HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010 05 18 Gartner Zone Change_PC Briefing MemoMEMORANDUM CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
DATE : May 18, 2010
TO: Springfield Planning Commission TRANSMITTAL
MEMORANDUM
FROM: Mark Metzger, Planner
SUBJECT: GARTNER ZONING MAP AMENDMENT (ZON2010‐00004)
ISSUE: A public hearing before the Planning Commission is scheduled for May 18th to consider a
proposed zone change to resolve a conflict between the Metro Plan Diagram designation and the zoning
for the property at 6444 Main Street. The applicant requests a zoning map amendment from the
classification Low Density Residential (LDR) to the classification Medium Density Residential (MDR). The
proposed zoning map amendment would bring the property into conformance with the Metro Plan
designation—Medium Density Residential.
DISCUSSION: The applicant is taking advantage of a city sponsored program that encourages rezoning
to resolve conflicts between Metro Plan Diagram designations and local zoning. The subject property is
about .54 acres in size and is currently zoned Low Density Residential (LDR). The Metro Plan designation
for the property is Medium Density Residential (MDR). The applicant is requesting the zone change
from LDR to MDR to be in compliance with Metro Plan Diagram.
The property is identified as Assessor’s Map No. 17‐02‐34‐42 Tax Lot 4301. The single tax lot includes a
single‐family home and a duplex. These structures were built in 1947 and 1941 respectively, before the
development and implementation of the Metro Plan.
RECOMMENDATION: Based on its analysis and findings of fact presented in the Staff Report
(Attachment 1), the requested zoning map amendment proposal is found by staff to be consistent with
the criteria of approval for approving zoning map amendments found in SDC Section 5.22‐115. It is the
opinion of staff that sufficient findings have been presented to support a recommendation that the
Planning Commission approve the proposed zoning map amendment (ZON2010‐00004).
ACTION REQUESTED: The Planning Commission is requested to approve, approve with conditions or to
deny the proposed zoning map amendment (ZON2010‐00004).
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1: Staff Report with Exhibits
Attachment 2: Planning Commission Order
Zoning Map Amendment‐ Type III
Bruno Gartner 6444 Main Street
Project Name: Zone Map Amendment—City sponsored Metro Plan Diagram/Zoning conflict resolution.
Project Proposal: Bruno Gartner has applied for a city sponsored zone change to resolve a conflict
between the Metro Plan Diagram designation and the zoning for his property. The subject property is
about .54 acres in size and is currently zoned Low Density Residential (LDR). The Metro Plan designation
for the property is Medium Density Residential (MDR). The single tax lot includes a single‐family home
and a duplex. These structures were built in 1947 and 1941 respectively, before the development and
implementation of the Metro Plan. The applicant is requesting zone change from LDR to MDR to be in
compliance with Metro Plan Diagram.
Case Number: ZON2010‐00004
Project Location: The subject property is located at 6444 Main Street; Assessor’s Map 17‐02‐34‐42 TL
4301
Zoning: Low Density Residential
Metro Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential
Overlay Districts: Not Applicable
Refinement Plan and Designation: Not Applicable
Application Submitted Date: February 27, 2010
Development Review Committee Meeting Date: March 16, 2010
Recommendation to the Planning Commission: Approval of the Zone Change
Associated Applications: None
OWNER/APPLICANT APPLICANT’S REPRESENTATIVE
Bruno Gartner
2883 Elysium Ave.
Eugene, OR 97401
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TEAM
POSITION REVIEW OF NAME PHONE
Planner III Land Use Planning Mark Metzger 726‐3775
Transportation Planning Engineer Transportation Jon Driscoll 726‐3679
Public Works Engineering Sanitary & Storm Sewer,
Utilities & Easements
Clayton McEachern 736‐1036
Deputy Fire Marshall Fire and Life Safety Gilbert Gordon 726‐2293
Community Services Manager Building Dave Puent 726‐3668
Attachment 1-1
I. Executive Summary
The maps below show the current and proposed zoning for subject site. Exhibits 1, 2 and 3 to this report
show the same maps at a larger scale. The current zoning for the subject property is Low Density
Residential (LDR). The proposed zoning, Medium Density Residential, is consistent with the existing
Medium Density residential designation shown for the property on the Eugene‐Springfield Metropolitan
Area General Plan Diagram (Metro Plan).
Current and Proposed Zoning and Metro Plan Designations
Current Zoning Metro Plan Designation
Proposed Zoning Metro Plan Designation
Existing development surrounding the property includes a manufactured home subdivision to the north
and west. An apartment complex is located to the east. Across Main Street to the south, are a mix of
single family homes and duplexes. Access to the property is currently from Main Street. ODOT has
jurisdiction over Main Street and must approve expanded access to Main Street that might result from
increased development density.
64th PLMain 65th PLMountaingate DRA Street
64th PLMain Street 65th PLMountaingate DRA Street
Subject PropertyStreet Subject PropertyZoningMedium Density ResidentialLow Density Residential
Metro PlanLow Density ResidentialMedium Density Residential
64th PLMain 65th PLMountaingate DRA Street
Street Subject Property64th PLMain Street 65th PLMountaingate DRA Street
Subject PropertyZoning Metro PlanMedium Density Residential Low Density ResidentialLow Density Residential Medium Density Residential
Attachment 1-2
Aerial Photos of the Vicinity
Subject
Site
Subject Site
Subject Site
Looking
South
Attachment 1-3
The staff report below addresses the criteria for approval for Zoning Map amendments found in Section
5.22‐115 of the Springfield Development Code (SDC) and presents findings and suggests conclusions that
address those criteria. Staff believes that the proposal satisfies the conditions of approval for zoning
map amendments found in Section 5.22‐115 and recommends that the Planning Commission approve
the proposed zone change.
II. Procedural Requirements
The City of Springfield is initiating this Zoning Map amendment. SDC Section 5.22‐110 describes the
process to be followed when amending the Zoning Map. Since this proposal affects a specific site, it
shall be processed as a Type III quasi‐judicial action, consistent with the requirements of SDC Section
5.22‐110 B.
The Planning Commission may approve, approve with conditions, or deny zone change applications. The
Planning Commission's decision shall include findings that address all of the applicable approval criteria
and/or development standards and any written or oral testimony.
The Planning Commission's decision is the City’s final decision, unless appealed. The decision is effective
the day notice is mailed to the applicant, property owner and those persons who submitted written or
oral testimony. The notice of decision shall include an explanation of the rights of each party to appeal
the decision.
A Type III review process is described in SDC Section 5.1‐135. Type III review processes require both
newspaper notice and mailed notice to property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the property
being reviewed and to the appropriate neighborhood association, where applicable (SDC Section 5.1‐
140 B). This section also requires that a sign be posted on the subject sites. The content and timing of
these notices are regulated by SDC Section 5.2‐115. Under state regulations following Ballot Measure
56, mailed notice is required at least 30 days prior to the first public hearing by the elected officials.
The Director shall distribute the application to the Development Review Committee or the Historical
Commission for comments, where applicable.
Mailed notice of the proposed Zoning map amendment must be sent to the Department of Land
Conservation and Development as specified in ORS 197.610 and OAR 660‐18‐0020. This notice must be
filed no less than 45 days before the first evidentiary hearing.
Findings
Finding # 1. The applicant initiated this zoning map for the subject site from LDR to MDR on
February 26, 2010.
Finding # 2. A public hearing on the proposed zone change was scheduled before the Planning
Commission for May 18, 2010.
Finding # 3. A “DLCD Notice Proposed Amendment” was mailed to the Department of Land
Conservation and Development on March 5, 2010, alerting the agency to the City’s intent to amend the
Zoning Map. The notice was mailed more than 45 days in advance of the first evidentiary hearing as
required by ORS 197.610.
Attachment 1-4
Finding # 4. The proposed Zoning Map amendment is property specific. It is being processed as a
quasi‐judicial action. As such, mailed property owner and resident notifications have been made as
required for quasi‐judicial land use actions.
Finding # 5. Mailed notice of public hearings concerning the proposed Metro Plan Diagram
amendment was sent out on April 12, 2010 to property owners and residents within 300 feet of the
subject site. The mailing allowed more than 20 days notice before the first public hearing as required
by SDC Section 5.2‐115 A.
Finding # 6. Notice of the proposed zone change was distributed to the departments and agencies
who participate on the Development Review Committee on March 2, 2010. A meeting of the
Development Review Committee was held on March 16, 2010 to consider the matter. Comments
submitted by members of the Committee have been integrated into the findings of this report.
Finding # 7. Notice of the public hearing before the Planning Commission concerning this matter was
published on April 28, 2010 in the Register Guard. The content of the notice followed the direction
given in Section 5.2‐115 B of the SDC for quasi‐judicial actions.
Finding # 8. No citizen comments were received in response to the mailed and publish notices of the
proposed rezoning.
Conclusion:
Procedural requirements described in Sections 5.2‐115 and 5.22‐110 of the SDC have been followed.
The notice to DLCD, as required by ORS 197.610 and OAR 660‐18‐0020 for amending the Development
Code has also been followed.
III. Decision Criteria and Findings
Section 5.22‐115 of the SDC describes the criteria to be used in approving a Zoning Map amendment. It
states that in reaching a decision, the Planning Commission and the City Council must adopt findings
which demonstrate that the proposed amendment show:
“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.”
Attachment 1-5
Criterion #1: “Consistency with applicable Metro Plan policies and the Metro Plan diagram;”
Findings
Finding # 9. The Metro Plan contains a Diagram designating land uses for all parcels within
Springfield’s planning jurisdiction. The subject site is currently designated Medium Density Residential
(MDR) on the Metro Plan Diagram.
Metro Plan Designation for the Subject Property
64th PLMain Street 65th PLMountaingate DRA Street
Subject PropertyMetro Plan
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Finding # 10. The Metro Plan description for Medium Density Residential (MDR) allows up to 20
dwelling units per gross acre as well as some non‐residential uses such as neighborhood parks (Metro
Plan pg. II‐G‐3).
Finding # 11. The proposed new zoning for the subject site is Medium Density Residential. Section
3.2‐205 of the Springfield Development Code states: “The MDR District establishes sites for residential
development where single‐family or multiple family dwellings are permitted with a minimum density of
more than 10 units per developable acre and a maximum density of 20 units per developable acre,
consistent with the provisions of this Code.”
Attachment 1-6
Conclusion
The proposed zone change is consistent with the Metro Plan and Metro Plan policies.
Criterion # 2: “Consistency with applicable Refinement Plans, Plan District maps, Conceptual
Development Plans and Functional Plans; and”
Findings:
Finding # 12. The subject site is outside the boundaries of any adopted Refinement Plan, Conceptual
Development Plan or Functional Plan.
Finding # 13. The subject site is outside the zone of contribution for any wellfield mapped on the
Springfield Drinking Water Protection Area Map. The site is therefore not subject to the Drinking Water
Protection Overlay District.
Conclusion
The subject property is not subject to any of the planning districts mentioned in this criterion.
Criterion #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.”
Findings:
Finding # 14. The subject site is about .54 acres. With the maximum building height standards (SDC
3.2‐115), minimum required parking (SDC 4.6‐125) and the required landscaping requirements found in
the Multi‐Unit Design Standards (SDC 3.2‐340); the site is likely to be limited to 5 units or less.
Finding # 15. The subject site is currently served by existing urban services (water, sewer, electricity,
stormwater, etc.) with the capacity to add the additional development density that site could
accommodate.
Finding # 16. There is an existing sewer main that crosses the subject property from east to west
about 13 feet south of the northerly property line. Structures may not be built over the top of the line,
but parking and landscape may be located within the sewer easement.
Finding # 17. Access to the subject site is currently taken from Main Street, and ODOT highway
facility.
Finding # 18. A change in zoning from LDR to MDR would allow for an increase in the number
dwelling units per acre. The site currently has three dwelling units on site. If the site was redeveloped
to include as many as 9 units, it would only add 90 trips per day according to the ITE Land Use Code 210
(Single‐Family Detached Housing). Compared to the existing traffic on Main Street, which was last
measured by the City of Springfield in this area as around 20,000 trips per day, this would be a meager
increase of one half of one percent. Consequently, the City of Springfield Transportation Section does
not feel this will worsen or reduce the performance of Main Street below acceptable standards.
Attachment 1-7
Finding # 19. Main Street is an ODOT facility and current policy requires developers to obtain an
encroachment permit when a new development is proposed that might affect a state facility. The City is
not empowered to grant the encroachment permit.
Finding # 20. Multi‐family developments must be submitted for site plan review, a process not
required for single family homes within an LDR zone. The site plan review process may reveal
development complications that cannot be anticipated in the zone change review process.
Conclusion
The subject site is adequately served by existing urban service facilities. Future development of the site
will require ODOT permitting and site plan review if that development includes multi‐family
development.
Criterion #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.”
Findings:
Finding # 21. The proposed Zoning Map amendment affects one tax lot.
Finding # 22. SDC Section 5.22‐110 B defines quasi judicial Zoning Map amendments to be those
“…generally affecting a single or limited group of properties and may or may not include a Metro Plan
diagram amendment.” By this definition, the proposed Zoning Map amendment is a quasi‐judicial
zoning map amendment.
Conclusion
Criterion #4 specifically addresses itself to “Legislative Zoning Map amendments.” The proposed Zoning
Map amendment is “quasi‐judicial” and not “legislative” and therefore does not apply to this proposal.
IV. Conclusion and Recommendation of Staff
Based on the findings of staff with respect to the criteria defined in Section 5.22‐115 of the Springfield
Development Code for approving a Zoning Map amendment, staff find that the proposed amendments
that would change the LDR zoning for the subject site to Medium Density Residential, to be consistent
with these criteria and recommend approval of the amendment.
V. Attachments
Exhibit 1: Current Zoning Map showing the subject property.
Exhibit 2: Proposed Zoning Map showing the subject property.
Exhibit 3: Metro Plan Designation showing the subject property.
Attachment 1-8
Exhibit 1
Current Zoning for the Subject Property
64th PLMain Street 65th PLMountaingate DRA Street
Subject PropertyZoning
Medium Density ResidentialLow Density Residential
Attachment 1-9
Exhibit 2
Proposed Zoning for the Subject Property
64th PLMain Street 65th PLMountaingate DRA Street
Subject PropertyZoning
Medium Density Residential
Low Density Residential
Attachment 1-10
Exhibit 3
Metro Plan Designation for the Subject Property
64th PLMain Street 65th PLMountaingate DRA Street
Subject PropertyMetro PlanLow Density ResidentialMedium Density Residential
Attachment 1-11
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
ZONING MAP AMENDMENT (
CASE NUMBER: ZON2010‐00004 (
FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND ORDER
NATURE OF THE APPLICATION
The applicant requests a zoning map amendment from the classification Low Density Residential (LDR)
to the classification Medium Density Residential (MDR) for property located at 6444 Main Street. The
proposed zoning map amendment would bring the property into conformance with the Metro Plan
designation of Medium Density Residential. The applicant is taking advantage of a city sponsored
program that encourages rezoning to resolve conflicts between Metro Plan Diagram designations and
local zoning. The property is identified as Assessor’s Map No. 17‐02‐34‐42 Tax Lot 4301.
CONCLUSION
The application was presented for approval under Section 5.22‐115 of the Springfield Development
Code (SDC) which describes the criteria to be used in approving a zoning map amendment.
On the basis of this record, the requested zoning map amendment proposal is found by staff to be
consistent with the criteria of approval found in SDC Section 5.22‐115 and is recommended to the
Planning Commission for approval. This general finding is supported by the specific findings of fact and
conclusion in the Staff Report that is attached hereto.
DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
On May 18, 2010, the Springfield Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to accept testimony
and to hear comments on this proposal. The Planning Commission is now ready to take action on this
proposal based upon the above recommendation and the evidence and testimony already in the record
as well as the evidence and testimony presented at this public hearing held in the matter of the zoning
map amendment from LDR to MDR for the subject property at 6444 Main Street.
It is the DECISION of the Planning Commission of Springfield that Case Number ZON2010‐00004 (be
approved) (be approved with conditions) (be denied) (no action be taken at this time).
This DECISION was presented to and approved by the Planning Commission on May 18, 2010.
ATTEST: __________________________________
Planning Commission Chairperson
AYES: _____
NOES: _____
ABSENT: _____
ABSTAIN: _____
Attachment 2-1