HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017 01 24 AIS for Metro Plan Amendment and Zone ChangeAGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: 1/24/2017 Meeting Type: Work Session/Reg. Mtg
Staff Contact/Dept.: Andy Limbird, DPW
Staff Phone No: 541-726-3784 Estimated Time: 30 Minutes
S P R I N G F I E L D PLANNING COMMISSION Council Goals: Encourage Economic Development and Revitalization through Community Partnerships ITEM TITLE: REQUEST FOR METRO PLAN DIAGRAM AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE FOR A 7.1
ACRE PROPERTY ON HIGHBANKS ROAD, CASES TYP416-00003 AND TYP316-00005
ACTION REQUESTED:
Conduct a work session and public hearing, and forward a recommendation to the City Council
regarding a proposal to amend the adopted Metro Plan diagram and Springfield Zoning Map.
ISSUE STATEMENT: The applicant has submitted concurrent Metro Plan diagram and Zoning Map amendment applications for a vacant residential property on Highbanks Road. The proposed amendment
would change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning for a vacant 7.1 acre property on
Highbanks Road from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Light Medium Industrial (LMI).
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Staff Report for Metro Plan Amendment
2. Staff Report for Zoning Map Amendment 3. Application and Exhibits
4. Ordinance
5. PC Order & Recommendation – Metro Plan Amendment Application TYP416-00003 6. PC Order & Recommendation – Zoning Map Amendment Application TYP316-00005
DISCUSSION:
The subject property is located on the north side of Highbanks Road at 53rd Street. The site is vacant and is zoned and designated for low density residential development in accordance with the
adopted Metro Plan diagram and the Springfield Zoning Map. The City limits and Urban Growth
Boundary (UGB) runs along the northeastern edge of the property, and the western boundary abuts property that is zoned and designated for Light Medium Industrial use.
Property owner-initiated amendments to the Metro Plan diagram are uncommon. The stated intent of the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment and zone change is to facilitate construction of a
Bishop’s Storehouse facility on the property. Staff has reviewed the proposed development plans
and determined that the physical and operational characteristics of the Bishop’s Storehouse are comparable to a warehouse building with attached office space. Because the facility cannot be
accommodated within the LDR district, the applicant has proposed to change the zoning and comprehensive plan designation for the site to LMI.
Staff has identified a deficiency in the applicant’s Goal 12 findings submitted with the project narrative and has requested additional information to satisfy TPR requirements under OAR 660-012-0060. To accommodate the submittal of additional information, staff recommends that the
public hearing is opened and continued to the next scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission on February 7, 2017.
The Planning Commission is requested to conduct a work session, open the public hearing on the proposal to amend the Metro Plan diagram and Zoning Map, and continue the public hearing to the
February 7, 2017 meeting. At the February 7 meeting the Planning Commission will have an
opportunity to review all materials submitted into the record, conduct deliberations, and forward a recommendation to the City Council. The public hearing before the City Council is scheduled for
February 21, 2017.
Staff Report and Findings
Springfield Planning Commission
Type I Amendment to the Metro Plan Diagram
Hearing Date: January 24, 2017
Case Number: TYP416-00003
Applicant: Johnny Watson, JRW & Associates on behalf of the LDS Church Project Location: Vacant property on the north side of Highbanks Road at 53rd Street
Request
The City has received an application for a Type I Metro Plan diagram amendment and a Zoning Map amendment from a property owner in the Thurston neighborhood (Attachment 3). The proposed Metro
Plan diagram amendment would change the plan designation for a 7.1 acre site from Low Density
Residential (LDR) to Light Medium Industrial (LMI). A concurrent amendment to the Springfield
Zoning Map would change the zoning of the property from LDR to LMI. Although uncommon, in
accordance with Springfield Development Code (SDC) Section 5.14-125.A, an amendment to the Metro Plan diagram can be initiated by a property owner at any time. The application was submitted on
November 29, 2016 and the Planning Commission public hearing on the proposed Metro Plan diagram
amendment is scheduled for January 24, 2017. The application is scheduled for a public hearing before
the City Council on February 21, 2017.
Overview of Proposed Metro Plan Diagram Amendment The adopted Metro Plan diagram designates the subject property for Low Density Residential land use.
The applicant is proposing to construct a Bishop’s Storehouse facility on the site, which is similar in
physical and operational characteristics to a warehouse commercial building with attached office space.
The current residential zoning and comprehensive plan designation for the property does not accommodate the proposed use. To facilitate project approval, the property owner has initiated a Metro
Plan diagram amendment and concurrent Zoning Map amendment to change the zoning and plan
designation from LDR to LMI.
In accordance with SDC 5.14-115.A.1, proposals for redesignating land inside the City limits are classified as a Type I Metro Plan diagram amendment requiring approval by Springfield only. In
accordance with SDC 5.14-130, the property-owner initiated amendment to the Metro Plan diagram is
processed as a Type IV (legislative) land use action that requires public hearings before the Springfield
Planning Commission and City Council.
Notification and Written Comments In accordance with the Oregon Administrative Rules (OARs) 660-018-0020, prior to adopting a change to
an acknowledged comprehensive plan or land use regulation, local governments are required to notify the
state Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) at least 35 days prior to the first evidentiary hearing. A Notice of Proposed Amendment was transmitted to the DLCD on December 20,
2016, which is 35 days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing on the matter.
In accordance with SDC 5.2-110.B, Type IV legislative land use decisions require notice in a newspaper of
general circulation. Notification of the January 24, 2017 public hearing was published in the legal notices section of The Register Guard on January 17, 2017.
Attachment 1, Page 1 of 10
Background Applicant’s Project Narrative: “We feel that the proposed LDS Bishop’s Storehouse is an excellent fit
with the surrounding light-medium industrial uses. Our welfare warehouse is similar in scale and
construction as the new development to the west1. The traffic generated from our facility is very low due to the hours of operation and customers are on a referral basis only... A zone change and plan amendment will be required to accommodate the proposed use. The site is currently zoned [low] density residential and does not support the proposed use. The proposed use fits well within definition of the light
medium industrial zone, and the City sees no problem with getting an approval for that change. The
process is two applications that both go before the City Planning Commission for recommendation, and to the City Council for decision.”
1 High Banks Business Park at 5250 Highbanks Road, approved in 2012 and constructed in 2015.
Criteria of Approval
Section 5.14-135 of the SDC contains the criteria of approval for the decision maker to utilize during review
of Metro Plan diagram amendments. The Criteria of approval are:
SDC 5.14-135 CRITERIA
A Metro Plan amendment may be approved only if the Springfield City Council and other applicable governing body or bodies find that the proposal conforms to the following criteria:
A. The amendment shall be consistent with applicable Statewide Planning Goals; and
B. Plan inconsistency:
1. In those cases where the Metro Plan applies, adoption of the amendment shall not make the
Metro Plan internally inconsistent.
2. In cases where Springfield Comprehensive Plan applies, the amendment shall be consistent with the Springfield Comprehensive Plan. A. Consistency with Applicable State-Wide Planning Goals
Finding 1: Of the 19 statewide goals, 13 should be considered in general terms as “urban” goals,
that is, these goals will be applicable for purposes of review to any plan map amendments in the city; however, it is the proposal and its effect on the purpose of these goals that will determine
whether or not the proposed amendment is “consistent with” the applicable goals. The goals that are
to be evaluated are: Goal 1 – Citizen Involvement; Goal 2 – Land Use Planning; Goal 5 Natural
Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces; Goal 6 Air, Water and Land Resources
Quality; Goal 7 – Areas Subject to Natural Hazards; Goal 8 Recreational Needs; Goal 9 – Economic Development; Goal 10 – Housing; Goal 11 Public Facilities and Services; Goal 12 Transportation;
Goal 13 Energy Conservation; Goal 14 – Urbanization; and Goal 15 Willamette River Greenway.
All of the statewide goals are listed below; the narrative that accompanies each is more expositive
when the discussion applies to the 13 goals identified above.
Goal 1 – Citizen Involvement
Applicant’s Narrative: “Goal 1, Citizen Involvement – the City Council hearing provides adequate
opportunity for citizen involvement.”
Attachment 1, Page 2 of 10
Finding 2: Goal 1 – Citizen Involvement calls for “the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process”. The proposed amendment to the adopted Metro Plan diagram is
the subject of a legislative decision-making process with multiple public hearings before the City’s
Planning Commission and Council. The Planning Commission is scheduled to conduct a public
hearing to consider the proposed amendment on January 24, 2017. The Planning Commission public hearing was advertised in the legal notices section of the Register-Guard on January 17, 2017. The recommendation of the Planning Commission will be forwarded to the Springfield City
Council for consideration at a public hearing meeting scheduled for February 21, 2017. Notification
of the Planning Commission and City Council public hearings was published in the Register-Guard
newspaper at least one week prior to the meeting dates. Staff finds that the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment is consistent with Goal 1 requirements.
Goal 2 – Land Use Planning
Applicant’s Narrative: “Goal 2, Land Use Planning – this application documents compliance with the city’s Development Code which was approved by the state as meeting this goal; therefore it is reasonable to expect consistency with this goal.”
Finding 3: Goal 2 – Land Use Planning outlines the basic procedures for Oregon’s statewide
planning program. In accordance with Goal 2, land use decisions are to be made in accordance with a comprehensive plan, and jurisdictions are to adopt suitable implementation ordinances that put the plan’s policies into force and effect.
Finding 4: The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) is the
acknowledged comprehensive plan for guiding land use planning in Springfield. The City has adopted other neighborhood- or area-specific plans (such as Refinement Plans) that provide more detailed direction for land use planning under the umbrella of the Metro Plan. The subject property
is not within an adopted Refinement Plan area.
Finding 5: The public hearing process used for amendment of the Metro Plan is specified in Chapter IV Metro Plan Review, Amendments, and Refinements. The findings under Criteria B (below) demonstrate that the proposed amendment will not make the adopted Metro Plan internally
inconsistent.
Finding 6: The Springfield Development Code is a key mechanism used to implement the goals and policies of the City’s adopted comprehensive plans, particularly the Metro Plan. The proposal is classified as a Type I amendment to the adopted Metro Plan diagram that is approved by Springfield
only in accordance with SDC 5.14-115.A. The proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment is
processed as a Type IV land use action (legislative) as described in SDC 5.1-140 and 5.14-130.
Staff finds that the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment is consistent with the policies pertaining to Review, Amendments and Refinements. Additionally, the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment has been initiated in accordance with the provisions of the City’s
acknowledged Comprehensive Plan and Development Code. Staff finds the proposed Metro Plan
diagram amendment does not affect City ordinances, policies, plans, and studies adopted to comply
with Goal 2 requirements. Goal 3 – Agricultural Land
Attachment 1, Page 3 of 10
Finding 7: Goal 3 – Agricultural Land applies to areas subject to farm zoning that are outside acknowledged urban growth boundaries (UGBs): “Agricultural land does not include land within acknowledged urban growth boundaries or land within acknowledged exceptions to Goals 3 or 4.”
(Text of Goal 3). The City has an acknowledged UGB and therefore consistent with the express
language of the Goal, does not have farm land zoning within its jurisdictional boundary.
Furthermore, the site of the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment is inside the City’s acknowledged UGB. Consequently, and as expressed in the text of the Goal, Goal 3 is not applicable.
Goal 4 – Forest Land
Finding 8: Goal 4 – Forest Land applies to timber lands zoned for that use that are outside acknowledged UGBs with the intent to conserve forest lands for forest uses: “Oregon
Administrative Rule 660-006-0020: Plan Designation Within an Urban Growth Boundary. Goal 4
does not apply within urban growth boundaries and therefore, the designation of forest lands is not
required.” The City has an acknowledged UGB and does not have forest zoning within its incorporated area. Furthermore, the site of the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment is inside the City’s UGB. Consequently, and as expressed in the text of the Goal, Goal 4 is not applicable.
Goal 5 – Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces
Applicant’s Narrative: “Goal 5, Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas and Open Spaces – none of the resources identified by the goal have been identified on the site; nor has it been
identified as providing scenic value. The current Metro Plan designation is not Parks and Open
Space; therefore this application will have no impact on the city’s ability to meet the open space aspects of the goal.” Finding 9: Goal 5 – Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources applies to
more than a dozen natural and cultural resources such as wildlife habitats and wetlands, and
establishes a process for each resource to be inventoried and evaluated. The site that is subject of
the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment has not been identified in the City’s Natural Resources inventory, Register of Historic Sites, or the Willamalane Park & Recreation District Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, the city does not have a specific zoning district which it applies
to inventoried Goal 5 natural resources; the presence of these resources is completely independent of
the process used to zone and designate land. Protective measures for all of the city’s inventoried
Goal 5 resources are applicable to the resource and are not circumscribed or altered based on zoning classification. The proposed amendment to the Metro Plan diagram does not modify or alter the City’s Development Code or other Metro Plan policies relating to identified natural resources. The
proposed diagram amendment does not make any changes to adopted Goal 5 natural resources
development standards or protective measures adopted to comply with Goal 5 requirements.
Therefore, this action does not alter the City’s acknowledged compliance with Goal 5. Goal 6 – Air, Water and Land Resources Quality
Applicant’s Narrative: “Goal 6, Air, Water and Land Resources Quality – the current Metro Plan designation places a pocket of Low Density Residential adjacent to Light Medium Industrial and Sand and Gravel designations. These are not generally considered incompatible but are also not generally considered highly compatible. This application will still leave the Low Density
Residential designation to the east adjacent to Light Medium Industrial but it will be for a shorter
Attachment 1, Page 4 of 10
distance and the Low Density Residential will be further from the Sand and Gravel which is the less compatible.”
Finding 10: Goal 6 – Air, Water and Land Resources Quality applies to local comprehensive plans
and the implementation of measures consistent with state and Federal regulations on matters such as
clean air, clean water, and preventing groundwater pollution. The proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment does not affect City ordinances, policies, plans, and studies adopted to comply with Goal 6 requirements Therefore, this action does not alter the City’s acknowledged compliance with
Goal 6.
Goal 7 – Areas Subject to Natural Hazards
Applicant’s Narrative: “Goal 7, Areas Subject to Natural Hazards – approximately the northern
200 feet of the property is within the floodplain. Generally when a flood occurs people stay home
because it isn’t safe to travel around during a storm of that magnitude. Therefore placement of a residential use within the floodplain puts the health, safety and welfare of the public at greater risk than an industrial use within the floodplain.”
Finding 11: Goal 7 – Areas Subject to Natural Hazards applies to development in areas such as
floodplains and potential landslide areas. Local jurisdictions are required to apply “appropriate
safeguards” when planning for development in hazard areas. The City has inventoried areas subject to natural hazards such as the McKenzie and Willamette River flood plains and potential landslide
areas on steeply sloping hillsides.
Finding 12: Approximately the northern one-third of the site that is subject to the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment is within the mapped flood hazard area of the McKenzie River. The Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element identifies the subject
site as vacant residential land, but approximately one-half of the site is within the mapped flood
hazard area and therefore classified as “constrained”. All proposed development within the mapped
flood hazard area regardless of the zoning that underlies the Flood Plain Overlay District would be
subject to the provisions of the City’s Floodplain Overlay District (SDC 3.3-400) and applicable state and federal regulations. All development, industrial, residential, commercial, government and
education, is prohibited from developing uses “…which are dangerous to health, safety and property
due to water or erosion hazards, or which result in damaging increases in erosion or in flood heights
or velocities.” (SDC 3.3-405(B))
Finding 13: The proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment has no effect on City ordinances,
policies, plans, and studies adopted to comply with Goal 7 requirements and siting standards for
development within the mapped flood hazard area of the McKenzie and Willamette Rivers.
Furthermore, the site proposed for Metro Plan diagram amendment is not exempted from
conformance with regulations affecting these hazard areas. Therefore, this action has no effect on the City’s acknowledged compliance with Goal 7.
Goal 8 – Recreational Needs
Applicant’s Narrative: “Goal 8, Recreational Needs – as noted above under Goal 5, the current designation does not relate to recreational activities; therefore changing the designation as proposed will not affect the ability to meet this goal.”
Attachment 1, Page 5 of 10
Finding 14: Goal 8 – Recreational Needs requires communities to evaluate their recreation areas and facilities and to develop plans to address current and projected demand. The provision of recreation services within Springfield is the responsibility of Willamalane Park & Recreation
District. Willamalane has an adopted 20-Year Comprehensive Plan for the provision of park, open
space and recreation services for Springfield. The proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment would
not affect Willamalane’s adopted Comprehensive Plan or other ordinances, policies, plans, and studies adopted to comply with Goal 8 requirements. Therefore, this action has no effect on the City’s acknowledged compliance with Goal 8.
Goal 9 – Economic Development
Applicant’s Narrative: “Goal 9, Economic Development – recent inventories have indicated a deficit of industrial lands within the UGB. This proposal will help address that deficit.
Additionally, when those studies occurred, this site was not included as a possible site for industrial
use.”
Finding 15: Goal 9 – Economic Development addresses diversification and improvement of the economy. It requires local jurisdictions to conduct an inventory of commercial and industrial lands,
anticipate future needs for such lands, and provide enough appropriately-zoned land to meet the
projected demand over a 20-year planning horizon. The City previously completed an analysis of its
employment land base and determined that a deficit existed. To address the projected deficit of commercial and industrial land, the City has undertaken a multi-year process to expand the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) in the Gateway and South 28th Street areas. Expansion of the UGB is
intended to provide sufficient employment-generating land area for the mandated 20-year planning
horizon. The proposed redesignation and rezoning of the subject property would incrementally
increase the amount of employment land within the City’s inventory. However, the size of the property involved in this proposal, 7.1 acres, the site characteristics and the proposed designation –
Light Medium Industrial, were not considered or included in the categories of employment land
needs sought in the UGB expansion effort. (See Commercial and Industrial Buildable Lands Study,
Economic Opportunities Analysis, 2009, Table 5.3)
Finding 16: Because this proposal is property-owner initiated, the City did not consider this
particular site in determining the amount and location of employment land required for its planned
UGB expansion. The site is listed in the residential land inventory as discussed in Goal 10 findings
below; conversion to a different type of land use was not envisioned for this site when the City
completed its studies and conclusions. Staff observes that the subject property is vacant and abuts existing industrial development along the western boundary. Contiguity with existing, developed
industrial land minimizes the potential for land use conflicts should the subject property be
redesignated and rezoned to a similar industrial land use.
Finding 17: As stated above in Finding 15, the proposed redesignation and rezoning of a 7.1 acre parcel – a portion of which is constrained by the mapped flood hazard area – has no effect on the
City’s employment land inventory, either the projected demand or site characteristics. Therefore,
this proposal has no impact on the City’s actions expanding the UGB for employment purposes.
Finding 18: The proposed redesignation and rezoning would not affect other City ordinances, policies, plans, and studies – such as the Commercial-Industrial Buildable Lands (CIBL) Survey –
adopted to comply with Goal 9 requirements. All of the city’s economic development policies
related to zoning classifications rely on commercial, industrial and mixed use land inventories. This
Attachment 1, Page 6 of 10
proposed redesignation would have an incremental positive effect on the commercial and industrial land inventory and would not adversely impact the City’s acknowledged compliance with Goal 9.
Goal 10 - Housing
Applicant’s Narrative: “Springfield has a 378 gross acre surplus of Low Density Residential land
as demonstrated by Chapter 6 and summarized on Page 8 of the Springfield Residential Land and
Housing Needs Analysis included as Exhibit B of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan, Residential Land Use and Housing Element adopted under Ordinance 6268. Therefore removal of this property from the Low Density Residential designation will not negatively impact the city’s ability to provide
housing.”
Finding 19: Goal 10 – Housing applies to the planning for – and provision of – needed housing
types, including multi-family and manufactured housing. As noted by the applicant’s narrative, staff and third-party analysis has determined that a surplus of LDR designated land exists within the
City’s land inventory. Similar to the Goal 9 impacts, redesignation and rezoning of the subject
property would have an incremental impact to the City’s overall residential land base. However, the
proposal would not reduce the City’s residential land inventory below threshold levels requiring
mitigation or compensatory actions elsewhere within the UGB. Additionally, approximately 370 acres of LDR designated land would remain within the City’s buildable land inventory (Table 6-7,
Residential Land and Housing Element, Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan).
Finding 20: The proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change would not affect other
City ordinances, policies, plans, and studies adopted to comply with Goal 10 requirements. Therefore, this action has no adverse effect on the city’s acknowledged compliance with Goal 10.
Goal 11 – Public Facilities and Services
Finding 21: Goal 11 – Public Facilities and Services addresses the efficient planning and provision of public services such as sewer, water, law enforcement, and fire protection. In accordance with
OAR 660-011-0005(5), public facilities include water, sewer and transportation facilities, but do not
include buildings, structures or equipment incidental to the operation of those facilities. The
proposed redesignation and rezoning will not result in permitted uses that will have an effect on the
demand for public facilities and services provided to the subject property and adjacent properties. This area is already planned for industrial and residential development and the public facilities
serving this area have been designed accordingly; therefore, the City’s continued acknowledged
compliance with Goal 11 is not affected by this proposal.
Goal 12 – Transportation
Applicant’s Narrative: “Goal 12, Transportation – the Low Density Residential designation allows
6-14 units/acre, which at 1.01 trips per unit, equates to a rate of 6-14 trips/acre. The Light Medium
Industrial designation has [a] rate of 7.26 trips/acre. Therefore, the proposal will at worst have no impact on the amount of trips and at best decrease the trips.”
Staff Response: The proposed redesignation and rezoning would change the type of uses permitted
to be developed on the property and intensity of use on the subject property. However, the
applicant’s project narrative may have oversimplified the potential effects of redesignating and
Attachment 1, Page 7 of 10
rezoning the subject property from residential to industrial by citing average traffic generation rates for each type of land use. Staff observes that, depending upon the specific nature of development occurring on a site zoned and designated LMI, the traffic generation could in fact exceed an
equivalent area of LDR land use. Additionally, the net acreage of residential land could be
somewhat less than the full 7.1 acres due to constraints imposed by the mapped flood hazard area
and the need to extend one or more public streets to serve residential development areas. Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) 660-012-0060 requires that, “if an amendment to a functional
plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land use regulation (including a zoning map),
would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, then the local government
must put in place measures” to mitigate the impact, as defined in OAR 660-012-0060(2). Based on the applicant’s narrative, staff is without an adequate basis to conclude that the proposed plan amendment and zone change from LDR to LMI will not significantly affect an existing or planned
transportation facility. For that reason, staff lacks adequate information to draft a finding of
compliance with Goal 12 until and unless additional information is supplied by the applicant.
Goal 13 – Energy Conservation
Finding 25: Goal 13 – Energy Conservation states that “land and uses developed on the land shall
be managed and controlled so as to maximize the conservation of all forms of energy, based upon
sound economic principles”. The proposed comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning does not affect the City’s ordinances, policies, plans, or studies adopted to comply with Goal 13
requirements. Converting the 7.1 acre property from LDR to LMI should not have an appreciable
impact to energy consumption. The developer will have an opportunity to incorporate suitable
energy conservation measures into the future site development upon redesignation and rezoning of
the subject property. The City’s building codes comply with all Oregon State Building Codes Agency standards for energy efficiency in commercial and industrial building design. The site’s
solar access is not compromised by surrounding development. The City’s conservation measures
applicable to storm water management, temporary storage, filtration and discharge apply to all
industrial uses developed on this site; therefore, this action has no effect on the city’s acknowledged
compliance with Goal 13.
Goal 14 - Urbanization
Finding 26: Goal 14 – Urbanization requires cities to estimate future growth rates and patterns, and
to incorporate, plan, and zone enough land to meet the projected demands. The City did not plan for industrial land use on the subject property when completing its buildable land inventories.
However, consistent with provisions of Goal 14, the City is responding to a request from a property
owner to redesignate and rezone the subject property from residential to industrial. The proposed
comprehensive plan amendment and zone change will be noted on both the employment land
inventory and the residential land inventory; similar reporting of inventory changes due to development will occur as required by ORS. However, the proposed redesignation and zone change
does not affect the City’s adopted ordinances, policies, plans, or studies adopted to satisfy the
compliance requirements of Goal 14.
Goal 15 – Willamette River Greenway
Finding 27: Goal 15 – Willamette River Greenway establishes procedures for administering the 300
miles of greenway that borders the Willamette River, including portions that are inside the City
limits and UGB of Springfield. The subject site is not within the adopted Willamette River
Attachment 1, Page 8 of 10
Greenway Boundary area so this goal is not applicable. The proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change does not change or nullify the requirement for development proposals to comply with the City’s existing Willamette River Greenway regulations regardless of the
underlying zoning, and to demonstrate compliance with Goal 15 requirements. Any new
development proposed on land within the Willamette Greenway Overlay District would be subject
to a separate Type III land use approval process requiring a public hearing before the Springfield Planning Commission, therefore this action has no effect on the city’s acknowledged compliance with Goal 15.
Goals 16-19 Estuarine Resources, Coastal Shorelands, Beaches and Dunes, and Ocean Resources
Finding 28: Goals 16-19 – Estuarine Resources; Coastal Shorelands; Beaches and Dunes; and Ocean Resources; these goals do not apply to land within the Willamette Valley, including
Springfield. Therefore, in the same way that Goals 3 and 4 do not apply in Springfield, Goals 16-19
do not apply in Springfield or to land use regulations adopted in Springfield.
Conclusion: Staff has concluded, with the exception of Goal 12 Transportation as explained in the preceding text under this Goal, that the proposed Metro Plan diagram land use designation
amendment from Low Density Residential to Light Medium Industrial is consistent with the criteria
for such action in SDC 5.14-135 (A): “The amendment shall be consistent with applicable
Statewide Planning Goals.” B. Plan Inconsistency
1. In those cases where the Metro Plan applies, adoption of the amendment shall not make the
Metro Plan internally inconsistent. Applicant’s Narrative: “No inconsistencies have been identified.”
Finding 29: The adopted Metro Plan is the principal policy document that creates the broad
framework for land use planning within the City of Springfield. The City’s adopted Zoning Map implements the zoning designations of the Metro Plan diagram and localized Refinement Plans. The subject property is not within an adopted Refinement Plan area so the Metro Plan is the
prevailing Comprehensive Plan for the site.
Finding 30: In accordance with Chapter IV – Metro Plan Review, Amendments, and Refinements, the City’s Comprehensive Plan is not designed or intended to remain static and unyielding in its assignment of land use designations. To that end, provisions of Chapter IV, Policy 7.a, allow for
property owners to initiate an amendment to the Metro Plan diagram to reflect a change in
circumstances or need. The applicant is proposing to amend the Metro Plan designation for the
subject property from LDR to LMI and to concurrently rezone the property to LMI. There are no conflicts created by this proposed diagram amendment based on needed residential land inventories or needed employment land inventories. The development of this land with industrial uses does not
conflict with other land use elements in the Metro Plan including commercial, park and open space,
or government and education. Upon a satisfactory determination of the Transportation Rule
standards, adoption of the amendment to the Plan diagram will not result in an internal inconsistency. Therefore, Criteria B.1 will have been met.
2. In cases where Springfield Comprehensive Plan applies, the amendment shall be consistent
with the Springfield Comprehensive Plan.
Attachment 1, Page 9 of 10
Applicant’s Narrative: “At this time, the Metro Plan is the applicable comprehensive plan.”
Finding 31: As previously stated herein, the subject property is not within an adopted Refinement
Plan area; the Metro Plan is the prevailing comprehensive plan for the subject site therefore this
criteria does not apply to this proposal. Conclusion and Recommendation Based on the applicant’s narrative, the findings above, and the criteria of SDC 5.14-135 for approving
amendments to the Metro Plan, staff finds the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment and zone change
from LDR to LMI is consistent with these criteria, except for compliance with Goal 12, for which the applicant has not provided substantial evidence of compliance as discussed under Goal 12 above. For that reason, staff recommends that the Planning Commission consider continuing the hearing to allow the
applicant additional time to submit additional supporting information. If the applicant is able to provide
additional evidence and findings that support compliance with Goal 12, staff recommends that the
Planning Commission support the proposal.
Attachment 1, Page 10 of 10
Staff Report and Findings Springfield Planning Commission Zone Change Request (Johnny Watson, JRW & Associates)
Hearing Date: January 24, 2017
Case Number: TYP316-00005 Applicant: Johnny Watson, JRW & Associates on behalf of the LDS Church
Property Owner: LDS Church Site: North side of Highbanks Road at 53rd Street (Map 17-02-28-00, Tax Lot 406)
Request
Rezone Tax Lots 406 from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Light Medium Industrial (LMI). Site Information/Background The application was initiated and accepted as complete on November 29, 2016, and the public hearing on
the matter of the Zone Change request is scheduled for January 24, 2017. The Zone Change request is
being processed concurrently with a Metro Plan Diagram amendment submitted under separate cover, Case TYP416-00003. The City Council will be reviewing both applications at a public hearing meeting scheduled for February 21, 2017.
The property that is subject of the Zone Change request is a vacant, 7.1 acre parcel on the north side of
Highbanks Road at 53rd Street. The site is zoned and designated LDR and abuts the High Banks Business Park along the western boundary and vacant industrial land along the northern boundary. A portion of the northeastern boundary of the site abuts the City’s Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). The property
immediately to the east of the subject site is zoned and designated LDR.
The applicant is proposing the zone change from LDR to LMI to facilitate construction of a Bishop’s Storehouse on the property. The facility would have the visual and operational characteristics of a warehouse building with attached office space, which couldn’t be accommodated in the current LDR
zoning.
Notification and Written Comments Notification of the January 24, 2017 Planning Commission public hearing was sent to all property owners and residents within 300 feet of the site on January 9, 2017. Notification was also published in the January
17, 2017 edition of The Register Guard. No written comments were received.
Criteria of Approval Section 5.22-100 of the Springfield Development Code (SDC) contains the criteria of approval for the decision maker to utilize during review of Zoning Map amendment requests. The Criteria of Zoning Map
amendment approval criteria are:
SDC 5.22-115 CRITERIA C. Zoning Map amendment criteria of approval:
1. Consistency with applicable Metro Plan policies and the Metro Plan diagram;
Attachment 2, Page 1 of 5
2. Consistency with applicable Refinement Plans, Plan District maps, Conceptual Development Plans and functional plans; and
3. The property is presently provided with adequate public facilities, services and transportation
networks to support the use, or these facilities, services and transportation networks are planned to be provided concurrently with the development of the property. 4. Legislative Zoning Map amendments that involve a Metro Plan Diagram amendment shall:
a. Meet the approval criteria specified in Section 5.14-100; and b. Comply with Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-012-0060, where applicable.
Proposed Findings In Support of Zone Change Approval
Criterion: Zoning Map amendment criteria of approval: 1. Consistency with applicable Metro Plan policies and the Metro Plan diagram;
Applicant’s Narrative: “Approval of the concurrent Metro Plan amendment application will provide consistency.” Finding 1: Metro Plan Policy B.6 states: “Increase the amount of undeveloped land zoned for light
industrial and commercial uses correlating the effective supply in terms of suitability and
availability with the projections of demand.” As concluded by the City’s Commercial-Industrial
Buildable Lands (CIBL) Study the 20-year inventory has an overall deficiency of readily available commercial and industrial land.
Finding 2: Metro Plan Policy B.11, Page III-B-5 states: “Encourage economic activities, which
strengthen the metropolitan area’s position as a regional distribution, trade, health, and service
center.” Finding 3: Metro Plan Policy B.15, Page III-B-5 states: “Encourage compatibility between
industrially zoned lands and adjacent areas in local planning programs.”
Finding 4: Metro Plan Policy B.24, Page III-B-6 states: “Continue to evaluate other sites in and around Springfield and Eugene for potential light-medium industrial and special light industrial uses, as well as potential residential uses.”
Finding 5: Metro Plan Chapter IV, Policy 7.a states: “A property owner may initiate a [Type I Metro Plan diagram] amendment for property they own at any time. Owner initiated amendments are subject to the limitations for such amendments set out in the development code of the home city.”
Finding 6: The property owner initiated a concurrent Metro Plan Diagram amendment in
accordance with provisions of SDC 5.14-100 (Case TYP416-00003). Upon adoption of the amending Ordinance, the Metro Plan Diagram would be amended and the requested zone change from LDR to LMI would be consistent with the provisions of the adopted Comprehensive Plan.
Prior or concurrent amendment of the Metro Plan Diagram will be required for the subject zone
change request to be approved.
Attachment 2, Page 2 of 5
Finding 7: The proposed zone change is consistent with provisions of the Metro Plan whereby zoning can be monitored and adjusted as necessary to meet current urban land use demands. The requested change from LDR to LMI would allow for construction of a Bishop’s Storehouse as
shown and described by the applicant’s conceptual site plans and project narrative.
Finding 8: The subject site abuts properties that are zoned and designated for LMI land use along the western and northern boundaries. The proposed Zone Change is consistent with the adjoining zoning and the zone change is compatible with existing uses in the area. The proposed site
development would provide an intermediate, less-intensive industrial use between the existing High
Banks Business Park and future residential development areas to the east.
Recommended Condition of Approval: Prior to or concurrent with approval of the Zone Change request, the Metro Plan Diagram shall be amended as initiated by Planning Action TYP416-00003.
2. Consistency with applicable Refinement Plans, Plan District maps, Conceptual Development Plans and functional plans; Applicant’s Narrative: “No applicable plans were identified.”
Finding 9: There are no adopted neighborhood Refinement Plans or Conceptual Development Plans for this area of Springfield. Therefore, the Metro Plan diagram remains the prevailing land use plan diagram for this site.
Finding 10: The City previously adopted the Residential Land Use and Housing Element of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan. The subject property was identified as low density residential inventory in the 2030 Plan because of its LDR zoning and location within the City limits and UGB. The site is identified as being partially constrained by the mapped floodplain of the McKenzie
River.
Finding 11: The Residential Land Use and Housing Element (Table 6-7) identifies approximately 378 acres of surplus LDR designated land within the City’s buildable land inventory. Upon redesignation and rezoning of the subject site, a surplus of about 370 acres of LDR designated land
would remain. Therefore, the proposed rezoning will not have a significant adverse impact on
available LDR designated land within the City’s inventory.
Finding 12: The City previously commissioned a Commercial-Industrial Buildable Lands Inventory (CIBL) and Economic Opportunities Analysis that determined a deficit of buildable commercial and
industrial parcels larger than 5 acres (2010 CIBL Study). The proposed zone change would create a
buildable site larger than 5 acres that would address some of this deficit. However, this single, 7.1
acre site does not fully address the City’s deficit which has been satisfied through expansion of the UGB in the Gateway and South 28th Street areas. Additionally, the City has undertaken a multi-year
process of determining the location and extent of UGB expansion areas which has been substantially
completed prior to the subject site being considered for redesignation and rezoning to industrial land
use. Therefore, the proposed zone change provides a modest increase to the City’s commercial-
industrial buildable land inventory, but does not materially affect the City’s ongoing endeavors to expand the UGB to provide a 20-year supply of buildable employment land.
Attachment 2, Page 3 of 5
3. The property is presently provided with adequate public facilities, services and transportation networks to support the use, or these facilities, services and transportation networks are planned to be provided concurrently with the development of the property.
Applicant’s Narrative: “The site fronts onto Thurston Road which has a bike lane. All necessary utilities (storm, sanitary, electric, water, communication and gas) are available for connection in Thurston Road.”
Finding 13: The property requested for Zone Change has frontage on Highbanks Road (not
Thurston Road as stated in the applicant’s narrative), which is a fully developed urban transportation
corridor with a full suite of public utilities and services available. Future development of the site with Light Medium Industrial uses will be subject to the land use approval process outlined in
Section 5.17-100 of the City’s Development Code. In addition, the applicant’s submittal for Metro
Plan diagram amendment will be supplemented with findings addressing the requirements of the
Transportation Planning Rule and this additional information will be included in that Plan
Amendment hearing before the Planning Commission on February 7, 2017.
4. Legislative Zoning Map amendments that involve a Metro Plan Diagram amendment shall:
a. Meet the approval criteria specified in Section 5.14-100; and
Applicant’s Narrative: “This is established in the concurrent Metro Plan Amendment
application.”
Finding 14: The applicant has submitted a concurrent Metro Plan Diagram amendment
application (Case TYP416-00003) under separate cover. The applicant’s submittal materials, narrative, and staff findings and recommendations demonstrate compliance with
the Metro Plan amendment provisions of Chapter IV of the Metro Plan and SDC 5.14-135,
with the exception of the findings addressing Goal 12 Transportation as noted above. Also as
noted above, that information will be included in the public hearing on the Plan Amendment
and should the Planning Commission determine that the standards of the Goal as implemented through the Rule are satisfied, the proposal shall satisfy this criteria.
b. Comply with Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-012-0060, where applicable.
Applicant’s Narrative: “As established in the concurrent Metro Plan Amendment application, the change from Low Density Residential to Light Medium Industrial will have
at worst no impact on the amount of trips and at best decrease the trips.”
Finding 15: The requested Zone Change is being undertaken as a site-specific change in
compliance with provisions of the adopted Metro Plan and the City’s Development Code. The applicant has initiated an amendment to the Metro Plan Diagram to change the
designation from LDR to LMI. Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) 660-012-0060 requires
that, “if an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land
use regulation (including a zoning map), would significantly affect an existing or planned
transportation facility, then the local government must put in place measures” to mitigate the impact, as defined in OAR 660-012-0060(2). Based on the applicant’s narrative, staff is
without an adequate basis to conclude that the proposed plan amendment and zone change
from LDR to LMI will not significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility.
Attachment 2, Page 4 of 5
For that reason, staff lacks adequate information to draft a finding of compliance with Goal 12 until and unless additional information is supplied by the applicant.
Conclusion: Based on the above-listed criteria, staff recommends support for the request subject to
resolution of the criteria above as specified in the staff explanation of the circumstances of the Plan
Amendment proposal. Once that matter has been resolved, staff recommends attachment of the conditions below:
Conditions of Approval
SDC Section 5.22-120 allows for the Approval Authority to attach conditions of approval to a Zone
Change request to ensure the application fully meets the criteria of approval. The specific language from the code section is cited below:
5.22-120 CONDITIONS
The Approval Authority may attach conditions as may be reasonably necessary in order to allow the Zoning Map amendment to be granted.
Staff advises that the Zone Change request was initiated in accordance with provisions of the City’s
Development Code. The proposal was found to be generally consistent with the criteria of approval;
however, because the applicant has initiated a concurrent Metro Plan Diagram amendment (Case TYP416-00003), the comprehensive plan amendment will need to be completed prior to or concurrent with approval of the Zone Change. Further, the City Council will be reviewing both land use applications
at a public hearing meeting on February 21, 2017. Staff recommends the following condition of approval:
Recommended Condition of Approval: Prior to or concurrent with approval of the Zone Change request, the Metro Plan Diagram shall be amended as initiated by Planning Action TYP416-00003.
The Planning Commission may choose to apply other conditions of approval as necessary to comply with
the Zone Change criteria or as further demonstrated by testimony and evidence entered into the record of
the hearing. Additional Approvals The subject application will facilitate review of future land use applications for the affected parcel. Any
future site development, including but not limited to grading, paving, or new construction on the property,
will be subject to the provisions of the SDC for the applicable zoning district.
Attachment 2, Page 5 of 5
Attachment 3, Page 1 of 12
Attachment 3, Page 2 of 12
Attachment 3, Page 3 of 12
Attachment 3, Page 4 of 12
5.14-135 Criteria
A Metro Plan amendment may be approved only if the Springfield City Council and other
applicable governing body or bodies find that the proposal conforms to the following criteria:
A. The amendment shall be consistent with applicable Statewide Planning Goals; and
The following identifies how this amendment is consistent with the applicable goals:
Goal 1, Citizen Involvement – the City Council hearing provides adequate opportunity
for citizen involvement
Goal 2, Land Use Planning – this application documents compliance with the city’s
Development Code which was approved by the state as meeting this goal; therefore
it is reasonable to expect consistency with this goal.
Goal 5, Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas and Open Spaces – none of the
resources identified by the goal have been identified on the site; nor has it been
identified as providing scenic value. The current Metro Plan designation is not Parks
and Open Space; therefore this application will have no impact on the city’s ability
to meet the open space aspects of the goal.
Goal 6, Air, Water and Land Resources Quality – the current Metro Plan designation
places a pocket of Low Density Residential adjacent to Light Medium Industrial and
Sand and Gravel designations. These are not generally considered incompatible but
are also not generally considered highly compatible. This application will still leave
the Low Density Residential designation to the east adjacent to Light Medium
Industrial but it will be for a shorter distance and the Low Density Residential will
be further from the Sand and Gravel which is the less compatible.
Goal 7, Areas Subject to Natural Hazards – approximately the northern 200 feet of the
property is within the floodplain. Generally when a flood occurs people stay home
because it isn’t safe to travel around during a storm of that magnitude. Therefore
placement of a residential use within the floodplain puts the health, safety and
welfare of the public at greater risk than an industrial use within the floodplain.
Goal 8, Recreational Needs – as noted above under Goal 5, the current designation does
not relate to recreational activities; therefore changing the designation as proposed
will not affect the ability to meet this goal.
Goal 9, Economic Development – recent inventories have indicated a deficit of industrial
lands within the UGB. This proposal will help address that deficit. Additionally,
when those studies occurred, this site was not included as a possible site for industrial
use.
Goal 10, Housing – Springfield has a 378 gross acre surplus of Low Density Residential
land as demonstrated in Chapter 6 and summarized on Page 8 of the Springfield
Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis included as Exhibit B of the Springfield
2030 Refinement Plan, Residential Land Use and Housing Element adopted under
Ordinance 6268. Therefore removal of this property from the Low Density
Residential designation will not negatively impact the city’s ability to provide
housing.
Attachment 3, Page 5 of 12
Goal 12, Transportation – the Low Density Residential designation allows 6-14
units/acre, which at 1.01 trips per unit, equates to a rate of 6-14 trips/acre. The Light
Medium Industrial designation has rate of 7.26 trips/acre. Therefore, the proposal
will at worst have no impact on the amount of trips and at best decrease the trips.
B. Plan inconsistency:
1. In those cases where the Metro Plan applies, adoption of the amendment shall not make
the Metro Plan internally inconsistent.
No inconsistencies have been identified.
2. In cases where Springfield Comprehensive Plan applies, the amendment shall be
consistent with the Springfield Comprehensive Plan.
At this time, the Metro Plan is the applicable comprehensive plan.
Attachment 3, Page 6 of 12
Attachment 3, Page 7 of 12
Attachment 3, Page 8 of 12
Attachment 3, Page 9 of 12
Attachment 3, Page 10 of 12
Attachment 3, Page 11 of 12
Attachment 3, Page 12 of 12
Attachment 4, Page 1 of 3
Attachment 4, Page 2 of 3
EXHIBIT A
Beginning at a point which is North 89° 50’ 58” East 934.53 feet and South 0° 09’ 17” East 661.35 feet from the
Northwest corner of the H. Johnson Donation Land Claim No. 62 in Township 17 South, Range 2 West of the
Willamette Meridian; thence South 0° 09’ 17” East 723.12 feet to the Northerly margin of Highbanks Road; thence
along said margin North 89° 19’ 17” West 326.97 feet; thence leaving said margin North 0° 16’ 43” West 257.30
feet; thence North 89° 00’ 20” West 165.12 feet; thence North 0° 16’ 43” West 458.40 feet; thence North 89° 55’
14” East 493.57 feet to the Point of Beginning, in Lane County, Oregon.
Attachment 4, Page 3 of 3
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON
ORDER AND RECOMMENDATION FOR:
TYPE I AMENDMENT TO THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD METROPOLITAN AREA GENERAL PLAN ] TYP416-00003
(METRO PLAN) DIAGRAM TO REDESIGNATE AN APPROXIMATELY 7.1 ACRE PARCEL IDENTIFIED ]
AS ASSESSOR’S MAP 17-02-28-00, TAX LOT 406 FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) ]
TO LIGHT MEDIUM INDUSTRIAL (LMI) ]
NATURE OF THE PROPOSAL
Staff is requesting that the Springfield Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the
Springfield City Council regarding the following proposed Type I amendment to the Metro Plan Diagram:
Redesignate an approximately 7.1 acre, vacant parcel located on the north side of Highbanks Road at 53rd
Street (Map 17-02-28-00, Tax Lot 406) from Low Density Residential to Light Medium Industrial. The subject
property is generally depicted and more particularly described in Exhibit A to this Order.
Timely and sufficient notice of the public hearing has been provided, pursuant to SDC 5.2-115.
On January 24, 2017, the Springfield Planning Commission held a work session and a public hearing on the
proposed Metro Plan Diagram amendment. The staff report, written comments, and testimony of those who
spoke at the public hearing were entered into the record.
CONCLUSION
On the basis of this record, the proposed Type I Metro Plan Diagram amendment is consistent with the criteria of
SDC 5.14-135. This general finding is supported by the specific findings of fact and conclusion in the Staff Report
and Findings and the additional information submitted for the January 24, 2017 public hearing.
ORDER/RECOMMENDATION
It is ORDERED by the Springfield Planning Commission that approval of Case Number TYP416-00003 be GRANTED
and a RECOMMENDATION for approval be forwarded to the Springfield City Council for their consideration at an
upcoming public hearing meeting.
____________________________ ____________________
Planning Commission Chairperson Date
ATTEST
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Attachment 5, Page 1 of 2
EXHIBIT A
Beginning at a point which is North 89° 50’ 58” East 934.53 feet and South 0° 09’ 17” East 661.35 feet from the
Northwest corner of the H. Johnson Donation Land Claim No. 62 in Township 17 South, Range 2 West of the
Willamette Meridian; thence South 0° 09’ 17” East 723.12 feet to the Northerly margin of Highbanks Road; thence
along said margin North 89° 19’ 17” West 326.97 feet; thence leaving said margin North 0° 16’ 43” West 257.30
feet; thence North 89° 00’ 20” West 165.12 feet; thence North 0° 16’ 43” West 458.40 feet; thence North 89° 55’
14” East 493.57 feet to the Point of Beginning, in Lane County, Oregon.
SITE
Attachment 5, Page 2 of 2
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON
ORDER AND RECOMMENDATION FOR:
AMENDMENT TO THE SPRINGFIELD ZONING MAP TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 7.1 ACRES ] TYP316-00005
OF LAND IDENTIFIED AS ASSESSOR’S MAP 17-02-28-00, TAX LOT 406 FROM LOW DENSITY ]
RESIDENTIAL (LDR) TO LIGHT MEDIUM INDUSTRIAL (LMI) ]
NATURE OF THE PROPOSAL
Staff is requesting that the Springfield Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the
Springfield City Council regarding the following proposed amendment to the Springfield Zoning Map:
Rezone an approximately 7.1 acre, vacant parcel located on the north side of Highbanks Road at 53rd Street
(Map 17-02-28-00, Tax Lot 406) from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Light Medium Industrial (LMI). The
subject Zone Change request is being processed concurrently with a Metro Plan Diagram amendment initiated
by Planning Case TYP416-00003. The subject property is generally depicted and more particularly described in
Exhibit A to this Order.
Timely and sufficient notice of the public hearing has been provided, pursuant to SDC 5.2-115.
On January 24, 2017, the Springfield Planning Commission held a work session and a public hearing on the
proposed Zoning Map amendment. The staff report, written comments, and testimony of those who spoke at the
public hearing were entered into the record.
CONCLUSION
On the basis of this record, the proposed Zoning Map amendment is consistent with the criteria of SDC 5.22-115.
This general finding is supported by the specific findings of fact and conclusion in the Staff Report and Findings
and the additional information submitted for the January 24, 2017 public hearing.
ORDER/RECOMMENDATION
It is ORDERED by the Springfield Planning Commission that approval of Case Number TYP316-00005 be GRANTED
and a RECOMMENDATION for approval be forwarded to the Springfield City Council for their consideration at an
upcoming public hearing meeting.
____________________________ ____________________
Planning Commission Chairperson Date
ATTEST
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Attachment 6, Page 1 of 2
EXHIBIT A
Beginning at a point which is North 89° 50’ 58” East 934.53 feet and South 0° 09’ 17” East 661.35 feet from the
Northwest corner of the H. Johnson Donation Land Claim No. 62 in Township 17 South, Range 2 West of the
Willamette Meridian; thence South 0° 09’ 17” East 723.12 feet to the Northerly margin of Highbanks Road; thence
along said margin North 89° 19’ 17” West 326.97 feet; thence leaving said margin North 0° 16’ 43” West 257.30
feet; thence North 89° 00’ 20” West 165.12 feet; thence North 0° 16’ 43” West 458.40 feet; thence North 89° 55’
14” East 493.57 feet to the Point of Beginning, in Lane County, Oregon.
SITE
Attachment 6, Page 2 of 2