4.2-105 is at the time of development proposal through the City’s development review process. The existing private connection is currently being used by the public to access Island Park, with the currently built road split between public and private property. As shown, the already adopted TSP PB-19 project that identifies a “Bridge between Downtown and Glenwood or modify Willamette River Bridges” would not have as many direct connection options to Island Park, City Hall, and Downtown Springfield. The conceptual local streets connecting A St and B St and B St and C St would support TSP Policy 3.7 which states, “Provide for pedestrian environment that supports adjacent land uses and is designed to enhance the safety, comfort, and convenience of walking by providing direct routes and removing barriers when possible.” Additionally, TSP Policy 3.4 states, “Provide for a continuous transportation network with reasonable direct travel routes to destination points for all modes of travel.” TSP Chapter 7 implementation measures for the TSP address system connectivity (page 83, Springfield 2035 TSP). The system connectivity to and from the park from Downtown, Washburne neighborhood, and City Hall relies on A St and C St for access to Island Park since B St is blocked between Pioneer Parkway East and 4th St. Exhibit E, Page 55 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 157 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 56 of 62 Tyson Park and 35th Street Findings: There are currently 108 single-family or duplex lots on 34th St, C St, and 35th St. Without a planned secondary emergency access this development would violate the fire code. Only 30 single family homes can be located off of a single access without secondary emergency access according to fire code. 2014 Oregon Fire Code Appendix D Section D107.1 states, “One- or two-family dwelling residential developments. Developments of one- or two-family dwellings where the number of dwelling units exceeds 30 shall be provided with two separate and approved fire apparatus access roads, and shall meet the requirements of Section D104.3 Exception… 2. The number of dwelling units on a single fire apparatus access road shall not be increased unless fire apparatus access roads will connect with future development, as determined by the fire code official.” Either the 33rd St to 34th St conceptual local street connection would need to be provided triggered by development or the street extension of 35th St would need to be provided to fulfill Oregon Fire Code requirements. TSP Policy 3.4 states, “Provide for a continuous transportation network with reasonably direct travel routes to destination points for all modes of travel.” TSP Chapter 7 implementation measures for the TSP address system connectivity (page 83, Springfield 2035 TSP). Exhibit E, Page 56 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 158 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 57 of 62 Thurston Hills Natural Area Trailhead and S. A Street Findings: Willamalane provided input about the conceptual local street alignment during their review serving on the TSP Implementation project’s Technical Review Team. The draft conceptual street map reflects the adjusted alignment that is in accordance with the Annexation Agreement between the City of Springfield and Willamalane Park and Recreation District. Below is email correspondence that shows the adjustment was made. The street connections shown above support TSP Policy 3.4, which states, “Provide for a continuous transportation network with reasonably direct travel routes to destination points for all modes of travel.” TSP Chapter 7 implementation measures for the TSP address system connectivity (page 83, Springfield 2035 TSP). Exhibit E, Page 57 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 159 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 58 of 62 Exhibit E, Page 58 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 160 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 59 of 62 Exhibit E, Page 59 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 161 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 60 of 62 Kalmia Findings: Exhibit E, Page 60 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 162 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 61 of 62 Right-of-way and local street construction has already started at the western end of the existing, built portion of Kalmia Street. The extension of Kalmia would provide an alternative to Jasper Road for people walking and biking who prefer walking or biking along a local street environment instead of along a major collector that currently lacks bike lanes and sidewalks along portions of it. The planned local street connection would also provide more direct neighborhood routes for some trips. The continuation of Kalmia Street supports TSP Policy 3.7 which states, “Provide for pedestrian environment that supports adjacent land uses and is designed to enhance the safety, comfort, and convenience of walking by providing direct routes and removing barriers when possible.” The street connections would support TSP Policy 3.4 which states, “Provide for a continuous transportation network with reasonably direct travel routes to destination points for all modes of travel.” TSP Chapter 7 also states that the implementation measures for the TSP need to address system connectivity (page 83, Springfield 2035 TSP). There are no other planned local streets that would help with connectivity between S. 42nd Street, Jasper Road, Mt. Vernon Road, S. 43th Street, and S. 44th Street. The current built block perimeter of S. 42nd Street, Jasper Road, S. 43rd Street, and Mt. Vernon Road is approximately 3,000 feet and the block to the east of S. 43rd Street, Jasper Road, S. 44th Street, and Mt Vernon Road is approximately 3,400 feet. The north-south block lengths are approximately double the existing, already adopted code requirement and the block perimeters are approximately double or more than double the 1,600 feet other zoning district block length standard (see Springfield Development Code Amendments Section 4.2-115 Block Length). Exhibit E, Page 61 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 163 of 164 Springfield Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation City of Springfield Case Numbers 811-17-000165-TYP4, Development Code Amendment; 811-17-000166-TYP4 Plan amendment; and Lane County Case Number PA 1359 February 26, 2018 Page 62 of 62 Statewide Planning Goal 13: Energy Conservation Land and uses developed on the land shall be managed and controlled so as to maximize the conservation of all forms of energy, based on sound economic principles. Findings: As noted in the Goal 13 findings for the TSP amendments on page 19 of this staff report, the TSP provides direction for the City regarding transportation improvements, including strategies to reduce vehicle miles traveled and single occupancy vehicle trips and includes policy direction and facility improvements intended to provide improved high frequency public transit efficiency and connectivity. All of these improvements and strategies are intended to reduce energy consumption associated with the transportation system. The proposed code amendments implement these policies. As a result, the proposed code amendments are consistent with Goal 13. Statewide Planning Goal 14: Urbanization To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use, to accommodate urban population and urban employment inside urban growth boundaries, to ensure efficient use of land, and to provide for livable communities. Finding: Goal 14 requires cities to estimate future growth rates and patterns, and to incorporate, plan, and zone enough land to meet the projected demands. The proposed amendments do not repeal, replace, or void existing code provisions regarding urbanizable land or annexation. The proposed code amendments are consistent with Goal 14. Statewide Planning 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. Finding: The proposed amendments do not change the City’s existing standards for development with respect to the Willamette River Greenway. The Greenway provisions allow development of permitted uses in the underlying zone, provided that all other Greenway requirements are satisfied. The proposed code amendments are consistent with Goal 15. Statewide Planning Goals 16 - 19: Estuarine Resources, Coastal Shorelands, Beaches and Dunes and Ocean Resources. Finding: These statewide planning goals relate to coastal lands in Oregon and are not applicable to the proposed amendments. CONCLUSION: Based on the findings above, the proposed Code amendments are consistent with the Statewide Planning Goals and administrative rules. SDC 5.6-115 Criterion A.3 has been met. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the findings and conclusions in this staff report, staff has demonstrated that the proposed amendments are consistent with the applicable criteria of approval for Metro Plan amendments in the Springfield Development Code (Section 5.14-135) and Lane County Code (Section 12.225), and with the applicable criteria of approval for amendments to the Springfield Development Code (Section 5.6-115). Staff recommends that the proposed amendments be approved. Exhibit E, Page 62 of 62 Attachment 3, Page 164 of 164