The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2017 04 18 AIS for Metro Plan Amendment and Zone ChangeAGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: 4/18/2017 Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Staff Contact/Dept.: Andy Limbird, DPW Staff Phone No: 541-726-3784 Estimated Time: 15 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 3.35 ACRE PROPERTY ON 5TH STREET, CASES TYP417-00002 AND TYP317-00004 ACTION REQUESTED: Conduct deliberations 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 six contiguous residential properties on 5th Street north of Q Street. The proposed amendment would change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning for the property from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium Density Residential (MDR) and High Density Residential (HDR). The requested amendment to the Metro Plan diagram would also concurrently amend the Q Street Refinement Plan diagram (a refinement plan to the Metro Plan) applicable to the site. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Staff Report for Metro Plan Amendment 2. Staff Report for Zoning Map Amendment 3. Application and Exhibits – Metro Plan Amendment 4. Application and Exhibits – Zone Change 5. Applicant’s Transportation Planning Rule Analysis 6. Public Comments Received During Notification Period and at April 4, 2017 Public Hearing 7. Memo from City Attorney Regarding Public Hearing Notification 8. Ordinance 9. PC Order & Recommendation – Metro Plan Amendment Application TYP417-00002 10. PC Order & Recommendation – Zoning Map Amendment Application TYP317-00004 DISCUSSION: The subject site is comprised of six contiguous parcels located on the east side of 5th Street between Q Street and T Street. The properties are addressed as 1975 – 1995 5th Street (Assessor’s Map 17- 03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600 – 5000). The properties contain five existing single family dwellings and are zoned and designated for low density residential development in accordance with the adopted Metro Plan and Q Street Refinement Plan diagrams and the Springfield Zoning Map. The subject site is bordered by commercial zoning to the south, single family residential zoning to the north and east and multi-family residential zoning to the west across Fifth Street. (Attachment 4 provides zoning and aerial maps depicting the context.) Changing the comprehensive plan designation and zoning for the property would allow for a host of residential uses including but not limited to multi-family residential, retirement or nursing homes and group care facilities. The applicant has not submitted a site plan application for the type of residential development proposed for the site, but staff advises that multi-family residential development could include duplex, four-plex, townhouse, apartment units or a combination of these permitted housing types and residential uses. Any future development will require a site plan application and public notice to surrounding residents and property owners. On April 4, 2017, the Planning Commission conducted a work session and held a public hearing on the proposal to amend the Metro Plan diagram and Zoning Map. At the conclusion of the April 4, 2017 meeting, the public hearing and written record for the applications were closed. The Planning Commission now intends to review all materials and testimony submitted into the record, conduct deliberations, and forward a recommendation to the City Council. The public hearing before the City Council is scheduled for May 15, 2017. Staff Report and Findings Springfield Planning Commission Type I Amendment to the Metro Plan Diagram Hearing Date: April 4, 2017 Case Number: TYP417-00002 Applicant: Rick Satre, Schirmer Satre Group on behalf of CMC Development LLC Project Location: Six contiguous residential properties on the east side of 5th Street and south of T Street; properties are addressed as 1975 – 1995 5th Street and include one vacant, non-addressed parcel (Assessor’s Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600 – 5000). Request The City has received an application for a Type I Metro Plan diagram amendment and a concurrent Zoning Map amendment from a property owner (Attachments 3 & 4). The proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment would change the plan designation for two parcels comprising 1.78 acres (Tax Lots 4600 and 5000) from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium Density Residential (MDR); and change the plan designation for four parcels comprising 1.57 acres (Tax Lots 4601, 4700, 4800 and 4900) from LDR to High Density Residential (HDR). The proposed amendment to the Metro Plan diagram would also amend the adopted Q Street Refinement Plan diagram, which is a refinement plan to the Metro Plan. Concurrently with the comprehensive plan amendment, an amendment to the Springfield Zoning Map would change the zoning of Tax Lots 4600 and 5000 from LDR to MDR; and the zoning of Tax Lots 4601, 4700, 4800 and 4900 from LDR to HDR. Although uncommon, in accordance with Springfield Development Code (SDC) Section 5.14-125.A, an amendment to the Metro Plan diagram can be initiated by a property owner at any time. The application was submitted on February 3, 2017 and the Planning Commission public hearing on the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment is scheduled for April 4, 2017. The application is scheduled for a public hearing before the City Council on May 15, 2017. Overview of Proposed Metro Plan Diagram Amendment The adopted Metro Plan diagram designates the subject property for Low Density Residential land use. The applicant has initiated a Metro Plan diagram amendment and concurrent Zoning Map amendment to change the zoning and plan designation from LDR to MDR and HDR. The applicant has not indicated the specific type of residential housing form that is intended for the property, but the proposed zoning would allow for duplex, four-plex, townhouse or apartment style units, or a combination thereof, as provided by SDC 3.2-200. A nursing home or group care facility also could be constructed on the property under the proposed zoning and comprehensive plan designation. In accordance with SDC 5.14-115.A.1, proposals for redesignating land inside the City limits are classified as a Type I Metro Plan diagram amendment requiring approval by Springfield only. In accordance with SDC 5.14-130, the property-owner initiated amendment to the Metro Plan diagram is processed as a Type IV (legislative) land use action that requires public hearings before the Springfield Planning Commission and City Council. Attachment 1, Page 1 of 15 Notification and Written Comments In accordance with the Oregon Administrative Rules (OARs) 660-018-0020, prior to adopting a change to an acknowledged comprehensive plan or land use regulation, local governments are required to notify the state Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) at least 35 days prior to the first evidentiary hearing. A Notice of Proposed Amendment was transmitted to the DLCD on February 28, 2017, which is 35 days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing on the matter. In accordance with SDC 5.2-110.B, Type IV legislative land use decisions require notice in a newspaper of general circulation. Notification of the April 4, 2017 public hearing was published in the legal notices section of The Register Guard on March 15, 2017. Staff responded to several phone calls, front counter inquiries, and requests for additional information regarding the proposal. Six written comments, including a neighborhood petition, were received from nearby property owners opposing the proposal. The written comments are included as Attachment 6 to the AIS. Staff Response: The written comments submitted by adjacent property owners and residents have several common elements of concern about the proposal, including: increased building heights and shading of backyards, incompatibility with existing single family housing in the neighborhood and the provisions of the adopted Metro Plan and Q Street Refinement Plan, and increased traffic and noise. Staff advises that the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment and zone change would allow for a variety of larger and more intensive housing forms to be constructed on the property. However, the developer has not provided any specific type or configuration of proposed housing units yet, nor is this required at this point. Any future development would be subject to the Multi-unit Design Standards of SDC 3.2-200, including building height limitations for properties to the south or west of existing single family homes, multi-unit development standards that provide for increased building setbacks from perimeter property lines, and provision of site landscaping and common outdoor amenity space for multi-family developments. The applicant has submitted a supplementary Transportation Planning Rule Analysis for the project (Attachment 5) that demonstrates the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the public street system. One written comment has raised the issue that the Notice of Public Hearing provided for these applications is not legally sufficient under Oregon law. That concern was forwarded to the City Attorney’s Office for review. Per the memorandum attached to this packet (Attachment 7), the City Attorney’s Office has advised that the notice provided in this proceeding is legally sufficient. Background Applicant’s Project Narrative: “There is a change in circumstances that makes this requested change to the Metro Plan diagram necessary. Between 2010 and 2030, Springfield can expect to see a 27% increase of residents living within its city limits (RLS, ECONorthwest, pg. ii). Currently, 824 buildable acres of land are zoned Low Density Residential, which equates to 60% of Springfield’s residential development capacity. Yet, only 95 buildable acres are designated as Medium Density Residential, totaling a mere 30% of residential development capacity, and 16 buildable acres are designated as High Density Residential, providing 4% of the City’s residential development capacity. To accommodate growth, Springfield will need to provide 5,980 new dwelling units to accommodate population growth. While there is a total surplus of residential land, there is a 72 gross acre surplus of Low Density Residential land. But there is only a surplus of 18 gross acres of Medium Density Residential land and a deficit of 34 gross acres of High Density Residential land. Therefore, circumstances have indeed changed greatly since the subject site was designated at Low Density Residential in the Metro Plan.” Attachment 1, Page 2 of 15 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: “The City has acknowledged provisions for citizen involvement that ensure the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. Specifically, the Springfield Development Code includes a requirement that adequate notice of the proposed amendment and public hearings is provided prior to a decision being made. The process for adopting amendments is in accordance with Statewide Planning Goal 1, as it complies with the requirements of the State’s citizen involvement provisions. This proposed Metro Plan amendment does not amend the citizen involvement program.” Finding 2: Goal 1 – Citizen Involvement calls for “the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process”. The proposed citizen initiated amendment to the adopted Metro Plan diagram is subject to the City’s acknowledged plan amendment process – SDC Section 5.14-100 Metro Plan Amendments and the City’s public notice standards – SDC Section 5.2-115 which requires a public hearing before the Springfield Planning Commission and a public hearing before the Springfield City Council, and includes specifications for the content, timing and dispersal of mailed notice (see description following). The Planning Commission is scheduled to conduct a Attachment 1, Page 3 of 15 public hearing to consider the proposed amendments on April 4, 2017. Mailed notification of the Planning Commission public hearing was provided to all property owners and residents within 300 feet of the subject property on March 1, 2017. The Planning Commission public hearing was advertised in the legal notices section of the Register-Guard on March 15, 2017. The recommendation of the Planning Commission will be forwarded to the Springfield City Council for consideration at a public hearing meeting scheduled for May 15, 2017. Notification of the Planning Commission and City Council public hearings was published in the Register-Guard newspaper at least one week prior to the meeting dates. Staff finds that the notice for this proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment complies with SDC 5.2-115 and is consistent with Goal 1 requirements. Goal 2 – Land Use Planning Applicant’s Narrative: “The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) is the policy tool that provides a basis for decision-making in the Eugene-Springfield area. The Metro Plan was acknowledged by the State in 1982 to be in compliance with statewide planning goals. These findings and record show that there is an adequate factual base for decisions to be made concerning the proposed amendment. Goal 2 requires plans be coordinated with the plans of affected governmental units and that opportunities be provided for review and comment by those units. To comply with the Goal 2 coordination requirement, the City will coordinate the review of the amendment with affected governmental units. Therefore, the amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 2.” Finding 3: Goal 2 – Land Use Planning outlines the basic procedures for Oregon’s statewide planning program. In accordance with Goal 2, land use decisions are to be made in accordance with a comprehensive plan, and jurisdictions are to adopt suitable implementation ordinances that put the plan’s policies into force and effect. Consistent with the City’s coordination responsibilities and obligations to provide affected local agencies with an opportunity to comment, the City sent a copy of the application submittals to the following agencies: Willamalane Park & Recreation District; Springfield Utility Board (water, ground water protection, electricity and energy conservation); Lane 911; USPS; Northwest Natural Gas; Emerald People’s Utility District; Rainbow Water District; Eugene Water and Electric Board – Water and Electric Departments; Springfield School District #19 Maintenance, Safe Rotes to School and Financial Services; Lane County Transportation, County Sanitarian; Lane Regional Air Pollution Authority; Comcast Cable; CenturyLink; Lane Transit District; and ODOT Planning and Development, State Highway Division. Additionally, notice was provided electronically to DLCD on February 28, 2017. Finding 4: The Metro Plan is the acknowledged comprehensive plan for guiding land use planning in Springfield. The City has adopted other neighborhood- or area-specific plans (such as Refinement Plans) that provide more detailed direction for land use planning under the umbrella of the Metro Plan. The subject property is within the adopted Q Street Refinement Plan area and the proposed amendment to the Metro Plan diagram would concurrently amend the adopted Refinement Plan diagram. Additionally, the City is in the process of developing and adopting the Springfield Comprehensive Plan, the final adopted version of which will replace the Metro Plan. The City’s initial action to this end was the adoption of Ordinance #6268 on June 20, 2011, which “establishes a separate Urban Growth Boundary for the City of Springfield as required by ORS 197.304 and a tax lot specific map of the UGB in accordance with OAR 660-024-0020(2); and the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element and Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis February 2011 attached as Exhibit Attachment 1, Page 4 of 15 A and B and incorporated here by this reference are adopted pursuant to ORS 197.304 as refinements to the Metro Plan.” This action effectively replaced the Metro Plan’s Residential Element, including findings, objectives and policies: “Section 3: The prior versions of the Metro Plan and its diagram superceded or replaced by this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect to authorize prosecution of persons in violation thereof prior to the effective date of this Ordinance.” (emphasis added) See SDC 5.14-120 Relationship to Refinement Plans, Special Area Studies or Functional Plan amendments. Finding 5: The public hearing process used for amendment of the Metro Plan and adopted Refinement Plans is specified in Chapter IV Metro Plan Review, Amendments, and Refinements. The findings under Criteria B (below) demonstrate that the proposed amendment will not make the adopted Metro Plan internally inconsistent. Finding 6: The Springfield Development Code is a key mechanism used to implement the goals and policies of the City’s adopted comprehensive plans, particularly the Metro Plan. The proposal is classified as a Type I amendment to the adopted Metro Plan diagram that is approved by Springfield only in accordance with SDC 5.14-115.A. The proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment is processed as a Type IV land use action (legislative) as described in SDC 5.1-140 and 5.14-130. The process observed for the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment is consistent with the policies pertaining to Review, Amendments and Refinements. Additionally, the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment has been initiated in accordance with the provisions of the City’s acknowledged Comprehensive Plan and Development Code. Staff finds the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment does not affect City ordinances, policies, plans, and studies adopted to comply with Goal 2 requirements, and that notice and coordination requirements “with those local governments, state and federal agencies and special districts which have programs, land ownerships, or responsibilities within the area” that includes this proposal have been provided consistent with Goal 2. Goal 3 – Agricultural Land Applicant’s Narrative: “Goal 3 is not applicable to this amendment, as the subject property and proposed action is located within an acknowledged urban growth boundary and does not affect any agricultural plan designation or use. Goal 3 excludes lands inside an acknowledged urban growth boundary, Goal 3 is not relevant and the amendment does not affect the subject site’s compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 3.” Finding 7: Goal 3 – As noted by the applicant in their narrative, Agricultural Land applies to areas subject to farm zoning that are outside acknowledged urban growth boundaries (UGBs): “Agricultural land does not include land within acknowledged urban growth boundaries or land within acknowledged exceptions to Goals 3 or 4.” (Text of Goal 3). The City has an acknowledged UGB and therefore consistent with the express language of the Goal, does not have farm land zoning within its jurisdictional boundary. Furthermore, the site of the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment is inside the City’s acknowledged UGB and within a mature, long-developed residential neighborhood. Consequently, and as expressed in the text of the Goal, Goal 3 is not applicable. Goal 4 – Forest Land Applicant’s Narrative: “Goal 4 is not applicable as the subject property and proposed action does not affect any forest plan designation or use. Goal 4 does not apply within urban growth Attachment 1, Page 5 of 15 boundaries and, therefore, does not apply to the subject property nor affect the area’s compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 4. Finding 8: Goal 4 – Forest Land applies to timber lands zoned for that use that are outside acknowledged UGBs with the intent to conserve forest lands for forest uses: “Oregon Administrative Rule 660-006-0020: Plan Designation Within an Urban Growth Boundary. Goal 4 does not apply within urban growth boundaries and therefore, the designation of forest lands is not required.” The City has an acknowledged UGB and does not have forest zoning within its incorporated area. Furthermore, the site of the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment is inside the City’s UGB. Consequently, and as expressed in the text of the Goal, Goal 4 is not applicable. Goal 5 – Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces Applicant’s Narrative: “The subject property does not include a Goal 5 resource site. The proposed amendment does not create or amend a list of Goal 5 resources, does not amend a plan or code provision adopted to protect a significant Goal 5 resource or to address specific requirements of Goal 5, does not allow new uses that could be conflicting uses with Goal 5 resource site, and does not amend the acknowledged Urban Growth Boundary. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 5 does not apply to this amendment.” Finding 9: Goal 5 – Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources applies to more than a dozen natural and cultural resources such as wildlife habitats and wetlands, and establishes a process for each resource to be inventoried and evaluated. The site that is subject of the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment has not been identified in the City’s Natural Resources inventory, Register of Historic Sites, or the Willamalane Park & Recreation District Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, the city does not have a specific zoning district which it applies to inventoried Goal 5 natural resources; the presence of these resources is completely independent of the process used to zone and designate land. Protective measures for all of the city’s inventoried Goal 5 resources are applicable to the resource and are not circumscribed or altered based on zoning classification. The proposed amendment to the Metro Plan diagram and the Q Street Refinement Plan diagram does not modify or alter the City’s Development Code or other Metro Plan policies relating to identified natural resources. The proposed diagram amendment does not make any changes to adopted Goal 5 natural resources development standards or protective measures adopted to comply with Goal 5 requirements. Therefore, this action does not alter the City’s acknowledged compliance with Goal 5. Goal 6 – Air, Water and Land Resources Quality Applicant’s Narrative: “Goal 6 addresses waste and process discharges from development and is aimed at protecting air, water, and land from impacts from those discharges. Nothing in the proposal, character of the site, or potential uses indicates a future development that would compromise air, water quality, or land resource policies. The City can reasonably expect that future development of the site complies with applicable environmental laws. Therefore, the amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 6.” Finding 10: Goal 6 – Air, Water and Land Resources Quality applies to local comprehensive plans and the implementation of measures consistent with state and Federal regulations on matters such as clean air, clean water, and preventing groundwater pollution. The proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment and concurrent Q Street Refinement Plan amendment does not affect City ordinances, Attachment 1, Page 6 of 15 policies, plans, and studies adopted to comply with Goal 6 requirements. Therefore, this action does not alter the City’s acknowledged compliance with Goal 6. Goal 7 – Areas Subject to Natural Hazards Applicant’s Narrative: “Goal 7 requires that local government planning programs include provisions to protect people and property from natural hazards such as floods, landslides, earthquakes and related hazards, tsunamis, and wildfires. The subject property is not located within known areas of natural disasters or hazards. The subject property is outside the flood zone and is not subject to hazards normally associated with steep slopes, wildfires, or tsunamis. Other hazards, such as earthquakes and severe winter storms can be mitigated at the time of development based on accepted building codes and building techniques. Therefore, this amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 7.” Finding 11: Goal 7 – Areas Subject to Natural Hazards applies to development in areas such as floodplains and potential landslide areas. Local jurisdictions are required to apply “appropriate safeguards” when planning for development in hazard areas. The City has inventoried areas subject to natural hazards such as the McKenzie and Willamette River flood plains and potential landslide areas on steeply sloping hillsides. The subject site is within a mature, developed residential neighborhood and is not located within an area of known natural hazards. Finding 12: The proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment has no effect on City ordinances, policies, plans, and studies adopted to comply with Goal 7 requirements and siting standards for development within the mapped flood hazard area of the McKenzie and Willamette Rivers. Furthermore, the site proposed for Metro Plan diagram amendment is not exempted from conformance with regulations affecting these hazard areas. Therefore, this action has no effect on the City’s acknowledged compliance with Goal 7. Goal 8 – Recreational Needs Applicant’s Narrative: “Statewide Planning Goal 8 ensures the provision of recreational facilities to Oregon citizens and is primarily concerned with the provision of those facilities in non-urban areas of the state. There are no public or private recreational facilities on or adjacent to the subject property. Therefore, the proposed amendment will not impact the provision of public recreational facilities nor will they affect access to existing or future public recreational facilities. As such, the amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 8.” Finding 13: Goal 8 – Recreational Needs requires communities to evaluate their recreation areas and facilities and to develop plans to address current and projected demand. The provision of recreation services within Springfield is the responsibility of Willamalane Park & Recreation District. Willamalane has an adopted 20-Year Comprehensive Plan for the provision of park, open space and recreation services for Springfield. The proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment would not affect Willamalane’s adopted Comprehensive Plan or other ordinances, policies, plans, and studies adopted to comply with Goal 8 requirements. Therefore, this action has no effect on the City’s acknowledged compliance with Goal 8. Goal 9 – Economic Development Applicant’s Narrative: “The proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment does not affect economic development, as it is not requesting to change the designation of the subject site to or from Attachment 1, Page 7 of 15 commercial. The amendment seeks to designate land currently identified as Low Density Residential to a mixture of Medium and High Density Residential. Therefore, the proposed amendment will not impact economic development or commercial land supply in any way. The amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 9.” Finding 14: Goal 9 – Economic Development addresses diversification and improvement of the economy. It requires local jurisdictions to conduct an inventory of commercial and industrial lands, anticipate future needs for such lands, and provide enough appropriately-zoned land to meet the projected demand over a 20-year planning horizon. The City previously completed an analysis of its employment land base and determined that a deficit existed. To address the projected deficit of commercial and industrial land, the City has undertaken a multi-year process to expand the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) in the Gateway and South 28th Street areas. Expansion of the UGB is intended to provide sufficient employment-generating land area for the mandated 20-year planning horizon. The proposed redesignation and rezoning of the subject property from Low Density Residential to Medium and High Density Residential will not affect the amount of employment land within the City’s inventory. Goal 10 - Housing Applicant’s Narrative: “Goal 10 requires that communities plan for and maintain an inventory of buildable residential land for needed housing units. The Administrative Rule for Statewide Planning Goal 10 (OAR 660 Division 8) states: ‘The mix and density of needed housing is determined in the housing needs projection. Sufficient buildable land shall be designated on the comprehensive plan map to satisfy housing needs by type and density range as determined in the housing needs projection. The local buildable lands inventory must document the amount of buildable land in each residential plan designation.’ The subject property is currently designated for Low Density Residential and the applicant wishes to redesignate the property as a mixture of Medium and High Density Residential. As mentioned in the applicant’s response to SDC 5.14-105, there is a 72 acre surplus of Low Density Residential land. Yet, there is only a minor 18 acre surplus of Medium Density Residential and a 34 acre deficit of High Density Residential land.” Finding 15: Goal 10 – Housing applies to the planning for – and provision of – needed housing types, including multi-family and manufactured housing. As noted by the applicant’s narrative, staff and third-party analysis has determined that a surplus of LDR designated land exists within the City’s land inventory. Redesignation and rezoning of the subject property would have an incremental impact to the City’s residential land base; arguably, the impact would be limited to a recalculation of surplus versus deficit levels for each of the Low, Medium, and High Density Residential categories. Based on the applicant’s submittal, the amount of surplus Low Density Residential land would be reduced by about 3.35 acres, and the amount of surplus Medium Density Residential land would increase by about 1.78 acres. The deficit of High Density Residential land would be reduced by about 1.57 acres. Staff observes that Findings 10 and 11 of the Residential Land Use and Housing Element identify a surplus of approximately 378 gross acres of LDR designation, a surplus of approximately 76 gross acres of MDR designation, and a deficit of approximately 28 gross acres of HDR designation. The Residential Land Use and Housing Element (Residential Finding 11, Page 11) goes on to state that the 28-acre deficit of HDR designation will be met through redevelopment in Glenwood. Staff is not certain where the applicant’s numbers are Attachment 1, Page 8 of 15 derived from because no specific reference or citation is provided. The applicant’s numbers depart from the calculated acreage of LDR, MDR and HDR in the adopted Residential Land Use and Housing Element, but still identify a surplus of LDR and MDR designation and a deficit of HDR designation. Finding 16: The proposed redesignation and rezoning would change the anticipated type of housing form on the property from single-family residential homes to duplex, four-plex, attached home, townhouse, or apartment units, or a combination of these types. A congregate care facility or group care home also could be constructed on the property under the proposed MDR and HDR zoning. Finding 17: The Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element classifies the subject site as a combination of vacant and developed residential land. Tax Lot 4600 is identified as vacant, and the remainder of the subject site (Tax Lots 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900 and 5000) is identified as developed. Therefore, nearly one-half of the subject site is classified for further residential development or redevelopment. Finding 18: The proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change would not affect other City ordinances, policies, plans, and studies adopted to comply with Goal 10 requirements. Therefore, this action has no adverse effect on the city’s acknowledged compliance with Goal 10. Goal 11 – Public Facilities and Services Applicant’s Narrative: “The subject site affected by the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment is located inside the City limits. The existing level of public facilities and services is adequate to serve the needs of existing and future development. The amendment to the Metro Plan diagram does not significantly affect the planning or development of future public facilities or services. Therefore, the amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 11.” Finding 19: Goal 11 – Public Facilities and Services addresses the efficient planning and provision of public services such as sewer, water, law enforcement, and fire protection. In accordance with OAR 660-011-0005(5), public facilities include water, sewer and transportation facilities, but do not include buildings, structures or equipment incidental to the operation of those facilities. The proposed redesignation and rezoning will not result in permitted uses that will have an adverse effect on the demand for public facilities and services provided to the subject property and adjacent properties. This area is already planned for a combination of commercial (south of the site) and a full spectrum of residential development, and the public facilities serving this area have been designed accordingly. Therefore, the City’s continued acknowledged compliance with Goal 11 is not affected by this proposal. Goal 12 – Transportation Applicant’s Narrative: “Goal 12 is implemented through the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR), as defined in Oregon Administrative Rule OAR 660-012-0000, et. seq. The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area Transportation Plan (TransPlan) provides the regional policy framework through which the TPR is implemented at the local level. The TPR (OAR 660-012-0060) states that when land use changes, including amendments to acknowledged comprehensive plans, significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, the local government shall put in place measures to assure that the allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and performance standards of the facility. The result of this plan amendment and zone change application would increase the trip generation potential of the subject parcels, so the applicant will Attachment 1, Page 9 of 15 address the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) to determine if there’s a significant effect. The TPR looks [at] capacity and performance to be consistent with the adopted Transportation System Plan. A trip generation comparison and capacity/LOS [Level of Service] analysis is being performed at the nearby intersections at 5th Street at Q Street and 5th Street at Hayden Bridge Road. The analysis will compare the trip generation under the proposed designation with the potential trip generation under the existing designation to determine if there is an impact as defined in OAR 660-012-0060 under the planning horizon analysis year of the current TSP. A TPR Analysis will be included in the application package.” Finding 20: Staff has reviewed the applicant’s Goal 12 analysis prepared by Branch Engineering Inc. and submitted under separate cover. Based on the findings and conclusions of the supplementary TPR analysis (Attachment 5), the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment and Zone Change will not have a significant adverse impact on the local transportation system. Staff concurs with the findings and conclusions of the applicant’s Goal 12 analysis and no further investigation or analysis is required at this time. Therefore, the proposal will not affect the City’s acknowledged compliance with Goal 12. Goal 13 – Energy Conservation Applicant’s Narrative: “Statewide Planning Goal 13 calls for land uses to be managed and controlled ‘so as to maximize the conservation of all forms of energy, based upon sound economic principles’. Goal 13 is directed at the development of local energy policies and provisions. It does not state requirements with respect to other types of land use decisions. To the extent that Goal 13 could be applied to the proposed amendment, the amendment is consistent with Goal 13. The property and proposed amendment are intended to support higher-density, clustered development so future residential housing can make efficient use of energy with direct and efficient access. Therefore, this proposal is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 13.” Finding 21: Goal 13 – Energy Conservation states that “land and uses developed on the land shall be managed and controlled so as to maximize the conservation of all forms of energy, based upon sound economic principles”. The proposed comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning does not affect the City’s ordinances, policies, plans, or studies adopted to comply with Goal 13 requirements. Converting the 3.35 acre property from LDR to a mixture of MDR and HDR should not have an appreciable impact to energy consumption, and in fact may offer opportunities for increased energy efficiency through contemporary multi-family housing design. The developer will have an opportunity to incorporate suitable energy conservation measures into the future site development upon redesignation and rezoning of the subject property. The City’s building codes comply with all Oregon State Building Codes Agency standards for energy efficiency in residential building design. The site’s solar access is not compromised by surrounding development. The City’s conservation measures applicable to storm water management, temporary storage, filtration and discharge would apply to multi-family residential uses developed on this site; therefore, this action has no effect on the city’s acknowledged compliance with Goal 13. Goal 14 - Urbanization Applicant’s Narrative: “The amendment does not affect the transition from rural to urban land use, as the subject property is within the City limits. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 14 does not apply.” Attachment 1, Page 10 of 15 Finding 22: Goal 14 – Urbanization requires cities to estimate future growth rates and patterns, and to incorporate, plan, and zone enough land to meet the projected demands. The City already planned for residential land use on the subject property when completing its residential buildable land inventory. Consistent with provisions of Goal 14, the City is responding to a request from a property owner to redesignate and rezone the subject property from low density residential to a mixture of higher density residential uses. As noted in Finding 15 above, the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change will be noted on the City’s residential land inventory; similar reporting of inventory changes due to development will occur as required by ORS. However, the proposed redesignation and zone change does not affect the City’s adopted ordinances, policies, plans, or studies adopted to satisfy the compliance requirements of Goal 14. Goal 15 – Willamette River Greenway Applicant’s Narrative: “The subject property is not within the boundaries of the Willamette River Greenway. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 15 does not apply.” Finding 23: Goal 15 – Willamette River Greenway establishes procedures for administering the 300 miles of greenway that borders the Willamette River, including portions that are inside the City limits and UGB of Springfield. The subject site is not within the adopted Willamette River Greenway Boundary area so this goal is not applicable; therefore, this action has no effect on the city’s acknowledged compliance with Goal 15. Goals 16-19 Estuarine Resources, Coastal Shorelands, Beaches and Dunes, and Ocean Resources Applicant’s Narrative: “There are no coastal, ocean, estuarine, or beach and dune resources on or adjacent to the subject property. Therefore, these goals are not relevant and the proposed amendment will not affect compliance with Statewide Planning Goals 16 through 19.” Finding 24: Goals 16-19 – Estuarine Resources; Coastal Shorelands; Beaches and Dunes; and Ocean Resources; these goals do not apply to land within the Willamette Valley, including Springfield. Therefore, in the same way that Goals 3 and 4 do not apply in Springfield, Goals 16-19 do not apply in Springfield or to land use regulations adopted in Springfield. Conclusion: Staff has concluded that the proposed Metro Plan diagram land use designation amendment from Low Density Residential to a combination of Medium and High Density Residential is consistent with all applicable statewide land use planning goals and the criteria for such action in SDC 5.14-135 (A): “The amendment shall be consistent with applicable Statewide Planning Goals.” B. Plan Inconsistency 1. In those cases where the Metro Plan applies, adoption of the amendment shall not make the Metro Plan internally inconsistent. 2. In cases where Springfield Comprehensive Plan applies, the amendment shall be consistent with the Springfield Comprehensive Plan. Applicant’s Narrative: “The adopted Metro Plan is the principal document that creates a framework for land use policy within the City of Springfield. The adopted Zoning Map implements the Metro Plan diagram and applicable refinement plans, which are amendments to the Metro Plan. Attachment 1, Page 11 of 15 Since the subject property is within an adopted Refinement Plan area, the Q Street Refinement Plan is the prevailing refinement plan for the subject property. When Metro Plan diagram amendments are approved, the applicable refinement plan diagram is also automatically amended. The proposed Metro Plan amendment does not make the Metro Plan internally [in]consistent. It does not affect any Metro Plan policies or text. The proposed amendment to the Metro Plan diagram also reduces the oversupply of Low Density Residential land and while slightly increasing the existing surplus of Medium Density Residential land, will decrease the deficit of High Density Residential land. Moreover, the Q Street Refinement Plan will not be made inconsistent through this amendment. The Q Street Refinement Plan will be amended automatically in conjunction with the Metro Plan amendment. There are no conflicts created by either of the proposed amendments to the residential land inventory, needed employment land inventory, nor any other land use elements of the Metro Plan or Q Street Refinement Plan. The City of Springfield also previously adopted the Residential Land Use and Housing Element of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan. As previously mentioned in this written statement, 824 buildable acres of land are zoned Low Density Residential. This equates to 60% of Springfield’s residential development capacity. Yet, only 95 buildable acres are designated as Medium Density Residential, totaling a mere 30% of residential development capacity, and 16 buildable acres are designated as High Density Residential, which provides only 4%of the City’s residential development capacity. To accommodate expected population growth, Springfield will need to provide 5,980 new dwelling units. While there is a total surplus of residential land, which includes a 72 gross acre surplus of Low Density Residential land, there is only a surplus of 18 gross acres of Medium Density Residential land and a deficit of 34 gross acres of High Density Residential land. Therefore, the proposed rezoning will not have an adverse impact on available Low Density Residential land within the urban growth boundary. The criteria in SDC 5.14-135.B is met. Based on the information contained in this written statement, the applicant believes that the requested Metro Plan amendment can be approved.” Finding 25: The adopted Metro Plan is the principal policy document that creates the broad framework for land use planning within the City of Springfield. The City’s adopted Zoning Map implements the zoning designations of the Metro Plan diagram and localized Refinement Plans, which are adopted amendments to the Metro Plan. The subject property is within an adopted Refinement Plan area, the Q Street Refinement Plan, but as noted in Finding #4, adoption of Springfield Ordinance #6268 included the new Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element, the policies and implementation actions of which replaced the goals, objectives and policies of the Metro Plan’s Residential Land Use and Housing Element. This relationship therefore requires the proposed amendment to be consistent with the Springfield Comprehensive Plan, the prevailing Comprehensive Plan residential and land use policies for the site. Inasmuch as Ordinance #6268 identified the results of that adoption as replacing the corresponding elements of the Metro Plan, the amendment process for adopted plans and implementation ordinances has not changed. Therefore, the process and criteria for amending refinement plans is found in SDC 5.6-115 and as preempted in SDC 5.14-120 and 5.14-135. Finding 26: In accordance with Chapter IV – Metro Plan Review, Amendments, and Refinements, the City’s Comprehensive Plan is not designed or intended to remain static and unyielding in its assignment of land use designations. To that end, provisions of Chapter IV, Policy 7.a, allow for property owners to initiate an amendment to the Metro Plan diagram to reflect a change in circumstances or need. The applicant is proposing to amend the Metro Plan designation for the subject property from LDR to a combination of MDR and HDR and to concurrently rezone 1.78 acres of the property to MDR and 1.57 acres of the property to HDR. There are no conflicts created by this proposed diagram amendment based on needed residential land inventories or needed employment land inventories. The development of this land with residential uses does not conflict Attachment 1, Page 12 of 15 with other land use elements in the Metro Plan including commercial, industrial, park and open space, or government and education. Adoption of the amendment to the Plan diagram will not result in an internal inconsistency. Therefore, Criteria B.1 will have been met. Finding 27: The Residential Land and Housing Policies and Implementation Actions of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element apply to the subject site. In accordance with Policy H.3, the City shall “support community-wide, district-wide and neighborhood-specific livability and redevelopment objectives and regional land use planning and transportation planning policies by locating higher density residential development and increasing the density of development near employment or commercial services, within transportation-efficient Mixed-Use Nodal Development centers and along corridors served by frequent transit service.” Finding 28: In accordance with Residential Land Use and Housing Element Policy H.6, the City shall “continue to seek ways to reduce development impediments to more efficient utilization of the residential land supply inside the UGB…” Finding 29: In accordance with Residential Land Use and Housing Element Policy H.7, the City shall “continue to develop and update regulatory options and incentives to encourage and facilitate development of more attached and clustered single-family housing types in the low density and medium density districts.” Finding 30: In accordance with Residential Land Use and Housing Element Policy H.10, “through the updating and development of each neighborhood refinement plan, district plan or specific area plan, amend land use plans to increase development opportunities for qualify affordable housing in locations served by existing and planned frequent transit service that provides access to employment center, shopping, health care, civic, recreational and cultural services.” Finding 31: In accordance with Residential Land Use and Housing Element Policy H.11, the City shall “continue to seek ways to update development standards to introduce a variety of housing options for all income levels in both existing neighborhoods and new residential areas that match the changing demographics and lifestyles of Springfield residents.” Finding 32: In accordance with Residential Land Use and Housing Element Policy H.12, the City shall “continue to designate land to provide a mix of choices (eg. location, accessibility, housing types, and urban and suburban neighborhood character) through the refinement plan update process and through review of developer-initiated master plans.” Finding 33: In accordance with Residential Land Use and Housing Element Policy H.13, the City shall “promote housing development and affordability in coordination with transit plans and in proximity to transit stations.” Finding 34: In accordance with Residential Land Use and Housing Element Policy H.14, the City shall “continue to update existing neighborhood refinement plan policies and to prepare new plans that emphasize the enhancement of residential neighborhood identity, improved walkability and safety, and improved convenient access to neighborhood services, parks, schools, and employment opportunities.” Finding 35: In accordance with Residential Land Use and Housing Element Policy H.15, the City shall “update residential development standards to enhance the quality and affordability of Attachment 1, Page 13 of 15 neighborhood infill development (eg. partitions, duplex developments, transitional neighborhoods, rehab housing, accessory dwelling units) and multi-family development. Finding 36: In accordance with Residential Land Use and Housing Element Policy H.16, “as directed by the City Council in 2009, [the City shall] conduct analysis to implement ‘Heritage LDR’ development standards to address Springfield’s different historical development patterns/neighborhood scale and form, rather than a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach when updating City development standards.” Finding 37: While the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element is the prevailing Comprehensive Plan for the site, the residential land use policies of the Q Street Refinement Plan also pertain to the proposed development. In accordance with Residential Criteria for Plan Designations #2, the Medium Density Residential plan designation shall be applied where the following circumstances predominate: a) areas that are primarily developed as high quality Medium Density Residential; b) areas that are designated Medium Density Residential, or adjacent to Medium Density Residential on the Metro Plan diagram; c) areas that could serve as a buffer between Low Density Residential and Community Commercial; d) areas that are within one-half mile of a transit transfer station. Finding 38: In accordance with Residential Criteria for Plan Designations #3 of the Q Street Refinement Plan, the High Density Residential plan designation shall be applied where the following circumstances predominate: a) areas that are primarily developed as high quality High Density Residential; b) areas that are designated High Density Residential, or are adjacent to High Density Residential, on the Metro Plan diagram; c) areas that are within one-half mile of a transit transfer station; d) areas that are within one-half mile of large Community Commercial centers; e) areas which can meet the solar setback requirements and other Development Code standards; f) areas that are within one quarter mile of an arterial or collector street. Finding 39: Staff observes that the subject property already meets or could meet some of the above-listed criteria for Medium and High Density Residential plan designation as follows: there is existing Medium and High Density Residential designated land on the west side of 5th Street across from the subject site; the property abuts a large Community Commercial site (Fred Meyer store) to the south; the property could serve as a buffer and transitional zone between the Fred Meyer commercial site and existing single family homes along 7th Street and T Street; the property is less than 500 feet from an existing Lane Transit District park and ride station located in the Fred Meyer parking lot and a transit stop on the east side of 5th Street; the property is sufficiently large to meet the solar setback requirements of SDC 3.2-225; and the property has frontage on 5th Street, which is classified as a major collector street. Based on the foregoing, the proposal is largely consistent with the policy direction provide by the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element and provisions of the adopted Q Street Refinement Plan for Medium and High Density Residential plan designation. Attachment 1, Page 14 of 15 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, concurrent Q Street Refinement Plan amendment, and zone change from LDR to a combination of MDR and HDR is consistent with these criteria. For these reasons, staff recommends that the Planning Commission consider supporting the proposal and forwarding a recommendation of support to the City Council. Attachment 1, Page 15 of 15 Staff Report and Findings Springfield Planning Commission Zone Change Request Hearing Date: April 4, 2017 Case Number: TYP317-00004 Applicant: Rick Satre, Schirmer Satre Group, on behalf of CMC Development LLC Property Owner: CMC Development LLC Site: East side of 5th Street between Q Street and T Street; properties addressed as 1975 – 1995 5th Street and include one vacant, non-addressed parcel (Assessor’s Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600 – 5000) Request Rezone Tax Lots 4600 and 5600 from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium Density Residential (MDR), and rezone Tax Lots 4601, 4700, 4800 and 4900 from LDR to High Density Residential (HDR). Site Information/Background The application was initiated and accepted as complete on February 3, 2017, and the Planning Commission public hearing on the matter of the Zone Change request is scheduled for April 4, 2017. The Zone Change request is being processed concurrently with a Metro Plan Diagram amendment submitted under separate cover, Case TYP417-00002. The City Council will be reviewing both applications at a public hearing meeting scheduled for May 15, 2017. The property that is subject of the Zone Change request is comprised of six contiguous parcels totaling approximately 3.35 acres and containing five existing single-family homes. The site has a rectangular configuration and is zoned and designated LDR in accordance with the Metro Plan and Q Street Refinement Plan diagrams and the Springfield Zoning Map. The site abuts 5th Street along the western boundary, the existing Fred Meyer store and parking lot along the southern boundary, and existing single family homes along the eastern and northern boundary. The applicant is proposing the zone change from LDR to a combination of MDR (1.57 acres) and HDR (1.78 acres) to facilitate future redevelopment of the property with higher-density housing forms. Notification and Written Comments Notification of the April 4, 2017 Planning Commission public hearing was sent to all property owners and residents within 300 feet of the site on March 1, 2017. Notification was also published in the March 15, 2017 edition of The Register Guard. Staff responded to several telephone and front counter inquiries about the proposal, and seven written submittals were received from adjacent residents and property owners opposing the proposal (Attachment 6). Staff Response: The written comments submitted by adjacent property owners and residents have several common elements of concern about the proposed rezoning, including: increased allowable building heights, shading of backyards, incompatibility with existing single family housing in the neighborhood, and increased traffic and noise. Staff advises that the proposed zone change could allow for a variety of larger and more intensive housing forms to be constructed on the property. However, the developer has not provided any specific type or configuration of proposed housing units yet, nor is this required at this point. Attachment 2, Page 1 of 8 Any future development would be subject to SDC 3.2-200, including building height limitations for properties to the south or west of existing single family homes, multi-unit development standards that provide for increased building setbacks from perimeter property lines, and provision of site landscaping and common outdoor amenity space for multi-family developments. The applicant has submitted a supplementary Transportation Planning Rule Analysis for the project (Attachment 5) that demonstrates the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the public street system. Criteria of Approval Section 5.22-100 of the Springfield Development Code (SDC) contains the criteria of approval for the decision maker to utilize during review of Zoning Map amendment requests. The Criteria of Zoning Map amendment approval criteria are: SDC 5.22-115 CRITERIA C. Zoning Map amendment criteria of approval: 1. Consistency with applicable Metro Plan policies and the Metro Plan diagram; 2. Consistency with applicable Refinement Plans, Plan District maps, Conceptual Development Plans and functional plans; and 3. The property is presently provided with adequate public facilities, services and transportation networks to support the use, or these facilities, services and transportation networks are planned to be provided concurrently with the development of the property. 4. Legislative Zoning Map amendments that involve a Metro Plan Diagram amendment shall: 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: “The Zoning Map amendment is consistent with the Metro Plan polfiices and diagram. It does not amend any Metro Plan policies or text. The zoning Map amendment is submitted concurrently with a Metro Plan amendment. The following Metro Plan policies support the proposed zone change: Metro Plan Policy 1 – The UGB and sequential development shall continue to be implemented as an essential means to achieve compact urban growth. The provision of all urban services shall be concentrated inside the UGB. The Metro Plan policies define compact growth as ‘the filling in of vacant and underutilized lands in the UGB’. The parcels affected by this application are currently within the [Springfield] portion of the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and are within the Attachment 2, Page 2 of 8 city limits of [Springfield]. The proposed rezoning is in compliance with the acknowledged comprehensive plan, implementing ordinances, and future development will have access to urban facilities and services. As such, the subject site provides for compact urban growth and essential services. Metro Plan Policy A.1 – Encourage the consolidation of residentially zoned parcels to facilitate more options for development and redevelopment of such parcels. The proposed rezoning will permit more options for development and ensure subsequent development is clustered together. Through rezoning the six parcels as a mixture of high and medium density residential, the subject site is able to balance the need to accommodate greater density with the need to appropriately transition from the single family neighborhoods to the north and east to high density on the subject site and more intense commercial zoning to the south. Metro Plan Policy A.3 – Provide an adequate supply of buildable residential land within the UGB for the 20-year planning period at the time of Periodic Review. As mentioned in the concurrent Metro Plan Amendment application, 824 buildable acres of land within the Springfield UGB are zoned Low Density Residential. This equates to 60% of Springfield’s residential development capacity. Yet, only 95 buildable acres are designated as Medium Density Residential, totaling a mere 30% of residential development capacity, and 16 buildable acres are designated as High Density Residential, which provides only 4% of the City’s residential development capacity. To accommodate expected population growth, Springfield will need to provide 5,980 new dwelling units. While there is a total surplus of Low Density Residential land, there is only a surplus of 18 gross acres of Medium Density Residential land and a deficit of 34 gross acres of High Density Residential land. Metro Plan Policy A.4 – Use annexation, provision of adequate public facilities and services, rezoning, redevelopment and infill to meet the 20-year projected housing demand. See response to Metro Plan Policy A.3 (above). Metro Plan Policy A.7 – Endeavor to provide key urban services and facilities required to maintain a five-year supply of serviceable, buildable residential land. The site is located inside the UGB and subsequent development will have access to urban facilities and services. Metro Plan Policy A.9 – Establish density ranges in local zoning and development regulations that are consistent with the broad categories of this plan. The proposed rezoning will result in development that meets the broad density requirements of the Metro Plan. Attachment 2, Page 3 of 8 Metro Plan Policy A.10 – Promote higher residential density inside the UGB that utilizes existing infrastructure, improves the efficiency of public services and facilities, and conserves rural resource lands outside the UGB. As previously mentioned, the rezoning will result in higher density development than what is allowed on the current low density residential zoning. In this manner, a higher number of residents will use existing infrastructure. This creates more efficient use of public services and facilities, as a greater number of people are living in proximity to existing facility. Moreover, rural resource lands are conserved, as more units are provided within the UGB. Metro Plan Policy A.11 – Generally locate higher density residential development near employment or commercial services, in proximity to major transportation systems or within transportation-efficient nodes. The proposed rezoning will locate medium and high density residential development near Q Street, 5th Street and Pioneer Parkway, all of which are key corridors in the City of Springfield. The subject site is also located near parks, schools, and services and amenities. It is also located near an EmX line (Pioneer Parkway) and both Q Street and 5th Street have transit service. It is an ideal location to provide access and opportunities to commercial services, education, employment, and major transportation systems. Metro Plan Policy A.12 – Coordinate higher density residential development with the provision of adequate infrastructure and services, open space, and other urban amenities. As mentioned in the response to Metro Plan Policy A.10 (above), the proposed rezoning will be coordinated with ensuring adequate infrastructure and services are provided to the subject site. Open space will be provided through the requirements found throughout the Springfield Development Code. Metro Plan Policy A.13 – Increase overall residential density in the metropolitan area by creating more opportunities for effectively designed in-fill, redevelopment, and mixed use while considering impacts of increased residential density on historic, existing and future neighborhoods. The proposed zoning mix provides for lots that abut single family homes to be zoned medium density residential (Tax Lots 4600 and 5000), so there is an effective and compatible transition between densities. In short, the lots proposed to be zoned medium density residential act as a ‘buffer’ between the lots proposed as high density residential and adjacent single family homes. The lots proposed to be rezoned high density residential (Tax Lots 4601, 4700, 4800, and 4900) abut Fred Meyer and 5th Street, which is an ideal location for higher density housing, as it is not adjacent to nearby single family housing. Furthermore, the proposed zoning allows for effective infill development that maximizes land utility. Metro Plan Policy A.17 – Provide opportunities for a full range of choice in housing type, density, size, cost, and location. Attachment 2, Page 4 of 8 As the proposed rezoning includes both medium and high density designations on the same subject site, there are many opportunities provided to ensure a full range of housing choices. Metro Plan Policy A.19 – Encourage residential development in or near downtown core areas in both cities. The subject site is a mile away from downtown Springfield and is located a half-mile from a key transit corridor. Metro Plan Policy A.23 – Reduce impacts of higher density residential and mixed-use development on surrounding uses by considering site, landscape, and architectural design standards or guidelines in local zoning and development regulations. The proposed rezoning is compatible with surrounding uses and therefore, shall have minimal impact on adjacent commercial and residential uses. As the proposal calls for a mix of medium and high density residential to best transition to and from adjacent uses, the suggested zoning is compatible with this policy. Therefore, the Metro Plan diagram will not be inconsistent with the zoning map amendment, should both amendments be approved.” Finding 1: Metro Plan Chapter IV, Policy 7.a states: “A property owner may initiate a [Type I Metro Plan diagram] amendment for property they own at any time. Owner initiated amendments are subject to the limitations for such amendments set out in the development code of the home city.” Finding 2: The property owner initiated a concurrent Metro Plan Diagram amendment in accordance with provisions of SDC 5.14-100 (Case TYP417-00002). Upon adoption of the amending Ordinance, the Metro Plan Diagram would be amended and the requested zone change from LDR to a combination of MDR and HDR would be consistent with the provisions of the adopted Comprehensive Plan. Prior or concurrent amendment of the Metro Plan Diagram will be required for the subject zone change request to be approved. Finding 3: The proposed zone change is consistent with provisions of the Metro Plan whereby zoning can be monitored and adjusted as necessary to meet current urban land use demands. The requested change from LDR to MDR and HDR would facilitate the future review and approval of multi-family housing on the site. Finding 4: The subject site abuts properties that are zoned and designated LDR along the northern and eastern boundaries. The site is proximate to properties that are zoned and designated for medium and high density residential development on the opposite side of 5th Street to the west and southwest of the subject property. The site also abuts Community Commercial zoning along the southern boundary. As such, the proposed Zone Change is consistent with nearby zoning and the zone change is compatible with existing uses in the vicinity. The proposed zoning would create a transitional, higher-density residential area between the Fred Meyer site and existing single-family homes along T Street and 7th Street. Attachment 2, Page 5 of 8 Recommended Condition of Approval: Prior to or concurrent with approval of the Zone Change request, the Metro Plan Diagram shall be amended as initiated by Planning Action TYP417-00002. 2. Consistency with applicable Refinement Plans, Plan District maps, Conceptual Development Plans and functional plans; Applicant’s Narrative: “As an amendment to the Metro Plan automatically amends the applicable refinement plan, in this case, the Q Street Refinement Plan, the proposed Zoning Map amendment is consistent with the applicable refinement plan. The City of Springfield also previously adopted the Residential Land Use and Housing Element of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan. As specified in the written statement submitted along with the concurrent Metro Plan Amendment application, 824 buildable acres of land are zoned Low Density Residential. This equates to 60% of Springfield’s residential development capacity. Yet, only 95 buildable acres are designated as Medium Density Residential, totaling a mere 30% of residential development capacity, and 16 buildable acres are designated as High Density Residential, which provides only 4% of the City’s residential development capacity. To accommodate expected population growth, Springfield will need to provide 5,980 new dwelling units. While there is a total surplus of Low Density Residential land, which includes a 72 gross acre surplus of Low Density Residential land, there is only a surplus of 18 gross acres of Medium Density Residential land and a deficit of 34 gross acres of High Density Residential land. Therefore, the proposed rezoning will not have an adverse impact on available Low Density Residential land within the urban growth boundary.” Finding 5: The property lies within the adopted Q Street Refinement Plan area of Springfield. Therefore, the Residential land use policies of the Q Street Refinement Plan apply to the subject site. In accordance with Residential Policy #1, “the City shall actively participate in efforts to maintain and enhance existing residential neighborhoods and attract compatible medium and high density residential developments that would enhance and benefit the Q Street area. This shall include requiring development to be large enough in size to insure efficient land use.” In accordance with Residential Policy #5, “provide for buffering of multiple family development from single family development through the Site Plan Review process.” Residential Policy #6 states: “minimize conflicts between residentially-designated land and commercial uses through the Site Plan Review process.” Finding 6: Staff observes that, in aggregate, the subject property is sufficiently large to represent a viable multi-family development area. Upon rezoning of the subject property, should this occur, the developer would be required to undertake a Site Plan Review for any type of development on the property. Under the current zoning and property configuration, the developer would only require a Building Permit for constructing, reconstructing or remodeling a single-family home. Finding 7: The City previously adopted the Residential Land Use and Housing Element of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan. The subject property was identified as low density residential inventory in the 2030 Plan because of its LDR zoning. A portion of the property (Tax Lot 4600) is identified as vacant and potentially developable or redevelopable on the inventory map. Finding 8: The Residential Land Use and Housing Element (Table 6-7) identifies approximately 378 acres of surplus LDR designated land within the City’s buildable land inventory. A recent Metro Plan diagram amendment and Zone Change for property on Highbanks Road (Cases TYP416-00003 and TYP316-00005) reduced this amount by approximately 8 acres. Upon redesignation and rezoning of the subject site, should this occur, a surplus of about 366.6 acres of Attachment 2, Page 6 of 8 LDR designated land would remain. The proposed rezoning would slightly increase the amount of surplus MDR zoned land and slightly reduce the deficit of HDR zoned land as identified in the City’s inventory. Therefore, the proposed rezoning will not have a significant adverse impact on available LDR, MDR, or HDR designated land within the City’s inventory. 3. The property is presently provided with adequate public facilities, services and transportation networks to support the use, or these facilities, services and transportation networks are planned to be provided concurrently with the development of the property. Applicant’s Narrative: “Finally, the subject site has adequate public facilities, services, and transportation network to support the proposed use. Stormwater and wastewater service are both available to the site through the system in 5th Street. There is also sufficient water and electric system capacity to serve the site. Moreover, the subject site fronts onto 5th Street, which is a minor arterial with bike lanes, sidewalks, and a center turn lane. There is also a LTD Park and Ride location in 5th Street in the Fred Meyer parking lot, immediately south of the subject property. Transit service is also provided by LTD via Route 17, which provides service to and from Springfield station.” Finding 9: The property requested for Zone Change has frontage on 5th Street along the western boundary, which is classified as a major collector street. Along the property frontage, 5th Street is a fully developed urban collector street with one vehicle travel lane and bicycle lane in each direction and a bi-directional center turn lane. The paved street has lane striping, street lighting, street trees, sidewalks and piped stormwater management facilities. A full suite of public utilities and services are available on the perimeter of the subject property. Future development of the site with Medium and High Density Residential uses will be subject to the land use approval process outlined in Section 5.17-100 of the City’s Development Code. In addition, the applicant’s submittal for Metro Plan diagram amendment is supplemented with findings addressing the requirements of the Transportation Planning Rule and is included as Attachment 5 to the packet. 4. Legislative Zoning Map amendments that involve a Metro Plan Diagram amendment shall: a. Meet the approval criteria specified in Section 5.14-100; and b. Comply with Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-012-0060, where applicable. Applicant’s Narrative: “Regarding the criteria contained in SDC 5.22-115.C.4.a and SDC 5.22-115.C.4.b, compliance with the approval criteria specified in Section 5.14-100 is established in the concurrent Metro Plan Amendment. Compliance with OAR 660-012-0060 is also established in the written statement for the concurrent Metro Plan amendment. The change from Low Density Residential to Medium and High Density Residential…would increase the trip generation potential of the subject parcels, so the applicant will address the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) to determine if there’s a significant effect. The TPR looks [at] capacity and performance to be consistent with the adopted Transportation System Plan. A trip generation comparison and capacity/LOS [Level of Service] analysis is being performed at the nearby intersections at 5th Street at Q Street and 5th Street at Hayden Bridge Road. The analysis will compare the trip generation under the proposed designation with the potential trip generation under the existing designation to determine if there is an impact as defined in OAR 660-012-0060 under the planning horizon analysis year of the current TSP. A TPR Analysis will be included in the application package. Therefore, SDC 5.22-115 is met.” Attachment 2, Page 7 of 8 Finding 10: The applicant has submitted a concurrent Metro Plan Diagram amendment application (Case TYP417-00002) under separate cover. The applicant’s submittal materials, narrative, and staff findings and recommendations demonstrate compliance with the Metro Plan amendment provisions of Chapter IV of the Metro Plan and SDC 5.14-135. Finding 11: The requested Zone Change is being undertaken as a site-specific change in compliance with provisions of the adopted Metro Plan and the City’s Development Code. The applicant has initiated an amendment to the Metro Plan Diagram to change the designation from LDR to MDR and HDR under separate cover (Case TYP417-00002). Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) 660-012-0060 requires that, “if an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land use regulation (including a zoning map), would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, then the local government must put in place measures” to mitigate the impact, as defined in OAR 660-012-0060(2). Staff has reviewed the applicant’s TPR Analysis (Attachment 5) and concurs with the summary and conclusion, which concluded that the proposed plan amendment and zone change from LDR to MDR and HDR will not significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility. Conclusion: Based on the above-listed criteria, staff has determined that the criteria have been met and recommends support for the request. Conditions of Approval SDC Section 5.22-120 allows for the Approval Authority to attach conditions of approval to a Zone Change request to ensure the application fully meets the criteria of approval. The specific language from the code section is cited below: 5.22-120 CONDITIONS The Approval Authority may attach conditions as may be reasonably necessary in order to allow the Zoning Map amendment to be granted. Staff advises that the Zone Change request was initiated in accordance with provisions of the City’s Development Code. The proposal was found to be consistent with the criteria of approval; however, because the applicant has initiated a concurrent Metro Plan Diagram amendment (Case TYP417-00002), 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 May 15, 2017. Staff recommends the following condition of approval: Recommended Condition of Approval: Prior to or concurrent with approval of the Zone Change request, the Metro Plan Diagram shall be amended as initiated by Planning Action TYP417-00002. The 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 property. Any future site development, including but not limited to grading, paving, or new construction on the property, will be subject to the provisions of the SDC for the applicable zoning district. Attachment 2, Page 8 of 8 Attachment 3, Page 1 of 32 THE APPLICATION PACKET A COMPLETE APPLICATION CONSISTS OF: 1.A complete application page (all of the sections on the opposite side of this page must be filled out). 2.A statement containing Findings of Fact addressing the Criteria of Approval found in Springfield Development Code (SDC) 7.070(3). In order for the Planning Commission and the City Council to consider an amendment of a plan text and/or diagram, there must be Findings of Fact submitted by the applicant. The Findings of Fact must show reason for the request consistent with the Criteria of Approval (shown below). If insufficient or unclear information is submitted by the applicant, the request may be denied or delayed. The application must include requirements for addressing specific statewide goals that the Oregon legislature has said must be part of the amendment analysis. In particular, Statewide Planning Goal 9 Economy and Goal 10 Housing must be addressed for impact on buildable lands inventories, and a Goal 12 Transportation analysis must address criteria contained in OAR 660-012-060(1) and (2) of the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) . Goals 9, 10 and 12 are three of several "Applicable State-Wide Planning Goals" that must be specifically addressed in criteria (a) of the Springfield Development Code (SDC) 7.070(3). These specific items must be included in the application submittal to be considered a complete application. In reaching a decision on these actions, the Planning Commission and the City Council shall adopt findings which demonstrate conformance to the following Criteria of Approval (SDC 7.070(3)): a) The amendment must be consistent with the relevant statewide planning goals adopted by the Land Conservation and Development Commission; and b) Adoption of the amendment must not make the Metro Plan internally inconsistent. 3. A map to scale depicting the existing and proposed diagram change. (If applicable) 4.The application fee.Refer to the Development Code Fee Schedule for the appropriate fee. A copy of the Fee Schedule is available at the Development Services Department. Revised 1/03 Attachment 3, Page 2 of 32 January 31, 2017 CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC – 5TH STREET PROPERTY Metro Plan Amendment Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lot 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 WRITTEN STATEMENT In accordance with SDC 5.14-100 through SDC 5.14-145, Metro Plan Amendments, the applicant, CMC Development LLC, is requesting that the City of Springfield review this Metro Plan Amendment request for Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 of Assessor’s Map 17-03-26-24. The applicant requests the City determine that the proposal complies with the approval criteria and approve this application. To aid Springfield staff in their review, the following information is provided. Background Local long-range land use is governed by the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan). Often supplemented with more specific refinement plans and/or neighborhood plans, the Metro Plan is then followed by site-specific zoning. Sometimes, zoning is comprised of base zoning and overlay zones. In this instance, the Q Street Refinement Plan is the applicable refinement plan and the Drinking Water Protection Overlay Zone is the applicable overlay zone for the subject property. Further information regarding individual tax lots is available in the table below. Physical Setting The site is located north of Q Street in north-central Springfield. It is comprised of six tax lots (Map 17-03- 26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000) and is approximately 3.35 acres in size. The site abuts 5th Street to the west, with single family housing to the north and east and a commercial shopping center to the south. Development Objective The development objective is to change the Metro Plan designation and base zoning of the six tax lots from Low Density Residential (LDR) to a mix of Medium Density Residential (MDR) and High Density Residential (HDR). See the table above for further detail. Therefore, the applicant is submitting concurrent Metro Plan Amendment and Zone Change applications for the subject property. Map and Tax Lot Metro Plan Designation Q Street Refinement Plan Zoning (Existing) Zoning (Proposed) 17-03-26-24 / 4600 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Base: Low Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Base: Medium Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24 / 4601 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Base: Low Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Base: High Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24 / 4700 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Base: Low Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Base: High Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24 / 4800 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Base: Low Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Base: High Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24 / 4900 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Base: Low Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Base: High Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24 / 5000 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Base: Low Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Base: Medium Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Attachment 3, Page 3 of 32 CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC – 5TH STREET PROPERTY Page 2 of 8 Metro Plan Amendment Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lot 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 January 31, 2017 Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 • Fax (541) 686-4577 COMPLIANCE WITH METRO PLAN AMENDMENT REQUIREMENTS Applicable sections of the code are in bold italics, followed by proposed findings of fact in normal text. SDC 5.14-105 Purpose. The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) is a long-range public policy document that establishes the broad framework upon which Springfield, Eugene and Lane County make coordinated land use decisions. While the Metro Plan is Springfield’s acknowledged land use policy document, it may require update or amendment in response to changes in the law or circumstances of importance to the community. Additionally, the Metro Plan may be augmented and implemented by more detailed plans and regulatory measures. Response: There is a change in circumstances that makes this requested change to the Metro Plan diagram necessary. Between 2010 and 2030, Springfield can expect to see a 27% increase of residents living within its city limits (RLS, ECONorthwest, pg. ii). Currently, 824 buildable acres of land are zoned Low Density Residential, which equates to 60% of Springfield’s residential development capacity. Yet, only 95 buildable acres are designated as Medium Density Residential, totaling a mere 30% of residential development capacity, and 16 buildable acres are designated as High Density Residential, providing 4% of the City’s residential development capacity. To accommodate growth, Springfield will need to provide 5,980 new dwelling units to accommodate population growth. While there is a total surplus of residential land, there is a 72 gross acre surplus of Low Density Residential land. But there is only a surplus of 18 gross acres of Medium Density Residential land and a deficit of 34 gross acres of High Density Residential land. Therefore, circumstances have indeed changed greatly since the subject site was designated at Low Density Residential in the Metro Plan. SDC 5.14-110 Review. A. A Development Issues Meeting is encouraged for citizen initiated amendment applications. B. Metro Plan amendments are reviewed under Type IV procedures as specified in Section 5.1-140. C. A special review, and if appropriate, Metro Plan amendment, shall be initiated if changes in the Metro Plan basic assumptions occur. An example would be a change in public demand for certain housing types that in turn may affect the overall inventory of residential land. Response: A Development Issues Meeting was held December 15, 2016 to discuss potential ideas and issues related to the subject site. As referenced in the applicant’s response in SDC 5.14-105, the applicant is requesting to amend the Metro Plan based on a change in circumstances related to residential land supply that influences the basic assumptions that inform the Metro Plan diagram. SDC 5.14-115 Metro Plan Amendment Classifications. A proposed amendment to the metro Plan shall be classified as Type I, Type II or Type III depending on the number of governing bodies required to approve the decision. A. A Type I amendment requires approval by Springfield only: 1. Type 1 Diagram amendments include amendments to the Metro Plan Diagram for land inside Springfield’s city limits. Response: The proposed amendment will be processed as a Type I decision, as it only requests an amendment to the Metro Plan Diagram for land inside Springfield’s city limits. Attachment 3, Page 4 of 32 CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC – 5TH STREET PROPERTY Page 3 of 8 Metro Plan Amendment Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lot 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 January 31, 2017 Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 • Fax (541) 686-4577 SDC 5.14-120 Relationship to Refinement Plans, Special Area Studies or Functional Plan Amendments. A. In addition to a Metro Plan update, refinement studies may be undertaken for individual geographical areas and special purpose or functional elements, as determined appropriate by Springfield, Eugene or Lane County. B. All refinement and functional plans shall be consistent with the Metro Plan. Should inconsistencies occur, the Metro Plan is the prevailing policy document. C. When a Metro Plan amendment is enacted that requires an amendment to a refinement plan or functional plan map or diagram for consistency, the Metro Plan Diagram amendment automatically amends the diagram or map if no amendment to refinement plan or functional plan text is involved. Response: The development site is also subject to the Q Street Refinement Plan, which designates the property as Low Density Residential. Therefore, in accordance with SDC 5.14-120.C, the Q Street Refinement Plan diagram will be automatically amended in conjunction with the Metro Plan diagram. SDC 5.14-125 Initiation. Metro Plan amendments shall be initiated as follows: A. A Type I amendment may be initiated by Springfield at any time. A property owner may initiate an amendment for property they own at any time. Owner initiated amendments are subject to the limitations for such amendments set out in this Code (also see Subsection E)… E. Metro Plan updates shall be initiated no less frequently than during the state required Periodic Review of the Metro Plan, although Springfield, Eugene and Lane County may initiate an update of the Metro Plan at any time. Response: In accordance with SDC 5.14-125.A. this Type I Amendment to the Metro Plan diagram is being initiated by a property owner for a property they currently own. SDC 5.14-130 Approval Process. A. The initiating government body of any Type I, Type II or Type III amendment shall notify all governing bodies of the intended amendment and the Type of amendment proposed within 20 days. If any governing body disagrees with the Type of proposed amendment, that governing body may refer the matter to the process specified in Subsections E. or F. as appropriate. B. For any Type I, Type II or Type III amendment, a public hearing shall be set for the Springfield Planning Commission, and the Planning Commissions of Eugene and Lane County, as applicable, within 90 days. C. For Type I, Type II and Type III amendments, the Springfield Planning Commission and the Planning Commissions of Eugene and Lane County, shall conduct a single or joint public hearing, as appropriate, and forward that record and their recommendations to the Springfield City Council and to their respective elected officials. The Springfield City Council and the participating elected officials shall also conduct a public hearing, as appropriate, prior to making a final decision… Response: The proposed Type I Amendment to the Metro Plan diagram complies with this standard and will be subject to public hearings and subsequent decisions conducted by the Springfield Planning Commission and the Springfield City Council. Attachment 3, Page 5 of 32 CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC – 5TH STREET PROPERTY Page 4 of 8 Metro Plan Amendment Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lot 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 January 31, 2017 Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 • Fax (541) 686-4577 SDC 5.14-135 Criteria. A Metro Plan amendment may be approved only if the Springfield City Council and other applicable governing body or bodies find that the proposal conforms to the following criteria: A. The amendment shall be consistent with applicable Statewide Planning Goals; B. Plan inconsistency: 1. In those cases where the Metro Plan applies, adoption of the amendment shall not make the Metro Plan internally consistent. 2. In cases where Springfield Comprehensive Plan applies, the amendment shall be consistent with the Springfield Comprehensive Plan. Response to SDC 5.14-135.A. The amendment is consistent with the following Statewide Planning Goals: Goal 1 Citizen Involvement: To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. The City has acknowledged provisions for citizen involvement that ensure the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. Specifically, the Springfield Development Code includes a requirement that adequate notice of the proposed amendment and public hearings is provided prior to a decision being made. The process for adopting amendments is in accordance with Statewide Planning Goal 1, as it complies with the requirements of the State’s citizen involvement provisions. This proposed Metro Plan amendment does not amend the citizen involvement program. Goal 2 – Land Use Planning: To establish a land use process and policy framework as a basis for all decisions and actions related to use of land and assure an adequate factual base for such decisions and actions. The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) is the policy tool that provides a basis for decision-making in the Eugene-Springfield area. The Metro Plan was acknowledged by the State in 1982 to be in compliance with statewide planning goals. These findings and record show that there is an adequate factual base for decisions to be made concerning the proposed amendment. Goal 2 requires plans be coordinated with the plans of affected governmental units and that opportunities be provided for review and comment by those units. To comply with the Goal 2 coordination requirement, the City will coordinate the review of the amendment with affected governmental units. Therefore, the amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 2. Goal 3 – Agricultural Land: To preserve and maintain agricultural lands. Goal 3 is not applicable to this amendment, as the subject property and proposed action is located within an acknowledged urban growth boundary and does not affect any agricultural plan designation or use. Goal 3 excludes lands inside an acknowledged urban growth boundary, Goal 3 is not relevant and the amendment does not affect the subject site’s compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 3. Goal 4 – Forest Land: To conserve forest lands. Goal 4 is not applicable as the subject property and proposed action does not affect any forest plan designation or use. Goal 4 does not apply within urban growth boundaries and, therefore, does not apply to the subject property nor affect the area’s compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 4. Goal 5 – Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources: To conserve open space and protect natural and scenic resources. Attachment 3, Page 6 of 32 CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC – 5TH STREET PROPERTY Page 5 of 8 Metro Plan Amendment Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lot 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 January 31, 2017 Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 • Fax (541) 686-4577 The subject property does not include a Goal 5 resource site. The proposed amendment does not create or amend a list of Goal 5 resources, does not amend a plan or code provision adopted to protect a significant Goal 5 resource or to address specific requirements of Goal 5, does not allow new uses that could be conflicting uses with Goal 5 resource sites, and does not amend the acknowledged Urban Growth Boundary. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 5 does not apply to this amendment. Goal 6 – Air, Water and Land Resources Quality: To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water, and land resources of the state. Goal 6 addresses waste and process discharges from development and is aimed at protecting air, water, and land from impacts from those discharges. Nothing in the proposal, character of the site, or potential uses indicates a future development that would compromise air, water, and land resources. The proposal does not amend the metropolitan area’s air, water quality, or land resource policies. The City can reasonably expect that future development of the site complies with applicable environmental laws. Therefore, the amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 6. Goal 7 – Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards: To protect life and property from natural disasters and hazards. Goal 7 requires that local government planning programs include provisions to protect people and property from natural hazards such as floods, landslides, earthquakes and related hazards, tsunamis, and wildfires. The subject property is not located within known areas of natural disasters or hazards. The subject property is outside the flood zone and is not subject to hazards normally associated with steep slopes, wildfires, or tsunamis. Other hazards, such as earthquakes and severe winter storms can be mitigated at the time of development based on accepted building codes and building techniques. Therefore, this amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 7. Goal 8 – Recreational Needs: To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors and, where appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary recreational facilities including destination resorts. Statewide Planning Goal 8 ensures the provision of recreational facilities to Oregon citizens and is primarily concerned with the provision of those facilities in non-urban areas of the state. There are no public or private recreational facilities on or adjacent to the subject property. Therefore, the proposed amendment will not impact the provision of public recreational facilities nor will they affect access to existing or future public recreational facilities. As such, the amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 8. Goal 9 – Economic Development: To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon’s citizens. The proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment does not affect economic development, as it is not requesting to change the designation of the subject site to or from commercial. The amendment seeks to designate land currently identified as Low Density Residential to a mixture of Medium and High Density Residential (see table on pg. 1). Therefore, the proposed amendment will not impact economic development or commercial land supply in any way. The amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 9. Goal 10 – Housing: To provide for the housing needs of the citizens of the state. Goal 10 requires that communities plan for and maintain an inventory of buildable residential land for needed housing units. The Administrative Rule for Statewide Planning Goal 10 (OAR 660 Division 8) states: Attachment 3, Page 7 of 32 CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC – 5TH STREET PROPERTY Page 6 of 8 Metro Plan Amendment Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lot 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 January 31, 2017 Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 • Fax (541) 686-4577 “The mix and density of needed housing is determined in the housing needs projection. Sufficient buildable land shall be designated on the comprehensive plan map to satisfy housing needs by type and density range as determined in the housing needs projection. The local buildable lands inventory must document the amount of buildable land in each residential plan designation”. The subject property is currently designated for Low Density Residential and the applicant wishes to redesignate the property as a mixture of Medium and High Density Residential (see table on pg.1). As mentioned in the applicant’s response to SDC 5.14-105, there is a 72 acre surplus of Low Density Residential land. Yet, there is only a minor 18 acre surplus of Medium Density Residential and a 34 acre deficit of High Density Residential land. Goal 11 – Public Facilities and Services: To plan and develop a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a framework for urban and rural development. The subject site affected by the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment is located inside the City limits. The existing level of public facilities and services is adequate to serve the needs of existing and future development. The amendment to the Metro Plan diagram does not significantly affect the planning or development of future public facilities or services. Therefore, the amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 11. Goal 12 – Transportation: To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system. Goal 12 is implemented through the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR), as defined in Oregon Administrative Rule OAR 660-012-0000, et seq. The Eugene – Springfield Metropolitan Area Transportation Plan (TransPlan) provides the regional policy framework through which the TPR is implemented at the local level. The TPR (OAR 660-012-0060) states that when land use changes, including amendments to acknowledged comprehensive plans, significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, the local government shall put in place measures to assure that the allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and performance standards of the facility. The result of this plan amendment and zone change application would increase the trip generation potential of the subject parcels, so the applicant will address the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) to determine if there’s a significant effect. The TPR looks capacity and performance to be consistent with the adopted Transportation System Plan. A trip generation comparison and capacity/LOS analysis is being performed at the nearby intersections at 5th Street at Q Street and 5th Street at Hayden Bridge Road. The analysis will compare the trip generation under the proposed designation with the potential trip generation under the existing designation to determine if there is an impact as defined in OAR 660-012-0060 under the planning horizon analysis year of the current TSP. A TPR Analysis will be included in the application package. Goal 13 – Energy Conversation: To conserve energy. Statewide Planning Goal 13 calls for land uses to be managed and controlled “so as to maximize the conservation of all forms of energy, based upon sound economic principles.” Goal 13 is directed at the development of local energy policies and provisions. It does not state requirements with respect to other types of land use decisions. To the extent that Goal 13 could be applied to the proposed amendment, the amendment is consistent with Goal 13. The property and proposed amendment are intended to support higher-density, clustered development so future residential housing can make efficient use of energy with direct and efficient access. Therefore, this proposal is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 13. Attachment 3, Page 8 of 32 CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC – 5TH STREET PROPERTY Page 7 of 8 Metro Plan Amendment Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lot 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 January 31, 2017 Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 • Fax (541) 686-4577 Goal 14 – Urbanization: To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use. The amendment does not affect the transition from rural to urban land use, as the subject property is within the City limits. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 14 does not apply. Goal 15 – Willamette River Greenway: To protect, conserve, enhance and maintain the natural, scenic, historical, agricultural, economic and recreational qualities of lands along the Willamette River as the Willamette River Greenway. The subject property is not within the boundaries of the Willamette River Greenway. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 15 does not apply. Goal 16 through 19 – Estuarine Resources, Coastal Shorelands, Beaches and Dunes, and Ocean Resources: There are no coastal, ocean, estuarine, or beach and dune resources on or adjacent to the subject property. Therefore, these goals are not relevant and the proposed amendment will not affect compliance with statewide planning Goals 16 through 19. This proposed Metro Plan Amendment meets the applicable Statewide Planning Goals. Response to SDC 5.14-135.B. The adopted Metro Plan is the principal document that creates a framework for land use policy within the City of Springfield. The adopted Zoning Map implements the Metro Plan diagram and applicable refinement plans, which are amendments to the Metro Plan. Since the subject property is within an adopted Refinement Plan area, the Q Street Refinement Plan is the prevailing refinement plan for the subject property. When Metro Plan diagram amendments are approved, the applicable refinement plan diagram is also automatically amended. The proposed Metro Plan amendment does not make the Metro Plan internally consistent. It does not affect any Metro Plan policies or text. The proposed amendment to the Metro Plan diagram also reduces the oversupply of Low Density Residential land and while slightly increasing the existing surplus of Medium Density Residential land, will decrease the deficit of High Density Residential land. Moreover, the Q Street Refinement Plan will not be made inconsistent through this amendment. The Q Street Refinement Plan will be amended automatically in conjunction with the Metro Plan amendment. There are no conflicts created by either of the proposed amendments to the residential land inventory, needed employment land inventory, nor any other land use elements of the Metro Plan or Q Street Refinement Plan. The City of Springfield also previously adopted the Residential Land Use and Housing Element of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan. As previously mentioned in this written statement, 824 buildable acres of land are zoned Low Density Residential. This equates to 60% of Springfield’s residential development capacity. Yet, only 95 buildable acres are designated as Medium Density Residential, totaling a mere 30% of residential development capacity, and 16 buildable acres are designated as High Density Residential, which provides only 4% of the City’s residential development capacity. To accommodate expected population growth, Springfield will need to provide 5,980 new dwelling units. While there is a total surplus of residential land, which includes a 72 gross acre surplus of Low Density Residential land, there is only a surplus of 18 gross acres of Medium Density Residential land and a deficit of 34 gross acres of High Density Residential land. Therefore, the proposed rezoning will not have an adverse impact on available Low Density Residential land within the urban growth boundary. The criteria in SDC 5.14-135.B. is met. Attachment 3, Page 9 of 32 CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC – 5TH STREET PROPERTY Page 8 of 8 Metro Plan Amendment Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lot 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 January 31, 2017 Schirmer Satre Group • 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 • (541) 686-4540 • Fax (541) 686-4577 IN CONCLUSION Based on the information contained in this written statement, the applicant believes that the requested Metro Plan amendment can be approved. If there are any questions regarding the above information, or other application materials, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (541) 686-4540 or rick@schirmersatre.com. Sincerely, Richard M. Satre Richard M. Satre, AICP, ASLA, CSI, Principal Schirmer Satre Group Attachment 3, Page 10 of 32 November 28, 2016 CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC 5TH STREET PROPERTY Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 Land Use Analysis The key to successful property development in Oregon is thorough research and analysis of prospective regulations and requirements. This is followed by the planning, design, and regulatory approval processes. Success comes by taking things one step at a time; each step providing clarity and focus for the next round of activity. The first step is research and analysis, where we identify land use, physical, and environmental requirements, as well as lay the groundwork for next steps. The results of our initial land use analysis is presented below. This analysis is based on public data and documents existing conditions and potentially applicable land use regulations. I. BACKGROUND A. Planning Context Local long-range land use is governed by the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) and is often supplemented with a more specific refinement plan and/or neighborhood plan. The Metro Plan and if applicable, refinement plan, is then followed by site- specific zoning. Sometimes, zoning is comprised of base zoning and additional overlay zones. The Q Street Refinement Plan and the Drinking Water Protection Overlay Zone are applicable to the subject property. Excerpt Springfield Zoning Map 2016 Map and Tax Lot Metro Plan Designation Q Street Refinement Plan Zoning 17-03-26-24 / 4600 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Base: Low Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24 / 4601 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Base: Low Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24 / 4700 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Base: Low Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24 / 4800 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Base: Low Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24 / 4900 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Base: Low Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24 / 5000 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Base: Low Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Attachment 3, Page 11 of 32 CMC Development LLC – 5th Street Property Page 2 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 Schirmer Satre Group 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 (541) 686-4540 B. Physical Setting The site is located north of Q Street, in north-central Springfield. It is comprised of six tax lots (Map 17-03-26-24, tax lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000) and is approximately 3.35 acres in size. The site abuts 5th Street to the west, with single family housing to the north and east and a commercial shopping center to the south. Subject Property Google Earth May 29, 2016 C. Development Objective The development objective is to change the designation and zoning of the six tax lots from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium Density Residential (MDR) and/or High Density Residential (HDR). The potential zoning will be discussed more in-depth at a Development Issues Meeting (DIM). II. LAND USE ANALYSIS A. Regulatory Review The following plans, documents and database sources were included in this review: 1. Planning and Zoning. a. Aerial Photographs (Google Earth and Bing Maps). b. Regional Land Information Database (RLID). c. Eugene – Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan). d. Springfield 2030 Plan. e. Q Street Refinement Plan. f. Springfield Zoning Map. 2. Transportation. a. Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area Transportation Plan (TransPlan). b. City of Springfield Street Classification Map and Conceptual Local Street Plan. c. Lane Transit District (LTD) System Map. 3. Utilities. a. Springfield Stormwater Facilities Master Plan. b. Springfield Wastewater Master Plan. c. Springfield Storm and Sanitary Infrastructure. d. Springfield Wellhead Protection Areas Map. e. Springfield Utility Board (SUB) – Water and Electric Infrastructure. 4. Natural Resources. a. Springfield Natural Resources Study Report b. Springfield Wetlands Map – National and Local Wetland Inventories c. Springfield Water Quality Limited Watercourses Map 5. Parks and Open Space. a. Willamalane Park and Recreation District Comprehensive Plan – Project Maps. Attachment 3, Page 12 of 32 CMC Development LLC – 5th Street Property Page 3 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 Schirmer Satre Group 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 (541) 686-4540 6. Development Standards. a. Springfield Development Code – Land Use Districts (Chapter 3), Development Standards (Chapter 4), and Land Use Process and Applications (Chapter 5) B. Findings. 1. Planning and Zoning. a. Jurisdiction: City of Springfield b. Metro Plan: Low Density Residential c. Base Zoning: Low Density Residential d. Refinement Plan: Q Street Refinement Plan e. Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Overlay Zone f. Map: 17-03-26-24 g. Tax Lots: 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 h. Acreage: Lot 4600: 1.32 acres Lot 4601: 0.18 acres Lot 4700: 0.53 acres Lot 4800: 0.40 acres Lot 4900: 0.46 acres Lot 5000: 0.46 acres 3.35 acres Attachment 3, Page 13 of 32 CMC Development LLC – 5th Street Property Page 4 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 Schirmer Satre Group 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 (541) 686-4540 2. Transportation. a. Metro Area TransPlan. The metro area’s adopted transportation plan¸ The Eugene – Springfield Transportation System Plan (TransPlan), adopted in 2001 and amended in 2002, does not include any projects within the vicinity of the subject property. b. City of Springfield Transportation System Plan. The City of Springfield’s transportation plan, adopted in 2014, does not include any projects within the vicinity of the subject’s property. c. Conceptual Local Street Plan. The City of Springfield Conceptual Local Street Plan depicts where future streets and street connections may be required. The current map, dated August 2012, does not show any new streets on or adjacent to the subject property. Excerpt Conceptual Local Street Plan City of Springfield d. Street Classification. Springfield’s Street Classification Map identifies 5th Street as a minor arterial. Each street classification carries with it a standard right-of-way (ROW). The standards for 5th Street is as follows: Street Classification Existing ROW Minimum ROW Min. Curb-to-Curb 5th Street Minor Arterial 60 feet 70 feet 48 feet e. Public Transit. The metro area’s public transit system, Lane Transit District (LTD), provides service to Springfield Station via Route 17 on 5th Street. There is a Park and Ride location on 5th Street in the Fred Meyer parking lot immediately south of the subject property. f. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities. There are bikes lanes, sidewalks, and a center turn lane on 5th Street. 3. Utilities. a. Stormwater and Wastewater. The subject site is located in the West Springfield/Q Street Basin. The Springfield Stormwater Facilities Master Plan identifies one capital improvement project, “Higher Priority CIP 4,” to address current issues around flooding of draining facilities during certain storm event conditions. Attachment 3, Page 14 of 32 CMC Development LLC – 5th Street Property Page 5 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 Schirmer Satre Group 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 (541) 686-4540 Capital Improvement Map Excerpt (Fig. 5-1) Stormwater Facilities Master Plan City of Springfield System Improvements Map Excerpt (Fig. 5-3) Sanitary Facilities Master Plan City of Springfield Stormwater service is available to the subject site through a 27 inch concrete pipe in 5th Street that runs along the same side of the street as the subject site. Wastewater service is also available to the site and there is a 10 inch concrete pipe that runs along 5th Street. There is also an 8 inch concrete pipe in a 20 foot right of way access strip that runs along the southern boundary line of tax lots 4601 and 4600. It also runs along the northern boundary of tax lots 4700 and 4800. Existing Sanitary and Storm Facilities City of Springfield Map 2009 b. Water and Electric Service. Lots 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 are served with a single ¾” water meter on 5th Street. There is sufficient capacity within the electric system to support the proposal. Existing Water Infrastructure Springfield Utility Board September 2016 Existing Electric Infrastructure Springfield Utility Board September 2016 Attachment 3, Page 15 of 32 CMC Development LLC – 5th Street Property Page 6 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 Schirmer Satre Group 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 (541) 686-4540 c. Wellhead Protection. The Springfield Wellhead Protection Areas Map lists the subject site as within the 20 year Time of Travel Zone and is therefore subject to the Drinking Water Protection Overlay District. Certain land use criteria may apply. Wellhead Protection Areas Map Excerpt City of Springfield January 2013 4. Natural Resources. a. Natural Resources Study. The Springfield Natural Resources Study does not identify any resources on or near the site. There are no wetland resources on or near the subject property, as well as no Water Quality Limited Watercourses on or near the property. 5. Parks and Open Space. a. Willamalane Park and Recreation District. There are no proposed park and recreation projects nearby the subject site. 6. Development Standards. The Springfield Development Code (SDC) is a comprehensive land use document that governs all lands within Springfield’s city limits and its urban services area. All six of the SDC chapters apply to the subject site, but three in particular are cited here. These include Chapter 3-Land Use Districts, Chapter 4-Development Standards, and Chapter 5-The Development Review Process and Applications. a. Within Chapter 3, the project will need to comply with SDC 3.2-210 Schedule of Use Categories, SDC 3.2-215 Base Zone Development Standards, and SDC 3.2-240 Multi-Unit Design Standards. b. Within Chapter 4, some of the applicable standards include requirements related to setbacks, height, building frontage, landscaping, and minimal parcel size. c. Within Chapter 5, the project will need to address Site Plan Review requirements. III. LAND USE APPLICATIONS Land use approval is required prior to the issuance of any building permits. Required land use applications for the subject property, in sequential order, are as follows. A. Development Issues Meetings (SDC 5.1-120A) 1. A Development Issues Meeting (DIM) is required for certain land use applications. For other applications, a Development Issues Meeting is voluntary. Regardless, a DIM is an excellent opportunity to present a development proposal and ask questions of city staff prior to generating a particular application. The meeting is tailored to address specific issues or concerns. 2. As part of the DIM process, the City of Springfield distributes application material to key staff that review, prepare for, and attend the meeting. Attachment 3, Page 16 of 32 CMC Development LLC – 5th Street Property Page 7 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 Schirmer Satre Group 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 (541) 686-4540 3. As this is not a land use decision, no official decision is issued. However, there is a take- away of city responses to submitted questions. 4. Meetings are generally scheduled 15 to 20 days from application submittal. B. Metro Plan Amendment (SDC 5.14-100) 1. A Metro Plan Amendment is a Type IV land use decision. A Type IV decision is a legislative decision and is described in SDC 5.1-140. It is a City Council decision and includes both public notice and a public hearing. An amendment or change to the Metro Plan diagram is known as a Metro Plan Amendment – Type II. 2. The application package is submitted to the city. There are number of specific steps that guide the processing of an application. These include: Pre-Submittal Meeting (SDC 5.1-120.C). A Pre-Submittal Meeting is Springfield’s process for determining if an application is complete and ready for processing. After submitting what the applicant believes is a complete application, the applicant meets with City representatives. The city aims to hold Pre-Submittal meetings within 7 to 14 days. The application submittal is reviewed and determined if it is complete and ready for processing. If not complete, the applicant is provided a list of items needing to be addressed. Re-Submittal. The application package is revised in accordance with Pre-Submittal comments. It is then re-submitted to the city and the city conducts a quick check to determine if the application is complete. State law requires an applicant to re-submit an application within 180 days. If this does not occur, the original application is null and void. If the applicant completes the application, the next step, Processing, begins. Processing. For a Type IV process, the initial public hearing held by the Planning Commission shall take place within 60 days of acceptance of a complete application. Public notice is provided at least 20 days before the public hearing and is provided to property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the property being reviewed, the local newspaper, appropriate neighborhood associations where applicable, and the newspaper. The Planning Commission will hold a hearing and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council’s will hold another public hearing and make the final decision, which goes into effect 30 days after the decision is made. The decision is appealable within 21 calendar days of the decision being issued. Type IV appeals go the Land Use Board of Appeals. C. Refinement Plan Amendment (SDC 1. A Refinement Plan Amendment application is a Type IV land use decision. When a Metro Plan amendment is enacted that requires an amendment to a refinement plan diagram for consistency, the Metro Plan diagram amendment automatically amends the refinement plan diagram if no amendment to the refinement plan text is needed. A Refinement Plan Amendment and Metro Plan Amendment can be processed concurrently. 2. For specific information on application submittal and process, see the section on Metro Plan Amendments above. D. Zone Change (SDC 5.22-100) 1. A Zone Change application is a Type IV land use decision when it includes concurrent amendments to the Metro Plan diagram and a refinement plan. The property is designated and zoned Low Density Residential in the Metro Plan diagram, City of Springfield Zoning Map, and Q Street Refinement Plan. Therefore, a Zone Change application is required for the applicant to rezone the property to Medium Density Residential and/or High Density Residential. A Type IV land use decision is a legislative application and is described in SDC 5.1-140. It is a City Council decision and includes both public notice and a public hearing. 2. The application package is submitted to the city. There are a number of specific steps that guide the processing of an application. These include: Attachment 3, Page 17 of 32 CMC Development LLC – 5th Street Property Page 8 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 Schirmer Satre Group 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 (541) 686-4540 Pre-Submittal Meeting (SDC 5.1-120.C). A Pre-Submittal Meeting is Springfield’s process for determining if an application is complete and ready for processing. After submitting what the applicant believes is a complete application, the applicant meets with City representatives. The city aims to hold Pre-Submittal meetings within 7 to 14 days. The application submittal is reviewed and determined if it is complete and ready for processing. If not complete, the applicant is provided a list of items needing to be addressed. Re-Submittal. The application package is revised in accordance with Pre-Submittal comments. It is then re-submitted to the city and the city conducts a quick check to determine if the application is complete. State law requires an applicant to re-submit an application within 180 days. If this does not occur, the original application is null and void. If the applicant completes the application, the next step, Processing, begins. Processing. For a Type IV process, notice is provided to property owners within 300 feet of the property being reviewed, as well as to the newspaper and appropriate neighborhood association where applicable. The Planning Commission will hold a hearing and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council’s will hold another public hearing and make the final decision, which goes into effect 30 days after the decision is made. The decision is appealable within 21 calendar days of the decision being issued. Type IV appeals go the Land Use Board of Appeals. E. Site Plan Review (SDC 5.17-100) 1. Site Plan Review is a Type II land use application that provides a process to regulate the manner in which land is used and developed, ensuring compliance with various public policies and objectives. In Springfield, Site Plan Review is required for most new development, additions, or expansions. It is a Planning Director decision and includes public notice, but no public hearing. 2. The application package is submitted to the city and the application is processed. There are a number of required steps that make up this process. These include: Pre-Submittal Meeting (SDC 5.1-120.C). A Pre-Submittal Meeting is Springfield’s process for determining if an application is complete and ready for processing. After submitting what the applicant believes is a complete application, the applicant meets with City representatives. The city aims to hold Pre-Submittal meetings within 7 to 14 days. The application submittal is reviewed and determined if it is complete and ready for processing. If not complete, the applicant is provided a list of items needing to be addressed. Re-Submittal. The application package is revised in accordance with Pre-Submittal comments. It is then re-submitted to the city and the city conducts a quick check to determine if the application is complete. State law requires an applicant to re-submit an application within 180 days. If this does not occur, the original application is null and void. If the applicant completes the application, the next step, Processing, begins. Processing. Notice (7 days); Public Comment (14 days); Review (21-35 days); and Staff Report (generally within 60-75 days of the application being deemed complete). Under state law, the date a decision is effective and any allowance for local appeals must be within 120 days of an application being deemed complete. 3. For a Type II process, the staff report contains a decision – approval, approval with conditions, or denial. The report is mailed to the applicant and any parties who submitted public comment or otherwise participated in the process. 4. The decision is appealable within 15 calendar days of the decision being issued. Type II appeals go to the Planning Commission. There is new public notice and an updated staff report. A public hearing is held by the Planning Commission. The Commission will uphold, modify, or reverse the decision. Attachment 3, Page 18 of 32 CMC Development LLC – 5th Street Property Page 9 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 Schirmer Satre Group 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 (541) 686-4540 5. If the decision is not appealed, the decision is in effect 15 calendar days after the initial staff decision. If the decision is appealed, the decision is in effect when the appeal decision is rendered. F. Final Site Plan Review (SDC 5.17-135) 1. The Final Site Plan submittal incorporates all approval conditions from the Site Plan Review decision. 2. The application is reviewed for completeness. The complete application is reviewed by staff and a Type I (no public notice or hearing) decision is issued. Upon approval, the Planning Director drafts a Development Agreement for signing by the City of Springfield and the developer. 3. A positive decision (approval) is based on staff finding compliance with the conditions of approval. 4. A Final Site Plan Review is a Type I process. There are no appeals available for a Type I process. 5. The Site Plan Review application is in effect upon the execution of the Development Agreement. 6. Final Site Plan Review must be submitted within 90 days of the initial Site Plan Review decision. Following that, there is a 30-day completeness review period and a 15 to 30 day processing period. Final Site Plan and Development Agreement is null and void if construction does not begin within 2 years of signing the Development Agreement. G. Drinking Water Protection (SDC 3.3-200) 1. The Drinking Water Protection (DWP) Overlay District is established to protect aquifers used as potable water supply sources from contamination. DWP requirements establish procedures and standards for the physical use and storage of hazardous or other materials harmful to groundwater by requiring development approval for new and existing land uses. 2. Drinking Water Protection and Site Plan Review applications can be submitted concurrently. 3. Drinking Water Protection applications are a Type I process. It is a staff decision with no public notice. In that regard, Process and Decision are the same as for Site Plan Review. 4. A Type I decision is not appealable. 5. The decision is in effect the day it is issued. IV. PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN A site plan has been generated for the proposed development of the property. It is attached hereto. A site plan has great value in assisting with initial land use analysis and in providing an explanation and the asking questions in a pre-application meeting. As detailed plans will of course be required for Site Plan Review and any other applications, it is never too soon to be thinking of the physical arrangement of contemplated improvements. V. ATTACHED INFORMATION 1. Planning and Zoning a. Google Earth – Aerial Photograph with Site Boundaries. b. Bing Maps – Aerial Photograph. c. Lane Regional Information Database – Tax Lot Map. d. City of Springfield – Refinement Plan Map. e. City of Springfield – Base Zoning. 2. Transportation a. Metro Area TransPlan – Projects Map. b. City of Springfield – Street Classification Map. 3. Utilities Attachment 3, Page 19 of 32 CMC Development LLC – 5th Street Property Page 10 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 Schirmer Satre Group 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 (541) 686-4540 a. City of Springfield – Existing Stormwater and Wastewater Infrastructure Map. b. Springfield Utility Board (SUB) – Existing Water Infrastructure Map. c. Springfield Utility Board (SUB) – Existing Electric Infrastructure Map. VI. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION The above information represents a brief outline of known applicable planning, zoning and site development requirements for the contemplated development of the subject property. We recommend scheduling a DIM to clarify and/or confirm the findings herein, as well as to discuss potential rezoning of the subject site. We hope this initial land use analysis proves helpful. Our office is available to discuss these findings, provide additional graphics upon request, or assist with additional project needs. Sincerely, Richard M. Satre Richard M. Satre, AICP, ASLA, CSI Principal Schirmer Satre Group Attachment 3, Page 20 of 32 Attachment 1a Attachment 3, Page 21 of 32 Attachment 1b Attachment 3, Page 22 of 32 RRRRRR70'61.53'145.92'33.03'60.87'69.09'1L=47.84'T153.70'WEST 237.92'86'6101S79°59'W 304.90'76.98'94'61.53'1ST76.83'124.68' M/L80'SOUTH 125.61'160'183.20'S00°01'37"W 180'60'84'773.25'86'25'S67 °54'ER=46'7N89°49'38"W117'52.32'43.86'N80³05'47"E 573.94'NORTH 147.68'72'LC=34.78'R=20'NORTH176.33'WEST220.03'60'S45°W100'140'130'2008-85.29'20'116.56'33.21'200050'60'N00°15'20"E300'92.24'25.45'35.01'91.80'S00°08'W70'137.92'N00°08'ES80°W 65'11.6'60'STREET15'62.15'N00°06'45"E61'60'NORTHIP243230'61.53'IP130'130'52'WARDELL8'8'S00°08'13"ETHREE EIGHTY Q STDLC 4820'199'50'66.25'N89°58'45"ES89°58'45"WN00°01'37"ESOUTH 174'EAST 100'1' STIPS89°55'W 310'N00°06'45"E313.50'25'72.96'75.20'85.28'3RD STSOUTHLC=S25°13'25"E65'82'61'(84')P 24EVERTT60'95'95.40'70'105'N00°15'20"E54.55'31.93'N84°E27.56'47.49'95.91'S89°44'10"E35.01'R=20'S34°35' 3 5 " W 290.40'177.9'20.33'N69°12'W41.17'LC=31.11'S56°28'WN00°08'E4100'100'70'60.96'105.42'116.26'84.60'150'152.40'140'N00°08'ENORTH6.02'EAST65.4'70'60'NORTH 158.37'42.84'118.15'130.30'S41°32'04"E 54.90'61.48'NORTH97.89'N78°15'44"EL=39.9 2'N18°03'32"EN33°29'07"W2750'135'61.53'61.53'61.53'99.80'NORTH115.32'133.70'566.65'52'104.72'66'WEST153.62'EAST174.52'125'STREET118'64.6'299.61'74.6'74.6'CONDOMINIUMSDLC 49125.92' (124.91')144.91'268.82'144.91'85'50'37.5'2.5' STRIP43.20'S89°58'45"W 300'92.55'68.75'S 35575EAST 137.92'IP25'145.92'S89°55'WS89°54'E313.5'70.41'75.20'75.20'85.29'85.28'85.29'85.28'N89°49'38"W 597'571.80'38.28'300'EAST 175'S00°36'54"W67'WEST 86.10'190.83'119.30'61.07'25'EAST 154.78'98-P1196STREET87.08'28.73'60'1800S.E. COR.J.HALSTEADD.L.C. 4787.72'60'60'95'95'63.07'70'80'85'85'86'SOUTHNORTHEAST 140'140'15'15.71'106.49'116.36'S79°59'WN48°15'ES38°E S34°03'55"WS23°10'E 35.0 1'35.02'N67°22'E50'18.6'60.97'101.91'111.70'89.3'22.36'69.40'68'77'258144.8'WEST 300'70'60.96'60.96'60'60'60'148.76'S00°08'W75.14'60'55'80'84.60'19.60'150'82'63.92'EASTN80°E 637.20'N79°56'15"E 571.96'S80°W 572.20'49.40'300'EASEMENTN00°08'E60'N00°02'E15'N80°E 574.9'37.4'110.82'67.21'43.86'70'60.91'55.54'61.22'91.09'9.58'NORTH 137.29'26'58.81'64.47'96.20'91.08'27.48'60'105'SOUTH 216.84'30'30'LC=45.72'S47°0 4'4 7"E LC=3 8'LC=54.54'2NDADD232528ACRESWARDELLEAST 565.74'STREET61.53'61.53'61.53'61.53'99.80'99.80'99.80'N00°06'45"EN00°06'45"EWEST 430.94'10' EASEMENT130'20'133.70'20'(176')(176')150'ACRESADD13.15'90'25.67'347.94'567.05'87.66'229.75'S00°01'E153.62'271.09'382.55'150'137.99'125'NORTHN85°54'E 569.30'30.15'5TH108'74.6'74.6'299.61'10'10'NE CORNW COR20'(124.91')(144.91')80'80'80'199'SOUTH 174'299.61'140'130'75'85'160'160'122'2.5'116.80'N89°58'45"ES00°01'37"WPCL 21100IPP2257S 41089130'51.21'29'29'60'35.29'56005701312.5'24'72.96'168'72.96'N89°54'W 627'S0°05'E85.92'N89°54'W 313.50'602'59.97'70.41'72.96'25'145.92'145.92'313.5'75.20'75.20'S0°08'W 75.20'85.29'85.29'85.29'85.29'N0°08'E5'7421SSTREET110'163.62'LC=S56°28'WEAST 100'WEST 100'85'NORTH65'115.71'67'15'S0°07'04"WS0°07'04"W119.30'84'25'SOUTH120.69'EAST 155'50063KENPLATQ566.76'566.81'17182029'29'60'S39771COMMON AREA1701S36900PARCEL A 1'60'60.87'S.W. COR.W.SPENCERD.LC. 50STREET7THS89°54'E 171.78'95.40'63.07'85.40'80'105'S00°15'20"W40.08'S89°44'10"E88.55'WEST 125'66.20'59.80'114.27'175'137.19'N19°E91.37'27.04'S70°E52.59'N22°37'40"E22.5 6'S89°44'10"E73'42.40'61'70.51'SOUTHN69°12'30"W 170.30'N69°12'W8.38'41.95'20'R=28'80.62'93.14'3610994'70'70'60.96'60'60'75.08'S00°08'W 88.03'75.20'55'80'117'82'WEST 53'SOUTHS79°56'15"W127.09'80.88'5'6.02'S00°02'W565.95'23.6'48.15'65.4'70'SOUTH138.85'53.91'86.37'44.56'S85°57'41"E61'30'26.5'81.21'S18°03'32"W60'105'NORTHEASTNORTHWEST 565.62'20'N26°15'08"EL=35.67'L=58.38'LC =22.68'TO2226293031135'61.76'61.76'61.53'61.53'99.80'NORTH 99.80'NORTH431.33'153.70'130'130'130'133.70'150'115.32'TO104.64'76.83'566.76'555.05'230.13'220.10'66'12.10'567.21'425' M/L175'133.94'WEST 125'SOUTH 3.55'14.14'100'74.6'74.6'74.6'EW POWERS20'124.91'(144.91')125.92'268.82'145.92'145.92'140'130'75'50'66.25'312.5'10'122'140'S89°58'45"W116.80'S00°01'37"W90.05'PCL 12001-P1439EAST 100'NORTH 299.61'29'SOUTH 125.61'P 1P 2N00°01'37"E 180'24'72.96'168'72.96'627'N89°55'W 110'S89°54'E 313.50'85.92'S00°07'25"WS00°06'45"W 218'25'72.96'292'75.20'75.20'85.28'85.29'85.28'85.28'N89°49'38"WIP6391.23'26.90'31.11' R=28'6.06' R=30'WEST 74.83'N88°34'50"W 100'N00°06'54"E115.81'N0°07'04"E 67'15'123.50'151.50'84'67.45'60'NORTH60'EAST 120.69'P 1852GARYTPUBLIC ROAD1516192135.69'23.83'24.71'29'29'57001900DUCK0.24 AC0.39 AC1.24 AC0.53 AC0.14 AC0.12 AC0.19 AC0.58 AC0.38 AC0.23 AC0.23 AC0.18 AC0.63 AC7.76 AC0.4 AC1.16 AC0.7 AC0.21 AC0.53 AC0.34 AC0.15 AC0.2 AC1.29 AC0.54 AC0.13 AC0.2 AC1.04 AC0.12 AC0.25 AC0.31 AC0.21 AC0.25 AC0.01 AC0.16 AC0.2 AC0.23 AC0.24 AC0.17 AC0.21 AC2.17 AC0.22 AC0.01 AC1.59 AC0.53 AC3700103104102200107110109108106105112111113300351135103512350935083507350635053800390040004100350435033502420042013501430043024314430343044313430743054306430943084310431143124504450645074508450945105000490048004700460146004500450551015100520053005102550055035502210022002300260025002400270227012700170027031600110212001400150111011300150017021000900100128003101320031003102320133003407340634053404340334023401404403402401801800700701702601602600502501550129003000019-00SEE MAP17032613SEE MAP17032623SEE MAP17032621SEE MAP17032624S002SEE MAP17032624S001SEE MAP17032612SEE MAP17032631SEE MAP17032642FOR ASSESSMENT ANDTAXATION ONLYS.E.1/4 N.W.1/4 SEC. 26 T.17S. R.3W. W.M.Lane County1" = 100'CANCELLED1800190020005701560057001100170117032624SPRINGFIELDSPRINGFIELD17032624LCATCAB - 2015-05-12 09:0REVISIONS10/05/2011 - LCAT155 - CONVERT MAP TO GIS05/11/2015 - LCAT115 - LLA BETWEEN TL'S 2900 & 3000 Attachment 1c Attachment 3, Page 23 of 32 I-105 Q ST S ST 5TH STM ST L ST N STBIKE PATH19TH STV ST R ST T ST U ST 2ND STDEBRA DR15TH STOLYMPIC ST QUINALT ST 12TH STPIONEER PARKWAY EASTPIONEER PARKWAY WEST9TH ST7TH ST8TH ST18TH STMILL ST17TH STMARKET ST3RD STHAYDEN BRIDGE RD 11TH STWATER ST1ST ST16TH STYOLANDA AVE HAYDEN BRIDGE WAY HARVEST LNWOODLANE DR 6TH STPLEASANT ST LAWNRIDGE AVE W Q ST CARTER LNRAMBLING DRMANOR DRVERA DR ON RAMP OLD ORCHARD LN SHADYLANE DRMCKENZIE CREST DRNORTHRIDGE A V E SEWARD AVE CASTLE DROTTO ST MANSFIELD ST PIEDMONT STROSE BLOSSOM DRWAYSIDE LN17TH PL10TH STVILLA WAYSCOTT RD GREENVALE DR ALLEN AVE DEL R O S E D R MOHAW K BLVDCENTENNIAL BLVD W N ST W K ST W M ST 20TH STRIVER KNOLL W AY HAYDEN BRIDGE PL CHEEK ST GROVEDALE DR11TH PLSHADY LP GRAND VISTA DR1ST PL 14TH PL14TH STCAMBRIDGE ST M I NT MEADOW WAY DELROSE AVE ROYALDEL L N DUMAS DRFAIRVIEW D RPRIVATE VERA ST WALNUT RIDGE DRCARRIAGE PL BONNIE LN FUCHSIA STMARTIN LUTHER KI NG J PKWYB L A CKSTONE ST MARCOLA RD PRASAD CT 10TH PL W OLYMPIC ST LOMOND AVE GREENBRIAR STWEMBERLY WAYSWANK CTYENTA AVE MOFFITT LN DELRO S E C T BRADLEY WAYESTATE CTRIVIERA CTI-105 6TH ST8TH ST 6TH ST10TH STSEWARD AVE DELROSE AVE 7TH STBLACKSTONE ST 16TH STI-105 18TH STPLEASANT ST 10TH STS ST 3RD STS ST 16TH STPRIVATE 17TH ST9TH STOLYMPIC ST ALLEN AVE L ST T ST M ST R ST M ST V ST 1ST STBIK E P A T H 17TH STV ST 10TH STT ST 15TH ST9TH ST8TH ST17TH STON R A M P 15TH ST11TH ST9TH ST7TH ST6TH STBIKE PATH PLEASANT ST 10TH STQ STREET REFINEMENT PLAN April 2008 Springfield,OR There are no warranties that accompany this product. Users assume all responsibility for any loss or damage arising from any error, omission or positional inaccuracy of this product. 0 1,000 2,000 Feet I Legend Community Commercial Neighborhood Commercial Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Public Land & Open Space Attachment 1d Attachment 3, Page 24 of 32 Attachment 1e Attachment 3, Page 25 of 32 AIRPORT RD CLEAR LAKE RD IRVING RDHWY99NPRAIRIERD ROYAL AVEGREENHILLRD BERTELSENRDW 18TH AVE CHAMBERSSTHILYARDSTE30THAVE W1STAVE CREST DR E33RDAVERIVERRD OAKWAYRDCRESCENT DR CENTENNIALBLVD COUNTRYCLUBRD DI LLARDRDGREENHILLRDELMIRA RDECHOHOLLOWRD C OB U R G R D GAMEFARMRDNI-105 ASPENSTWILKES DR HUNSAKER LN F OX RDW EST AMAZONDRAVEPOLKSTRDMCKINLEYSTLORANEHWY BLVD MI LLST21STST28THSTMARCOL A RD JASPERRD WDST EST 6THAVE 7THAVE W2NDAVE SENECARDHAYDENBRIDGERD MAINST MAINST OLYMPIC ST MARCOLA RD HAYDENBRIDGE R D 31STSTMcKENZIE HWY S P RIN GFIE L D-CRESWELLHWY42NDST58TH STCOMMERCIA L S T 32NDSTHIGHBANKSRD 48THST52THSTGAMEFARMRDGILHAMRDHORNPARKAVENBARGER AVE BOND RD BEACON DR W DANEBOW13THAVE W 11TH AVE DONALDSTW ILLAMETTESTBAILEYHILLRDBAILEY HILLR D I-5I-5I-5I-5SPENCERCREEKRD LORANEHW Y OAKPATCHRD5THST5THSTBEACON DR E BEACON DR E WILLOWCREEK RD TERRYDELTAHWYE13THAVE SAST GLENWOODBLVDW 39TH AVE W 40TH AVE B EL TLIN E RD W 18TH AVE CROW RD WALNUTSTMAINST CRESTDRBERTELSENRDTERRYW11THAVE 35THSTTHURSTONRD E40THCHAMBERSSTE11THAVEWASHINGTONSTPOLK STCITYVIEWSTW 18TH AVEWILLOWCREEKRDTERRYBARGERAVE ROYALAVE RI VERRDBELTLINERD MAXWELL RD FRANKLINNORTHWESTEXPRESSWAYIRVINGTONDRGREENHILLRDCOBURGRD E43RD AVEBRAEBURNBLANTONAGATE SPRINGWILLAMETTESTHARRISSTUNIVERSITYSTHILYARDSTPATTERSONSTHIGHSTOAKSTE18THAVEALDERSTPEARLST AGATESTVILLARDSTFRANKLINBLVD ORCHARD STHAWKINSBRITTANYWARRENBL A IR BLVDW5THAVEGARFIELDSTW6THAVE JEFFERSONSTLINCOLNSTRAI LR OAD BL VD W 5THAVE W11THAVE ROOSEVELTBLVD W1STAVE H WY 99 N BELTLINERDMAPLEFAIRFIELDPARK HOWARD SILVER GROVEDIVISION RIVERAVE SPRING CREEK SOUTHWOOD OAK MON T VANDUYNGARDENWAYBOGARTMINDANORKENZIERD BELTLINERD CHAD GILHAMRDLOCKECO B UR G RD AYRES WILLAKENZIERD ISLAND GOODPASTURECALYOUNGRD HENDERSONW 27TH AVEOLIVESTLINCOLNSTJEFFERSONSTLINCOLNSTJEFFERSONSTFRIENDLYSTW28THAVE W24THAVE WILLAMETTESTHARLOW RDHARLOW RD CENTENNIALGATEWAYST HOLLOWWILLAGILLESPIERDENID RD E ENIDRDWJEPPESENACRESBEAUERAWBREYLN W7THAVE ARTHUR STAMAZONPKWYBAILEYLN N O RT H WE ST EX P R E SS WA YROOSEVELTBLVD CHAMBERSSTGREENACRES CENTENNIAL BLVD BLVD I-105N.DE LTAHW Y COUNTYFARMLP COUNTYFARMLPVALLEYRIVERDR FRANKLINBLVDRIVERLOOP#2 M OH AW KBAILEYHILLRDW7THAVE GARFIELDSTRI VERRDVALLEYRIVERWAYVANBURENM cLE ANB LVD STOREYWAMAZONDREAMAZONDRW 29TH AVE E24THAVE E19THAVE PIONEERPARKWAYE46TH AVE CLUBRD I-5 GIMPL H ILL RD 19THSTGO NYEAE30THAVE HWY126 Hwy 126 Hwy126 Hwy126 Hwy126CREEK MILLPOND JASPERPARK ISLANDPARK AREA BUFORD RECREATION RANCH DORRIS PARK PARK BUTTE SKINNER PARKHENDRICKS ALTONBAKERPARK MILLRACE RIVER FORK WILLAMETTE MIDDLE COASTFORKWILLAMETTERIVER WILLAMALANE PARK MORSERANCHRIVERWILLAMETTE STATE PARK (MAHLON SWEETFIELD) EUGENEAIRPORT SPENCERBUTTEPARKAMAZON M C K E N ZIE RIVER M O H A W K R IV E R ARMITAGE CENTRALOREGONPACIFIC -COOS BAY BRANCHBURLINGTONNORTHERNRR U NI O N P A CIFIC R AILR O A D UNION P A C I FI CRAI LROADSISKIYOUBRANCHCENTRALOREGONPACIFICRRUNIONPACIF ICRR' $ $ ' $ ' '' '' $ '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' 92 .-,5 (/99 .-, .-,105 (/99 5 118 66332 6194861874 1 4 336 98 48625533 747 363 420 57 554 1397 1 3 432 481 7 8 39 542 527 44973715163515303 342 51654254954441245 9 3 3 318 136657509 90940994545429631651 644 6 31543576533 42 18632 777447603 930 7099188098187780750948545 21524472670680724530 233297715818 75669678370 3821 664 659469 18766606 5 606 (/99 .-,105 .-, (/99 .-,5 409 638 178 768 133 75 712 133133 69 951 924927 622 774250 250 250 250 721 537 487118 54 91545444548576896 838 838 835 835786 785 787 836450 697 298299343 452 92 '250 250 555 338 339 337 Urban Standards Financially-Constrained Roadway Projects This map illustrates the roadway projects planned as capital investment actions for a 20-year planning horizon. The map reflects the general location of programmed and unprogrammed projects contained in the Capital Investment Actions Roadway Projects list. These projects are considered necessary to adequately meet regional transportation needs for the TransPlan 20-year planning horizon and are part of the financially constrained plan. Jurisdictions responsible for these projects are the Cities of Eugene and Springfield, Lane County, and the Oregon Department of Transportation. Added Fwy Lanes/Major Interchange Imps Added Fwy Lanes/Major Interchange Imps Added Fwy Lanes/Major Interchange Imps Urban Standards Arterial Capacity Improvements$ Added Fwy Lanes/Major Interchange Imps $ Programmed Intersections Study'Arterial Capacity Improvements''New Arterial Link or Interchange'Unprogrammed Intersections Arterial Capacity Improvements New Arterial Link or Interchange Programmed Projects Urban Growth Boundary Study New Collectors Arterial Capacity Improvements New Arterial Link or Interchange Unprogrammed Projects Legend Eugene-Springfield Metro Area TransPlan 101 Miles Map produced by Lane Council of Governments July 2002 Nodal Development Areas Further study in west Eugene is expected to result in amendments to these projects and potentially other projects in TransPlan. Note: This map is illustrative and should be used for reference only. The map depicts approximate locations of existing and proposed transportation facilities. Areas identified as nodal development areas are considered to have potential for this type of land use pattern. Other areas not designated for nodal development may be found to have potential for nodal development. Study $Study N Attaachment 2a Attachment 3, Page 26 of 32 Attachment 2b Attachment 3, Page 27 of 32 34 2857 60 59 56 48 6157565 6 5 7 6160 28 60 60 58 58 48 28 61 60 58 48 10 09 10 10 22 22 10 22 10 1010 091009 10!!!!!-!!$1!!!!$1 $1 $1 $1 $1 !- !- !- !- !- !-!!!!!!!!$1 $1 !!!!$1 !!$1 !!!!!!$1 !!!- !- $1 $1 !-!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-!!!-!!$1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-!!!!$1 !- !-!!!!$1 !!!!!!$1 $1!!!!!!!-!!!!!!!!!-!!$1 $1 $1 !- !- $1 !- !-!!!!!!!- !-!!!- $1 $1 $1 !- !-!!!- $1 !- !-!!!-!!$1 $1 !!$1 !!$1 $1 $1 $1 $1 !- $1 !- $1 $1 $1 $1 $1!!!!!!$1 $1 $1 !!!!$1 !!!!!- $1 $1 !!!!$1!!!- !-!!!- !- !-!!!- !-!!$1 !-!-$1 !!!!$1 $1!!$1 !- !- !- !-!- $1 !!!!$1 !- $1 !!!-!-!!!!!!$1 $1 $1 $1 $1 $1 $1 $1 $1 !!!- !-!!$1 !-!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-!- !- !- !- !- !-!!$1 !!!!!!!!!!!!!- $1 !!!!$1 !-!- !- !-!- $1 $1 !- $1 $1 $1 $1 $1!!!!!!!!!- !- $1 $1 !-!- !- "!;Î!!"!;Î!!"!;Î"!;Î"!;Î"!;Î!!!!"!;Î"!;Î "!;Î "!;Î "!;Î !Z!Z"?B !Z "?B"?B "?B "?B"?B "?B "?B "?B "?B "?B !Z !Z !Z!!!!!!!!!!!Z !!!Z !!!Z!!!!!Z !!!Z !!Z !Z !Z !Z !Z !Z !Z!!!!!!!!!!!Z !!!!!Z !Z!Z !Z !Z !!!Z $1!!GH!!!!!!GH GH "?B GH "?B "?B "?B GH GH GH GH GH "?B GH GH "?B GH "?B GH GH GH GH "?B "?B GH GH GH "?B GH GH "?B GHGH "?B "?B GH GH "?B GH "?B GH "?B "?B GH !!AP!!"?B"?B !!"?B !Z!!!!!!"?B "?B !!"?B!!!Z GH "?B GH !!GH!!"?B GH !!"?B "?B "?B !!GH !!GH GH GH!!"?B "?B !Z !!"?B !Z !!!!!!!Z !Z GH !!GH!!!!!!!!!!!Z !Z "?B !!!!"?B!Z !Z !Z !Z "?B "?B !!"?B !!!!"?B "?B GH "?B GH!!GH !Z GH !Z GH !Z GH!!!!!Z !Z "?B !Z "?B !!!Z GH !Z "?B GH !!!Z GH GH GH !!!!$1 $1 $1 GH GH "?B GH !!!!GH !!$1 !!!!"?B $1 $1 !Z !Z!!$1 !!!!$1!!!!GH $1 GH !!GH GH "? $1 !Z !!!Z !Z!!GH $1 !Z !!!!!!!!!!$1$1 !Z $1 !!!!GH GH !Z 401 351 702703 704 700700 704 701 707 400 401 391 504 502 505 354 350 405 352 501 355 406 350 356 403 350411 506 501 501 352 503 502 401 502 505 406 508 412 507 503 501 503 410 402 501 504 506 413 353 502 505 402 507504 401 403 503 501 403 503 404 501 401 405 501 104 407406 405 401 402 406 504 409 505 501 703 503 351 402 401 450 503 501 505 504 700 406 407 506 504 415 414 408 407 419 403 418 503 417 502 501 502 505 504 404 402 501 401 503 305 507 506 386 377 378 501 502 410 304 502 365 387 700 379 380 366 388 381 500 389 501 502 501 382 350 301 376 383384 390 302 303 137135 2181 2175 934143 2173 942 145 2092 2112 2180 926 4162114 2118 915 2171 447 2095443345 371 921 2091126 845 21312133 263 439 2131 226 393 140 307 21552148 2130 2136 2145 128 2230 2122 367 531 2132 558 882 883 2126 830 2074 2124 2150 2160 918214821282155 2080 2157 2121 275 89 2242 2090 407 833 181 2173 2244 21722183 472224 2079 560 183127 2087 852 2241 2140 856 2221 129 157 213521262143 859 605 21552188 821809 623 641 2126 401 425 2146 8672112 2130 640 2167231233 2131 303 155 804 485 804652 2107 7962122 470 2180 453 2219 958473 764 680 780 970 394 805 383 2107368 973 1995 638 2103 2061 2168 833 606 655 2186 483 1990 361 628 300 2117 291 2138 2065 2063 2105 1884 2112 346 808 6522133 442 694 2052 1948 287 2033 1980 2004 2133 954568 616 6342125 957 1996 1975 637 298 472 375 2105 342 890 2028 1983 322 936 496 498 962536 1914 1946 762420 2060 2078834 790788 781 1914 304 2114 2060 910340 19982038 829 867 330 370 1914 1903 1875 19441893 901 775 392 2134 895 965 930 1962 909 1835 18521834 1987 808 957907 774 933 1850 810 748 530 1883 9101873 972 650650 2001 8311984 973 664 676604 1876 1920 945 1981 1983 2029 1851 948 853 951805 1855 1993 2093 1914 2045 1914 249 943629 819 2050 663 2125 929 776 2031 303 1866 1980 2098 1866 1864 774 651 1866 2092675 127115 555 251 2095 1865 303301 372 824 748 2127 280 531 563 693 937 1990 1849 662 686 1971 1829 931 897875 245 995 1966 18271801 270 471 301 375333 407 1877 747 497439 495 1922 741 225 1868 1856 955 957 2052 725 999 770 514 2022 1812 344 2017 700 905 388 1853 848 924 2064 2015 826 1977 929 9311840 315 212 610 1871 2077 2076 905 987 1842 818 386 1905 780 816 930 888 802 380 924 1910 1963 968902 2010862 992 1970 1902 846 183 439 1935 1928 824 896 952836 1890 974 1972 449 1930 2029 1942 1938 1915 803 815 19801920 889 1885 823 994 370 2075 528 910 994 1950 1950 1950 19501950 1950 392 304 450400 1891 1887 1895 1955 195519551955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 19551955 1955 1955 1955 19551955 19551955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 19551955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 19551955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 19551955 195519551955 2048 2050 1853 1960 18811881 CON 10CON 10CON 10 CON 12CON 8CON 18CON 48 CON 12CON 8CON 10 CON 1 2 CON 12CON 12CON 12 CON 15 CON 18 CON 15CON 10CON 48CON 12 CON 42 CON 120CON 10CON 27CON 21CON 12CON 21CON 24 CON 18 CON 18CON 21 CON 18CON 21 CON 18CON 30CON 12 CON 18CON 12CON 42 CON 24CON 10CON 12 CON 10CON 15 CON 24 523'104'100'100' 181'100'100'104'109'139'105'105' 120' 111' 11 9 ' 118'120'118' 135'160'150'144'140'140'150'153'147'160'160'150'177' 175' 160'169'163' 125' 179' 178' 197'190'204'190' 203'217'212'218.4'205' 210'210'380'225'222' 229.4'217'240'233'249'157'436'270'280'275'294'295'290' 308' 312' 345' 370.58' 378' 445'483'495'104 101 111 110 108 107 102 106 105 102 114 117 102 102 101 101 103 123 101102 109 105 103 106 119 118 10 104 112 102 101 103 105 101 101 105 103104 102 103 107 115 116 104 101 109 113 103 106 101 102 101 101 102 101 136 101 103 102 120 124 108 121 120103 104 121 102 107 102 103 104 105 101 115 122 101'314'265'280.23'463'104'105'303'101'117'110'116'122'116'330'392'11 4 ' 131'138'134'128'140'136'154'140' 155'156'156'156'170' 165'165.5'160'182'177' 177'175'199'222'211.51'214.59'217'222'226.43'225'227'920'236'230'246'250'245' 245'247'282' 285'275'286' 271'296'285' 300' 310' 308.47' 318' 327'595'337'341'335'350' 402' 390' 400' 411' 411.8' 415.49' 411' 427'442.81'498'565' 790' 954' CON8CON8CON 8 CON 8CON 24CON 8TRU 8CON 10CON 8 CON 18CON 24CON 18CON 8 PVC 8PVC 8CON 8 CON 8 CON 8 PVC 8 HDPE 8PV C 8PVC 8CON 8 CON 8 PVC 8 CON 18HDPE 8HDPE 8CON 8PVC 10CON 24CON 42 CON 10CON 8 CON 8 CON 8 PVC 8CON 8 CON 8 CON 8 CON 8HDPE 8 PVC 8 CON 8 PVC 10PVC 10CON 10CON 42 PVC 8 PVC 8 HDPE 8 CON 8 TRU 8 TRU 10CON 42 14+07 1+25 2+95 0+00 N 2+79.2 12+59.3 1+46 1+28.5 1+46.5 1+59 8+14 14+15 15+80 0+00 NE 1+88 178.5 1+77.5 0+00 N S 8+91 6+60 9+26 2+45 3+42.55 0+00 0+00 N E 4+90 3+07 2+00 3+18 3+30 3+39 12+95 6+56 3+94 6+44 4+28 129+45.7 0+00 N 0+00N S 0+00 E W 3+00 SE 007 015 010 009 005 002 001 006 004 009 001 004 017 008 002 006 001 010 008 002 007 004 009 012 003 009 008 001 013 007 019 020 012 011 003 021 006 014 002 003 009 007 005 007 002 006 013 015 007 008 016 014 001 005 013 003 008 015 007 011 004 023 003 001 005 001 021 008 080 081 003 004 005 018 011 006 005 008 014 005 022 023 024020 021 002 003 006 009 010011 004 004 012 004 010 011 009 214 238 254 256 269 271 201 203 220 218 204 206 208 205 229 204 216 202 207 213 209 215 216 225 201 201 231 266 223 204 203 267 261 268 270 205 206 258 259 200 214 253 260 200 255 201 203 246 241 249 245 210 235 236 296 211 250 251 252 262 257 263 264 265 220 212 212 239 237 240 242 243 244 247 298294 251 0+781+190+4 4 7+411+848+261+852+484+055+004+570+562+963+445+590+467+11 8+27 0+3 6 9+35 13+69 4+08.51+50 0+315+276+003+841+011+89 0+790+081+371+822 + 1 4 1+463+85 3+30 5+803+402 + 2 2 8+ 8 4 4+191+542+101+11 2+803+146+83 2+22 5+210+921+49 0+58 14+478+79 2+58 13+66 5+06 12+11 11+11 5+02 1+77 1+363+42 3+062+220+631+453+181+781+872+37 0+355+68 4+21 7+0 82+479+49 0+43 1+14 6+43 2+52 0+12 8+47 7+18 6+05 8+43 2+833+903+73 1+991+404+17.50+531+68 0+903+309+19 14+160+603+721+99 2+96 1+45.50+780+ 2 39+650+77 0+68 1+24 4+418+58 4+211+080+05 0+610+88 3+311+892+6810+457+479+302+69 2+862+52 12+73 1+71 12+52 4+91.48+76 6+29 4+03 2+541+310+87 2+793+23 1+80 2+200+832+393+20 13+51 7+18 4+82 5+83 6+50 4+72 12+04 1+11 9+16 9+95 0+569+593+671+53 3+20 2+563+300+70 0+711+283+891+680+8811+37 1+11 1+35 1+3 5 1+121+41 Q ST S ST 9TH STT ST 7TH STQ ST PRIVATE ROADT ST 9TH STNORTHRIDGE AV E 10TH U ST 3RD STFUCHSIA ST R ST I-105 S ST6TH ST8TH ST2ND ST5TH ST1+79 5+61 H169 H168 H167 H163 H367 H166 H251 H483 H413 H412 H291 H492 H451 H286 H383 H396 H292 H365 H533 IA0797 IA1011 IA0822 IA0669 IA0476 IA0479 IA0474 IA0442 IA0447 IA0430 IA0387 IA0388IA0391 IA0402 IA0414 IA0221 IA0222 IA0110IA0103 IA0068 +4,258,000 +4,258,000 +4,258,600 +4,258,600 +4,259,200 +4,259,200 +4,259,800 +4,259,800 +4,260,400 +4,260,400 +4,261,000 +4,261,000+883,200+883,200+883,600+883,600+884,000+884,000+884,400+884,400+884,800+884,800CONTOUR INTERVAL: 2' VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD '88 (CONVERTED 6/30/06 FROM ORIGINAL CONTROL AND MAPPING AT NGVD 47 ADJ.; CONVERSION FACTOR = + 3.5') GRID: OREGON LAMBERT, SOUTH ZONE, NAD83 CONTOURS IN OBSCURED AREAS DO NOT MEET NATIONAL MAP ACCURACY STANDARDS AND MAY NOT BE RELIABLE 1734 SE TACOMA ST.PORTLAND, OREGON 97202 JOB #: 1911 DAVID C. SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC. PHOTOGRAMMETRIC MAPPING BY: Requestor assumes all responsibility for the use of this product and agrees to hold harmless the City of Springfield, OR against any loss or damage arising from any error, omission or positional inaccuracy of this product. The parties to this agreement are the agency or business firm requesting the plot, who is also the end user of the spatial dataidentified in this agreement (referred to as Requestor) and the City of Springfield, OR. This spatial data can not be resold and/or provided for the purpose of resale to any business entity, private entity, or public entity for any reason without written authorization from the City Engineer. The relative accuracy and absolute accuracy of this spatial data are not guaranteed by the City of Springfield and accuracy should be checked by the end user. Except as otherwise provided herein, the spatial dataprovided under this agreement is "as-is" without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied, including but not limited to implied warranties of fitness for a particular purpose. Requestor agrees that The City of Springfield's liability, whether in contract, in tort (including negligence), in strict liability or otherwise shall not exceed the return of the price of this product. Under no circumstance shall the City of Springfield be liable for any special, incidental or consequential damages, including personal injury, property damage, damage or loss of equipment, lost profit or revenue, cost of renting replacement and other additional expenses, even if the City of Springfield has been notified of the possibility of such damages. 0 100 20050 Ft 8 SCALE: 1" = 100' or 1:1,200 DATE OF ORTHO-PHOTOGRAPHY: 5-24-2008 CITY OF SPRINGFIELD Lane County, Oregon SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE BCDEFGHJ KLMNOPQR S 00010203040506070809101112131415161718 n3n2n1 SHEET NO. Legend Legend Wastewater Infrastructure Springfield Private !- !- E06 PLOT DATE: 12/20/2011 REVISION DATE: 12/20/2011 9:42:43 AM REVISED BY: zeit5397 E05 D06E07 F06Clean Out Maintainer Non-Access Point Maintainer Abandoned!- Abandoned$1 Springfield$1 Private$1 Lane County!!Eugene!!Abandoned!!Springfield !!Private!!Pump Station Maintainer Eugene[Ú Abandoned[Ú Springfield [Ú Private[Ú Maintenance Hole Maintainer Vault Maintainer Abandoned""V Springfield ""V Private""V Boundaries Wastewater Pipes Type/Owner/Maintainer Gravity Main - Abandoned Gravity Main - Springfield - Springfield Gravity Main - MWMC - Springfield Gravity Main - Private - Springfield Pressure Main - Springfield - Springfield Pressure Main - MWMC - Springfield Service Line - Springfield - Springfield0+00 Storm Water Infrastructure Lane County Private !Z !Z Clean Out Non-Access Point Springfield!Z Springfield$1 Private$1 Lane County!!Abandoned!!Springfield !!Private!!Area Drain Springfield !PA Private!PA Maintenance Hole Split Drain Vault""V Storm Water Pipes Type/Owner/Maintainer Gravity Main - Abandoned Gravity Main - Springfield - Springfield Gravity Main - Private - Springfield Gravity Main - Lane County - Springfield Open Channel - Springfield - Springfield Service Line - Springfield - Springfield Catch Basin Springfield "?B Lane County"?B Private"?B Lane CountyGH AbandonedGH Springfield GH PrivateGH Curb Inlet Oil & Water Separator³³WQ Springfield³Private³Junction BoxÉÉJ Other Structures 0+00 Storm Flow Water Quality Water Quality Facility Out Fall"!;Î In Flow!! Maintainer Maintainer Maintainer Maintainer Maintainer Maintainer Maintainer 43 77 77 Storm Water 58 800 58 Wastewater Improvement Agreements Sewer Hook-Ups Attachment 3a Attachment 3, Page 28 of 32 SMSSSSSSSSSAttachment 3b Attachment 3, Page 29 of 32 Attachment 3c Attachment 3, Page 30 of 32 SUBJECT SITEMETRO PLAN AMENDMENT Phase Drawn By Checked Date © 2017, SCHIRMER SATRE GROUP Project Number SCHIRMER SATRE GROUP, PLANNERS, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS AND ENVIRONMENTALSPECIALISTS, EXPRESSLY RESERVE ITS COMMON LAW COPYRIGHT AND OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTSIN THESE PLANS. THESE PLANS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANYFORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO A THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF SCHIRMER SATRE GROUP. IN THEEVENT OF UNAUTHORIZED REUSE OF THESE PLANS BY A THIRD PARTY, THE THIRD PARTY SHALLHOLD SCHIRMER SATRE GROUP HARMLESS. SCHIRMER SATRE GROUP 375 West 4th, Suite 201, Eugene OR 97401 Phone: 541.686.4540 Fax: 541.686.4577 www.schirmersatre.com DescriptionRevisionsDate#MA-1(MAP 17-03-26-24, LOTS 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000) CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC 5th STREET PROPERTY jas rms 2-3-2017 1668 LEGENDMETRO PLAN LAND USE DIAGRAMEXISTING PLANNntsNOT FORCONSTRUCTION ntsNPROJECT AREAVICINITY MAPAttachment 3, Page 31 of 32 SUBJECT SITEMETRO PLAN AMENDMENT Phase Drawn By Checked Date © 2017, SCHIRMER SATRE GROUP Project Number SCHIRMER SATRE GROUP, PLANNERS, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS AND ENVIRONMENTALSPECIALISTS, EXPRESSLY RESERVE ITS COMMON LAW COPYRIGHT AND OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTSIN THESE PLANS. THESE PLANS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANYFORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO A THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF SCHIRMER SATRE GROUP. IN THEEVENT OF UNAUTHORIZED REUSE OF THESE PLANS BY A THIRD PARTY, THE THIRD PARTY SHALLHOLD SCHIRMER SATRE GROUP HARMLESS. SCHIRMER SATRE GROUP 375 West 4th, Suite 201, Eugene OR 97401 Phone: 541.686.4540 Fax: 541.686.4577 www.schirmersatre.com DescriptionRevisionsDate#(MAP 17-03-26-24, LOTS 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000) CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC 5th STREET PROPERTY jas rms 2-3-2017 1668 METRO PLAN LAND USE DIAGRAMPROPOSED PLANNntsMA-2NOT FORCONSTRUCTION ntsNPROJECT AREAVICINITY MAPLEGENDLEGENDAttachment 3, Page 32 of 32 Attachment 4, Page 1 of 48 Zoning Map Amendment Submittal Requirements Checklist 1.The application fee - Refer to the Development Code Fee Schedule for the appropriate application and postage fee. A copy of the Fee Schedule is available at the Development Services Department. 2.Deed - A copy of the deed to show ownership. 3.Vicinity Map – A map of the property and the surrounding vicinity which includes the existing zoning and plan designations. One copy must be reduced to 8 ½” by 11” which will be mailed as part of the required neighboring property notification packet. 4.Findings - Before the Planning Commission can approve a Zone/Overlay District Change Request, there must be information submitted by the applicant which adequately supports the request. The Criteria the Planning Commission will consider in making their decision is listed below. If insufficient or unclear data is submitted by the applicant, there is a good change that the request will be denied or delayed. It is recommended that you hire a professional planner or land use attorney to prepare your findings. Criteria of Approval (Quasi-judicial) SDC 12.030 requires that in reaching a decision on these actions, the Planning Commission or Hearings Official map approve, approve with conditions or deny a quasi- judicial Zoning Map amendment based upon approval criteria (a)-(c), below. (a)Consistency with the Metro Plan policies and the Metro Plan Diagram; (b)Consistency with applicable Refinement Plans, Plan District maps, Conceptual Development Plans and functional plans; and (c) The property is presently provided with adequate public facilities, services and transportation networks to support the use, or these facilities, services and transportation networks are planned to be provided concurrently with the development of the property. Attachment 4, Page 2 of 48 January 31, 2017 CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC – 5TH STREET PROPERTY Zoning Map Amendment Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lot 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 WRITTEN STATEMENT In accordance with SDC 5.22-100 through SDC 5.22-125, Zoning Map Amendments, the applicant, CMC Development LLC, is requesting that the City of Springfield review this Zoning Map Amendment request for Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 of Assessor’s Map 17-03-26-24. The applicant requests the City determine that the proposal complies with the approval criteria and approve this application. To aid Springfield staff in their review, the following information is provided. Background Local long-range land use is governed by the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan). Often supplemented with more specific refinement plans and/or neighborhood plans, the Metro Plan is then followed by site-specific zoning. Sometimes, zoning is comprised of base zoning and overlay zones. In this instance, the Q Street Refinement Plan is the applicable refinement plan and the Drinking Water Protection Overlay Zone is the applicable overlay zone for the subject property. Further information regarding individual tax lots is available in the table below. Physical Setting The site is located north of Q Street in north-central Springfield. It is comprised of six tax lots (Map 17-03- 26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000) and is approximately 3.35 acres in size. The site abuts 5th Street to the west, with single family housing to the north and east and a commercial shopping center to the south. Development Objective The development objective is to change the Metro Plan designation and base zoning of the six tax lots from Low Density Residential (LDR) to a mix of Medium Density Residential (MDR) and High Density Residential (HDR). See the table above for more information. Therefore, the applicant is submitting concurrent Metro Plan Amendment and Zone Change applications for the subject property. Map and Tax Lot Metro Plan Designation Q Street Refinement Plan Zoning (Existing) Zoning (Proposed) 17-03-26-24 / 4600 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Base: Low Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Base: Medium Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24 / 4601 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Base: Low Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Base: High Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24 / 4700 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Base: Low Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Base: High Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24 / 4800 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Base: Low Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Base: High Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24 / 4900 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Base: Low Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Base: High Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24 / 5000 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Base: Low Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Base: Medium Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Attachment 4, Page 3 of 48 COMPLIANCE WITH ZONING MAP AMENDMENT REQUIREMENTS Applicable sections of the code are in bold italics, followed by proposed findings of fact in normal text. SDC 5.22-105 Purpose. The purpose of this section is to provide standards and procedures for legislative and quasi-judicial amendments to the Official Zoning Maps. Response: The proposed Zoning Map amendment complies with all applicable standards and procedures. SDC 5.22-110 Review. Official Zoning Map amendments may be initiated by the Director, the Planning Commission, the Hearings Official, the City Council, or a citizen. Zoning Map amendments shall be reviewed as follows: A. Legislative Zoning Map amendments involve broad public policy decisions that apply to other than an individual property owner, generally affecting a large area and/or require a concurrent Metro Plan diagram amendment as specified in Section 5.14.100. Legislative Zoning Map amendments are reviewed using Type IV procedure. 1. Metro Plan diagram amendment determination. An amendment to the Metro Plan diagram shall be required if the proposed Zoning Map amendment is not consistent with the Metro Plan diagram. Both amendments may be processed concurrently. 2. Transportation Planning Rule Compliance. Where applicable, legislative Zoning Map amendments shall be reviewed to determine whether the application significantly affects a transportation facility, as specified in Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-012-0060. In this case a Traffic Impact Study shall be submitted as specified in Section 4.2-105A.4. B. Quasi-judicial Zoning Map amendments involve the application of existing policy to a specific factual setting, generally affecting a single or limited group of properties and may or may not include a Metro Plan diagram amendment. Quasi-judicial Zoning Map amendments are reviewed using Type III procedure, unless a Metro Plan diagram amendment is required. In this case, the Quasi-judicial Zoning Map amendment will be raised to a Type IV review. Response: The proposed Zoning Map amendment will comply with the criteria in SDC 5.14-110(B). The amendment is quasi-judicial in nature and includes a limited group of properties with a concurrent Metro Plan diagram amendment. Both proposed amendments are subject to Type IV review. SDC 5.22-115 Criteria. A. Quasi-judicial Zoning Map Amendments. The Planning Commission or Hearings Official may approve, approve with condition or deny a quasi-judicial Zoning Map amendment based on approval criteria C.1. through 3., below. The Planning Commission or Hearings Official shall make the final local decision on all quasi- judicial Zoning map amendments that do not include a Metro Plan diagram amendment. B. Legislative Zoning Map Amendments and Quasi-judicial Zoning Map Amendments Raised to a Type IV Review. The Planning Commission or Hearings Official may make a recommendation to the City Council to approve, approve with conditions or deny Zoning Map amendments and Metro Plan diagram amendments based upon approval criteria in Subsection C.1. through 4., below. The City Council shall make the final local decision on all Zoning Map amendments involving a Metro Plan diagram amendment. C. Zoning Map amendment criteria of approval: 1. Consistency with applicable Metro Plan policies and the Metro Plan diagram; Attachment 4, Page 4 of 48 2. Consistency with applicable Refinement Plans, Plan District maps, Conceptual Development Plans and functional plans; and 3. The property is presently provided with adequate public facilities, services and transportation networks to support the use, or these facilities, services and transportation networks are planned concurrently with the development of the property. 4. Legislative Zoning Map amendments that involve a Metro Plan Diagram amendment shall: a. Meet the approval criteria specified in Section 5.14-100; and b. Comply with Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-012-0060, where applicable. Response to SDC 5.22-115.A. – B. The proposed Zoning Map amendment will be processed as a quasi-judicial decision. The amendment is submitted concurrently with a Metro Plan diagram amendment and therefore, will be processed as a Type IV decision. Response to SDC 5.22-115.C.1. The Zoning Map amendment is consistent with the Metro Plan policies and diagram. It does not amend any Metro Plan policies or text. The Zoning Map amendment is submitted concurrently with a Metro Plan amendment. The following Metro Plan policies support the proposed zone change:  Metro Plan Policy 1. – The UGB and sequential development shall continue to be implemented as an essential means to achieve compact urban growth. The provision of all urban services shall be concentrated inside the UGB. The Metro Plan policies define compact growth as “the filling in of vacant and underutilized lands in the UGB”. The parcels affected by this application are currently within the Eugene portion of the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and are within the city limits of Eugene. The proposed rezoning is in compliance with the acknowledged comprehensive plan, implementing ordinances, and future development will have access to urban facilities and services. As such, the subject site provides for compact urban growth and essential services.  Metro Plan Policy A.1 – Encourage the consolidation of residentially zoned parcels to facilitate more options for development and redevelopment of such parcels. The proposed rezoning will permit more options for development and ensure subsequent development is clustered together. Through rezoning the six parcels as a mixture of high and medium density residential, the subject site is able to balance the need to accommodate greater density with the need to appropriately transition from the single family neighborhoods to the north and east to higher density on the subject site and more intense commercial zoning to the south.  Metro Plan Policy A.3 – Provide an adequate supply of buildable residential land within the UGB for the 20-year planning period at the time of Periodic Review. As mentioned in the concurrent Metro Plan Amendment application, 824 buildable acres of land within the Springfield UGB are zoned Low Density Residential. This equates to 60% of Springfield’s residential development capacity. Yet, only 95 buildable acres are designated as Medium Density Residential, totaling a mere 30% of residential development capacity, and 16 buildable acres are designated as High Density Residential, which provides only 4% of the City’s residential development capacity. To accommodate expected population growth, Springfield will need to provide 5,980 new dwelling units. While there is a total surplus of residential land, which includes a 72 gross acre surplus of Low Density Residential land, there is only a surplus of 18 gross acres of Medium Density Residential land and a deficit of 34 gross acres of High Density Residential land. Attachment 4, Page 5 of 48  Metro Plan Policy A.4. – Use annexation, provision of adequate public facilities and services, rezoning, redevelopment, and infill to meet the 20-year projected housing demand. See response to Metro Plan Policy A.3.  Metro Plan Policy A.7 – Endeavor to provide key urban services and facilities required to maintain a five-year supply of serviceable, buildable residential land. The site is located inside the UGB and subsequent development will have access urban facilities and services.  Metro Plan Policy A.9 – Establish density ranges in local zoning and development regulations that are consistent with the broad density categories of this plan. The proposed rezoning will result in development that meets the broad density requirements of the Metro Plan.  Metro Plan Policy A.10 – Promote higher residential density inside the UGB that utilizes existing infrastructure. Improves the efficiency of public services and facilities, and conserves rural resource lands outside the UGB. As previously mentioned, the rezoning will result in higher density development than what is allowed on the current low density residential zoning. In this manner, a higher number of residents will use existing infrastructure. This creates more efficient use of public services and facilities, as a greater number of people are living in proximity to existing facility. Moreover, rural resource lands are conserved, as more units are provided within the UGB.  Metro Plan Policy A.11 – Generally locate higher density residential development near employment or commercial services, in proximity to major transportation systems or within transportation-efficient nodes. The proposed rezoning will locate medium and high density residential development near Q Street, 5th Street, and Pioneer Parkway, all of which are key corridors in the City of Springfield. The subject site is also located near parks, schools, and services and amenities. It is also located near an EmX line (Pioneer Parkway) and both Q Street and 5th Street have transit service. It is an ideal location to provide access and opportunities to commercial services, education, employment, and major transportation systems.  Metro Plan Policy A.12 – Coordinate higher density residential development with the provision of adequate infrastructure and services, open space, and other urban amenities. As mentioned in the response to Metro Plan Policy A.10, the proposed rezoning will be coordinated with ensuring adequate infrastructure and services are provided to the subject site. Open space will be provided through the requirements found throughout the Springfield Development Code.  Metro Plan Policy A.13 – Increase overall residential density in the metropolitan area by creating more opportunities for effectively designed in-fill, redevelopment, and mixed use while considering impacts of increased residential density on historic, existing and future neighborhoods. The proposed zoning mix provides for lots that abut single family homes to be zoned medium density residential (Tax Lots 4600 and 5000), so there is an effective and compatible transition between densities. In short, the lots proposed to be zoned medium density residential act as a “buffer” between the lots proposed as high density residential and adjacent single family homes. The lots proposed to be rezoned high density residential (Tax Lots 4601, 4700, 4800, and 4900) abut Fred Meyer and 5th Street, which is an ideal location for higher density zoning, as it is not adjacent to nearby single family housing. Furthermore, the proposed zoning allows for effective infill development that maximizes land utility.  Metro Plan Policy A.17 – Provide opportunities for a full range of choice in housing type, density, size, cost, and location. As the proposed rezoning includes both medium and high density designations on the same subject site, there are many opportunities provided to ensure a full range of housing choices. Attachment 4, Page 6 of 48  Metro Plan Policy A.19 – Encourage residential development in or near downtown core areas in both cities. The subject site is a mile away from downtown Springfield and is located a half mile from a key transit corridor.  Metro Plan Policy A.23 – Reduce impacts of higher density residential and mixed-use development on surrounding uses by considering site, landscape, and architectural design standards or guidelines in local zoning and development regulations. The proposed rezoning is compatible with surrounding uses and therefore, shall have minimal impact on adjacent commercial and residential uses. As the proposal calls for a mix of medium and high density residential to best transition to and from adjacent uses, the suggested zoning is compatible with this policy. Therefore, the Metro Plan diagram will not be inconsistent with the zoning map amendment, should both amendments be approved. Response to SDC 5.22-115.C.2. As an amendment to the Metro Plan automatically amends the applicable refinement plan, in this case, the Q Street Refinement Plan, the proposed Zoning Map amendment is consistent with the applicable refinement plan. The City of Springfield also previously adopted the Residential Land Use and Housing Element of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan. As specified in the written statement submitted along with the concurrent Metro Plan Amendment application, 824 buildable acres of land are zoned Low Density Residential. This equates to 60% of Springfield’s residential development capacity. Yet, only 95 buildable acres are designated as Medium Density Residential, totaling a mere 30% of residential development capacity, and 16 buildable acres are designated as High Density Residential, which provides only 4% of the City’s residential development capacity. To accommodate expected population growth, Springfield will need to provide 5,980 new dwelling units. While there is a total surplus of residential land, which includes a 72 gross acre surplus of Low Density Residential land, there is only a surplus of 18 gross acres of Medium Density Residential land and a deficit of 34 gross acres of High Density Residential land. Therefore, the proposed rezoning will not have an adverse impact on available Low Density Residential land within the urban growth boundary. Response to SDC 5.22-115.C.3. Finally, the subject site has adequate public facilities, services, and transportation network to support the proposed use. Stormwater and wastewater service are both available to the site through the system in 5th Street. There is also sufficient water and electric system capacity to serve the site. Moreover, the subject site fronts onto 5th Street, which is a minor arterial with bike lanes, sidewalks, and a center turn lane. There is also a LTD Park and Ride location in 5th Street in the Fred Meyer parking lot, immediately south of the subject property. Transit service is also provided by LTD via Route 17, which provides service to and from Springfield Station. Response to SDC 5.22-115.C.4.a. – b. Regarding the criteria contained in SDC 5.22-115.C.4.a and SDC 5.22-115.C.4.b., compliance with the approval criteria specified in Section 5.14-100 is established in the concurrent Metro Plan Amendment. Compliance with OAR 660-012-0060 is also established in the written statement for the concurrent Metro Plan amendment. The change from Low Density Residential to Medium and High Density Residential The result of this plan amendment and zone change application would increase the trip generation potential of the subject parcels, so the applicant will address the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) to determine if Attachment 4, Page 7 of 48 there’s a significant affect. The TPR looks capacity and performance to be consistent with the adopted Transportation System Plan. A trip generation comparison and capacity/LOS analysis is being performed at the nearby intersections at 5th Street at Q Street and 5th Street at Hayden Bridge Road. The analysis will compare the trip generation under the proposed designation with the potential trip generation under the existing designation to determine if there is an impact as defined in OAR 660-012-0060 under the planning horizon analysis year of the current TSP. A TPR Analysis will be included in the application package. Therefore, SDC 5.22-115 is met. SDC 5.22-120 Conditions. The Approval Authority may attach conditions as may be reasonably necessary in order to allow the Zoning Map amendment be granted. Response: The applicant acknowledges this potentiality and will comply with any conditions of approval attached to the proposed amendment. SDC 5.22-125 Mobile Home Park Notice. If a Zoning Map amendment involves property containing an existing mobile home park, the Director shall provide written notice to each unit in the mobile home park as specified in Section 5.2-115 and as specified in ORS 90.630(5). Response: There is no existing mobile home park included within the boundaries of the Zoning Map amendment. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. IN CONCLUSION Based on the information contained in this written statement, the applicant believes that the requested Zoning Map amendment can be approved. If there are any questions regarding the above information, or other application materials, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (541) 686-4540 or rick@schirmersatre.com. Sincerely, Richard M. Satre Richard M. Satre, AICP, ASLA, CSI, Principal Schirmer Satre Group Attachment 4, Page 8 of 48 November 28, 2016 CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC 5TH STREET PROPERTY Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 Land Use Analysis The key to successful property development in Oregon is thorough research and analysis of prospective regulations and requirements. This is followed by the planning, design, and regulatory approval processes. Success comes by taking things one step at a time; each step providing clarity and focus for the next round of activity. The first step is research and analysis, where we identify land use, physical, and environmental requirements, as well as lay the groundwork for next steps. The results of our initial land use analysis is presented below. This analysis is based on public data and documents existing conditions and potentially applicable land use regulations. I. BACKGROUND A. Planning Context Local long-range land use is governed by the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) and is often supplemented with a more specific refinement plan and/or neighborhood plan. The Metro Plan and if applicable, refinement plan, is then followed by site- specific zoning. Sometimes, zoning is comprised of base zoning and additional overlay zones. The Q Street Refinement Plan and the Drinking Water Protection Overlay Zone are applicable to the subject property. Excerpt Springfield Zoning Map 2016 Map and Tax Lot Metro Plan Designation Q Street Refinement Plan Zoning 17-03-26-24 / 4600 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Base: Low Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24 / 4601 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Base: Low Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24 / 4700 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Base: Low Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24 / 4800 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Base: Low Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24 / 4900 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Base: Low Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24 / 5000 Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Base: Low Density Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Attachment 4, Page 9 of 48 CMC Development LLC – 5th Street Property Page 2 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 Schirmer Satre Group 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 (541) 686-4540 B. Physical Setting The site is located north of Q Street, in north-central Springfield. It is comprised of six tax lots (Map 17-03-26-24, tax lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000) and is approximately 3.35 acres in size. The site abuts 5th Street to the west, with single family housing to the north and east and a commercial shopping center to the south. Subject Property Google Earth May 29, 2016 C. Development Objective The development objective is to change the designation and zoning of the six tax lots from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium Density Residential (MDR) and/or High Density Residential (HDR). The potential zoning will be discussed more in-depth at a Development Issues Meeting (DIM). II. LAND USE ANALYSIS A. Regulatory Review The following plans, documents and database sources were included in this review: 1. Planning and Zoning. a. Aerial Photographs (Google Earth and Bing Maps). b. Regional Land Information Database (RLID). c. Eugene – Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan). d. Springfield 2030 Plan. e. Q Street Refinement Plan. f. Springfield Zoning Map. 2. Transportation. a. Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area Transportation Plan (TransPlan). b. City of Springfield Street Classification Map and Conceptual Local Street Plan. c. Lane Transit District (LTD) System Map. 3. Utilities. a. Springfield Stormwater Facilities Master Plan. b. Springfield Wastewater Master Plan. c. Springfield Storm and Sanitary Infrastructure. d. Springfield Wellhead Protection Areas Map. e. Springfield Utility Board (SUB) – Water and Electric Infrastructure. 4. Natural Resources. a. Springfield Natural Resources Study Report b. Springfield Wetlands Map – National and Local Wetland Inventories c. Springfield Water Quality Limited Watercourses Map 5. Parks and Open Space. a. Willamalane Park and Recreation District Comprehensive Plan – Project Maps. Attachment 4, Page 10 of 48 CMC Development LLC – 5th Street Property Page 3 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 Schirmer Satre Group 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 (541) 686-4540 6. Development Standards. a. Springfield Development Code – Land Use Districts (Chapter 3), Development Standards (Chapter 4), and Land Use Process and Applications (Chapter 5) B. Findings. 1. Planning and Zoning. a. Jurisdiction: City of Springfield b. Metro Plan: Low Density Residential c. Base Zoning: Low Density Residential d. Refinement Plan: Q Street Refinement Plan e. Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Overlay Zone f. Map: 17-03-26-24 g. Tax Lots: 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 h. Acreage: Lot 4600: 1.32 acres Lot 4601: 0.18 acres Lot 4700: 0.53 acres Lot 4800: 0.40 acres Lot 4900: 0.46 acres Lot 5000: 0.46 acres 3.35 acres Attachment 4, Page 11 of 48 CMC Development LLC – 5th Street Property Page 4 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 Schirmer Satre Group 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 (541) 686-4540 2. Transportation. a. Metro Area TransPlan. The metro area’s adopted transportation plan¸ The Eugene – Springfield Transportation System Plan (TransPlan), adopted in 2001 and amended in 2002, does not include any projects within the vicinity of the subject property. b. City of Springfield Transportation System Plan. The City of Springfield’s transportation plan, adopted in 2014, does not include any projects within the vicinity of the subject’s property. c. Conceptual Local Street Plan. The City of Springfield Conceptual Local Street Plan depicts where future streets and street connections may be required. The current map, dated August 2012, does not show any new streets on or adjacent to the subject property. Excerpt Conceptual Local Street Plan City of Springfield d. Street Classification. Springfield’s Street Classification Map identifies 5th Street as a minor arterial. Each street classification carries with it a standard right-of-way (ROW). The standards for 5th Street is as follows: Street Classification Existing ROW Minimum ROW Min. Curb-to-Curb 5th Street Minor Arterial 60 feet 70 feet 48 feet e. Public Transit. The metro area’s public transit system, Lane Transit District (LTD), provides service to Springfield Station via Route 17 on 5th Street. There is a Park and Ride location on 5th Street in the Fred Meyer parking lot immediately south of the subject property. f. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities. There are bikes lanes, sidewalks, and a center turn lane on 5th Street. 3. Utilities. a. Stormwater and Wastewater. The subject site is located in the West Springfield/Q Street Basin. The Springfield Stormwater Facilities Master Plan identifies one capital improvement project, “Higher Priority CIP 4,” to address current issues around flooding of draining facilities during certain storm event conditions. Attachment 4, Page 12 of 48 CMC Development LLC – 5th Street Property Page 5 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 Schirmer Satre Group 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 (541) 686-4540 Capital Improvement Map Excerpt (Fig. 5-1) Stormwater Facilities Master Plan City of Springfield System Improvements Map Excerpt (Fig. 5-3) Sanitary Facilities Master Plan City of Springfield Stormwater service is available to the subject site through a 27 inch concrete pipe in 5th Street that runs along the same side of the street as the subject site. Wastewater service is also available to the site and there is a 10 inch concrete pipe that runs along 5th Street. There is also an 8 inch concrete pipe in a 20 foot right of way access strip that runs along the southern boundary line of tax lots 4601 and 4600. It also runs along the northern boundary of tax lots 4700 and 4800. Existing Sanitary and Storm Facilities City of Springfield Map 2009 b. Water and Electric Service. Lots 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 are served with a single ¾” water meter on 5th Street. There is sufficient capacity within the electric system to support the proposal. Existing Water Infrastructure Springfield Utility Board September 2016 Existing Electric Infrastructure Springfield Utility Board September 2016 Attachment 4, Page 13 of 48 CMC Development LLC – 5th Street Property Page 6 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 Schirmer Satre Group 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 (541) 686-4540 c. Wellhead Protection. The Springfield Wellhead Protection Areas Map lists the subject site as within the 20 year Time of Travel Zone and is therefore subject to the Drinking Water Protection Overlay District. Certain land use criteria may apply. Wellhead Protection Areas Map Excerpt City of Springfield January 2013 4. Natural Resources. a. Natural Resources Study. The Springfield Natural Resources Study does not identify any resources on or near the site. There are no wetland resources on or near the subject property, as well as no Water Quality Limited Watercourses on or near the property. 5. Parks and Open Space. a. Willamalane Park and Recreation District. There are no proposed park and recreation projects nearby the subject site. 6. Development Standards. The Springfield Development Code (SDC) is a comprehensive land use document that governs all lands within Springfield’s city limits and its urban services area. All six of the SDC chapters apply to the subject site, but three in particular are cited here. These include Chapter 3-Land Use Districts, Chapter 4-Development Standards, and Chapter 5-The Development Review Process and Applications. a. Within Chapter 3, the project will need to comply with SDC 3.2-210 Schedule of Use Categories, SDC 3.2-215 Base Zone Development Standards, and SDC 3.2-240 Multi-Unit Design Standards. b. Within Chapter 4, some of the applicable standards include requirements related to setbacks, height, building frontage, landscaping, and minimal parcel size. c. Within Chapter 5, the project will need to address Site Plan Review requirements. III. LAND USE APPLICATIONS Land use approval is required prior to the issuance of any building permits. Required land use applications for the subject property, in sequential order, are as follows. A. Development Issues Meetings (SDC 5.1-120A) 1. A Development Issues Meeting (DIM) is required for certain land use applications. For other applications, a Development Issues Meeting is voluntary. Regardless, a DIM is an excellent opportunity to present a development proposal and ask questions of city staff prior to generating a particular application. The meeting is tailored to address specific issues or concerns. 2. As part of the DIM process, the City of Springfield distributes application material to key staff that review, prepare for, and attend the meeting. Attachment 4, Page 14 of 48 CMC Development LLC – 5th Street Property Page 7 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 Schirmer Satre Group 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 (541) 686-4540 3. As this is not a land use decision, no official decision is issued. However, there is a take- away of city responses to submitted questions. 4. Meetings are generally scheduled 15 to 20 days from application submittal. B. Metro Plan Amendment (SDC 5.14-100) 1. A Metro Plan Amendment is a Type IV land use decision. A Type IV decision is a legislative decision and is described in SDC 5.1-140. It is a City Council decision and includes both public notice and a public hearing. An amendment or change to the Metro Plan diagram is known as a Metro Plan Amendment – Type II. 2. The application package is submitted to the city. There are number of specific steps that guide the processing of an application. These include: Pre-Submittal Meeting (SDC 5.1-120.C). A Pre-Submittal Meeting is Springfield’s process for determining if an application is complete and ready for processing. After submitting what the applicant believes is a complete application, the applicant meets with City representatives. The city aims to hold Pre-Submittal meetings within 7 to 14 days. The application submittal is reviewed and determined if it is complete and ready for processing. If not complete, the applicant is provided a list of items needing to be addressed. Re-Submittal. The application package is revised in accordance with Pre-Submittal comments. It is then re-submitted to the city and the city conducts a quick check to determine if the application is complete. State law requires an applicant to re-submit an application within 180 days. If this does not occur, the original application is null and void. If the applicant completes the application, the next step, Processing, begins. Processing. For a Type IV process, the initial public hearing held by the Planning Commission shall take place within 60 days of acceptance of a complete application. Public notice is provided at least 20 days before the public hearing and is provided to property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the property being reviewed, the local newspaper, appropriate neighborhood associations where applicable, and the newspaper. The Planning Commission will hold a hearing and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council’s will hold another public hearing and make the final decision, which goes into effect 30 days after the decision is made. The decision is appealable within 21 calendar days of the decision being issued. Type IV appeals go the Land Use Board of Appeals. C. Refinement Plan Amendment (SDC 1. A Refinement Plan Amendment application is a Type IV land use decision. When a Metro Plan amendment is enacted that requires an amendment to a refinement plan diagram for consistency, the Metro Plan diagram amendment automatically amends the refinement plan diagram if no amendment to the refinement plan text is needed. A Refinement Plan Amendment and Metro Plan Amendment can be processed concurrently. 2. For specific information on application submittal and process, see the section on Metro Plan Amendments above. D. Zone Change (SDC 5.22-100) 1. A Zone Change application is a Type IV land use decision when it includes concurrent amendments to the Metro Plan diagram and a refinement plan. The property is designated and zoned Low Density Residential in the Metro Plan diagram, City of Springfield Zoning Map, and Q Street Refinement Plan. Therefore, a Zone Change application is required for the applicant to rezone the property to Medium Density Residential and/or High Density Residential. A Type IV land use decision is a legislative application and is described in SDC 5.1-140. It is a City Council decision and includes both public notice and a public hearing. 2. The application package is submitted to the city. There are a number of specific steps that guide the processing of an application. These include: Attachment 4, Page 15 of 48 CMC Development LLC – 5th Street Property Page 8 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 Schirmer Satre Group 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 (541) 686-4540 Pre-Submittal Meeting (SDC 5.1-120.C). A Pre-Submittal Meeting is Springfield’s process for determining if an application is complete and ready for processing. After submitting what the applicant believes is a complete application, the applicant meets with City representatives. The city aims to hold Pre-Submittal meetings within 7 to 14 days. The application submittal is reviewed and determined if it is complete and ready for processing. If not complete, the applicant is provided a list of items needing to be addressed. Re-Submittal. The application package is revised in accordance with Pre-Submittal comments. It is then re-submitted to the city and the city conducts a quick check to determine if the application is complete. State law requires an applicant to re-submit an application within 180 days. If this does not occur, the original application is null and void. If the applicant completes the application, the next step, Processing, begins. Processing. For a Type IV process, notice is provided to property owners within 300 feet of the property being reviewed, as well as to the newspaper and appropriate neighborhood association where applicable. The Planning Commission will hold a hearing and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council’s will hold another public hearing and make the final decision, which goes into effect 30 days after the decision is made. The decision is appealable within 21 calendar days of the decision being issued. Type IV appeals go the Land Use Board of Appeals. E. Site Plan Review (SDC 5.17-100) 1. Site Plan Review is a Type II land use application that provides a process to regulate the manner in which land is used and developed, ensuring compliance with various public policies and objectives. In Springfield, Site Plan Review is required for most new development, additions, or expansions. It is a Planning Director decision and includes public notice, but no public hearing. 2. The application package is submitted to the city and the application is processed. There are a number of required steps that make up this process. These include: Pre-Submittal Meeting (SDC 5.1-120.C). A Pre-Submittal Meeting is Springfield’s process for determining if an application is complete and ready for processing. After submitting what the applicant believes is a complete application, the applicant meets with City representatives. The city aims to hold Pre-Submittal meetings within 7 to 14 days. The application submittal is reviewed and determined if it is complete and ready for processing. If not complete, the applicant is provided a list of items needing to be addressed. Re-Submittal. The application package is revised in accordance with Pre-Submittal comments. It is then re-submitted to the city and the city conducts a quick check to determine if the application is complete. State law requires an applicant to re-submit an application within 180 days. If this does not occur, the original application is null and void. If the applicant completes the application, the next step, Processing, begins. Processing. Notice (7 days); Public Comment (14 days); Review (21-35 days); and Staff Report (generally within 60-75 days of the application being deemed complete). Under state law, the date a decision is effective and any allowance for local appeals must be within 120 days of an application being deemed complete. 3. For a Type II process, the staff report contains a decision – approval, approval with conditions, or denial. The report is mailed to the applicant and any parties who submitted public comment or otherwise participated in the process. 4. The decision is appealable within 15 calendar days of the decision being issued. Type II appeals go to the Planning Commission. There is new public notice and an updated staff report. A public hearing is held by the Planning Commission. The Commission will uphold, modify, or reverse the decision. Attachment 4, Page 16 of 48 CMC Development LLC – 5th Street Property Page 9 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 Schirmer Satre Group 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 (541) 686-4540 5. If the decision is not appealed, the decision is in effect 15 calendar days after the initial staff decision. If the decision is appealed, the decision is in effect when the appeal decision is rendered. F. Final Site Plan Review (SDC 5.17-135) 1. The Final Site Plan submittal incorporates all approval conditions from the Site Plan Review decision. 2. The application is reviewed for completeness. The complete application is reviewed by staff and a Type I (no public notice or hearing) decision is issued. Upon approval, the Planning Director drafts a Development Agreement for signing by the City of Springfield and the developer. 3. A positive decision (approval) is based on staff finding compliance with the conditions of approval. 4. A Final Site Plan Review is a Type I process. There are no appeals available for a Type I process. 5. The Site Plan Review application is in effect upon the execution of the Development Agreement. 6. Final Site Plan Review must be submitted within 90 days of the initial Site Plan Review decision. Following that, there is a 30-day completeness review period and a 15 to 30 day processing period. Final Site Plan and Development Agreement is null and void if construction does not begin within 2 years of signing the Development Agreement. G. Drinking Water Protection (SDC 3.3-200) 1. The Drinking Water Protection (DWP) Overlay District is established to protect aquifers used as potable water supply sources from contamination. DWP requirements establish procedures and standards for the physical use and storage of hazardous or other materials harmful to groundwater by requiring development approval for new and existing land uses. 2. Drinking Water Protection and Site Plan Review applications can be submitted concurrently. 3. Drinking Water Protection applications are a Type I process. It is a staff decision with no public notice. In that regard, Process and Decision are the same as for Site Plan Review. 4. A Type I decision is not appealable. 5. The decision is in effect the day it is issued. IV. PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN A site plan has been generated for the proposed development of the property. It is attached hereto. A site plan has great value in assisting with initial land use analysis and in providing an explanation and the asking questions in a pre-application meeting. As detailed plans will of course be required for Site Plan Review and any other applications, it is never too soon to be thinking of the physical arrangement of contemplated improvements. V. ATTACHED INFORMATION 1. Planning and Zoning a. Google Earth – Aerial Photograph with Site Boundaries. b. Bing Maps – Aerial Photograph. c. Lane Regional Information Database – Tax Lot Map. d. City of Springfield – Refinement Plan Map. e. City of Springfield – Base Zoning. 2. Transportation a. Metro Area TransPlan – Projects Map. b. City of Springfield – Street Classification Map. 3. Utilities Attachment 4, Page 17 of 48 CMC Development LLC – 5th Street Property Page 10 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 Schirmer Satre Group 375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 (541) 686-4540 a. City of Springfield – Existing Stormwater and Wastewater Infrastructure Map. b. Springfield Utility Board (SUB) – Existing Water Infrastructure Map. c. Springfield Utility Board (SUB) – Existing Electric Infrastructure Map. VI. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION The above information represents a brief outline of known applicable planning, zoning and site development requirements for the contemplated development of the subject property. We recommend scheduling a DIM to clarify and/or confirm the findings herein, as well as to discuss potential rezoning of the subject site. We hope this initial land use analysis proves helpful. Our office is available to discuss these findings, provide additional graphics upon request, or assist with additional project needs. Sincerely, Richard M. Satre Richard M. Satre, AICP, ASLA, CSI Principal Schirmer Satre Group Attachment 4, Page 18 of 48 Attachment 1a Attachment 4, Page 19 of 48 Attachment 1b Attachment 4, Page 20 of 48 RRRRRR70'61.53'145.92'33.03'60.87'69.09'1L=47.84'T153.70'WEST 237.92'86'6101S79°59'W 304.90'76.98'94'61.53'1ST76.83'124.68' M/L80'SOUTH 125.61'160'183.20'S00°01'37"W 180'60'84'773.25'86'25'S67 °54'ER=46'7N89°49'38"W117'52.32'43.86'N80³05'47"E 573.94'NORTH 147.68'72'LC=34.78'R=20'NORTH176.33'WEST220.03'60'S45°W100'140'130'2008-85.29'20'116.56'33.21'200050'60'N00°15'20"E300'92.24'25.45'35.01'91.80'S00°08'W70'137.92'N00°08'ES80°W 65'11.6'60'STREET15'62.15'N00°06'45"E61'60'NORTHIP243230'61.53'IP130'130'52'WARDELL8'8'S00°08'13"ETHREE EIGHTY Q STDLC 4820'199'50'66.25'N89°58'45"ES89°58'45"WN00°01'37"ESOUTH 174'EAST 100'1' STIPS89°55'W 310'N00°06'45"E313.50'25'72.96'75.20'85.28'3RD STSOUTHLC=S25°13'25"E65'82'61'(84')P 24EVERTT60'95'95.40'70'105'N00°15'20"E54.55'31.93'N84°E27.56'47.49'95.91'S89°44'10"E35.01'R=20'S34°35' 3 5 " W 290.40'177.9'20.33'N69°12'W41.17'LC=31.11'S56°28'WN00°08'E4100'100'70'60.96'105.42'116.26'84.60'150'152.40'140'N00°08'ENORTH6.02'EAST65.4'70'60'NORTH 158.37'42.84'118.15'130.30'S41°32'04"E 54.90'61.48'NORTH97.89'N78°15'44"EL=39.9 2'N18°03'32"EN33°29'07"W2750'135'61.53'61.53'61.53'99.80'NORTH115.32'133.70'566.65'52'104.72'66'WEST153.62'EAST174.52'125'STREET118'64.6'299.61'74.6'74.6'CONDOMINIUMSDLC 49125.92' (124.91')144.91'268.82'144.91'85'50'37.5'2.5' STRIP43.20'S89°58'45"W 300'92.55'68.75'S 35575EAST 137.92'IP25'145.92'S89°55'WS89°54'E313.5'70.41'75.20'75.20'85.29'85.28'85.29'85.28'N89°49'38"W 597'571.80'38.28'300'EAST 175'S00°36'54"W67'WEST 86.10'190.83'119.30'61.07'25'EAST 154.78'98-P1196STREET87.08'28.73'60'1800S.E. COR.J.HALSTEADD.L.C. 4787.72'60'60'95'95'63.07'70'80'85'85'86'SOUTHNORTHEAST 140'140'15'15.71'106.49'116.36'S79°59'WN48°15'ES38°E S34°03'55"WS23°10'E 35.0 1'35.02'N67°22'E50'18.6'60.97'101.91'111.70'89.3'22.36'69.40'68'77'258144.8'WEST 300'70'60.96'60.96'60'60'60'148.76'S00°08'W75.14'60'55'80'84.60'19.60'150'82'63.92'EASTN80°E 637.20'N79°56'15"E 571.96'S80°W 572.20'49.40'300'EASEMENTN00°08'E60'N00°02'E15'N80°E 574.9'37.4'110.82'67.21'43.86'70'60.91'55.54'61.22'91.09'9.58'NORTH 137.29'26'58.81'64.47'96.20'91.08'27.48'60'105'SOUTH 216.84'30'30'LC=45.72'S47°0 4'4 7"E LC=3 8'LC=54.54'2NDADD232528ACRESWARDELLEAST 565.74'STREET61.53'61.53'61.53'61.53'99.80'99.80'99.80'N00°06'45"EN00°06'45"EWEST 430.94'10' EASEMENT130'20'133.70'20'(176')(176')150'ACRESADD13.15'90'25.67'347.94'567.05'87.66'229.75'S00°01'E153.62'271.09'382.55'150'137.99'125'NORTHN85°54'E 569.30'30.15'5TH108'74.6'74.6'299.61'10'10'NE CORNW COR20'(124.91')(144.91')80'80'80'199'SOUTH 174'299.61'140'130'75'85'160'160'122'2.5'116.80'N89°58'45"ES00°01'37"WPCL 21100IPP2257S 41089130'51.21'29'29'60'35.29'56005701312.5'24'72.96'168'72.96'N89°54'W 627'S0°05'E85.92'N89°54'W 313.50'602'59.97'70.41'72.96'25'145.92'145.92'313.5'75.20'75.20'S0°08'W 75.20'85.29'85.29'85.29'85.29'N0°08'E5'7421SSTREET110'163.62'LC=S56°28'WEAST 100'WEST 100'85'NORTH65'115.71'67'15'S0°07'04"WS0°07'04"W119.30'84'25'SOUTH120.69'EAST 155'50063KENPLATQ566.76'566.81'17182029'29'60'S39771COMMON AREA1701S36900PARCEL A 1'60'60.87'S.W. COR.W.SPENCERD.LC. 50STREET7THS89°54'E 171.78'95.40'63.07'85.40'80'105'S00°15'20"W40.08'S89°44'10"E88.55'WEST 125'66.20'59.80'114.27'175'137.19'N19°E91.37'27.04'S70°E52.59'N22°37'40"E22.5 6'S89°44'10"E73'42.40'61'70.51'SOUTHN69°12'30"W 170.30'N69°12'W8.38'41.95'20'R=28'80.62'93.14'3610994'70'70'60.96'60'60'75.08'S00°08'W 88.03'75.20'55'80'117'82'WEST 53'SOUTHS79°56'15"W127.09'80.88'5'6.02'S00°02'W565.95'23.6'48.15'65.4'70'SOUTH138.85'53.91'86.37'44.56'S85°57'41"E61'30'26.5'81.21'S18°03'32"W60'105'NORTHEASTNORTHWEST 565.62'20'N26°15'08"EL=35.67'L=58.38'LC =22.68'TO2226293031135'61.76'61.76'61.53'61.53'99.80'NORTH 99.80'NORTH431.33'153.70'130'130'130'133.70'150'115.32'TO104.64'76.83'566.76'555.05'230.13'220.10'66'12.10'567.21'425' M/L175'133.94'WEST 125'SOUTH 3.55'14.14'100'74.6'74.6'74.6'EW POWERS20'124.91'(144.91')125.92'268.82'145.92'145.92'140'130'75'50'66.25'312.5'10'122'140'S89°58'45"W116.80'S00°01'37"W90.05'PCL 12001-P1439EAST 100'NORTH 299.61'29'SOUTH 125.61'P 1P 2N00°01'37"E 180'24'72.96'168'72.96'627'N89°55'W 110'S89°54'E 313.50'85.92'S00°07'25"WS00°06'45"W 218'25'72.96'292'75.20'75.20'85.28'85.29'85.28'85.28'N89°49'38"WIP6391.23'26.90'31.11' R=28'6.06' R=30'WEST 74.83'N88°34'50"W 100'N00°06'54"E115.81'N0°07'04"E 67'15'123.50'151.50'84'67.45'60'NORTH60'EAST 120.69'P 1852GARYTPUBLIC ROAD1516192135.69'23.83'24.71'29'29'57001900DUCK0.24 AC0.39 AC1.24 AC0.53 AC0.14 AC0.12 AC0.19 AC0.58 AC0.38 AC0.23 AC0.23 AC0.18 AC0.63 AC7.76 AC0.4 AC1.16 AC0.7 AC0.21 AC0.53 AC0.34 AC0.15 AC0.2 AC1.29 AC0.54 AC0.13 AC0.2 AC1.04 AC0.12 AC0.25 AC0.31 AC0.21 AC0.25 AC0.01 AC0.16 AC0.2 AC0.23 AC0.24 AC0.17 AC0.21 AC2.17 AC0.22 AC0.01 AC1.59 AC0.53 AC3700103104102200107110109108106105112111113300351135103512350935083507350635053800390040004100350435033502420042013501430043024314430343044313430743054306430943084310431143124504450645074508450945105000490048004700460146004500450551015100520053005102550055035502210022002300260025002400270227012700170027031600110212001400150111011300150017021000900100128003101320031003102320133003407340634053404340334023401404403402401801800700701702601602600502501550129003000019-00SEE MAP17032613SEE MAP17032623SEE MAP17032621SEE MAP17032624S002SEE MAP17032624S001SEE MAP17032612SEE MAP17032631SEE MAP17032642FOR ASSESSMENT ANDTAXATION ONLYS.E.1/4 N.W.1/4 SEC. 26 T.17S. R.3W. W.M.Lane County1" = 100'CANCELLED1800190020005701560057001100170117032624SPRINGFIELDSPRINGFIELD17032624LCATCAB - 2015-05-12 09:0REVISIONS10/05/2011 - LCAT155 - CONVERT MAP TO GIS05/11/2015 - LCAT115 - LLA BETWEEN TL'S 2900 & 3000 Attachment 1c Attachment 4, Page 21 of 48 I-105 Q ST S ST 5TH STM ST L ST N STBIKE PATH19TH STV ST R ST T ST U ST 2ND STDEBRA DR15TH STOLYMPIC ST QUINALT ST 12TH STPIONEER PARKWAY EASTPIONEER PARKWAY WEST9TH ST7TH ST8TH ST18TH STMILL ST17TH STMARKET ST3RD STHAYDEN BRIDGE RD 11TH STWATER ST1ST ST16TH STYOLANDA AVE HAYDEN BRIDGE WAY HARVEST LNWOODLANE DR 6TH STPLEASANT ST LAWNRIDGE AVE W Q ST CARTER LNRAMBLING DRMANOR DRVERA DR ON RAMP OLD ORCHARD LN SHADYLANE DRMCKENZIE CREST DRNORTHRIDGE A V E SEWARD AVE CASTLE DROTTO ST MANSFIELD ST PIEDMONT STROSE BLOSSOM DRWAYSIDE LN17TH PL10TH STVILLA WAYSCOTT RD GREENVALE DR ALLEN AVE DEL R O S E D R MOHAW K BLVDCENTENNIAL BLVD W N ST W K ST W M ST 20TH STRIVER KNOLL W AY HAYDEN BRIDGE PL CHEEK ST GROVEDALE DR11TH PLSHADY LP GRAND VISTA DR1ST PL 14TH PL14TH STCAMBRIDGE ST M I NT MEADOW WAY DELROSE AVE ROYALDEL L N DUMAS DRFAIRVIEW D RPRIVATE VERA ST WALNUT RIDGE DRCARRIAGE PL BONNIE LN FUCHSIA STMARTIN LUTHER KI NG J PKWYB L A CKSTONE ST MARCOLA RD PRASAD CT 10TH PL W OLYMPIC ST LOMOND AVE GREENBRIAR STWEMBERLY WAYSWANK CTYENTA AVE MOFFITT LN DELRO S E C T BRADLEY WAYESTATE CTRIVIERA CTI-105 6TH ST8TH ST 6TH ST10TH STSEWARD AVE DELROSE AVE 7TH STBLACKSTONE ST 16TH STI-105 18TH STPLEASANT ST 10TH STS ST 3RD STS ST 16TH STPRIVATE 17TH ST9TH STOLYMPIC ST ALLEN AVE L ST T ST M ST R ST M ST V ST 1ST STBIK E P A T H 17TH STV ST 10TH STT ST 15TH ST9TH ST8TH ST17TH STON R A M P 15TH ST11TH ST9TH ST7TH ST6TH STBIKE PATH PLEASANT ST 10TH STQ STREET REFINEMENT PLAN April 2008 Springfield,OR There are no warranties that accompany this product. Users assume all responsibility for any loss or damage arising from any error, omission or positional inaccuracy of this product. 0 1,000 2,000 Feet I Legend Community Commercial Neighborhood Commercial Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Public Land & Open Space Attachment 1d Attachment 4, Page 22 of 48 Attachment 1e Attachment 4, Page 23 of 48 AIRPORT RD CLEAR LAKE RD IRVING RDHWY99NPRAIRIERD ROYAL AVEGREENHILLRD BERTELSENRDW 18TH AVE CHAMBERSSTHILYARDSTE30THAVE W1STAVE CREST DR E33RDAVERIVERRD OAKWAYRDCRESCENT DR CENTENNIALBLVD COUNTRYCLUBRD DI LLARDRDGREENHILLRDELMIRA RDECHOHOLLOWRD C OB U R G R D GAMEFARMRDNI-105 ASPENSTWILKES DR HUNSAKER LN F OX RDW EST AMAZONDRAVEPOLKSTRDMCKINLEYSTLORANEHWY BLVD MI LLST21STST28THSTMARCOL A RD JASPERRD WDST EST 6THAVE 7THAVE W2NDAVE SENECARDHAYDENBRIDGERD MAINST MAINST OLYMPIC ST MARCOLA RD HAYDENBRIDGE R D 31STSTMcKENZIE HWY S P RIN GFIE L D-CRESWELLHWY42NDST58TH STCOMMERCIA L S T 32NDSTHIGHBANKSRD 48THST52THSTGAMEFARMRDGILHAMRDHORNPARKAVENBARGER AVE BOND RD BEACON DR W DANEBOW13THAVE W 11TH AVE DONALDSTW ILLAMETTESTBAILEYHILLRDBAILEY HILLR D I-5I-5I-5I-5SPENCERCREEKRD LORANEHW Y OAKPATCHRD5THST5THSTBEACON DR E BEACON DR E WILLOWCREEK RD TERRYDELTAHWYE13THAVE SAST GLENWOODBLVDW 39TH AVE W 40TH AVE B EL TLIN E RD W 18TH AVE CROW RD WALNUTSTMAINST CRESTDRBERTELSENRDTERRYW11THAVE 35THSTTHURSTONRD E40THCHAMBERSSTE11THAVEWASHINGTONSTPOLK STCITYVIEWSTW 18TH AVEWILLOWCREEKRDTERRYBARGERAVE ROYALAVE RI VERRDBELTLINERD MAXWELL RD FRANKLINNORTHWESTEXPRESSWAYIRVINGTONDRGREENHILLRDCOBURGRD E43RD AVEBRAEBURNBLANTONAGATE SPRINGWILLAMETTESTHARRISSTUNIVERSITYSTHILYARDSTPATTERSONSTHIGHSTOAKSTE18THAVEALDERSTPEARLST AGATESTVILLARDSTFRANKLINBLVD ORCHARD STHAWKINSBRITTANYWARRENBL A IR BLVDW5THAVEGARFIELDSTW6THAVE JEFFERSONSTLINCOLNSTRAI LR OAD BL VD W 5THAVE W11THAVE ROOSEVELTBLVD W1STAVE H WY 99 N BELTLINERDMAPLEFAIRFIELDPARK HOWARD SILVER GROVEDIVISION RIVERAVE SPRING CREEK SOUTHWOOD OAK MON T VANDUYNGARDENWAYBOGARTMINDANORKENZIERD BELTLINERD CHAD GILHAMRDLOCKECO B UR G RD AYRES WILLAKENZIERD ISLAND GOODPASTURECALYOUNGRD HENDERSONW 27TH AVEOLIVESTLINCOLNSTJEFFERSONSTLINCOLNSTJEFFERSONSTFRIENDLYSTW28THAVE W24THAVE WILLAMETTESTHARLOW RDHARLOW RD CENTENNIALGATEWAYST HOLLOWWILLAGILLESPIERDENID RD E ENIDRDWJEPPESENACRESBEAUERAWBREYLN W7THAVE ARTHUR STAMAZONPKWYBAILEYLN N O RT H WE ST EX P R E SS WA YROOSEVELTBLVD CHAMBERSSTGREENACRES CENTENNIAL BLVD BLVD I-105N.DE LTAHW Y COUNTYFARMLP COUNTYFARMLPVALLEYRIVERDR FRANKLINBLVDRIVERLOOP#2 M OH AW KBAILEYHILLRDW7THAVE GARFIELDSTRI VERRDVALLEYRIVERWAYVANBURENM cLE ANB LVD STOREYWAMAZONDREAMAZONDRW 29TH AVE E24THAVE E19THAVE PIONEERPARKWAYE46TH AVE CLUBRD I-5 GIMPL H ILL RD 19THSTGO NYEAE30THAVE HWY126 Hwy 126 Hwy126 Hwy126 Hwy126CREEK MILLPOND JASPERPARK ISLANDPARK AREA BUFORD RECREATION RANCH DORRIS PARK PARK BUTTE SKINNER PARKHENDRICKS ALTONBAKERPARK MILLRACE RIVER FORK WILLAMETTE MIDDLE COASTFORKWILLAMETTERIVER WILLAMALANE PARK MORSERANCHRIVERWILLAMETTE STATE PARK (MAHLON SWEETFIELD) EUGENEAIRPORT SPENCERBUTTEPARKAMAZON M C K E N ZIE RIVER M O H A W K R IV E R ARMITAGE CENTRALOREGONPACIFIC -COOS BAY BRANCHBURLINGTONNORTHERNRR U NI O N P A CIFIC R AILR O A D UNION P A C I FI CRAI LROADSISKIYOUBRANCHCENTRALOREGONPACIFICRRUNIONPACIF ICRR' $ $ ' $ ' '' '' $ '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' 92 .-,5 (/99 .-, .-,105 (/99 5 118 66332 6194861874 1 4 336 98 48625533 747 363 420 57 554 1397 1 3 432 481 7 8 39 542 527 44973715163515303 342 51654254954441245 9 3 3 318 136657509 90940994545429631651 644 6 31543576533 42 18632 777447603 930 7099188098187780750948545 21524472670680724530 233297715818 75669678370 3821 664 659469 18766606 5 606 (/99 .-,105 .-, (/99 .-,5 409 638 178 768 133 75 712 133133 69 951 924927 622 774250 250 250 250 721 537 487118 54 91545444548576896 838 838 835 835786 785 787 836450 697 298299343 452 92 '250 250 555 338 339 337 Urban Standards Financially-Constrained Roadway Projects This map illustrates the roadway projects planned as capital investment actions for a 20-year planning horizon. The map reflects the general location of programmed and unprogrammed projects contained in the Capital Investment Actions Roadway Projects list. These projects are considered necessary to adequately meet regional transportation needs for the TransPlan 20-year planning horizon and are part of the financially constrained plan. Jurisdictions responsible for these projects are the Cities of Eugene and Springfield, Lane County, and the Oregon Department of Transportation. Added Fwy Lanes/Major Interchange Imps Added Fwy Lanes/Major Interchange Imps Added Fwy Lanes/Major Interchange Imps Urban Standards Arterial Capacity Improvements$ Added Fwy Lanes/Major Interchange Imps $ Programmed Intersections Study'Arterial Capacity Improvements''New Arterial Link or Interchange'Unprogrammed Intersections Arterial Capacity Improvements New Arterial Link or Interchange Programmed Projects Urban Growth Boundary Study New Collectors Arterial Capacity Improvements New Arterial Link or Interchange Unprogrammed Projects Legend Eugene-Springfield Metro Area TransPlan 101 Miles Map produced by Lane Council of Governments July 2002 Nodal Development Areas Further study in west Eugene is expected to result in amendments to these projects and potentially other projects in TransPlan. Note: This map is illustrative and should be used for reference only. The map depicts approximate locations of existing and proposed transportation facilities. Areas identified as nodal development areas are considered to have potential for this type of land use pattern. Other areas not designated for nodal development may be found to have potential for nodal development. Study $Study N Attaachment 2a Attachment 4, Page 24 of 48 Attachment 2b Attachment 4, Page 25 of 48 34 2857 60 59 56 48 6157565 6 5 7 6160 28 60 60 58 58 48 28 61 60 58 48 10 09 10 10 22 22 10 22 10 1010 091009 10!!!!!-!!$1!!!!$1 $1 $1 $1 $1 !- !- !- !- !- !-!!!!!!!!$1 $1 !!!!$1 !!$1 !!!!!!$1 !!!- !- $1 $1 !-!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-!!!-!!$1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-!!!!$1 !- !-!!!!$1 !!!!!!$1 $1!!!!!!!-!!!!!!!!!-!!$1 $1 $1 !- !- $1 !- !-!!!!!!!- !-!!!- $1 $1 $1 !- !-!!!- $1 !- !-!!!-!!$1 $1 !!$1 !!$1 $1 $1 $1 $1 !- $1 !- $1 $1 $1 $1 $1!!!!!!$1 $1 $1 !!!!$1 !!!!!- $1 $1 !!!!$1!!!- !-!!!- !- !-!!!- !-!!$1 !-!-$1 !!!!$1 $1!!$1 !- !- !- !-!- $1 !!!!$1 !- $1 !!!-!-!!!!!!$1 $1 $1 $1 $1 $1 $1 $1 $1 !!!- !-!!$1 !-!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-!- !- !- !- !- !-!!$1 !!!!!!!!!!!!!- $1 !!!!$1 !-!- !- !-!- $1 $1 !- $1 $1 $1 $1 $1!!!!!!!!!- !- $1 $1 !-!- !- "!;Î!!"!;Î!!"!;Î"!;Î"!;Î"!;Î!!!!"!;Î"!;Î "!;Î "!;Î "!;Î !Z!Z"?B !Z "?B"?B "?B "?B"?B "?B "?B "?B "?B "?B !Z !Z !Z!!!!!!!!!!!Z !!!Z !!!Z!!!!!Z !!!Z !!Z !Z !Z !Z !Z !Z !Z!!!!!!!!!!!Z !!!!!Z !Z!Z !Z !Z !!!Z $1!!GH!!!!!!GH GH "?B GH "?B "?B "?B GH GH GH GH GH "?B GH GH "?B GH "?B GH GH GH GH "?B "?B GH GH GH "?B GH GH "?B GHGH "?B "?B GH GH "?B GH "?B GH "?B "?B GH !!AP!!"?B"?B !!"?B !Z!!!!!!"?B "?B !!"?B!!!Z GH "?B GH !!GH!!"?B GH !!"?B "?B "?B !!GH !!GH GH GH!!"?B "?B !Z !!"?B !Z !!!!!!!Z !Z GH !!GH!!!!!!!!!!!Z !Z "?B !!!!"?B!Z !Z !Z !Z "?B "?B !!"?B !!!!"?B "?B GH "?B GH!!GH !Z GH !Z GH !Z GH!!!!!Z !Z "?B !Z "?B !!!Z GH !Z "?B GH !!!Z GH GH GH !!!!$1 $1 $1 GH GH "?B GH !!!!GH !!$1 !!!!"?B $1 $1 !Z !Z!!$1 !!!!$1!!!!GH $1 GH !!GH GH "? $1 !Z !!!Z !Z!!GH $1 !Z !!!!!!!!!!$1$1 !Z $1 !!!!GH GH !Z 401 351 702703 704 700700 704 701 707 400 401 391 504 502 505 354 350 405 352 501 355 406 350 356 403 350411 506 501 501 352 503 502 401 502 505 406 508 412 507 503 501 503 410 402 501 504 506 413 353 502 505 402 507504 401 403 503 501 403 503 404 501 401 405 501 104 407406 405 401 402 406 504 409 505 501 703 503 351 402 401 450 503 501 505 504 700 406 407 506 504 415 414 408 407 419 403 418 503 417 502 501 502 505 504 404 402 501 401 503 305 507 506 386 377 378 501 502 410 304 502 365 387 700 379 380 366 388 381 500 389 501 502 501 382 350 301 376 383384 390 302 303 137135 2181 2175 934143 2173 942 145 2092 2112 2180 926 4162114 2118 915 2171 447 2095443345 371 921 2091126 845 21312133 263 439 2131 226 393 140 307 21552148 2130 2136 2145 128 2230 2122 367 531 2132 558 882 883 2126 830 2074 2124 2150 2160 918214821282155 2080 2157 2121 275 89 2242 2090 407 833 181 2173 2244 21722183 472224 2079 560 183127 2087 852 2241 2140 856 2221 129 157 213521262143 859 605 21552188 821809 623 641 2126 401 425 2146 8672112 2130 640 2167231233 2131 303 155 804 485 804652 2107 7962122 470 2180 453 2219 958473 764 680 780 970 394 805 383 2107368 973 1995 638 2103 2061 2168 833 606 655 2186 483 1990 361 628 300 2117 291 2138 2065 2063 2105 1884 2112 346 808 6522133 442 694 2052 1948 287 2033 1980 2004 2133 954568 616 6342125 957 1996 1975 637 298 472 375 2105 342 890 2028 1983 322 936 496 498 962536 1914 1946 762420 2060 2078834 790788 781 1914 304 2114 2060 910340 19982038 829 867 330 370 1914 1903 1875 19441893 901 775 392 2134 895 965 930 1962 909 1835 18521834 1987 808 957907 774 933 1850 810 748 530 1883 9101873 972 650650 2001 8311984 973 664 676604 1876 1920 945 1981 1983 2029 1851 948 853 951805 1855 1993 2093 1914 2045 1914 249 943629 819 2050 663 2125 929 776 2031 303 1866 1980 2098 1866 1864 774 651 1866 2092675 127115 555 251 2095 1865 303301 372 824 748 2127 280 531 563 693 937 1990 1849 662 686 1971 1829 931 897875 245 995 1966 18271801 270 471 301 375333 407 1877 747 497439 495 1922 741 225 1868 1856 955 957 2052 725 999 770 514 2022 1812 344 2017 700 905 388 1853 848 924 2064 2015 826 1977 929 9311840 315 212 610 1871 2077 2076 905 987 1842 818 386 1905 780 816 930 888 802 380 924 1910 1963 968902 2010862 992 1970 1902 846 183 439 1935 1928 824 896 952836 1890 974 1972 449 1930 2029 1942 1938 1915 803 815 19801920 889 1885 823 994 370 2075 528 910 994 1950 1950 1950 19501950 1950 392 304 450400 1891 1887 1895 1955 195519551955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 19551955 1955 1955 1955 19551955 19551955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 19551955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 19551955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 1955 19551955 195519551955 2048 2050 1853 1960 18811881 CON 10CON 10CON 10 CON 12CON 8CON 18CON 48 CON 12CON 8CON 10 CON 1 2 CON 12CON 12CON 12 CON 15 CON 18 CON 15CON 10CON 48CON 12 CON 42 CON 120CON 10CON 27CON 21CON 12CON 21CON 24 CON 18 CON 18CON 21 CON 18CON 21 CON 18CON 30CON 12 CON 18CON 12CON 42 CON 24CON 10CON 12 CON 10CON 15 CON 24 523'104'100'100' 181'100'100'104'109'139'105'105' 120' 111' 11 9 ' 118'120'118' 135'160'150'144'140'140'150'153'147'160'160'150'177' 175' 160'169'163' 125' 179' 178' 197'190'204'190' 203'217'212'218.4'205' 210'210'380'225'222' 229.4'217'240'233'249'157'436'270'280'275'294'295'290' 308' 312' 345' 370.58' 378' 445'483'495'104 101 111 110 108 107 102 106 105 102 114 117 102 102 101 101 103 123 101102 109 105 103 106 119 118 10 104 112 102 101 103 105 101 101 105 103104 102 103 107 115 116 104 101 109 113 103 106 101 102 101 101 102 101 136 101 103 102 120 124 108 121 120103 104 121 102 107 102 103 104 105 101 115 122 101'314'265'280.23'463'104'105'303'101'117'110'116'122'116'330'392'11 4 ' 131'138'134'128'140'136'154'140' 155'156'156'156'170' 165'165.5'160'182'177' 177'175'199'222'211.51'214.59'217'222'226.43'225'227'920'236'230'246'250'245' 245'247'282' 285'275'286' 271'296'285' 300' 310' 308.47' 318' 327'595'337'341'335'350' 402' 390' 400' 411' 411.8' 415.49' 411' 427'442.81'498'565' 790' 954' CON8CON8CON 8 CON 8CON 24CON 8TRU 8CON 10CON 8 CON 18CON 24CON 18CON 8 PVC 8PVC 8CON 8 CON 8 CON 8 PVC 8 HDPE 8PV C 8PVC 8CON 8 CON 8 PVC 8 CON 18HDPE 8HDPE 8CON 8PVC 10CON 24CON 42 CON 10CON 8 CON 8 CON 8 PVC 8CON 8 CON 8 CON 8 CON 8HDPE 8 PVC 8 CON 8 PVC 10PVC 10CON 10CON 42 PVC 8 PVC 8 HDPE 8 CON 8 TRU 8 TRU 10CON 42 14+07 1+25 2+95 0+00 N 2+79.2 12+59.3 1+46 1+28.5 1+46.5 1+59 8+14 14+15 15+80 0+00 NE 1+88 178.5 1+77.5 0+00 N S 8+91 6+60 9+26 2+45 3+42.55 0+00 0+00 N E 4+90 3+07 2+00 3+18 3+30 3+39 12+95 6+56 3+94 6+44 4+28 129+45.7 0+00 N 0+00N S 0+00 E W 3+00 SE 007 015 010 009 005 002 001 006 004 009 001 004 017 008 002 006 001 010 008 002 007 004 009 012 003 009 008 001 013 007 019 020 012 011 003 021 006 014 002 003 009 007 005 007 002 006 013 015 007 008 016 014 001 005 013 003 008 015 007 011 004 023 003 001 005 001 021 008 080 081 003 004 005 018 011 006 005 008 014 005 022 023 024020 021 002 003 006 009 010011 004 004 012 004 010 011 009 214 238 254 256 269 271 201 203 220 218 204 206 208 205 229 204 216 202 207 213 209 215 216 225 201 201 231 266 223 204 203 267 261 268 270 205 206 258 259 200 214 253 260 200 255 201 203 246 241 249 245 210 235 236 296 211 250 251 252 262 257 263 264 265 220 212 212 239 237 240 242 243 244 247 298294 251 0+781+190+4 4 7+411+848+261+852+484+055+004+570+562+963+445+590+467+11 8+27 0+3 6 9+35 13+69 4+08.51+50 0+315+276+003+841+011+89 0+790+081+371+822 + 1 4 1+463+85 3+30 5+803+402 + 2 2 8+ 8 4 4+191+542+101+11 2+803+146+83 2+22 5+210+921+49 0+58 14+478+79 2+58 13+66 5+06 12+11 11+11 5+02 1+77 1+363+42 3+062+220+631+453+181+781+872+37 0+355+68 4+21 7+0 82+479+49 0+43 1+14 6+43 2+52 0+12 8+47 7+18 6+05 8+43 2+833+903+73 1+991+404+17.50+531+68 0+903+309+19 14+160+603+721+99 2+96 1+45.50+780+ 2 39+650+77 0+68 1+24 4+418+58 4+211+080+05 0+610+88 3+311+892+6810+457+479+302+69 2+862+52 12+73 1+71 12+52 4+91.48+76 6+29 4+03 2+541+310+87 2+793+23 1+80 2+200+832+393+20 13+51 7+18 4+82 5+83 6+50 4+72 12+04 1+11 9+16 9+95 0+569+593+671+53 3+20 2+563+300+70 0+711+283+891+680+8811+37 1+11 1+35 1+3 5 1+121+41 Q ST S ST 9TH STT ST 7TH STQ ST PRIVATE ROADT ST 9TH STNORTHRIDGE AV E 10TH U ST 3RD STFUCHSIA ST R ST I-105 S ST6TH ST8TH ST2ND ST5TH ST1+79 5+61 H169 H168 H167 H163 H367 H166 H251 H483 H413 H412 H291 H492 H451 H286 H383 H396 H292 H365 H533 IA0797 IA1011 IA0822 IA0669 IA0476 IA0479 IA0474 IA0442 IA0447 IA0430 IA0387 IA0388IA0391 IA0402 IA0414 IA0221 IA0222 IA0110IA0103 IA0068 +4,258,000 +4,258,000 +4,258,600 +4,258,600 +4,259,200 +4,259,200 +4,259,800 +4,259,800 +4,260,400 +4,260,400 +4,261,000 +4,261,000+883,200+883,200+883,600+883,600+884,000+884,000+884,400+884,400+884,800+884,800CONTOUR INTERVAL: 2' VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD '88 (CONVERTED 6/30/06 FROM ORIGINAL CONTROL AND MAPPING AT NGVD 47 ADJ.; CONVERSION FACTOR = + 3.5') GRID: OREGON LAMBERT, SOUTH ZONE, NAD83 CONTOURS IN OBSCURED AREAS DO NOT MEET NATIONAL MAP ACCURACY STANDARDS AND MAY NOT BE RELIABLE 1734 SE TACOMA ST.PORTLAND, OREGON 97202 JOB #: 1911 DAVID C. SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC. PHOTOGRAMMETRIC MAPPING BY: Requestor assumes all responsibility for the use of this product and agrees to hold harmless the City of Springfield, OR against any loss or damage arising from any error, omission or positional inaccuracy of this product. The parties to this agreement are the agency or business firm requesting the plot, who is also the end user of the spatial dataidentified in this agreement (referred to as Requestor) and the City of Springfield, OR. This spatial data can not be resold and/or provided for the purpose of resale to any business entity, private entity, or public entity for any reason without written authorization from the City Engineer. The relative accuracy and absolute accuracy of this spatial data are not guaranteed by the City of Springfield and accuracy should be checked by the end user. Except as otherwise provided herein, the spatial dataprovided under this agreement is "as-is" without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied, including but not limited to implied warranties of fitness for a particular purpose. Requestor agrees that The City of Springfield's liability, whether in contract, in tort (including negligence), in strict liability or otherwise shall not exceed the return of the price of this product. Under no circumstance shall the City of Springfield be liable for any special, incidental or consequential damages, including personal injury, property damage, damage or loss of equipment, lost profit or revenue, cost of renting replacement and other additional expenses, even if the City of Springfield has been notified of the possibility of such damages. 0 100 20050 Ft 8 SCALE: 1" = 100' or 1:1,200 DATE OF ORTHO-PHOTOGRAPHY: 5-24-2008 CITY OF SPRINGFIELD Lane County, Oregon SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE BCDEFGHJ KLMNOPQR S 00010203040506070809101112131415161718 n3n2n1 SHEET NO. Legend Legend Wastewater Infrastructure Springfield Private !- !- E06 PLOT DATE: 12/20/2011 REVISION DATE: 12/20/2011 9:42:43 AM REVISED BY: zeit5397 E05 D06E07 F06Clean Out Maintainer Non-Access Point Maintainer Abandoned!- Abandoned$1 Springfield$1 Private$1 Lane County!!Eugene!!Abandoned!!Springfield !!Private!!Pump Station Maintainer Eugene[Ú Abandoned[Ú Springfield [Ú Private[Ú Maintenance Hole Maintainer Vault Maintainer Abandoned""V Springfield ""V Private""V Boundaries Wastewater Pipes Type/Owner/Maintainer Gravity Main - Abandoned Gravity Main - Springfield - Springfield Gravity Main - MWMC - Springfield Gravity Main - Private - Springfield Pressure Main - Springfield - Springfield Pressure Main - MWMC - Springfield Service Line - Springfield - Springfield0+00 Storm Water Infrastructure Lane County Private !Z !Z Clean Out Non-Access Point Springfield!Z Springfield$1 Private$1 Lane County!!Abandoned!!Springfield !!Private!!Area Drain Springfield !PA Private!PA Maintenance Hole Split Drain Vault""V Storm Water Pipes Type/Owner/Maintainer Gravity Main - Abandoned Gravity Main - Springfield - Springfield Gravity Main - Private - Springfield Gravity Main - Lane County - Springfield Open Channel - Springfield - Springfield Service Line - Springfield - Springfield Catch Basin Springfield "?B Lane County"?B Private"?B Lane CountyGH AbandonedGH Springfield GH PrivateGH Curb Inlet Oil & Water Separator³³WQ Springfield³Private³Junction BoxÉÉJ Other Structures 0+00 Storm Flow Water Quality Water Quality Facility Out Fall"!;Î In Flow!! Maintainer Maintainer Maintainer Maintainer Maintainer Maintainer Maintainer 43 77 77 Storm Water 58 800 58 Wastewater Improvement Agreements Sewer Hook-Ups Attachment 3a Attachment 4, Page 26 of 48 SMSSSSSSSSSAttachment 3b Attachment 4, Page 27 of 48 Attachment 3c Attachment 4, Page 28 of 48 5th STREET S STREETT STREET7th STREET SUBJECT SITEZONING MAP AMENDMENT Phase Drawn By Checked Date © 2017, SCHIRMER SATRE GROUP Project Number SCHIRMER SATRE GROUP, PLANNERS, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS AND ENVIRONMENTALSPECIALISTS, EXPRESSLY RESERVE ITS COMMON LAW COPYRIGHT AND OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTSIN THESE PLANS. THESE PLANS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANYFORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO A THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF SCHIRMER SATRE GROUP. IN THEEVENT OF UNAUTHORIZED REUSE OF THESE PLANS BY A THIRD PARTY, THE THIRD PARTY SHALLHOLD SCHIRMER SATRE GROUP HARMLESS. SCHIRMER SATRE GROUP 375 West 4th, Suite 201, Eugene OR 97401 Phone: 541.686.4540 Fax: 541.686.4577 www.schirmersatre.com DescriptionRevisionsDate#ZA-1(MAP 17-03-26-24, LOTS 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000) CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC 5th STREET PROPERTY jas rms 2-3-2017 1668 NntsNOT FORCONSTRUCTION ntsNPROJECT AREAVICINITY MAPLEGENDMEDIUM DENSITYRESIDENTIALLOW DENSITYRESIDENTIALZONING LAND USE DIAGRAMEXISTING PLANPUBLIC LAND ANDOPEN SPACECOMMUNITYCOMMERCIALHIGH DENSITYRESIDENTIALAttachment 4, Page 29 of 48 5th STREET S STREETT STREET7th STREET SUBJECT SITEZONING MAP AMENDMENT Phase Drawn By Checked Date © 2017, SCHIRMER SATRE GROUP Project Number SCHIRMER SATRE GROUP, PLANNERS, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS AND ENVIRONMENTALSPECIALISTS, EXPRESSLY RESERVE ITS COMMON LAW COPYRIGHT AND OTHER PROPERTY RIGHTSIN THESE PLANS. THESE PLANS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANYFORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO A THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF SCHIRMER SATRE GROUP. IN THEEVENT OF UNAUTHORIZED REUSE OF THESE PLANS BY A THIRD PARTY, THE THIRD PARTY SHALLHOLD SCHIRMER SATRE GROUP HARMLESS. SCHIRMER SATRE GROUP 375 West 4th, Suite 201, Eugene OR 97401 Phone: 541.686.4540 Fax: 541.686.4577 www.schirmersatre.com DescriptionRevisionsDate#(MAP 17-03-26-24, LOTS 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000) CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC 5th STREET PROPERTY jas rms 2-3-2017 1668 ZONING LAND USE DIAGRAMPROPOSED PLANNntsZA-2NOT FORCONSTRUCTION ntsNPROJECT AREAVICINITY MAPLEGENDMEDIUM DENSITYRESIDENTIALLOW DENSITYRESIDENTIALPUBLIC LAND ANDOPEN SPACECOMMUNITYCOMMERCIALHIGH DENSITYRESIDENTIALAttachment 4, Page 30 of 48 Attachment 4, Page 31 of 48 Attachment 4, Page 32 of 48 Attachment 4, Page 33 of 48 Attachment 4, Page 34 of 48 Attachment 4, Page 35 of 48 Attachment 4, Page 36 of 48 Attachment 4, Page 37 of 48 Attachment 4, Page 38 of 48 Attachment 4, Page 39 of 48 Attachment 4, Page 40 of 48 Attachment 4, Page 41 of 48 Attachment 4, Page 42 of 48 Attachment 4, Page 43 of 48 Attachment 4, Page 44 of 48 Attachment 4, Page 45 of 48 Attachment 4, Page 46 of 48 Attachment 4, Page 47 of 48 Attachment 4, Page 48 of 48 Attachment 5, Page 1 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 2 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 3 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 4 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 5 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 6 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 7 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 8 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 9 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 10 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 11 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 12 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 13 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 14 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 15 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 16 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 17 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 18 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 19 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 20 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 21 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 22 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 23 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 24 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 25 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 26 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 27 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 28 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 29 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 30 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 31 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 32 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 33 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 34 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 35 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 36 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 37 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 38 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 39 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 40 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 41 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 42 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 43 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 44 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 45 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 46 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 47 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 48 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 49 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 50 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 51 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 52 of 53 Attachment 5, Page 53 of 53 Attachment 6, Page 1 of 26 Attachment 6, Page 2 of 26 Attachment 6, Page 3 of 26 Attachment 6, Page 4 of 26 Attachment 6, Page 5 of 26 Attachment 6, Page 6 of 26 Attachment 6, Page 7 of 26 Attachment 6, Page 8 of 26 Attachment 6, Page 9 of 26 Attachment 6, Page 10 of 26 Attachment 6, Page 11 of 26 From: Darrell Graham <degraham1@hotmail.com> Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2017 7:15 PM To: LIMBIRD Andrew Subject: Case # TYP317-00004 (ZMA) TYP417-00002 (MPA) Dear Mr Limbird, No on the rezoning, No Apartments on property 5th Street and T Street. We own a property bordering the proposed area...yes to houses or duplexes, no on rezoning for apartments. Thank you.... Very concerned, Elaine and Darrell Graham Attachment 6, Page 12 of 26 Attachment 6, Page 13 of 26 Attachment 6, Page 14 of 26 Attachment 6, Page 15 of 26 Attachment 6, Page 16 of 26 Attachment 6, Page 17 of 26 Scanned by CamScannerAttachment 6, Page 18 of 26 Attachment 6, Page 19 of 26 Attachment 6, Page 20 of 26 Attachment 6, Page 21 of 26 Attachment 6, Page 22 of 26 Attachment 6, Page 23 of 26 Attachment 6, Page 24 of 26 Attachment 6, Page 25 of 26 Attachment 6, Page 26 of 26 MEMORANDUM OFFICE OF CITY ATTORNEY DATE: March 29, 2017 TO: Andy Limbird, Senior Planner Jim Donovan, Planning Supervisor Greg Mott, Current Planning Manager CC: Springfield Planning Commission FROM: Kristina Schmunk Kraaz, Assistant City Attorney Office of City Attorney RE: Notice of Public Hearing for TYP317-00004 & TYP417-00002 ISSUE: A public comment has been submitted in response to the application for a plan amendment and zone change, TYP317-00004 and TYP417-00002, in which an adjacent property owner, William Carpenter, has questioned the sufficiency of the Notice of Public Hearing issued by the City. The notice is alleged to be insufficient because it does not identify by street address or map the specific parcels proposed to be re- designated and re-zone specifically as HDR. QUESTION: Is the Notice of Public Hearing provided by the City for this matter legally sufficient, or could deficiency in the notice be grounds for remand on appeal to LUBA? FACTS: Roy Gray has submitted an application to re-designate and re-zone property south of T Street and between 5th and 7th Street from LDR to a mix of MDR and HDR. The Notice of Public Hearing mailed by the City in advance of the April 4 quasi-judicial hearing on this matter lists the properties subject to the application by tax lot number, specifically listing which tax lots are proposed to be HDR and which MDR. A vicinity map is also included that shows all the parcels subject to the application, but does not label the tax lot numbers for each specific parcel. After receiving the notice from the City, Mr. Carpenter called City staff requesting additional information that was provided, and Mr. Carpenter then subsequently submitted a letter of public comment in opposition to the proposed plan amendment on several grounds, including that the public hearing notice was insufficient under ORS 197.830. CONCLUSION: After reviewing Mr. Carpenter’s argument, Oregon state law, and LUBA case law, I conclude that the Notice of Public Hearing for this matter is legally sufficient because it reasonably identifies the property subject to the development proposal. Attachment 7, Page 1 of 3 March 29, 2017 Page 2 _____________________________ ANALYSIS: The requirements for notice of quasi-judicial land use hearings are listed in ORS 197.763(3). Among other requirements, the notice must: “Explain the nature of the application and the proposed use or uses which could be authorized;” and “Set forth the street address or other easily understood geographical reference to the subject property[.]” The notice in this matter meets both of those requirements, because it identifies by tax lot number the proposed map designation and zoning map amendment (LDR to MDR or LDR to HDR), and includes a vicinity map identifying the area subject to the proposal. Mr. Carpenter’s public comment expresses concern that the notice is insufficient under ORS 197.830(3). That statute extends the timeline for LUBA appeal for a person who is adversely affect by a land use decision if the local government’s final decision is so different from the initial notice that the notice does not “reasonably describe” the decision. Thus, before any final decision has been made on this application, any argument that the notice of public hearing is inadequate under ORS 197.830 is premature. The notice of public hearing in this matter is sufficient under both ORS 197.763 and 197.830 if the City ultimately approves the plan amendment and zone change as proposed by the applicant. To be legally sufficient notice of a quasi-judicial hearing, the notice must “reasonably describe” the decision. Mr. Carpenter has cited the LUBA case, Kevedy v. City of Portland, 28 OR LUBA 227 (1994), as legal support for the proposition that the notice should have included a labeled map or the street address for the properties proposed to be re-designated HDR. I have reviewed that case, and disagree with Mr. Carpenter’s analysis. The underlying facts in Kevedy are similar to the present matter. The City of Portland mailed a notice of public hearing to apply a historic designation to three parcels. The parcels were identified by tax lot number, but not all were identified by street address. A map was included showing all three parcels, but it was not labeled. LUBA held that the notice in that case was sufficient. Because the present facts are similar, Kevedy supports the conclusion that notice in this matter was sufficient. Mr. Carpenter has argued that a notice must be specific enough to notify a recipient of “the degree of impact,” and “approximately… the actual impact” of the proposal on his or her interests. I also disagree with this characterization of public hearing notice requirements. LUBA case law merely holds that a notice must reasonably inform the recipient that his or her interests “may be affected by the proposal,” but does not place more stringent requirements on the City to give specific information about possible impacts upon recipients. Rather, if the notice reasonably informs the recipient that his or her interests could be affected, it is incumbent upon the recipient to then participate in the local proceeding to protect those interests. From Kevedy: [W]e believe ORS 197.830(3) imposes a requirement that a reasonable person be able to tell from the notice of public hearing that the local government might take the action that the local government ultimately takes. In this regard, a reasonable person recognizes that the detail with Attachment 7, Page 2 of 3 March 29, 2017 Page 3 _____________________________ which a proposal is described in a notice of public hearing is related to the length of the notice. A reasonable person also recognizes that proposals for land use approval may change somewhat after the notice of public hearing is given, either because the applicant modifies the proposal or the local decision maker imposes conditions of approval that change the nature of the proposal in some respect. A reasonable person who recognizes that his or her interests may be affected by the proposal, participates in the local proceedings to protect his or her interests. [Emphasis added.] Mr. Carpenter’s concerns might be well-taken if the notice only identified a proposal for a plan amendment and zone change to MDR, but a later decision was made to change the designation and zoning to HDR. But, in this case, the notice identifies both proposed designations and zone changes, and is sufficient to put any recipient on notice that immediately adjacent property could become HDR and developed at significantly higher densities than currently allowed. Taken as a whole, the notice reasonably alerts interested parties that their interests may be affected by the proposal, and that they may therefore wish to participate in the local proceeding to protect those interests. Even if the notice is deficient under ORS 197.7603 or 197.830, a petitioner must demonstrate that the deficient notice prejudiced his or her right a full and fair hearing to receive relief from LUBA on appeal. Forest Park Estate v. Multnomah County, LUBA No. 90-070, 20 Or LUBA 319, 331 (1990). Based on the notice provided, Mr. Carpenter has requested more information from City planning staff, which has been provided, and he has submitted detailed public comment in opposition to the proposal. Other adjacent property owners have also submitted public comments. This indicates that the notice was in fact sufficient to notify adjacent property owners that their interests may be affected by the proposal. If Mr. Carpenter still has unresolved questions about this proposal, and feels he has been prejudiced by some deficiency in the notice that he can articulate at the upcoming public hearing, the Planning Commission may continue the hearing to a later date to allow Mr. Carpenter or others extra time to participate in the hearing. Alternately, the PC may wish to leave open the written record, without any need for a showing of prejudice from an interested party. Finally, in abundance of caution, City staff will be addressing Mr. Carpenter’s concerns with the notice by adding tax lot number labels to the notice of public hearing for the City Council hearing on this matter. Any interested party can participate in that hearing regardless of whether they participated at the Planning Commission hearing, which further ensures that all interested parties will have a meaningful opportunity to participate in the local proceedings on this proposal. Attachment 7, Page 3 of 3 Attachment 8, Page 1 of 3 Attachment 8, Page 2 of 3 Attachment 8, Page 3 of 3 BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON ORDER AND RECOMMENDATION FOR: TYPE I AMENDMENT TO THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD METROPOLITAN AREA GENERAL PLAN ] TYP417-00002 (METRO PLAN) DIAGRAM AND THE Q STREET REFINEMENT PLAN DIAGRAM TO REDESIGNATE ] APPROXIMATELY 1.78 ACRES IDENTIFIED AS ASSESSOR’S MAP 17-03-26-24, TAX LOTS 4600 ] AND 5000 FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MDR); ] AND TO REDESIGNATE APPROXIMATELY 1.57 ACRES OF LAND IDENTIFIED AS ASSESSOR’S ] MAP 17-03-26-24, TAX LOTS 4601, 4700, 4800 AND 4900 FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ] (LDR) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (HDR) ] NATURE OF THE PROPOSAL Staff is requesting that the Springfield Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the Springfield City Council regarding the following proposed Type I amendment to the Metro Plan Diagram: Redesignate approximately 1.78 acres of residential property on 5th Street (Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600 and 5000) from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential. The subject property is generally depicted and more particularly described in Exhibit A to this Order. Redesignate approximately 1.57 acres of residential property on 5th Street (Map 17-03-26-34, Tax Lots 4601, 4700, 4800 and 4900) from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential. The subject property is generally depicted and more particularly described in Exhibit B to this Order. Concurrently amend the Q Street Refinement Plan diagram to redesignate Tax Lots 4600 and 5000 from LDR to MDR; and to redesignate Tax Lots 4601, 4700, 4800 and 4900 from LDR to HDR as generally depicted and more particularly described in Exhibits A and B to this Order. Timely and sufficient notice of the public hearing has been provided, pursuant to SDC 5.2-115. On April 4, 2017, the Springfield Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Metro Plan Diagram amendment. The staff report, written comments, and testimony of those who spoke at the public hearing were entered into the record. CONCLUSION On the basis of this record, the proposed Type I Metro Plan Diagram amendment is consistent with the criteria of SDC 5.14-135. This general finding is supported by the specific findings of fact and conclusion in the Staff Report and Findings and the additional information submitted for the April 4, 2017 public hearing. ORDER/RECOMMENDATION It is ORDERED by the Springfield Planning Commission that approval of Case Number TYP417-00002 be GRANTED and a RECOMMENDATION for approval be forwarded to the Springfield City Council for their consideration at an upcoming public hearing meeting. ____________________________ ____________________ Planning Commission Chairperson Date ATTEST AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Attachment 9, Page 1 of 5 PROPERTIES REDESIGNATED FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 5th Street 7th Street T Street Attachment 9, Page 2 of 5 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Parcel 1 (Tax Lot 4600): Beginning at a point 989.418 feet North of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47, in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian; running thence North 116.792 feet to the Southeast corner of the tract described in Deed No. 43434; thence West 566.33 feet, more or less, to the East line of Fifth Street, in the town of Springfield; thence South along said East line of Fifth Street, 64.792 feet; thence East 150 feet; thence South 52 feet; thence East 416.33 feet to the point of beginning, in Lane County, Oregon. Parcel 2 (Tax Lot 5000): Beginning at a point 835.68 feet due North of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47, in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian; thence North 153.70 feet; thence West 130 feet; thence South parallel with the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, extended 153.70 feet; thence East 130 feet to the place of beginning; all in Springfield, Lane County, Oregon. Attachment 9, Page 3 of 5 PROPERTIES REDESIGNATED FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 5th Street 7th Street T Street Attachment 9, Page 4 of 5 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Parcel 3 (Tax Lot 4601): Beginning at a point 989.418 feet North of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47, in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian; running thence North 116.792 feet to the Southeast corner of the tract described in Deed, Reception No. 43434; thence West 566.33 feet more or less to the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, Oregon, extended; thence South on and along said East line, 64.792 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence South along said East line of Fifth Street, 52.0 feet; thence East 150 feet; thence North approximately 52.0 feet to the point directly East of the True Point of Beginning; thence West 150.0 feet to the True Point of Beginning, in Lane County, Oregon. Parcel 4 (Tax Lot 4700): Commencing at a point 835.68 feet due North and 390 feet West of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47, in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West, Willamette Meridian, in Lane County, Oregon; thence North 153.70 feet; thence West 176.65 feet to the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, Oregon, extended; thence South on and along the said East line of Fifth Street 153.70 feet; and thence East 176.81 feet; more or less, to the place of beginning, in Lane County, Oregon. EXCEPT that portion conveyed and dedicated to the City of Springfield by instrument recorded July 6, 1978, Recorder’s Reception No. 78-46741, Lane County Oregon Official Records. Parcel 5 (Tax Lot 4800): Beginning at a point 835.68 feet due North and 260 feet West of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47 in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian, in Lane County, Oregon; thence North 153.70 feet; thence West 130 feet; thence South parallel with the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, Oregon, extended, 153.70 feet; thence East 130 feet to the Place of Beginning, all lying in and being in what is known as the Seavey tracts lying North of Springfield, Oregon. EXCEPTING THEREFROM the northerly 20 feet as conveyed to the City of Springfield for a public road, by document recorded April 8, 1989, Reception No. 88-13697, Lane County Oregon Records. Parcel 6 (Tax Lot 4900): Beginning at a point 835.68 feet due North and 130 feet West of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47 in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian, in Lane County, Oregon; thence North 153.70 feet; thence West 130 feet; thence South parallel with the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, Oregon, extended, 153.70 feet; thence East 130 feet to the place of beginning all lying in and being in what is known as the Seavey tracts lying North of Springfield, Oregon. Attachment 9, Page 5 of 5 BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON ORDER AND RECOMMENDATION FOR: AMENDMENT TO THE SPRINGFIELD ZONING MAP TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 1.78 ACRES ] TYP317-00004 OF LAND IDENTIFIED AS ASSESSOR’S MAP 17-03-26-24, TAX LOTS 4600 AND 5000 FROM ] LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MDR); AND TO REZONE ] APPROXIMATELY 1.57 ACRES OF LAND IDENTIFIED AS ASSESSOR’S MAP 17-03-26-24, TAX LOTS ] 4601, 4700, 4800 AND 4900 FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) TO HIGH DENSITY ] RESIDENTIAL (HDR) ] NATURE OF THE PROPOSAL Staff is requesting that the Springfield Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the Springfield City Council regarding the following proposed amendment to the Springfield Zoning Map: Rezone two parcels comprising approximately 1.78 acres that are municipally addressed as 1993 5th Street and a vacant, non-addressed parcel (Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600 and 5000) from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium Density Residential (MDR). The subject properties are generally depicted and more particularly described in Exhibit A to this Order. Rezone four parcels comprising approximately 1.57 acres that are municipally addressed as 1975, 1981, 1987 and 1995 5th Street (Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4601, 4700, 4800 and 4900) from Low Density Residential (LDR) to High Density Residential (HDR). The subject properties are generally depicted and more particularly described in Exhibit B to this Order. The subject Zone Change request is being processed concurrently with a Metro Plan Diagram amendment initiated by Planning Case TYP417-00002. The subject property is generally depicted and more particularly described in Exhibits A and B to this Order. Timely and sufficient notice of the public hearing has been provided, pursuant to SDC 5.2-115. On April 4, 2017, the Springfield Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Zoning Map amendment. The staff report, written comments, and testimony of those who spoke at the public hearing were entered into the record. CONCLUSION On the basis of this record, the proposed Zoning Map amendment is consistent with the criteria of SDC 5.22-115. This general finding is supported by the specific findings of fact and conclusion in the Staff Report and Findings and the additional information submitted for the April 4, 2017 public hearing. ORDER/RECOMMENDATION It is ORDERED by the Springfield Planning Commission that approval of Case Number TYP317-00004 be GRANTED and a RECOMMENDATION for approval be forwarded to the Springfield City Council for their consideration at an upcoming public hearing meeting. ____________________________ ____________________ Planning Commission Chairperson Date ATTEST AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Attachment 10, Page 1 of 5 PROPERTIES REZONED FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 5th Street 7th Street T Street Attachment 10, Page 2 of 5 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Parcel 1 (Tax Lot 4600): Beginning at a point 989.418 feet North of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47, in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian; running thence North 116.792 feet to the Southeast corner of the tract described in Deed No. 43434; thence West 566.33 feet, more or less, to the East line of Fifth Street, in the town of Springfield; thence South along said East line of Fifth Street, 64.792 feet; thence East 150 feet; thence South 52 feet; thence East 416.33 feet to the point of beginning, in Lane County, Oregon. Parcel 2 (Tax Lot 5000): Beginning at a point 835.68 feet due North of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47, in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian; thence North 153.70 feet; thence West 130 feet; thence South parallel with the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, extended 153.70 feet; thence East 130 feet to the place of beginning; all in Springfield, Lane County, Oregon. Attachment 10, Page 3 of 5 PROPERTIES REZONED FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 5th Street 7th Street T Street Attachment 10, Page 4 of 5 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Parcel 3 (Tax Lot 4601): Beginning at a point 989.418 feet North of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47, in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian; running thence North 116.792 feet to the Southeast corner of the tract described in Deed, Reception No. 43434; thence West 566.33 feet more or less to the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, Oregon, extended; thence South on and along said East line, 64.792 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence South along said East line of Fifth Street, 52.0 feet; thence East 150 feet; thence North approximately 52.0 feet to the point directly East of the True Point of Beginning; thence West 150.0 feet to the True Point of Beginning, in Lane County, Oregon. Parcel 4 (Tax Lot 4700): Commencing at a point 835.68 feet due North and 390 feet West of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47, in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West, Willamette Meridian, in Lane County, Oregon; thence North 153.70 feet; thence West 176.65 feet to the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, Oregon, extended; thence South on and along the said East line of Fifth Street 153.70 feet; and thence East 176.81 feet; more or less, to the place of beginning, in Lane County, Oregon. EXCEPT that portion conveyed and dedicated to the City of Springfield by instrument recorded July 6, 1978, Recorder’s Reception No. 78-46741, Lane County Oregon Official Records. Parcel 5 (Tax Lot 4800): Beginning at a point 835.68 feet due North and 260 feet West of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47 in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian, in Lane County, Oregon; thence North 153.70 feet; thence West 130 feet; thence South parallel with the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, Oregon, extended, 153.70 feet; thence East 130 feet to the Place of Beginning, all lying in and being in what is known as the Seavey tracts lying North of Springfield, Oregon. EXCEPTING THEREFROM the northerly 20 feet as conveyed to the City of Springfield for a public road, by document recorded April 8, 1989, Reception No. 88-13697, Lane County Oregon Records. Parcel 6 (Tax Lot 4900): Beginning at a point 835.68 feet due North and 130 feet West of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47 in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian, in Lane County, Oregon; thence North 153.70 feet; thence West 130 feet; thence South parallel with the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, Oregon, extended, 153.70 feet; thence East 130 feet to the place of beginning all lying in and being in what is known as the Seavey tracts lying North of Springfield, Oregon. Attachment 10, Page 5 of 5