HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 6407 10/21/2019 /iii i,i, .:/i,i,,,,ri✓ir L ,,./vi3 i ✓/ivi,ii„ .,/,.//ii a,,,/////,,,,!/',/////„/,.: /i. ,..,,A vam/7✓%/////,...ii.fii ..iii„G.iri,//////L...//ca/////////!/i,G/ ,/✓/ .//.i✓ii//✓/////////l¢/✓✓ /iiii /_,........
r,i. ✓ ,/,/lJ// ,✓,./.is //// /��i,
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON
ORDINANCE NO. 6407 (GENERAL)
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD METROPOLITAN AREA GENERAL
PLAN (METRO PLAN) DIAGRAM BY REDESIGNATING APPROXIMATELY 13.6 ACRES OF LAND
FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL(LDR)TO MIXED USE COMMERCIAL (MUC);
CONCURRENTLY AMENDING THE GATEWAY REFINEMENT PLAN DIAGRAM BY
REDESIGNATING THE SAME APPROXIMATELY 13.6 ACRES OF LAND FROM LDR TO MUC;
CONCURRENTLY AMENDING THE SPRINGFIELD ZONING MAP BY REZONING THE SAME
APPROXIMATELY 93.6 ACRES OF LAND FROM LDR TO MUC; ADOPTING A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD FINDS THAT:
WHEREAS, Section 5.14-100 of the Springfield Development Code (SDC) sets forth procedures for
Metro Plan diagram amendments; and
WHEREAS, Section 5.14-115.A of the SDC classifies amendments to the Metro Plan diagram for land
inside the Springfield City limits as being Type I Metro Pfan amendments that require approval by
Springfield only; and
WHEREAS, Section 5.14-125.A of the SDC sets forth procedures for property owners to initiate a Type I
Metro Plan diagram amendment for property under their ownership; and
WHEREAS, the applicant/owner of the subject property initiated a Type I Metro Plan diagram
amendment as follows:
Redesignate approximately 13.6 acres of property identified herein as 3522 & 3530 Game Farm
Road (Assessor's Map 17-03-15-40, Tax Lot 3100) as generally depicted and more particularly
described in Exhibit A to this Ordinance, from Low Density Residential to Mixed Use; and
WHEREAS, Section 5.22-110 of the SDC sets forth procedures for property owners to initiate an
amendment to the Springfield Zoning Map; and
WHEREAS, Section 5.22-110.A,1 sets forth procedures for concurrent amendments to the Metro Plan
diagram and Springfield Zoning Map through the Legislative Zoning Map amendment process; and
WHEREAS the applicant/owner of the subject property initiated the following Springfield Zoning Map
amendment:
Rezone approximately 13.6 acres of property identified herein as 3522 & 3530 Game Farm Road
(Assessor's Map 17-03-15-40, Tax Lot 3100), as generally depicted and more particularly
described in Exhibit B to this Ordinance, from Low Density Residential to Mixed Use
Commercial; and
WHEREAS, on May 7, 2019 the Springfield Planning Commission opened a public hearing on the
proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment request and concurrent request for Gateway Refinement Plant
diagram and Zoning Map amendments; the public hearing was continued to May 21, 2019 and the
written record was extended to June 4, 2019; the Development & Public Works Department staff report,
including criteria of approval, findings and recommendations, together with the testimony and submittals
of the persons testifying at that hearing, were considered and were made a part of the record of the
proceeding;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission met on June 4 and July 2, 2019 to conduct deliberations and
adopt a recommendation for the City Council; at the regular meeting on July 2, 2019, the Planning
/ //% i� /oi�// i/✓,� /,i/,i%%�,%%,,,,,//o////%(, ,/,/ %//i///,✓/n,/F; i -<- i ::.r iii,// ;I/,;//J,,,/If i/�i//1//l///i �/ /i/i//%f.//%(////�/ii/o/,,.4/// ///, / i,.u. is r irFR„i
,,, ,.✓,.s, o, :,<,, „ ,,,,;; .o ..,,,,.,. ..,,,,i,,,<. i .,,�.o c„�rc ioOCi ;,,, ,,,, ,;,,,,,✓ieii✓eiLvio„,,.,,,�. ,,,,,,, ,.: „eaiLr�✓ni il%iaaiiE„ 000„ r,,,u„ :,i v ,,;. ,,,,, i, ..moo. .,,,.,,.
Commission voted 4 in favor and 3 opposed to forward a recommendation to the City Council to deny the
proposed Metro Pia/7 diagram, Gateway Refinement Plan diagram, and Zoning Map amendments; and
WHEREAS, on September 3, 2019 the City Council held a public hearing to receive testimony and hear
comments on the proposals; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is now ready to take action on these proposals with due consideration given
to the above recommendations of the Planning Commission and the evidence and testimony already in
the record, as well as the evidence and testimony presented at this public hearing held in the matter of
adopting this Ordinance amending the Metro Plan diagram, Gateway Refinement Plan diagram, and
Springfield Zoning Map; and
WHEREAS, substantial evidence exists within the record and the findings set forth in Exhibits C & D,
attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, that the proposal meets the relevant approval
criteria,
NOW, THEREFORE, BASED ON THE FOREGOING FINDINGS, THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1_. The above findings and conclusions are hereby adopted.
Section 2. The applicant narrative and the City Council Report and Findings to this Ordinance
set forth in Exhibits C & D, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, are hereby adopted.
Section 3. The Metro Plan diagram designation of the subject property identified as 3522 &
3530 Game Farm Road (Assessor's Map 17-03-15-40, Tax Lot 3100), generally depicted and more
particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby
amended from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Mixed Use (MU).
Section 4. The Gateway Refinement Plan diagram designation of the subject property
identified as a portion of 3522 & 3530 Game Farm Road (Assessor's Map 17-03-15-40, Tax Lot 3100),
generally depicted and more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein
by reference, is hereby amended from LDR to MU.
Section 5. The Springfield Zoning Map is hereby amended to rezone the subject property
identified as 3522 & 3530 Game Farm Road (Assessor's Map 17-03-15-40, Tax Lot 3100), generally
depicted and more particularly described in Exhibit E attached hereto and incorporated herein by
reference, from LDR to Mixed Use Commercial ( UC).
Section 6. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is
for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, that portion
shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent provision and that holding shall not affect the
validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance.
Section 7. Notwithstanding the effective date of ordinances as provided by Section 2.110 of
the Springfield Municipal Code 1997, this ordinance shall become effective 30 days from the date of
passage by the City Council and approval by the Mayor or upon the date of acknowledgement as
provided in ORS 197.625, whichever date is later.
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Springfield this day of October ' 2019
by a vote of_r.®for and against. (Against - Moore and Stoehr)
ORDINANCE N0. 6407
��i�, i Via, ��i�,ia �.�;i,i,i�.,/,„l„i,n�a i,�„iii ✓/„/o����.,,,,, ���,,:,,,,i,i v,i/lisrra���, „��„1 „� m,/aii miL�e// ,%i„a�....,ri.,,, �F ,o',�„r,i oi,ii�,,, rii ,,, .,,.. „oma .,
APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Springfield this 2j day of DLII ar , 2019.
Mayor C.._..„
ATTEST:
06
City ReUoker
RE-VIEWED&APPROVED
ORDINANCE NO. 6407
,¢ „��,��, x „c ai,��,i,ii„ vr,,,q roiiii�nii�i�/i//,, �,,,,/iq,, ,c iioi�,lit�iii,,,c,ioi�i,,,l iiir,iii iia,,,� i� �a iii rim.......iii ivi��i„�i�w,,,,ii,,,/�r,,,iG,i�i���iiiiiiiiooi!,.✓aii,,,,iiG,ii xiiu//riiii ,aiuiii .; �� „ ,���w9
i
EXHIBIT A, Page 1 of 1
PROPERTY REDESIGNATED FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MIXED USE
f
Game Far Rd .,
E>eadmo.„hd Ferry Rd
..
Beltline Rd
No c
^ b ?
h�
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Real property in the City of Springfield,County of Lane,State of Oregon,described as follows:
Beginning at a point on the North line of the WILLIAM M. STEVENS DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 46, in 'Township 17
South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian, 709 feet South 89°55' East of the intersection of the North line of said
claim with the center of the main tract of the Oregonian Railroad, said point of intersection being, according to old
county surveys,South 89'55' East 383.8 feet from the Northwest corner of said claim;and running thence South 89°55'
East along the North line of the claim 879.8 feet,thence South 06° 15' East 238.3 feet,thence South 89°44' East 614.4
feet to the center of the County Road, thence South 33° 34' East 246 feet, thence South 04° 18' East 48.9 feet, thence
North 89'44' West 1605 feet,thence North 06° 15' West 488.6 feet to the point of beginning, being in said WILLIAM M.
STEVENS DONATION LAND CLAIM, in Lane County,Oregon.
Except the portion conveyed to the City of Springfield, to be used as a public road, in the Bargain and Sale Deed
recorded September 29, 1982, Reception No.82-29288,Official Records, in Lane County,Oregon.
Also Except the portion conveyed to the City of Springfield, to be used as a public road, in the Bargain and Sale Deed
recorded May 19,2005, Reception No. 2005-036716,Official Records, in Lane County,Oregon,
ORDINANCE NO. 6407
EXHIBIT B, Page 1 of 1
PROPERTY REZONED FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MIXED USE COMMERCIAL
CL
Game Farm Rd
_..., mm . --------
11 "erry fad
r
Beltline Rd
m
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Real property in the City of Springfield,County of Lane,State of Oregon,described as follows.
Beginning at a point on the North line of the WILLIAM M. STEVENS DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 46, in Township 17
South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian,705 feet South 89°55' East of the intersection of the North line of said
claim with the center of the main tract of the Oregonian Railroad, said point of intersection being, according to old
county surveys,South 89°55' East 383.8 feet from the Northwest corner of said claim;and running thence South 89°55'
East along the North line of the claim 879.8 feet,thence South 06° 15' East 238.3 feet, thence South 89°44' East 614.4
feet to the center of the County Road, thence South 33° 34' East 246 feet, thence South 04° 18' East 48.9 feet, thence
North 89°44' West 1605 feet,thence North 06° 1.5' West 488.6 feet to the point of beginning, being in said WILLIAM M.
STEVENS DONATION LAND CLAIM, in Lane County,Oregon.
Except the portion conveyed to the City of Springfield, to be used as a public road, in the Bargain and Sale Deed
recorded September 29, 1982, Reception No.82-29288,Official Records,in Lane County,Oregon.
Also Except the portion conveyed to the City of Springfield, to be used as a public road, in the Bargain and Sale Deed
recorded May 19, 2005, Reception No.2005-036716,Official Records, in Lane County,Oregon.
ORDINANCE NO. 6407
;, .,,,,,,,:: ,,,,,,.a, ..,n,,.._;o„i3O,o„��G�iiiia,,...,/,,,F,,,,a,,,,.:�iO,.,,ir .,,,:..,,,,...C...,,� ,,,v,, „i,,,,o,,.,,,air,,,,,,.. .a ,.,,, ,,r<..,,,.✓,a,��,,.oLiii„c,i vov. . ,,.. ,.. ,..
✓/,i✓✓////i ///' :✓ ..ilii✓/i/, r .,.Liii iii ,.,✓r[,,,.i/.r,//✓/✓/////✓✓/,✓✓/,////✓�/G//i✓/✓////✓, ,/./..r r. .,v,.rc..,,..,i,.rr ,.,...v, ,,...
EXHIBIT C, Page 1 of 27
Springfield City Council Report and Findings
Type I Amendment to the Metro.Plan Diagram.
Meeting Date: October 21,2019
Case Number: 811-19-000065-TYP4
Applicant: "Teresa 13ishow,Bishow Consulting LLC oft behalf of Urban Transitions LLC
Project Location: 3522 &3530 Game Farm Road (Assessor's Map 17-03-15-40, Tax Lot 3100)
Request
The City has received applications for a Type I Metro Plein diagram amendment and a concurrent Zoning
Map amendment from a property owner. Under Springfield Development Code (SDC) 5.14-11.5.A.1, an
amendment to the Metro Plan diagram inside the City limits is classified as a Type 1 Metro Plan diatrarn
amendment requiring approval by Springfield only. Under SDC; 5.14-1.25,A, an amendment to the Metro
Plan diagram can be initiated by a property owner at any time. Under SDC 5.14-130, a property-owner
initiated amendment to the Metra Plan diagram is processed as a T"ype IV land use action,which requires
public hearings before the Springfield Planning Commission and.City Council.
The proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment would change the plan designation for the subject parcel
from Low Density Residential (LDR)to Mixed Use (MU).' The proposed amendment to the Metro Plan
diagram would also amend the adopted Gateway Refinement Plan diagram, which is a refinement plan to
the Matra Plan. Concurrent with the Metro Plan diagram amendment and Gateway Refinement Plan
amendment, the applicant has proposed to amend the Springfield.Zoning Map to change the zoning of"the
site from IA)R to Mixed Use Commercial (MUC).
The proposed Mixed Use plan designation and MUC zoning would allow for construction of a variety of
commercial and higher density residential traits such as hotels, meeting and conference facilities, eating
and drinking establishments, retail stores,and offices. According to the applicant's submittal:
"The ,zone change will allow redevelopment of the site for° a new vibrant rnix of"Uses that will
stimulate job growth, sul)I)ort the hospitality industry, andprovide new diverse housing options."
The application was submitted on March 14, 2019 and the initial public hearing before the Springfield
Planning Commission was held oil May 7,2019. The public hearing was continued to May 21, 2019 and
'The application and public notices identity the proposal as changing the designation of the subject property from a
combination of Commercial and Low Density Residential to Mixed Use. When the tax lot map is overlaid with the Metro Plan
diagram,the western portion of the subject property appears to be designated Commercial with the remainder Low Density
Residential. However,the Metro Flan diagram was not adopted to apply designations to specific properties. The Goieway
Refinement Plan refines the Alletro Plan diagram to assign plan designations to specific properties. The Gateway Refinement
Plan diagram clearly shows that the entire property subject to this proposal is designated as Low Density Residential,with.
Commercial designation immediately to the west of the subject property. Accordingly,the existing designation for the subject
property tinder both theMe/ro Plan and Chale>wa,Re,inerr ew,Plan is only Low Density Residential.
Additionally,the applicant's narratives refers to the proposed designation as both"Mixed Use"and"Cornmercial Mixed Use."
The applicant's maps show the proposed designation as"Mixed Use." "Commercial.Mixed Use"is not a land use designation
recognized under the C.xOICIVay,Refinement Plan. According,all references by the applicant to Commercial Mixed Use
designation are treated as a reference to the,Mixed 1.1se designation.
ORDINANCE. NO. 6407
iai,oc�i!r✓.✓ii✓/i/i�✓i//„ .ilii✓oilii�i✓/i�✓✓✓ iGi/oi/c„ �,i r, ✓nr. ,avii� i,,,,,,,✓crioc„✓o, iiii« , iia�✓l/ rrm✓v✓/,,,ai/i oil,✓i,.,, i, iii✓ir i, ca i;i i i ,i;:;
�/r 1,i/LL////,/ //r,//ii:. .//Gri,G r...,v,.! iii i/,..Y. %%i ii/O/✓J✓///i///O✓ /�iii9////.r.,/.,,r n ii i, a _///v:,,, iii .iris iii////�//// .//////E%%„///,/////l//a/.////// ...rriiiiii ,. //ilii,,f iiiii. i« iiiiiri.... ,ii /. ./iiiiii..
EXHIBIT C, Page 2 of 27
the written record was extended to May 28, 2019. The Planning Commission deliberated and adopted a
recommendation to the City Council on July 2,2019.
On September 3, 2019,the City Council opened a public hearing for the proposed.Metro Plan amendment.
and Zone Change and the public hearing was continued to the regular meeting on September '16, 2019.
The written record was extended to September 23, 2019. to allow the applicant to submit final rebuttal.
comments. The City Council deliberated on October 7, 2019 and directed staff to prepare findings in
support of the proposed redesignation and rezoning action.
The findings and conclusions in this report demonstrate that the application complies with the criteria of`
approval. Except where the findings specifically state otherwise, the applicant's narrative copied herein is
adopted as findings in support of this application.
Notification
Under Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 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 March 22,2019, which is 46 days prior to
the initial Planning Commission public hearing on the matter.
Under SDC 5.2-1.1.0.13,this application requires mailed notification of the public hearing as well as notice in
a newspaper of general circulation. Notice of the May 7, 2019 Planning Commission public hearing was
mailed to adjacent property owners and residents on April 12, 2019 and published in the legal notices
section of The Reglster Guard on April 29, 2019. Staff also posted notices of the May 7, 2019 public
hearing at two places along the Gauze farm Road frontages of the property (northwest and southeast
driveway entrances); along the Beftline Road frontage of the subject property; in the lobby of City Hall; on
the Development&Kiblic Works office digital display; and on the City's webpage.
Notification of the September 3, 2019 City Council public hearing was mailed to adjacent property owners
and residents on August 6, 2019 and published in the legal notices section of The Register Guard on August
20 & 27, 2019. Staff`also posted notices of the September 3, 2019. public hearing at two places along the
Game Farm 'Rod frontages ofthe property(northwest and southeast driveway entrances), along the Beltline
Road frontage of the subject property; in the lobby of City Hall;on the Development&Public Works office
digital display, and on the City's webpage. Notice of the continued public hearing on September 16 and of
the one-week record extension was provided orally by the City Council during the meetings on September 3
and September 16,respectively.
Response to Public Testimony
Over the course of the,initial public comment period,and during[lie Planning Commission and City Council
public hearings, both written and verbal testimony was submitted to the record. Forty-six written submittals
were entered into the record of the Planning Commission action and another 48 written submittals were
added to the record for the City Council action. The issues raised in the submitted comments are
summarized below and are permanently kept in the Planning file for this application (Case 81 t-19-000065-
TYl'4). All of the testimony was presented to the City Council for consideration prior to the closure of”the
public hearing meeting on September 16,2019 and closure of the written record on September 23,2019.
CIRDINANCE NO, 6407
,.i//, i,.✓/i ,...i., :.ilii, lie...%rr ii ,i.:: .i. vli //,,,,////%/.`,..,//%i/ //,✓///,.... ..Y .., r,...,.i i,,,,: ii.,r,..vii ii,...i,✓, NO/
EXHIBIT C, Page 3 of 27
Issues Identified
The following key issues are among those identified in the public comments submitted to the public record.
of these land use actions:
• The proposal will effectively render existing homes on the subject property almost worthless
because the resale value will be impacted by the change of plan designation and changing the zoning
from residential to mixed use commercial;
• A change in plan designation is unwarranted when other property [in the vicinity] is undeveloped or
underdeveloped;
• Other jurisdictions have adopted comprehensive plan policies that address manufactured dwelling
parks;
• The proposed redesignation is contrary to State law, particularly Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS)
Sections 90 and 456.
• The proposed Metro Plan amendment could require residents to vacate their homes;
• The Patrician mobile home park is a form of affordable housing for vulnerable segments of the
population including the elderly and persons with disabilities;
• The state-mandated compensation for closure of mobile home parks ($6,000 - $8,000 per dwelling
unit) isn't enough to cover the cost of relocation. And, even if relocation of the affected homes was
possible,there are very few vacant mobile home park spaces available in the region;
• The City has the authority to pass an ordinance requiring additional compensation for owners of
mobile homes in the event of a park closure, and the compensation should be closer to real market
value instead of state-mandated minimums;
• The owner and/or City need to provide assurance to the residents that mobile home park closure
won't occur unless a timetable has been established;
• The Gateway area of Springfield has been developed as a 'hospitality center over the past several
decades and a conference center is a natural next step in the economic development of this
neighborhood;
• The subject property was identified as a prefcrred site f?.)r a conference center development in.
Springfield.
1^indings in Response to Issues Raised.
Pro j,)ose(i Rezoning Action Diminishes Value,(#'Exi s ting Di vellings
A common theme among respondents that oppose the proposed redesignation and rezoning is a concern
that the action would render the existing manufactured dwellings on the site essentially worthless. Not
only would the residents be required to disclose the change of zoning to a potential purchaser, the
property owner has indicated that site redevelopment is anticipated in the next 5-1.0 years malting long-
term viability of the manufactured dwellings doubtful. At least one respondent has commented that the
loss in value of"the existing units due to rezoning would constitute an unconstitutional taking of private
property. Additionally, relocation of the vintage manufactured dwellings could be costly and damaging to
the structures. And, even if relocation could be undertaken, there are very few vacant manufactured
dwelling park sites available in the region.
The redesignation and rezoning of the properly would make the existing mobile home park a legal non-
conforming use. Non-conforming uses are created when the City changes the type of uses it allows in a
zoning district as a way to implement goals and policy that indicate a desire for a different type Of future
land uses. `The City has no policies about non-conforming uses that provide any direction in terms of this
plan amendment and rezoning. Neither approval nor denial of the proposed Metra Plan diagram
amendment and zone change affects the property owner's right to close the mobile home park in
accordance with state landlord-tenant law and redevelop the property.
ORDINANCE NO, 6401
,. i�ai/i�///,ii, „A,iiiirioi,i�.� „iii r i grill„ riii , „„way, i iiG,,,//ic✓ iiiivvi c.. i,,,riiolilt i ioi/G;iiiiiyii�iG„a/i%i,iivrc,ii,r,i�i „iaiiciii!!,,,,,, ,rc pie iia i:2i
✓o ,.o,.,,„,,,, ... : i „ i. ion, /✓✓�%„ii✓r s ....,,,,,moo ii ,,,,.oi,,, ✓,✓i„ ✓ai,✓v✓,✓/i a✓i i,,., „ ,F, .o,✓,,✓ ✓✓✓ ,_r,„ri moi, ao.
EXHIBIT C, Page 4 of 27
Proposed Re-7oningAction is Ccrntrcrr^y 10 Provisions orf ORAS”90&456
One respondent cited a section of the Oregon Revised. Statutes (ORS) and stated the proposed action was
contrary to state; law regarding tenant's rights to compete to purchase parks that are offered for sale. The
provisions of ORS 90 & 456 pertain to landlord-tenant relationships, including manufactured hornes
within managed parks, and are not governed by the City or applicable to land use actions affecting the
property,
Proposed Rezoning Action Could Result in Residents.Becoming I-Tcrnaeles°s
A primary concern among respondents is the high cost of housing in the area, and the fact that the
Patrician Mobile Home Park is an age 55+ facility that offers relatively low cost housing for vulnerable
demographics the elderly, veterans, and persons with disabilities. Residents testified that the rezoning
could result in park closure and eventual displacement of" the residents, and that there are few if any
"landing spots" for the residents. Some of the respondents indicated that they would not meet income
qualifications for a different park if they are forced to move because they are ori a fixed income and rents
have been increasing at a faster rate than pensions and Social Security benefits. Respondents also spoke
of not only being afraid of losing their homes, but also their community and each other. They like the
location of the park as it is near transit and services,
As noted above, redesignating and rezoning the property does not affect the property owner's right to
issue a park closure notice at any tirrre in accordance with state landlord-tenant law. Neither approval nor
denial of the application prevents or guarantees park closure and displacement of residents. Given the
applicant's statement that redevelopment is planned for the next 5-10 years under either the existing or
proposed plan designation and zoning, approval of the application does not affect residents' likelihood of
displacernent.
Proposed Rezoning Action Constitutes cx Mobile Morrie Park Closure
Respondents cited the public hearing notice as their indication that the Patrician Mobile Home Park was
about to close and their dwellings "would be'bulldozed." Although the rezoning itself"does not result in a
closure—as the park can continue to function as a legal non-conforming use--the applicant has indicated.
an intent to redevelop the site within the next 5-10 years. Regardless of whether the rezoning is approved
---or not—the applicant could still announce a mobile home park closure in the upcoming years and the
residents would have to find other places to live. There would not be a public hearing or land use
approvals required for a park: closure. Amending the Metro Plan designation and zoning of the subject
property, if approved, does not automatically displace current: residents from their homes. The existing
residential uses on the site can continue indefinitely under either the current or the proposed comprehensive
plan designation and zoning. if the plan designation is changed to mixed-rise and the zoning is changed to
mixed use commercial,the mobile home park could remain as an existing non-conforming use until the site
formally redevelops, Nothing in the proposal alters the landlord's obligations to tenants under state law (as
provided in ORS 90.645-655) before closing a manufactured dwelling park, nor does this development
proposal require the closing of the rnanufactured dwelling park, which is consistent with the City's
obligations in ORS 90.660 not to interfere with a tenant's rights under state law.
Owner-an(flor City to Provide Assui-tmce ofPttrk.Remaining Open
Tile requested land use actions do riot constitute a notification of park closure. Additionally, there are no
criteria of approval that require the City to take action against park closure or enter into an agreement with
the park owner or the residents regarding long-term plans for redevelopment, ';Therefore, requiring
assurance that,the Patrician Mobile lfome Park won't close within a specified time period is not within the
City's authority. Any such agreements would have to be made between the landowner and the tenants
through modified lease agreement language,
ORDINANCE NO. 6407
,/i :i.ii.r/iiia.dl G/O///�/J.r.//i/////i// . //.ni,: rrrrrri /iia.l,,.<i ,. /i....� / /////////,lr„///////llllll/%!!i////// L/Lriiirir. i,/i✓
.i// .ri, .::/ /iiiii././ .✓i.. riii..c /////rrr/`r r r r r .r i. .i.LL/ ,,,,,G/i/!/i. ,v/. ..///iii/i/
EXHIBIT C, Page 5 of 27
Available Compensation is Insufficient f6r Mobile Home Turk Closure
Respondents commented that the compensation they would receive, is insufficient to compensate for the
loss of their dwelling, to facilitate a relocation of their unit, or to provide a down payment on another
dwelling — whether in a manufactured dwelling park or another type of housing. Almost all of the
residents within the Patrician Mobile Home hark own their units, but not the underlying property. At
such time as a park closure is announced, state statute (ORS 90.645) provides for a one year notification
and $6,000 for a single-wide or $8,000 for a double-wide unit (or more based on inflation) as
compensation from the park owner.
Some residents requested that the City include a condition of approval or adopt new City-wide regulations
to require additional compensation or longer notice periods prior to park closure. There are no criteria of
approval or any other existing City regulation that would require this type of payment or notice to the
tenants, Furthermore, the City is explicitly preempted by state statute (ORS 90,660) from enforcing any
ordinance, rule, or other local law regulating manufiu;tured dwelling park closures or partial closures
adopted after July 1, 2007.
Regarding the remaining issues raised under public comtxlents, the findings in this report demonstrate that.
the proposed M.etro Plan diagram amendment complies with the requirements of the Statewide Planning
Goals, including Goal 10 -- Flousing. Dilt'erent and conflicting Metro and Refinement Plan policies were
identified that apply to the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change. The City Council
has the authority under the Metro Plan to deterrnine which policies are more applicable or carry greater
weight: in this case. A majority of the City Council has determined that the Metro Plan and Gateway
Refinement Plan policies pertaining to redevelopment for mixed uses and economic opportunities take
precedence over the applicable policies pertaining to retaining existing residential uses, as generally
described and more specifically detailed under Criterion 13.2 below.
Findings in Support of Metro Plan Ame�adn�ent
The Gateway Area of,5'[�ring field has Evolved us a Husl)itulity Center Over.Several Decades
As the Gateway area of Springfield has developed over the years, several key ingredients that favor mixed
use development have been implemented including bus rapid transit, improved local and regional
transportation infrastructure, increased 1-5 freeway exposure, redevelopment of the Shoppes at Gateway,
and construction of several new hotels, restaurants and brewpubs. ']'his progression has paved the way for
further evolution of the Gateway area with additional hospitality and tourism facilities such as a hotel and
conference center,
The Subject Site is Identified as a Preferred Location.for°a Conference('enter
A 2007 study conducted by the Springfield Conference Center Consortium found that the site of the
Patrician Mobile home Park was a preferred location for a hotel with conference facilities. This was a
determining factor in the applicant purchasing the property after the study was released. Participants in the
Consortium study, including Travel Lane County and the Springfield Chamber of Commerce, have
expressed their written support for the redesignation and rezoning action.
Final Rebuttal.Comments from Applicant
issue: Rebuttal to comments urging city administration and government should work with the owner on a
"When an(Illow”astr"ategj)to minimize the negative irrli)act on. current res'itlents".
(ORDINANCE NO, 6407
.,,.�,i,i iiiF✓i, r//,//r,,,; r/iiiii „c.' ry rr /r..i i:.E..//iii rii ii/../,rU,//,%////v/ir////// ,..:.i,iri ,,..//✓ .....s.Ji /...ir, ,ei/ v,/,/////,//%�////✓Li„//%////%llll/•/%d,v,i,i. ...//fF/. iiiirr.,i ,/,i,i.ivr i c ri... ie<.
EXHIBIT C, Page 6 of 27
Summary of A,M icant Rebuttal: The Applicant stated that it would be willing to enter an agreement
with the City of Springfield to operate and maintain the park: through at least January 31, 2023. The
Applicant suggests that the negotiations oil the details of the agreement occur outside of the 'land use
process. The Applicant offered this proposal not as a condition of approval on the land use decisions but
to provide a greater level of certainty to the tenants. The agreement is not intended to be the formal park.
closure notice but to reflect a commitment to maintain the park through at least January 31, 2023.
Urban Transitions, [,LC; acquired the property on January 2, 2008. Currently, only 12 (or about 15%) of
the manufactured dwellings are still occupied by the original households. The ownership of the
remaining manufactured dwellings (85%) has changed at least once since the park was acquired in 2008
by the Applicant.
On March 14, 2019, Urban 'Transitions, I LCI gave all park residents notice of the intent to submit the
pending applications to the City of Springfield. At that time, 75 of the park spaces were rented to
households who owned their mobile borne. Since March 14, 2019, 8 of these hornes were sold by former
residents and are now occupied by new residents. This reflects a 10% turnover in the past six months.
About 44% oaf the mobile 'homes owned by residents are occupied by households that purchased their
homes since January 1,2016. Turnover in the park is normal and due to a variety of factors, including but
not limited to health,monetary circumstances, and change in life circumstances.
The applicant cannot legally prevent or obstruct a current resident from selling their mobile home.
Provided the prospective buyer meets the criteria for renting space in the park and agrees to follow the
park's Statement of Policy and Rules and Regulations, Urban Transitions, LLC is obligated to rent the
ground space and allow the sale transaction of the personal property mobile home to go forward. 'To
minimize the negative impact on current residents, Urban Transitions, LLC stated its goal to maintain and
operate the park as long as possible consistent with its redevelopment goals.
Findings in Response: Regardless of whetber the Metro Plan amendment and Zone Change request is
granted or not, the property owner has the right to issue notification of park closure at any time in
accordance with state landlord tenant law. 'T'he City has declined to enter into any agreement with the
applicant regarding future park closure, because it is outside the authority of the City to place restrictions
or requirements on manufactured park closures unrelated to the criteria of approval for this application.
The City's decision in this matter is 'based on the criteria of approval, which does not include potential
scenarios that could unfold if and when park closure is announced.
.Issue: Rebuttal to comments urging the ("ity to table the rezoning until a new city ordinance is Imssed'
mandating all mobile home park owners to compensate tenants;, in addition to ORS 90,610 mandator�y
compensation, up to current market values. Vote against the rezoning until all current residents have a
safir and crfJordable place to go.
Summary ofAp)licant Rebuttal: State law prohibits cities from enacting new ordinances that require
mobile home park owners to compensate tenants beyond what is established in ORS 90.610, or place
other restrictions on park closure above what is required by state law (see ORS 90.660). In the event of
a park closure, Urban Transitions, LLC has indicated that it will comply by State law and provide tenants
the required compensation. State law requires landlords to provide tenants compensation according to the
size of the manufactured home (e.g., single-'wide, double-wide) and not based on local market conditions
or assessed valuations. This provides existing and fixture tenants certainty as to what financial
compensation they will receive in the event of park closure.
ORDINANCE NO. 6407
i .oic,iio,,.a,,;,iiiioi�ni„c, ✓,,,,,,i ,,�., .,,. ,,,,.........
—//-----,'--,//........ ......
EXHIBIT C, Page 7 of 27
Findin2s in Response: The requested Metro Plan amendment and lone Change does not constitute a
notification of park closure,therefore the rezoning action is not dependent upon the approval of new policies
or programs to increase compensation for residents. Tabling the ordinance until all residents have a "safe
and affordable place to go" is subjective and assumes that the rezoning action will result in immediate
closure of the mobile home park. Park closure is unrelated to the criteria of approval, and therefore does not
provide a reasonable basis to defer the decision to an unknown future date.
Testimony Rejected by the Council for Consideration in the Record
After the close of the public hearing and written record, members of the Council received communications
from members of the public regarding the Patrician Mobile Home Park. Those communications were
disclosed at the October 7, 2019 meeting. One email communication included a letter and lease agreement.
amendment sent by the applicant to park residents, which included an offer by the applicant not to close the
park prior to January 31, 2023;the email to which these documents were attached included a park resident's
comments that they did not want to agree to the terms of the lease amendment. On October 7, the Council
rejected the communication and excluded it from the record, because the terms of lease agreements and the
circumstances around park closure are unrelated to the criteria of approval for this application. A second
communication sent to Councilors after the close of the written record included a letter written to the
Oregonian newspaper about the City Council's public hearing and deliberations in the matter, and.
requesting that the Oregonian cover the land use proceedings in their publication. Because this letter cited
to facts already in the record and to portions of the public hearings and meetings held by the Council, and
did not contain any new information or facts,, the Council also rejected this communication and did not
include it in the record on. October 7. Finally, members of the Council have received communications that
contain only a general staternent urging the Councilor to vote in favor or against the application; these
communications have also been excluded from the record as they have no factual bearing on the criteria of
approval for the application.
Criteria of Approval
Section 5.141.35 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 CRREWIA
A Metro flan amendment mgy be alal)roved only if'theSpringfield Qv Council and other alrnlicable
governing body or bodiesfind that. theIrroposarl c:•ortfarms to the.Jallvwing ct1ter1a:
A. The amendment shall be consistent with applicable,S`tatewide Planning Goals; and
13. Plan inconsistency:
1. In those cases ivhere the Metro Plan applies,, adopion of"the amendment shall not make the
Metro Plan internally inconsistent.
2. In cases where .SPringfield Comprehensive Plan applies, the amendment shall be consistent
kvah the S'I)rins;freld Comlrrehensive Plan.
ORDINANCE NO. 6407
rc/i,,r/i/ a/ vvr//, r/. .✓:a//iiiii/moo///90//,,r rc ., ,r..:.,/ rr„rvr, ,rv�/iar.,r., r/ 2,rr .„!/ ////i/m//r/� c /i/oi/i.ii;✓r.,r,,. ;..0„r,..,r ria. ,,,rr� r r/vr rr�.
--------------a , ,,jai: c,,,., rad�Crr ,., ,ii... .:, ., ,,i«/iaiait iiiii r,%„ , E.,,,i ceiii�,rraimiiii `„iv,, o,,,, ,,,._:r .,✓i., oo ,,, ...,
EXHIBIT C, Page 8 of 27
In addition, SDC 5.1.4-115A provides the criteria of approval for refinement plan amendments:
A. In reaching a decision on the adoption or amendment of refinement plans and this Code's text, the
City Council shall adopt findings that demonstrate conformance to the following,.
1. The Metro Plan;
2. applicable State statutes; and
3. Applicable State-wide Planning Goals and Administrative Rules.
The criteria of approval in SDC 5.14-1.15A require the same findings as the criteria ofapproval f,or Metro
Plan amendments in SDC 5.14-1.35. Because the criteria of approval for Metro Plan diagram
amendments and refinement plan diagram amendments are the same (although worded differently), the
findings in this report that demonstrate compliance with the criteria in SDC 5.14-135 also demonstrate
cornpliance with SDC 5.14-1.15A and those criteria are therefore not addressed separately.
A. Consistency with Applicable State-Wide Planning Coals
Finding 1: Of the 19 statewide planning; goals, 1.3 are "urban” goals: the goals that may be
applicable to plan map amendments within Springfield's urban growth boundary (UG13). The
potentially applicable goals 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 1.1 - Public Facilities and Services; Goal 12 -
Transportation; Gaal 13 - Energy Conservation; Goal 14 Urbanization; and Goal 15 - Willamette
River Greenway. Goal 3 --Agricultural Lands and Goal 4 —Forest Lands are not applicable within
the City's acknowledged UGB. Goals 16 through 19 are related to ocean and coastal planning and
not applicable within Springfield's UGLY. The 13 urban statewide planning goals are listed below;
findings and a determination of compliance are included for each applicable goal.
Goal I. —Citizen Involvement
Applicant's Narrative: "The City of. Springfield has a citizen involvement proal, am that is
acknowledged by the.State as in compliance with Goal 1. This,Metro Plan amendment and related
land use applications are being reviewed a.v a Type IV procedure. This procedure includes
opportunities for citizens to be involved including two public hearings,. Requirements under Goal 1
are met by adherence to the citizen involvement processes required hyv the Metro flan and
implemented by the Sx)ringfield Development Coda, Chapter.5, 7ype IV land use application review
procedures. This application complies with the U)C Type IV procedures and thus complies with
Goan.”
Finding 2: Goal I — Citizen Involvement calls for "the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all
phases of the planning process." As the applicant notes in their narrative, the proposed citizen-
initiated amendment to the adopted Metro Plan diagram is subject to the City's acknowledged plan
amendment process (SDC 5.14-100 Metro Plan Amendments) and the City's public notice standards
(SDC 5.2-115). This process requires a public hearing before the Springfield Planning Commission.
and a public hearing before the Springfield City Council, and requires the City to provide mailed
notice (see description following). Mailed notice of the initial Planning Commission public hearing
ORDINANCE NO. 6407
ri ir.ilii L✓i/.r// ✓//i,r ,/F//cr ri../ ii„2 riiii ii,3.,,, is%///,✓i/r/id/, ////,l,ii, iiiir,..viii., ,,,r..,i[.i .iii.i i✓i..ilii rriirr.i. Oi//%..�//,/l✓/////// i/// i,i,ii,iii.s., G,ir ii,✓iiiii.. fiii„r.,.v...
EXHIBIT C, Page 9 of 27
on May 7, 2019 was sent to all property owners and residents within 300 feet of the subject property
on April 12, 2019. The Planning Commission public hearing was advertised in the Register-Guard
on.April 29, 2019,
Finding 3: At the request of persons testifying at the May 7, 2019 public hearing,the public hearing
was extended to May 21, 2010 and the written record was subsequently extended to May 28, 2019.
All public testimony and information addressing the criteria of approval was considered and is
included in the record for the Planning Commission's recommendation to City Council.
Finding 4: Planning Commission hearing procedures for open record requests and deliberations
resulted in the rescheduling of` the initial City Council hearing on the matter until September 3,
2019. Mailed notification of the rescheduled City Council public hearing was provided to all
property owners and residents within 300 feet of the subject property on May 14, 2019.
Finding 5: Mailed notice of the City Council public hearing on September 3, 2019 was sent to a.11.
property owners and residents within 300 feet of the subject property on August 6, 2019. The City
Council public hearing was advertised in the Register-Guard on August 20 and 27, 2019.
Additionally, staff posted notices for the public hearing at three locations on the perimeter of the
subject property, in the lobby of City Hall, on the Development & Public Works office digital
display, and on the City's webpage. The notice for this proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment
complies with SDC 5.2-115 and is consistent with Goal 1 requirements.
Finding 6: At the request of persons testifying at the September 3, 2019. public hearing, the public
hearing was extended to September 16, 2019 and the written record was held open until September
23, 2019. for the applicant to submit final rebuttal comments. Notice of the, continued public hearing
was provided at the meeting on September 3; notice of the extended written record was provided at
the meeting on September 16.
Finding 7: Public testimony and all information received addressing the criteria of approval has
been considered andincluded in the record for the City Council's decision.
Finding 8: As demonstrated above, the citizen involvement process for this application is consistent
with the City's acknowledged procedures for compliance with Goal 1 --Public Involvement.
Goal 2-- l.,and Use Planning
Applicant's Narrative: "Goal 2 requires local plans and reguhaory measures to be consistent with
statewide goals and land use decisions to be supported by an adequate factual basis. Geral 2 also
requires that comprehensive pian amendments be adopted q/ter a public hearing by the governing-
body thatpTrovides citizens ern opportunity,to comment on the proposed amendment. The,V)ringfield
Developrment Code implements Goal 2 by providing state-acknowledged procedures and criteria
governing land use decisions. This, Metro Plan amendment and related applications will be
considered by the .Planning Cotnrnission and City Council followiug two public hearings. This
application complies with the requirements of the :Springfield Development Code and thus complies
with Goal 2.”
Finding 9: Goal 2 -- Land Use Planning outlines the basic procedures for Oregon's statewide
planning program. Under Goal 2, land use decisions must be consistent with a comprehensive plan,
and jurisdictions are to adopt suitable implementation ordinances that put the plan's policies into
ORDINANCE NO, 6407
EXHIBIT C, Page 10 of 27
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; United
States Postal Service; 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 Routes to School and. Financial. Services; bane 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 March 22,2019..
Finding 10: 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 Metra Plan. The subject property is within the adopted Gateway Refinement Plan area and the
proposed amendment to the.Metra Plan diagram would concurrently amend the adopted.Refinement
Plan diagram. Additionally, the City is in the process of developing and adopting a Springfield-
specific Comprehensive Plan. The acknowledged 51)ringfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential
Land Use and llousin�iZ E'lemeni (Ordinance 62613) provides supplemental policies and findings and
expands upon — but does not replace — the applicable residential .Metra Plan policies. The
acknowledged Springfield 2030 Cony�rehensive .Plan Economic Element (Ordinance 636 1) replaces
the economic development and employment findings and policies of the Metro Plan. Findings that
demonstrate the proposal's consistency with these elements of the comprehensive plan are provided
under Criteria B. These findings demonstrate the public need and justification for the proposed
Matra.flan and Gatewctt;Re
frnernent flan diagra►n amendment.
Finding 1.1: The public hearing process used to amend the Metro Plan and adopted refinement plans
is specified in Chapter IV Matra flan Review, Amendments, and Refinements. These policies are
acknowledged as consistent with the Goal 2 requirement that citizens and affected governments be
provided notice and an opportunity to review and comment on minor changes to the comprehensive
plan. The following relevant sections of the Springfield Development Code are acknowledged to
implement the above AlIc}tro, Plan policies and Coal 2. The proposal is classified as a Type 1
amendment to the adopted Metro Plan diagram that is approved by Springfield only under SDC
5.14-1.15.A. The proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment was initiated Linder SDC 5.14-125 and.
is being processed as a Type IV land use action consistently with SDC; 5.1-1.40 and 5.14-1.30.
Because this process is consistent: with file relevant procedures in the Springfield Development
Code, it is consistent with the Metro Plan policies and Goal 2.
Goal 5 --Natural Resources Seen ic-and .1hstoric Are.s, and C7pen Spaces
Applicant's Narrative: "The property does not contain any inventoried Statewide Geral S resources.
The Gateway Re
finemeni Plan does not identify any natural assets or historic resources on the
property. Gaal.5 is not applicable."
Finding 12: Goal 5 .-.- Open Spaces, Scenic and 1-listoric 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. As stated in the applicant's
narrative, the site that is subject of the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment is considered.
developed and has not been identified in the City's Natural Resources Inventory, Register of
ORDINANCE NO, 6407
...////////J.E.✓ ✓//. ./ �..i //i,..i.,,,.i, ......... r, ..iiia.,i.......
EXHIBIT C, Page 11 of 27
historic Sites, or the Willarnala.ne Park & Recreation District Comprehensive Plan. ']'here are no
known natural or cultural resources present on the subject site. Therefore, this action does .not alter
the City's acknowledged compliance with Goal 5.
Goal Cry-Air,Nater and Land Resources Qq lily
Applicant's Narrative: "The City ()f.Springfield has existing programs and regulations in place io
maintain and improve the quality cif the air, water and land resources. Springfield's Environmental
Services Divisions (ESD) coordinates the City's and Metra region's compliance with applicable
.federal and state environmental quality statutes. ESID manages multiple programs to maintain
compliance with Goal 6 including Water Resources Programs, such as, implementing the City's
�S
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination "stem (Nl�'7.P.S) starmwater discharge permit and the
Wastewater & ,S`turmwaler (sewer cl'c drainage) Programs. This Metro Plan amendment will allow
redevelopment of an existing developed site. All new development must comply with applicable
local, state and federal air and water quality standards. The proposed Metro.flan amendment does
not tiller the C'ity's acknowledged compliance with Goal 6"
Finding 13: Goal 6—Air, Water and Land Resources Quality applies to local comprehensive plans
and the implementation ofineasures 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 Gatewrxy Rejinement Plan amendment does not affect City ordinances,
policies,plans, and studies adopted to comply with Goal 6 requirements. Therefore,this action does
not alter the City's acknowledged compliance with Goal 6.
Goal 7—Areas !Subject to Natural Hazards
Applicant's Narrative: "The Metrcr Plan, Springfield's 2030 Plan and the City's Development Cade
are acknowleck.,ed to be in compliance with all applicable statewide land use goals, including Goal
7. Springfield has existing programs, policies, zoning overlays, and development standards to
regulate development in areae subject to natural disasters and hazards. The property included in
this Metra Plan amendment is not in the City's Floodplain Overlay District or the Hillside
Development Overlay. .The Gateway Refinement Plan does root identify the property,as within the
Floodway, Floodway Fi inge, or containing hydric soils. The properly does not contain an},known
natural hazards. (acral 7 is not apj)lieable."
Finding 14: Goal 7 --- Areas Subject to Naturalhazards 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 floodplains and potential landslide
areas on steeply sloping hillsides. The subject: site is within a developed residential neighborhood
and is on level ground, but it is outside the mapped 100-year flood hazard area of the McKenzie
River. Future site development will be subject to the provisions of the City's Site Ilan Review
process as described in SDC 5.1.7-100.
Finding 15: The proposed Metrcr 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 hillside areas or the mapped flood hazard area ofthe McKenzie and Willamette
Rivers. "1"herefore,this action has no effect on the City's acknowledged compliance with Goal 7.
ORDINANCE NO. 6407
✓ii, i, ,,,,,..i; %„viii, ,i,...�, ,,.,i„�,,,i�,,,,� ,�,,,ii,aiarr✓,ii.�ioiir,ii i„? i,,,. ii,,,,, r„�o/i/l,i . r.... ..//11W,
EXHIBIT C, Page 12 of 27
Goal 8-Recreational Needs
Applicant's Narrative: "The subject property is located in the Willamalane Park and Recreation
District. located at 1500 Mallard Avenue (sic]. Gamebird Park is improved with a full basketball
court, playground and other amenities. Per Goal S, the 20.12 Willamalane Park and Recreation
C'mruprehensive Plan assessed projected population growth and changes in community
demographics. The plan proposed new and expanded recreational facilities although none were
iclentific�cl on the subfect property. Within a mile of'the subject prolrerty, an area adjacent to the
McKenzie River is identified.firr a proposed new path and special use park. The subject property is
currently,designated on the Metro Plan Diagram as a combination crf Commercial and Law Density
Residential. The proposed Metra Plan amendment will allow a diversity af.commercial and high-
density residential uses (through] a concurrent zone change to Mixed Use Commercial (MUC). A
x�
propo
ed
the
ld
ce center providing
visitorsyand tin educaiionalfoil ty br the rze�,ionl's�r�orkforc�e.nlhc su1 jest p cper yci not need dirr
The w >, tea
satisfy recreational needs. The proposed Metro Plan Diagram amendment and related applications
comply with Goal 8.”
Finding 16: As stated in the applicant's narrative, Goal 8 --- Recreational Needs requires
communities to evaluate their recreation areas and facilities and to develop plans to address current
and projected dernand. "floc provision of recreation sea-vices within Springfield is the responsibility
of Willarnalane Park & Recreation District. Wi'llanialane 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: "Pursuant to hStaievvide,Planning C.;oal 9, in T`cbrivar y 2010, the Sl)ringfleld
City Council, together with Eugene and Lane County, approved the Regional Prosperity Economic
Development. Plan providing a„fi amcRwark to better align regional economic growth with the area's
assets and values. In 2016 the C"ity of Sprinogield amended the Metro Plan and adapted
,Springfield's city-,specific Sj)ringfield 2030 Comprehensive Plan Economic Element including
Economic Development Goals, Policies and Implementation Strategies cis well as its Technical
,S''upplement the Springfield Commercial and Induustrial Buildable Lands Inventory and Economic
Opportunities AnaljWs (EOA). (City Ordinance No. 6361). The adopted Economic Element stated
a need f.w large sites.far future emploYment. Specifically, `The employment land needs that may not
be met within the UC B are for sitesffuve acres and larger. The City has one buildable site 20 acres
or larger. ' (T'inding 16). It is worth noting that the EOA indicated there were no available sites
designated either Commercial or Mixed Use between 10.00-19.99 acres (See EOA, Table 2-9). The
property is approximately 13 acres and if available for° commercial development would help meet
the projected demand. The EOA listed sectors with the most growth potential czs: Health and Social
Assis7ance; Administrative} and ,Support,- Construction; and Accommodations and Ibod Services.
Other sectors, with growth opportunities were listed cis: Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation;
Management of'Companies and EnterTrises,- Professional, Scientific, and Technical5"ervices; and
Private Educational Services (Yee EOA pages 62 and 63). Consistent with Coal 9 requirements, the
C11ity of'Springfield identified `target industries' or those most likely to be attractive to S'prinlYfield
(S'ee EOA pages 65-67). The `target industries'include:
ORDINANCE NO. 6407
,Ji�,,,.,r, ..L.iriii 1....i .,lr r,i i,i,i. ,iii ..oil, ..., ir,! f r,�/.�/.a„m„zi,i,,,,,, ... „,i ii,i;vtevr ...',,,,,, ,ii.,;,,,i,.r/ar.,/! /. //..uvvm�i.i,.,,,,r...i, ail... ,,,,,,,,o .ii.,i.i i.. i.... ✓ei,..,. .i.
EXHIBIT C, Page 13 of 27
• Medical&,ruices
Services for Seniors
«
Call Centers
Mantle iacturing
*
Specialty food Processing
• ligh-7r ch
• Professional and Technical.Services
•
Call Centers,[.sic]
• hack-Office Functions”
• Tourism
• Green Businesses
• Corporate Headquarters
• Services of Residents
• Government and Public Sen,xices
The City of'Springfield has multiple plan designations that can accommodate the target industries
listed above (See EOA, Table 4-2 Target Industries and Plan Designations). This Metro Plan
amendment would change the Plan Diagram for the subject property from a combination of
Commercial and Low Density Residential to Mixed Use. The Mixed Use designation would provide
a new 13 acre site available„for several of Springfield's tat-get industries. As noted in the EOA,
`Many businesses in .Springfield especially large businesses like those in Springfield's target
industries, are located as close to Interstate 5 or a state highway as possible_Mitch of..Springfield's,
employment base, especially large employers, is clustered in the Gateway area, within one milt, (or
less) of I-5.' (,See page 92). The subeel property is located within one mile of Interstate S and close
to other major employers and medical services such as RiverBend Hospital. the subfect property is
ideally suited for a mix of uses including a conference center, hotels,, higher education or business
training,facility, The proposed Metro Flan amendment and related applications will increase the
avoilable supply gflandfibr employment needs and thus complies with Goal 9."
Finding 17: 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 f"or such lands, and provide enough appropriately-zoned land to meet the
projected demand over a 20-year planning horizon. The City's acknowledged Commercial and
Industrial Buildable I..,ands Inventory and Economic Opportunities analysis (Cl131,-E0A) identified
a deficit of employment land, including a need for 4 new sites that are between S and 20 acres in
size. To address this deficit, the City expanded the UGB to provide sufficient employment-
generating land area four the 20-year planning horizon. The UGI3 expansion has been acknowledged
by LCDC effective March S, 2019, 'I"his proposal would result in a small surplus ol:'sites between 5
and 20 acres in size that are available l'or mixed use commercial development, which is consistent.
with Goal 9.
Finding 18: The proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment from Low Density Residential to Mixed
CJse will supplement the amount of employment land within the City's inventory. Amending the
Metro Plan diagram to facilitate redevelopment of existing sites complies with Goal 9.
ORDNANCE NO, 6407
r vi villi .c "i „v"cc. L"i lir,,.H //,IIIc„��,,,��/J/ii/////(„l is iii JG, c/iii a��i,u,viiq. ,,,,, „ii ,it✓� �i��o{.. iic,//� v iiiG, oi�� a i�n�G /!„/� ii2��ir,/i�L i V/
ria..........
EXHIBIT C, Page 14 of 27
Goal 10 -I-lousin
Applicant's Narrative: "The April 201.1 Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needy Analysis
(RLHNA) serves as the City's 'housing needs analysis and buildable lands inventory' under Goal
10, Division 008 and ORS 197.296. The April 2011 RUINA demonstrated in the aggregate there
was szefficient buildable residential lane' within ,5pringfield's urban growth boundary to meet
residential,public and semi-public land needs during the 20 year planning period. As stated in the
adopting Ordinance No. 6268, FvhibitT'-14:
`Springfield has cin overall surplus cif residential land in two residential plan desig-nations.
• The Low Density Residential (LDR) designation had a surplus cif approximately 378
buildable acres,;
• The Medium Density Residential (MDR) designation had a surplus r,'lf`czpproximately
76 gross buildable acres.
However,
• The High Density Residential (HDR) designation had a deficit gf`opproximately 28
gross buildable acres needed to accommodate cin additional 411 high-density,
multiple family housing units. '
The City was not required, nor did the City take action to address the surplus cif buildable land
available for low-and medium-density housing. The City did amend the Glenwood Refinement Plan
to re-desirnarte 28 acres as .Mr,`xed lAe to help address the deficit of high-density residential land.
The proposed plan amendments and zone change application will farther address the de
fr""c;°iency by
providing an additional 13 acre site available for high-density residential uses. The RLHNA
included a detailed spreadsheet of the tax lots in the residential land base by plan designotion and
zoning. Since the subject property was developed, it was, not included in the residential buildable
land inventory as a site available to meet,future housing needs. the subject prolaerty is designated
in the Metro flan as Commercial and Low Density Residential. The proposed Metra Plan
amendment would shift surplus low-density residential land to Mixed Use Commercial helping to
further address the deficit of high density multiple family housing. Please r ff r to F,xhibit C—Metro_
Plan Diagram Existint;and.Protzczseal The Metro Plan change and related applications comply
with Goal 10."
Finding 1.9: Goal 10 -- Housing applies to the planning for -- and provision of— needed housing
types, including mobile; home or manufactured dwelling parks. The subject site is currently
developed as a mobile home and manufactured dwelling park, which is a permitted use in the,
existing LIAR designation and zone. As nested by the applicant's narrative, a surplus of LDR
designated land exists within the City's land inventory. Currently, the surplus of LDR designated
land is approximately 164.6 acres. (See Ordinances 6364, 6373, 6374, 6375, 6378, 6395, and 6400).
Finding 20: The proposed .Metra Plan diagram amendment would change the anticipated type of
development on the property from single-family homes to a variety of commercial uses with
provision for higher-density residential units to be included. Although the proposed Metro Plan
diagram amendment from LDR to Mixed Use would allow for certain types of residential units to be
constructed on the site;, the 1.3.6-acre property would no longer be part of the City's residential land
inventory.
Finding 21: the subject property is identified in the acknowledged Residential Land and Housing
Needs Analysis (RLHNA) as not available for housing because it is already a fully developed site.
ORDINANCE NO. 5407
,, ...
EXHIBIT C, Page 15 of 27
Amending the Metro Plan designation of the subject site from LDR to Mixed Use will have a
collateral impact on the City's housing inventory because, upon future redevelopment of the site,the
existing dwelling units on the subject site would no 'longer be counted toward meeting the City's
housing need. The subject site is 13.6 acres and is currently developed to support 80 manufactured
dwelling units or mobile homes and there is one stick-built house. The RI.,I-NA assumes
redevelopment of currently developed sites will occur at a rate of 5% from 2010-2030.
Redevelopment of the subject site would remove 81 dwellings from the housing inventory that are
attri'butab'le to the subject site in the RLHNA. The RLHNA assumes a future density of 7.9
dwelling units per acre for all dwelling types. Therefore, if 81 dwelling units are removed from the
inventory of existing dwellings upon future site redevelopment, there is a need for approximately
10.3 acres of additional buildable LDR land. Effectively, this reduces the City's surplus of LDR.to
154 acres. Because the inventory shows a surplus of residential buildable land both before and after
the proposed plan amendment, the remaining Surplus shows that the plan amendment is consistent
with Goal 10.
Finding 22: Under a Mixed Use plan designation, the existing residential dwellings on the site
would become legal non-conforming uses. 'The subject land use action does not constitute a notice
of manufactured home park: closure, so the dwellings could remain indefinitely. Proposed
modifications to the existing manufactured home, park under a Mixed Use designation and zoning
would require a separate land use action for expansion of non-conforming use.
Finding 23: The site is adjacent to a pedestrian and transit-oriented Nodal Development area, and is
close to major employers, health care facilities, multi-use pathway connections, and the regional.
transportation network. Other sites in the immediate vicinity have been the subject of recent Metro
Plan diagram amendments to change the designation from LDR to higher density residential districts
(i.e. Medium acid High Density Residential), The North Gateway area of Springfield is growing and
evolving based on existing development and the recent intensification of land use on
underdeveloped LDR sites located nearby. In this context, the site would be suitable for more
intensive forms of development such as Mixed Use Commercial,which could include higher density
residential uses.
Finding 24: The proposed Metro Plan diagrarn amendment will retain the existing surplus of low
density residential buildable land within the Springfield UGB which allows development of
manufactured bonne dwelling units. Changing trends in the Gateway area support redevelopment of
the subject site with mixed uses, which could include high density residential uses. 'therefore, this
proposal is consistent with.Goal 10.
Goal 11 —Public Facilities arid Services
Applicant's Narrative: "The property is located within the C"itv of ASpringfie>,ld and currently is
provided the Jull range c f urban public facilities and services. The proposal will neat affect the City
or other service providers' abililif to provide public services. The Metro .Plan amendment and
related applications comply with Goal 11."
Finding 25: Goal 1 i ---Public Facilities and Services addresses the efficient planning and provision
of public services such as sewer, water, law enforcement, and fire protection. Under 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 Public
F'acilitie.s° and&5 rvices Plan (PFSP) is a functional plan of the Metro Plan that is acknowledged to
ORDINANCE NO. €407
,i,....ii i..i....v: ii// ,.ii. .,i/1,.,,,.,v .., ,i.vir ,iii,i/,// .✓u ,//////.iir..cr//„ ...irir,,.. / i.,.,,.... ...i//ii /i.,,ia,.,.,.r/////ir _. c
EXHIBIT Cy, Page 16 of 27
meet Springfield's obligations under (goal 11. This area of Springfield is already planned for a.
variety of residential, commercial„ campus industrial, and institutional development and the public
facilities serving this area have been planned accordingly. The PFSP states that there is current
capacity to adequately serve all infill, redevelopment, and Nodal Development Areas within
Springfield city limits, which includes the subject property. If future redevelopment results in a
need to increase the capacity of existing infrastructure serving the property, mitigation would be
required at time of development.
Goal j2--"I'ranspartatian
Applicant's Narrative: "The City of5pringfield'S adopted and acknowledged Transportation
,yslem flan (l SSP) is the Springfield 7035 TransportationkV-stem flan. The proposed Metra Plan
Diagram change Fromm a combination of Community Commercial and Lou, Density, Residential to
Commercial Mixed Use is consistent with the TV. The amendment uvill allow the creation of a
vibrant, mixed use area taking advantage of the strategic location near transit crud major
transportation corridors. The mixed lase land use pattern will be developed at densities that support
transit ridership and decrease reliance on the automobile. To comply with the Transportation
Planning Rude and local regulations, a .special Traffic lrnpact aStarc(v was crarrclrrcted to assess
prajectecl traffic associated with commercial mixed use development at the Patrician Mobile home
Park. The Traffic ImpactStudy,prepared by David Evans and As°sociates�, concluded:
Approval elf the proposed zoning of Carrrmercial Mixed Use world not result in a
,significant cffc�ct to the existing or planned transportation facilities in the opening year of
2020 or the 20 year planning horizon af'203ti. With signal timing optimization at the
intersection of Gateway at Came farm Road, all study area intersections are prgjected to
meet the ODO and City mobility target in the opening year of 2070. For the,forecast
year of 2038, all study area intersections are project to meet the 0DOT and City mobility
targets with currently planned improvements. A detailed safety analysis determined that
safety oriented mitigations are not necessary, and that there are no trendy that would be
rmmagnafaed by the proposed redevelopment of the project site. '
For additional inf mrmalion, please refer°to the Traf is Ir�act Study dated March 2019 prepcarc�d fiat°
Urban Transitions, LLC distributed under.separate coves."
Finding 26: OAR 660-012-0060, also referred to as the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR),
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 roust put in place measures"to mitigate the impact,
as defined in OAR 660-012-0060(2). l.Jnder the TPR, a plan amendment and/or zone change may
result in a "significant affect" under OAR 660-012-0060(2)(x) & (b) by changing the functional
classification of an existing or planned transportation facility, or by changing the standards
implementing a functional classification system. The proposed Metro .Plan dia.grauru amendment
from LDR to Mixed I Jse does not alter the functional classification of any facility or change any
standards for implementing the functional classification system and therefore do not result in a
"significant affect"under OAR 660-012-0060(2)(a)or(b).
I inding 27: [_lnder the TPR, a plan amendment or zone change may also result in a "significant
affect" if' it would result in any of the effects listed under OAR 660-012-0060(2)(c) "based on
prcliected conditions measured at the end of the planning period identified in the. adopted TSI'.,,
DRDINANCF" NO. CAM
EXHIBIT C, Page 17 of 27
Under the TPR, a"significant affect" occurs if the proposed amendments) would result in types or
levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the identified functional classification of the
existing or planned transportation facilities, that degrade the performance of an existing or planned
transportation facility such that it would not meet performance standards identified in the TSP, or that
degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise not
projected to meet the performance standards identified in the TSP.
Finding 213: When determining whether a proposed functional plan or land use amendment has a
significant effect, OAR 660-01.2-0060(4)(a) stages that local governments shall rely on existing
transportation facilities and services and on the planned transportation facilities and services set forth
under subsections (4)(b) and(4)(c) of the rule. CSAR 660-012-0060(4)(b)(E) states that improvements
to regional and local roads, street, or other facilities that are included in a regional or local
transportation system plan are considered planned facilities, improvements or services when the
responsible local government 'provides a written statement that the facilities, improvements, or
services are"reasonably likely to be provided by the end of the planning period."
Finding 29: Under OAR 660-01.2-0060(4)(c)(A), which is applicable within interstate interchange
areas,the facilities and improvements listed in subsection (4)(b)(E) are considered planned facilities if
the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) provides written concurrence that the proposed
funding and mitigation measures are sufficient to avoid a significant adverse impact on the Interstate
Highway systems. Under OAR 660-012-0060(4)(c)(B), which is applicable within interstate
interchange areas, the City may rely on improvements listed in an adapted interchange area
management plan that are also identified under subsection(4)(b)(E).
Finding 30: The City of Springfield has an adopted and acknowledged transportation system plan
under Coal 12: the,SIrringfield 2035 Tran.l)ortation"S)�,Ytern Plan (Springfield TSI'). The end of the
planning period in the 5pringfield TS`P is the year 2035. The "S[xringfield TSP prioritizes planned
improvements and facilities that the City expects to construct in the 20-year planning horizon (20-
year projects) and those that they may not be constructed in that time (beyond 20-year projects).
The 20-year projects are broken down in relative order of priority as "priority projects,"
`"opportunity projects,°" and "as-development occurs" projects. However, any of the projects listed
in the,Springfield ISI'could be constructed within the planning period as opportunities arise.
Finding 31: The development area falls within the geographic scope of the interstate interchange area
for 1-5 and Beltline. The I-5/Beh ine Interchange Project Interchange Area. Management Plan is
Oregon Department of 'transportation's (ODDT's) adopted Interchange Area Management flan
(TAMP) for the interstate interchange area. ODOT facilities are subject to the performance standards
in the Caret,=vn Highway Plan.
Finding 32: As required by SDC 5.22-11.0, the applicant has submitted a Traffic Impact Study (TIS)
addressing traffic impacts associated with the proposed zone change from Low Density Residential to
Mixed Use Commercial to show compliance with the TPR at OAR 660-012-0060. The scope of the
applicant's TIS complies with the requirements in SDC 4.2-1.5A.4 and the City of Springfield's
Standard Operational Procedures and Policies. 'file intersections and driveways scoped in the
applicant's TIS are reasonable, appropriate, and relevant to the potential impacts of the proposed plan
amendment and zone change.
Finding 33: The applicant's TIS relies upon three planned Springfield TS'P projects -R-3, R-50, and
R-2—in the analysis for the future buildout conditions in order to determine whether the proposed
ORDINANCE NO. 6407
EXHIBIT C, Page 18 of 27
comprehensive plan diagram and zoning reap amendments would meet performance standard within
the applicable planning horizon. Project R-3, Game Farm Road--East to International Way, is listed
as a "priority project" in the SIxingfield TW"s 20-year project list and it is reasonably likely that this
project will be completed by the end of the planning period in 2035. Project R-50, Gateway/Beltline
Phase 2 project" is listed as a "priority project" in the Springfield TSP's 20-year project list and is
included in the I-5/I3eitline Interchange Project. It is reasonably likely that this project will be
completed by the end of the planning period in 2035, Project R-2, Gateway Road/International Way
to UGI3, is listed as an"opportunity project" in the Sl.)ringfield TS'P's 20-year project list, Again, it is
reasonably likely that this project will be completed by the end of the planning period in 2035.
Finding 34: The applicant's TIS was submitted to C)DOT Region 2 for review. Via memo dated April.
3, 2019,. OD(Tf has reviewed the submitted TIS and has provided written concurrence that the
applicant's proposed mitigation measures (i.e. none) are reasonable for this project (Attachment 6).
The City's Transportation Planning Engineer concurs with the applicant's trip generation
methodology and findings. The applicant's TITS provides Trip Generation scenarios for the existing
and proposed plan designation(s) and zoning. 'The trips generated by 130 single fancily dwellings amid
under "Scenario 2" (i.e, 168 multifamily housing units in mid-rise apartments and 125,000 112
shopping center) represent the "reasonable worst case scenarios" under the current and proposed
zoning and comply with the TPR.
Finding 35: The applicant's TIS assumed retiming of the intersections and optimization of signal
operations in determining transportation facility performance for the various scenarios and analysis
time periods. The applicant's assumptions regarding retiming adjustments and optimization activities
are common and reasonable assumptions and are accepted by the City of Springfield for analysis
purposes.
Finding 36: The applicant's TIS analyzes traffic impacts in year 2020 at "opening" of the
anticipated development and in 2038. Under the T`PR,a plan amendment or zone change results in a
"significant affect" if it has results listed under OAR 660-012-0060(2)(c) "based on projected
conditions measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSF'." The end of
the planning period in the,Springfiehl T, P is the year 2035.
Finding 37: The applicant's TIS demonstrates that the proposed zoning of Mixed. Use Commercial.
will not result in any study intersections failing to meet ODO'f and City of Springfield mobility
standards in the projected opening year of 2020 and in 2038. Thus, the applicant's TIS demonstrates
that, through the end of the planning period in 2035 (and beyond until at least 2038), the proposed
amendments will not degrade the performance of an existing or planned facility such that it does not
meet the performance standards in the,S�.�ringfield TSP or Oregon Ilighway Plan. 'Thus, the proposed
Metra Plan diagram amendment and zone change do not result in a "significant affect" under OAR.
660-012-0060(2)(c).
Finding 38: "The applicant's Goal 1.2 Transportation findings and supplementary Transportation
Analysis, including the'Ilransportation Impact Study(TIS)prepared by David Evans a:nd.Associates,
concludes that the vehicle trip generation for the proposed Mixed Use site would not create a
significant affect.
Finding 39: Based on the above findings,the proposed Alletro Plan diagram amendment from LDR to
Mixed Use and.Zoning Map amendment from L.,DR to MUC;will not significantly affect an existing or
planned transportation facility. Therefore, the proposed amendments are consistent with OAR 660-
ORDINANCE
60-CRDINANCE NO. 6407
//,.,.,//L//.//.r%//il%///%„%/�i .../////., ///,ri f.rii iiiii i..//,/ i/',//,/r ii r,,,/,.v ,..r..,, ),.,.,//ilii //... iiiliii,.,.i. fi./., ��//%/%/G,%%///%/J%//////i/// .rr i//r.... it//i r✓/.. i ,/./,iiiii.i,.. ,. ....
EXHIBIT C, Page 19 of 27
012-0060 and SDC 5.22-115C.4.b, and no additional mitigation is required tinder the TPR. The
proposal is consistent with Goal 12.
Goal 13 —Energy Conservation
Applicant's Narrative: "There are no non-renewable resources on the property. The proposed
redevelopment will allow a greater mix of uses potentially decreasing, the reliance on the
taulomobile. All new development will be required to comply with local, state and federal codes
related to energy conservation.”
Finding 40: The proposed Metro .flan diagram amendment and zone change does not affect the
City's ordinances, policies, plans, or studies adopted to comply with Goal 13 requirements. As
stated in the applicant's narrative, converting the property from IDR to Mixed Use Commercial
Should not have an appreciable impact to energy consumption and could offer opportunities for
increased energy efficiency by implementing green building concepts. The developer will have an
opportunity to incorporate suitable energy conservation measures into the 'future site development
when detailed construction plans are prepared for the site. The City's building codes comply with
all Oregon State Building Codes Agency standards for energy efficiency in commercial and.
residential building design. The site's solar access is not compromised by surrounding
development. Any future development will be required to observe the building height limitations
and solar setback provisions in SDC 3.2-615 where Mixed Use Commercial sites abut existing LDR
properties or other acknowledged land use regulations adopted to implement Goal 13. The City's
acknowledged conservation measures applicable to storm water management, temporary storage,
filtration and discharge also would apply to commercial uses to be 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: "This Metro flan amendment does not proposed to expand the t.Jrban
Growth Boundary thus does not require', a review of the tronsitian of ramal to urban land uses.
Therefore, the provisions of Goal al 14 and OAR Chapter 660, Division 24 (Urban (;rc7wth
Boundaries) are not applicable."
Finding 41: The subject property is within the City's acknowledged UGB and no changes to the
UGB are proposed. The proposed. Metro flan diagram amendment and zone change do not affect
the City's adopted ordinances, policies, plans, or studies adopted to satisfy the compliance
requirements of Goal 1.4.
Goal 15 --Willamette Rivet Greenway
Applicant's Narrolive: "The property is not in the Willamette River GreentvQy. Goal 15 is not
applicable."
Finding 42: Goal 15 -_.Willamette Diver Greenway establishes procedures for administering the 300
miles of greenway that borders the Willamette River, including portions that are inside the City
limits and UG13 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.
ORDINANCE NO. 6407
jv riiiiiiii r ii✓ii .,iii //.i i,/////,.,! ,iii.✓.,sir,,,/,i✓/ r,/Lv/l.i.✓✓G/✓ ✓ ii...i ii:' .....r✓i, i//1,,.,,.,ir„iii. i...i.....,i✓,i ✓//✓,✓✓///. ,✓..,,.ii./ ......F,ii.r _iiE.,✓i„ .✓/ rr.i //i,./.. ,.,..irr, /.
EXHIBIT C, Page 20 of 27
Conclusion: The above findings dernonstrate that the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment from
Low Density Residential to Mixed.Use is consistent with the applicable statewide land use planning goals
as required by SDC 5.1.4-135.A: "The amendment shall be consistent with applicable Statewide Planning
Goals." The proposal meets this criterion of approval
B. Plan Inconsistency
1.. In those cases where the Metro Plan applies,adoption of the amendment shall not make the
Metro Plan internally inconsistent.
Applicant's Narrative: "This Metra Plan amendment is limited to a change to the Plan Diagram
affecting a single property. The proposed amendment sloes not create any internal inconsistencies
or conflicts with the remainder of the Metro Plan.”
Finding 43: The subject property is located within the Gateway Refinement Plan, which is an
acknowledged refinement of the Metro Plan. According to SDC 5.1.4-1201), "[w]hen a Metro Plan
diagram amendrrrent is enacted that requires an amendment to a refinement plan ... diagram for
consistency, the Metra Plan diagram amendment automatically amends the diagram ... if no
amendment to the refinement plan ... text is involved." No amendments to the refinement plan text
have been proposed as part of this application and the proposed diagram amendment is not
inconsistent with any provisions of the Gateway Rcfinement Plan text., so "no amendment to the
refinement plan... text is involved" in this proposal. Therefore, approval of the proposed Metro
Plan diagram amendment autornatically amends the Gateway Refinement Plan.
Finding 44: As discussed under subcriterion 13.2 below, to the extent that this criterion requires
consistency with the Metro Plan policies,the applicant's proposal complies with this criterion.
Finding 45: The subject property is within the adopted Gateway Refinement Plan area, which is a
refinernent of the Metro Plan. Consistency with the Gaieway Refinement Plan is discussed in
Findings 60 and 61.
2. In cases where Springfield Comprehensive Plan applies,the amendment shall be consistent
with the Springfield Comprehensive Plan.
Applicant's Narrative: "This Matra Plan amendment shzfts an underutilized site with a combination
of Commercial and Low Density Residential designations to a new ("ommercial Mixed Use
designation. The Metro flan amendment is consistent with the following ,Sjaringfield 2030
Comprehensive Plan (20301 Plan)goals crud policies.
• 2030 Plan EG-1 Broaden, improve and diversify the state and regional economy, and
the Springfield economy in particular, while maintaining or enhancing environmental
quality and Springfield's natural heritage.
This Metro Plan Amendment will provide a new mixed use ,.site allowing.for a
diversity cif ecrrrrmerc°r'cl crrrcl medium- to lriglr-density residential uses. The increased
range and density of uses will help .strengthen the economy. the site does not
contain any significant,9atewide Goal S environmental or historic resources.
ORDINANCE NO, 6407
„p „,,,,,. m,,,,✓, ,,,✓i✓9�4,m,,,,, ,,.„c,;,,,,,, iii„q.,, ,,,, ,,,. ,�„ ----:: our.,,;,c,. ,,,Q, o✓ ,,. ,,,,�,, ,.✓ � ,i,,, „✓ ,,��,,,,.., ., , „ ,
14
4
EXHIBIT C, Page 21 of 27
2030 Plan EG-5 Support the development of emerging economies guided by the
following principles;
a. Healthy Living -- Champion businesses and entrepreneurs that promote a
healthy, safe, and clean community while enhancing, protecting, and making
wise use of natural resources.
b. Ideas to Enterprise — Encourage a culture of entrepreneurship and re-
investment into the local community.
c. Regional Identity— Create a strong economic personality that celebrates our
region's attributes and values.
d. Be Prepared—Contribute to the development of the region's physical, social,
educational, and workforce infrastructure to meet the needs of tomorrow.
e. Local Resilience — Support businesses and entrepreneurs that lead the city
and region to greater economic independence, innovation, and growth of the
traded sector economies.
The proposed Metro Plan Diagram amendment will lrrovide a new Commercial
Mixed Use area that will allow a conference center, educational facilities and other
businesses that will contribute to a diversified economy, support entrepreneurs, and
of educational opportunities„for the local workforce. The Commercial Mixed Use
area will also create the opportunity for new housing close to commercial services,
major employment areas and medical services.
O 2030 Pion E.6 Facilitate short term and long term redevelopment activity and
increased efficiency of land use through the urban renewal program, updates to
refinement plans and the development review process.
llre pro/rased Metro Plan Diagram amendment will frcilitate redevelopment of an
existing underutilized site. The proposed Commercial Mixed Use designation will
increase the mix and density gl'uses in a manner that more efficiently utilizes public
services.
i 2030 Plan E.11 Plan, zone and reserve a sufficient supply of industrial and
commercial buildable land to create opportunity sites for employment uses in the
2015 Economic Opportunities Analysis (EOA), with an initial emphasis on Target
Industries listed in the analysis Table S-1, Target industries, Springfield 2010-2030
(page iii-iv).
The proposed Metro Plan Diagram amendment will provide a new opportunity site
for emltI vrnent uses in particular the City cif,fpring field Target industries of tourism
and senior services.
d 2030 Plan E.14 Leverage and promote Springfield's interstate 5 corridor location
and visibility.
The primaq impetus fcrr the prrrposed tipplicalions is the ability to develop the
subject prolrerty fiar a conference canter and hospitality uses. 11tese tourist-related
uses will leverage and promote Springfields strategic location on the 1-5 corridor.
ORDINANCE NO. 6407
,,, v �5; i iia.. / /i,i iip„J/-i ioa,,p,i,,,i, ii:c, ,,i iii li ivy,�,tic�„ i,✓i, ,,,i ri iir ,
.......... c iia rrrio i c �, „6i, ,wi, f�//ii, iivx�i iii„i w fv ii
ri. /i.//,. ,.`,r///. ///////ii. //.l/! //ir.,,.ii/./r,iii i..v,// ///////./i/ /,/ri/.i/ ri ii ilii„t ri ,r iiiii.'//,,,✓/.rri/,// .i. i..i..?.r///ice////..�/%/%/ii/G, ,.rar„ri.r .r, r,.. ///,//ii. .i. ....u...iiiiiiii / r// ,..//,./,/.
EXHIBIT C, Page 22 of 27
• 2030 Plan E.19 In the 2030 Plan diagram and Land Use Element, and future
refinement planning, locate regional, community and neighborhood-serving
commercial uses to support economically viable centers, enhanced commercial
corridors, and walkable neighborhood scale mixed-use centers.
The 13 acre site is large enough to create a vibrant walkable mixed use area. It is on
an arterial and is conveniently located near transit services.
« 2030 Plan E.22 Plan, designate and zone land to allow community and
neighborhood retail commercial uses in new, existing or expanded mixed use
centers/nodes to address the land need for retail described in the Economic
Opportunities Analysis, timing sholl be coordinated with City refinement planning
processes or through property-owner initiated proposals that are consistent with
Springfield Comprehensive Plan policies.
This property-owner initiated proposal is, consistent with aSpringfrelcl Comprehensive
Plan policies and will allow for redevelopment opportunities that address both
commercial and residential land needs.
O 2030 Plan E.35 Increase the potential for convention- and tourist-related economic
activities to generate economic activity, especially in the service industries like retail,
food services, and accommodations.
This Metro Plan amendment "411provide a suitable site for a new conference center,
hotels, and other tourist-related economic activities. The site is located in the north
(xatewczv area near the Interstate S corridor. The site has'frontage on Beitline Road
and Game Farm Road providingr excellent visibility and easy access to transportation
facilities including 1-5 and the airport.
* 2030 Plan E.44 Expand the City's partnership with the University of Oregon, Lone
Community College, Oregon State University and other education institutions to
support the development of education and research facilities and programs into
Springfield, to bring new technologies and innovations to market, and to promote
sustainable practices.
This Metro flan amendment will enable the site to be developed with a mix (Y'uses
including a conference center and/or other educational facilities.far adults.
• 2030 Plan 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 quality affordable housing in locations served by
existing and planned frequent service that provides access to employment centers,
shopping, health care, civic, recreational and cultural services
Tyre,s,ublect property is ideally suiled f6r new high-density housing due to its location
near employment centers, shopping, and medical services. It is near transit stops
providing access to numerous civic, recreational and cultural services. The Metro
Plan amendment will help address the need for new multiple family,housing.
ORDINANCF NO. 6407
,a .viii inivi/,✓,, i,,, „�ii ✓iiwi Ewi „„ ,� , /� �, vii v ,,.r,
rraa,,,, �,,,,o a ,,,,,,,,,,,.. ,,,,�.... ..,,,,,;, ,i i.ri,iraraniicr/„^.<<;,i,,,, „,� ,��,✓✓/iiai iiiim,,,,,, ,F ,,,,,,,.,gar,n,,ii� ria�� ,,,ii„gym,:; i^..2 ,,,,,,,,�„, ,%„o,,, ,,,,, „E,,.
EXHIBIT C, Page 23 of 27
* 2030 Plan H,12 Continue to designate land to provide a mix of choices(i.e. location,
accessibility, housing types, and urban and suburban neighborhood character)
through the refinement plan update process and through review of developer-
initiated master plans.
This Metro Plan amendment will result in additional land designated mixed use
increasing the opporl°unities.for nem,housing options for residents. The location near
medical services will make the site attractive to people working in the medical field
and to those wanting to live near medical services.
Based upon the above information, the Proposed Moro Plan amendment complies with SDC 5.14-
135. ”
Finding 46: The adapted Metro .Plan is the principal policy document that creates the broad
framework for land use planning within the City of Springfield. The adoption of Springfield
Ordinances #6268 and #6400 included the rtew,S'pringfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land
Use and.Housing Element and Economic .Element respectively. The policies and implementation.
actions of the wS�rinl field 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Mousing Element are
intended to refine and update the goals, objectives and policies of the Metro Plan's Residential Land
Use and Housing }element. The policies and implementation actions of theS�prin,) geld 2030
Comprehensive Plan Economic Element replace the economic development and employment:growth
provisions of the Metro Plan, Therefore, both plans are applicable to this request andthe proposed
Metro Plan amendment and zone change must be consistent with both the Metro Plan and the
Springfield 2030 Comprehensive Plan, The following findings in this section identify and show
compliance with the applicable Metro Plan and Sprin r reld 2030 Plan policies. Policies not
identified herein are not applicable to this proposal.
Finding 47: Chapter 1 of the Metra Plan,under the heading Use of the Metro Plan, states:
"The [City] recognize[s] that there are apparent conflicts and inconsistencies
between and among some goals and policies. When making decisions based on
the Metra Plan, not all of the goals and policies can be met to the same degree in
every instance. Use of the Metro Plan requires a balancing of its various
components on a case-by-case basis, as well as a selection of these goals'.
objectives, arid policies most pertinent to the issue at hand,”
Communities like Springfield are faced with the dilemma of managing growth pressures while
preserving a:feeling of"community." 'To address this,planning decisions need to be intentional and
smart to protect the community that is already established — not just made for the sake of overall
growth.
,S'prinl> relet2030 C'�rnlrr^ehen.sive!'lan and Gatewa,Re inement Plan. Economic I'Indings.
Finding 48: As stated in the applicant's project narrative above, the Policies and. Implementation
Actions of the Springfield 2030 Comprehensive Plan Economic Element apply to the subject site.
The applicant's findings above assert that the proposal complies with applicable policies and
implementation strategies of'the Economic Element and further supports the identified goals. The
f"ollowing findings discuss the proposal's compliance with other applicable policies and
ORDINANCE NO. 6407
.... i/io/iii%„FlG„/iJ.i/,iii,oil. ,,/,nisi///ii„„„i//iiOiL/iiilOi a ,ill/,his,r i mt ✓ ,iii,�i iii iii i,;,: wi , R✓ i,ivii, iv„im,,,ipiiii iii///,,,,,,,7/fln0/ro,,ilei/(n iiii�c,i., riiii+
EXHIBIT C, Page 24 of 27
implementation strategies in the Springfield 2030 Plan. Policies not discussed in this report are not
applicable to this proposal.
Finding 49: Policy E.l of the "SfrrinV,,ielcl 2030 Comprehensive Plan Economic Element states that
the City will "[d]esignate an adequate supply of land that is planned and zoned to provide sites of
varying locations, configurations, sire and characteristics as identified and described in the
Economic Opportunity Analysis to accommodate industrial and other employment over the planning
period. These sites may include vacant undeveloped Land; partially developed sites with potential
for additional development through infill development; and sites with redevelopment potential."
The proposal is consistent with this policy because it would help meet the City's need for 4
commercial and mixed use sites between 5 and 20 acres in size.
Finding 50: Policy E.7 of the.S&ingf elcl 2030 Comprehensive Flan Economic Element states that
the City will "[w]hcre possible, concentrate development on sites with existing infrastructure or on
sites where infrastructure can be provided relatively easily and at a comparatively low cost."° The
subject property is surrounded by ari existing transportation network and utility infrastructure. The
subject property is already developed and has all available utilities and services on the perimeter.
The proposal is consistent with this policy because the subject site is served by existing;
infrastructure that could support redevelopment of commercial mixed uses more easily and at a
comparatively low asst compared to the recent UGIT expansion areas that lack existing
infrastructure.
Finding 51: Policy E.12 of the Springfield 2030 Comprehensive Plan Economic Element states that
the City will "[r]ecruit or support businesses that pay higher than average wages for the region (as
reported by the Oregon Employment Department) to diversify and expand Springfield's economy."
Specifically, to implement that policy, Implementation. Strategy 12.6 states that the City will
"[s]upport development of convention- and tourism-related economic activities." The proposal is
consistent with this implementation strategy because it would facilitate the future redevelopment of
the site with hotel and conference-center uses which support convention- and tourism-related
activities.
F irrdirrg 52: Policy E.16 of the,Sfrrin,field 2030 Comprehensive.Plan Economic Element states that
the City will "[c]onsider the economic opportunities provided by transportation corridors and seek
to maximize economic uses in corridors that provide the most optimal locations and best exposure
for existing and future commercial and industrial uses." The subject property is located at the
intersection of an arterial and a collector street (Beltline Road arid Game harm Road) and the site
has extensive frontage on three major streets. The property proposed for rezoning is in close
proximity to I-5 and the Beltline Road and Gateway Street intersection, which are among the busiest.
streets in the metro area. The proposal is consistent with this policy because its proximity to
important local and regional transportation corridors will maximize economic use of the property.
Finding 53: The subject property is located within the Gateway Refinement Plan, which is all
acknowledged refinement of the Metro flan. According to SDC 5.14-120.D, "[w]hen a.Metra Plan
diagram amendment is enacted that requires an amendment to a refinement plan ... diagram for
consistency, the Metro flan diagram amendment automatically amends the diagram ... if no
amendment to the refinement plan ... text is involved." No arnendments to the refinement plan text
have been proposed as part of this application and the proposed diagram amendment is not
inconsistent with any provisions of the Gateway Refinement Plan text, so "no amendment to the
ORDINANCE NO. 6407
z,, ,„� ,iinii,�i r aiii�iiaia�,iii%i/ii%i�.,.,�iiiciii iiiiiil/oii,iii ioaii;. „ii iiir, ,/1/.r ii,,, c„ ii,vi „� i ,i�/0,,i iiriii <., , of „✓ii „aci/ii/„icr,i/rriiL, ,/Lie/iioiiioiriL„ii, i r,✓„.. ,/i/�,UG,..,..
/iii ire% ../i„✓ri ,f/iii iFf.. %./.!///li. ///,lli,.i.i/.////.///,//,"///l/%%///////l/ri i///,/i i. /.r.1. i .iile✓cl/////l/l/ ////////I ..iii.,..r,.,,,, ///////, ..%//l/„J /.//,.ld/e%i////.//i/, /..i-/iei/%././ .ir ,.,. i,.iiiG vi/ ir./v.
EXHIBIT C, Page 25 of 27
refinement plan... text is involved” in this proposal. Therefore, approval of the proposed Metra
Plan diagram amendment automatically amends the Gatewcxv Refinement plan.
Finding 54: The applicant's submittal complies with the applicable Economic Element policies of
the,Springfield 2030Plan and the Gateway Refinement Plan,
Gaterva Re inernent Plan._Commercial Element Findin 7s
Finding 55: The Gateway Refinement Plan --- Commercial Element states the City should
"[rn]inimizc potential conflicts between residential and commercial development" (Goal 2). The
applicant cited Gateway Refinement plan policies in the application for zoning map amendment
(Case 811-1.9-000066-TY113) that demonstrate that amending the plan designation and zoning; to
allow mixed commercial uses is consistent with the refinement plan policies. The applicant's
narrative regarding the refinement plan policies in. Case 811-19-000066-TYP3 are hereby adopted as
findings in support of this criterion, except as noted in the findings to Case 811-19-000066-TY113.
Finding 56: `Fhe planning Commission's recommendation identified Gateway Refinement Plan
policies and goals in support of retaining the existing plan designation and zoning. however, the
amendment provisions of tine Metro plan and Gateway Refinement Plan allow for changes to the
land use pattern upon demonstration that the proposal, meets the applicable criteria of approval. As
stated under Finding 1 above„ use of the .Metro Plan, including its component refinement plans,
requires a balancing of its various components on a case-by-case basis, as well as a selection of
those goals, objectives, and policies most pertinent to the issue at hand. The goals and objectives
stated by the applicant in support of the subject application are more pertinent than goals and
objectives related to preserving existing residential areas, in part because the underlying plan
designation and zoning does not affect the future preservation or closure of the existing patrician
Mobile Home Park. As demonstrated in the applicant's narrative and this report,the subject request
meets this criterion of approval.
Metro plan and Sarin T field 2030 Cclm rrclren,sive plan-Residential Land Use and 1lousin Findin s
Finding 57: Policy A.I I of the Metro Plan---Residential Land U.ve and Housing Element states that
the City will "[g]enerally locate higher density residential development near employment or
commercial services, in proximity to major transportation systems or within transportation-efficient
nodes." The proposal is consistent with this policy because it could I:acilitate redevelopment of the
subject site with higher density mixed commercial and residential Uses near major employment
centers including RiverBend hospital and in close proximity to major transportation systems
including I-5.
Finding 58: Policy A.l 3 of the Metra Plan -Residential land U.ve and l/ousing Element states that
the City will "ji]ncrease overall residential density in the metropolitan area by creating more
opportunities for effectively designed in-fill, redevelopment, and rnixed use while considering
impacts of increased residential density on historic, existing and future neighborhoods." The
proposal is consistent with this policy because it would facilitate redevelopment of the site for
mixed-use, hnpacts of potential redevelopment on adjacent properties in the existing neighborhood
will be mitigated at the time of development; future development will be required to comply with
the City's acknowledged land use regulations that mitigate impacts of commercial and mixed uses
on adjacent neighborhoods.
ORDINANCE NO, 6407
✓ ,,:..�. ,, ,,.,... .✓,.;. ✓✓ii✓ ,,,,,,.✓, ,aii✓,✓iG,✓✓ii,✓✓i„_ir,✓ ✓,, ., ✓..✓✓i✓Z✓✓„ci✓i,,,,,,✓i ,✓„ ,.:✓,,,i✓✓,✓,✓ii✓/✓✓iii✓a✓�✓i ✓„m✓„ ,,. ,i, . ✓,,,,.✓k ✓,,, .r,<,,, ,,,,_�.
EXHIBIT C, Page 26 of 27
Finding 50: The goal of the Miura Plan — Residential Lana Use and Housing Element is to
"[p]rovide viable residential communities so allresidents can choose sound, affordable housing that
meets individual needs.” The Planning Commission recommendation concluded that denying the
application is consistent with this goal because the existing Patrician Mobile Home Park provides
housing for low and very low income households, as well as for seniors and persons with
disabilities. However, approval or denial of the subject application has no effect on the applicant's
legal right: as the property owner to issue a park closure notice and redevelop the property at any
time in accordance with state landlord tenant law. Denial of the application does not provide any
certainty that the Patrician Mobile Home Park will remain on the property, as opposed to other
fon,ns of low density residential development. In addition, redevelopment of the property for higher
density residential uses under a mixed use plan designation could also meet the goal of providing
housing that meets individual needs. Approval of the subject application therefore has no eff%ct on
the stated goal of the Metra Plan---.Residential Land Use and I'lousing Element.
Finding 60: Policy A.25 of the Mtrtro Plan -Residential Land Use and 1-lousing-Element states'that.
the City will "[c]onserve the metropolitan area's supply of existing affordable housing and increase
the stability and quality of older residential neighborhoods, through measures such as revitalization;
code enf'orcernent; appropriate zoning; rehabilitation programs, relocation of existing structures;
traffic calming;parking requirements; or public safety considerations. These actions should support
planned densities in these areas.” A majority of the Planning Commission concluded that the
Patrician Mobile Home Park represents an existing, older residential neighborhood and provides
needed housing. However, in accordance with state law, the property owner has the option to
provide notification and close and redevelop the park at any time regardless of the City's decision
on the requested .Aletro Plan amendment and. Zone Change. In addition, the park can continue to
operate under the proposed designation and zoning as an existing non-conforming use until such
time as the property owner initiates redevelopment.Neighborhood preservation and stability depend
entirely on the applicant's decision whether to redevelop, which can occur under either the existing
I-DIS plan designation and zoning, or the proposed MU and MUC plan designation and zoning.
'T'herefore,Policy A.25 is not applicable to this application.
Finding 61: The applicant's submittal complies with the applicable Residential. Element policies of
the Metra Plan, Gateway Refinement.flan and the Sjxringfield 2030 Refinement.Plan.
Conclusion
Finding 62: The above findings illustrate that not all of the goals and policies in the Metre Plan,
.Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan, and Gateway Refinement Plan regarding residential land use and
housing and economic development can be mct to the same degree for this application. The City
Council has balanced these competing policies and goals, and finds that, fir the present proposal,the
policies that favor economic development outweigh and are more pertinent than the policies
encouraging preservation and rehabilitation of existing housing, as explained in the applicant's
narrative and the findings above. ']'his is primarily due to the impermanent nature of the mobile
home park on the Subject property: it could be closed and redeveloped at any time in accordance
with state law, without any input or approval required from the City and regardless of the underlying
plan designation and zoning. As explained in findings 43-61 above, the applicant's proposal is
consistent with the most pertinent policies in the S�)ringfleld 2030 Plan, Metra Plan, and Gatervav
Re
firacrment f'larr.
Conclusion: Based on the above findings, Criterion B is met.
ORDINANCF NO. 6407
EXHIBIT C, Page 27 of 27
Conclusion and Recommendation
The proposed Metro Plan diagrarn amendment to change the property's designation from Low
Density Residential to Mixed Use is consistent with the adopted policies of the Mary Plan, the
Galeway,Re nement Plan, and the wVprin�,f field 2030 Plan under Criterion B. Because the criteria are
met, the City Council approves the application for a comprehensive plan diagram amendment from
Low Density Residential to Mixed Use on the basis of the findings contained herein.
ORDINANCE NO. 6407
ii/(//G i O, /Oi//,/O/i///i///,,,Uio ii, .:o it/iiiiii. ,✓/„////i/fir,: iri.,,, iii;, iii i/,� iii/i, i;i ,r ii,i r. r iiiir ii.iiigii iiiii,,,,i// /, iir i/i7 iri, , . i./,.e
/,i,,r„ .r..,.... ii .moi„,ii, ii,F .,ii,,.iiirri ,ii,,,,,Y. „i.,it.,,`i,ir,G.ir,// �%i„i ..iiiis ..:<..F„ ii,✓ate✓i,c< i. .,..o ,.,,...//.fir„///„i,i,/O✓,i.,. „vraii ✓iiiii. ... ,,,iii„i..,.r,,, ........v....,, ....r.
EXHIBIT D, Page 1 of 7
Springfield City Council Report and Findings
Zane Change Request
Meeting Date: October 21,2019
Carse Number: 1 1 1.-19-000066-TYP3
Applicant: Teresa Bishow,L3ishow Consulting L.1..,C on behalf of Uz•bann'Frail sit ions LLC
Property Owner: Urban Transitions I.,LC;
Site: 3522 &3530 (lame Farm.Road(Map 17-03-15-40jax Lot 31.00)
Request
Rezone a 13.6-acre parcel fronn Low Density Residential (LDR)to Mixed Use Commercial (MUC).
Site Inforuation/Background
The application was initiated and accepted as complete on March. 14, 2010. The initial Planning
Commission public hearing on the matter of the Zone Change request was held oil May 7, 2019. The
public hearing was continued to May 21, 2019 and the written record was extended to May 28,2019. The
City Council public hearing was opened on September 3, 2019 and continued to September 16, 2019.
The written record was extended to September 23, 2019 to allow the applicant to submit final rebuttal.
comments. This zoning map amendment is being processed concurrently with a Metro Plan diagram and
Gateway Re
f%nement.flan diagram amendment submitted under Case 811-19-000065-'I"YP4.
The property that is subject of the zoning map amendrrrent is a single parcel comprising approximately
13.6 acres. 'Phe site is currently developed as the Patrician Mobile Llomc Park and is developed to
accommodate 81 dwellings. The site has frontage on. Bel,tline Road along the southern boundary and
Garne Farm Road along the eastern boundary and a portion of the northern boundary. The property is
designated LDR oil the 1L Oro .Flan diagram and. Gateway Refinement .flan, and is zoned LDR on the
Springfield Zoning Map. '1"]ne site adjoins existing commercial uses along the western boundary and.
single family residences (also zoned LDR) along the northeast boundary. Zoning in the vicinity of the
site includes Community Commercial (CC) to the west and southwest, Campus Industrial (Cl) to the
north; Low Density Residential to the south and northeast; and a combination of Medium and High
Density Residential to the cast.
The applicant proposes to change the zoning from LINZ to MUC; to facilitate fixture redevelopment of the
property with a variety of potential uses including hotels and accommodations, conference and meeting
facilities, eating and drinking establishments, retail stores, offices, and higher density residential housing
units.
The findings and conclusions in this report demonstrate that the application complies with the criteria of
approval. Except where (lie findings specifically state otherwise, the applicant's narrative copied herein is
adopted as findings in support of this application.
Notification
Notice of the initial May 7, 2010 Planning Commission public hearing was sent to a1.1 property owners and.
residents within 300 feet of the site on. April 12, 2019. Notice of the initial Planning Commission public
hearing was published in the April 29, 2019. edition of'the Register°-Guar^tl. Staff also posted notices of the
May 7 public hearing at two places along the Gate Farm Road frontage of the property (northwest and
ORDINANCE NO. 6407
ni.,,,, :. ,,,, v....,;,✓,✓ , ✓'. ,,,i ,,.,�,i „✓ ✓.,, ,i i,i..,,,/�✓✓ i,✓, .;✓i✓„✓ ,✓, .,,,, i i."✓i,r i„ice„ ✓ .✓s. ,✓,o„✓r,ii✓ii„i✓✓,r,,,;,✓i, .r i✓ .... .„ ,,, ...,,,.. .,,._.F..,,,,,,,,, ,...a..
EXHIBIT D, Page 2 of 7
southeast driveway entrances), along the Be'ltline Road frontage of the property, in the lobby of City Hall,
on the Development&Public Works office digital display,and on the City's webpage.
Notification of the September 3, 2019 City Council public hearing was mailed to adjacent property owners
and residents on August 6, 2019 and published in the legal notices section of The Register Guard on August
20 & 27, 2019. Staff also posted notices of the September 3, 2019 public hearing at two places along the
Game Farm Road frontages of the property(northwest and southeast driveway entrances);along the Behline
Road frontage of the subject property; in the lobby of City Hall, on the Development&Public Works office
digital display; and on the City's webpa.ge. Notice of the continued public hearing on September 16 andof
the one-week record extension was provided orally by the City Council during the meetings on September 3
and September 16,respectively.
Response to Public Testimony
Over the course of the initial public comment period,and during the Planning Commission and City Council
public hearings, both written andverbal testimony was submitted to the record. Forty-six written submittals
were entered into the record of the Planning Commission action and another 48 written submittals were
added to the record for (lie City Council action. The issues raised in the submitted comments are
summarized below and are permanently'kept in the Planning file for this application (Case 811-19-000065-
TYP4). All of the testimony was presented to the City Council for consideration prior to the closure of the
public hearing meeting on September 16,2010 and closure of the written record on September 23,2019..
'The public testimony received on this request is the same as the testimony and evidence submitted for tile
requested Metro Plan diagram amendment in Case 811-19-000065-"TYP4. The issues identified in
testimony from the public, the city's findings in response to those issues, and the applicant's rebuttal of
those issues are set forth in the City(AnIncil Report and fi indin.,sfir the Metro Plan Diagram Amendment
in Case 81.1-19-000065-TYP4,which are incorporated herein by reference.
Criteria of Approval
Section 5.22-1.00 of the Springfield Development Code (SDC) contains the criteria of approval for the
decision rnaker to utilize during review of Zoning Map amendment requests. The criteria of approval for a.
zoning map amendment are as follows:
SDC 5.22-IIS CRI-TERIA
C'. 7oning Map amendment criteria of'approval:
I. Consislency�with applicable Metro Plan policies and the Metro Plan diagram;
2. Consistency with applicable lac f nement Plans, Plan District maps, Conceptual Development
Plans and functional plans; and
3. The property is presently provided with adeclrrate public/acilitr'es, services and transportation
networks to support the use, or these facilities, services and transportation networks are
planned to be provided concurrently with the development caf the property.
4. Legislative Zonin,(r Map amendments that involve a Metro Plan Diagram amendment shall:
a. Afeet the approval criteria spec(fied in Section 5.14-100,• and
b. (,'omply, with OreW_y n Administrative Rule ((,)AR) 660-012-0060, inhere applicable.
ORDINANCE= NO, 6407
/,ii.ii i.S lir i,,..i J. /. r✓fi /vl.v, //.11111:." i ei,i ilii, "lily/i//////i///./%,i,i ..,.i,.,,✓.i.i.i. i.- .r..iii ii r.11111/.....,////r,/ii/i,/// //////O„//�//,Zia//, ..,i r. i,,,i,r,iii, r,1,,.11111 .. ii i..iiiri ii,iii,,,,.,_...
EXHIBIT D, Page 3 of 7
1. Consistency with applicable Metro Flan policies and the Metra Flan diagram;
Applicant's Narrative: "The Metro Plan defines Mixed Use as `A building, project or area of
development that contains at least two deferent uses such as housing, retail., and office uses.' 77ae
Metro Plan Diagram describes the Jllixed Use designation as,:
This category represents areas where more than one use might be appropriate, usually as
deternrinecl by r^✓finement plans on the local level. (Tor example, the Whiteaker Refinement
Plan includes several areas where a mix of compatible uses, basest in part on existing
development, are designated). In the absence of a ref nement plan, the underlying plan
designation shall determine the predominant land use.'
According to W)C 3,2-605,A,
'The primary development objectives of the MUC' District are to expand housing
opportunities,; allow businesses to locate in a variety of'settings; provide options for living,
worrkin,, and shopping environments;fitcilitate more intensive use (?f land while minimizing
potentially adverse impacts; and to provide options for pedestrian-oriented lifestyles. '
The Zoning.Map amendment is consistent with the Metro Plan policies and upon adoption elf the
Metro Plan diagram amendment being processed concurrently, the Zoning .Map amendment will
also be consistent with the Metro Plan diagram. herr additional evidence, please rc�fi>r to the
.firadinlrs abo�Fe relcxted to 45'DC'.5.6-IIS.A.Z."
Finding 1: The property owner has initiated a concurrent Metro .flan Diagram amendment: under
SDC 5.14-100 (Case 811-1q-000065-"rYP4)to change the property designation from LDR.to Mixed
Use, The Gateway.refinement Plan and the city's acknowledged land use regulations at SDC 3.2-
61.0A permit MUC zoning to implement the Mixed Use plan designation. Upon approval of the
.Metro flan diagram amendment, if this were to occur, the MUC" zoning would be consistent with
the Metro Plan diagram. Prior or concurrent amendment of the Metro Plan diagram is required for
the subject zone change request to be approved. Without an approved amendment to change the
plan designation to Mixed [.Jse, the zone change is inconsistent with the Metro Clan diagram and
Gateway Re
finement Plan and therefore does not meet this criterion.
Finding 2: The City Council has determined that the proposed comprehensive plan amendment
meets the applicable; criteria of approval, based upon the findings in Attachment I Exhibit C,
incorporated herein by reference. Upon prior or concurrent amendment of the Metro Plan diagram
to Mixed [Jse, the zoning map amendment from 1,1:711, to Mixed Use Commercial is consistent with
the Metro Plan diagram.
2. Consistency with applicable Refinement Plans, flan District maps, Conceptual Development
Plans and functional plans;
Applicant's Narrative: "Upon adoption of the Gateway Refinement Plan amendments being
processed concurrently with this Zoning Map amendment, the proposed zone change will be
consistent with the Gateway Refinement Plan. 17ze zone change also sloes not create any conflicts
with TransPlan, the Public T'ac'ilities Plan, or the Willamalane Comprehensive Plan Below are
applicable G ttewexy Refinement Plan policies,followed by findings off fact.
ORDINANCE NO. 6407
,wz, c„oil;., ii iri ii„i,11112,,,,lie/,-l'%GL//%✓iv//!,loll/ii iiri i�iLd///Oil,i/ii, i, i,or%„ ,,� „, ,/ic„i ,,,,ii✓iii6r✓iii , ,iiq ;i„ ,.i/ilii ri iiire ,ai ii„v rii„i/„/Liiiir/„o „�i2
,i,iii,r.x ilii ii�r,.oi /i s7 i/a// ///,.f. ,i,llll,... %J%,////,.. i/v,//a/%/. 1' .. r ter. . �a/✓ia/a//// ir,.//,.; it,ir,.,ii vvr/.//,i,;i////l a///1:'/%,.irir,,,i,i/ via./i.?i ii. i...r...ii,ri ... iri ..-..e
EXHIBIT IJ, Page 4 of 7
• Gateway Plan - .Support tourism and convention activities that promote the Springfield
Area. (Community and Economic Development Element,, Goal 5)
The change in zoning from LDR Low Density Residential to MUC"Mixed Use Commercial
will create a 13-acre site in a strategic location for a new conference center, hotels and
other touristrelated activities.
• Gateway Plan--Attract new business, development and investment to theSpringfield area.
((.,'ommunity and Economic Development Element, Gaal G)
The proposed zoning will be attractive to new and growing businesses and stimulate
substantial private investment during redevelol)ment cif the property.
• Gateway Plan --- Provide filar o diversity of'sound, affordable housing in the Refinement
Plan area. (Residential Element, Coal 1)
• Gateway Plan—Ensure the availability of adequate supplies gl'land appropriate for low-,
medium-, and high-density residential development. Maintain approximately the existing
balance among LI)R-, MDR-, and 11DR-designated lands, consistent with Metro .Plan
allocations, while allowing for an appropriate nu"x of uses consistent with the
Transportation and Residential elements of the Metro Plan. (Residential Element, Goal 2,
as amended per Ordinance 60)51,)
The Patrician Allobile Home Park was established in 1972 (Ind currently consists cif'one
single family dwelling, a clubhouse, and 81 spaces for mobile homes. Of the 81 spaces, 2
are occupied with mobile homes that are owned by Urban Transitions LLC'and rented 2
are occupied with RVs and the remainder are occupied by the owners gf'the mobile homes.
All of. the mobile homes were manufactured between 1.970 and 1975 except.for one
manufactured in 1985. For the mobile homes with known production dates the breakdown
is as follows:
1970---3
1971 22
1972 18
1973 13
1,974-- 17
1975-- 1
1985- 1
Please refer to section titled "History qf'S'ite and Current Use in the Summary. The term
`affordable housing' is not defined in the Gateway Refinement Plan. LCU"s 11ousing
goal requires cities to maintain adequate supplies,of buildable lands.for needed housing as
follows:
`Goal: To provide for the housing needs cif citizens of the state. '
`Buildable lands for residential use shall be invenloried and plans shall encourage
the availability qf'adequale number of housing omits al price ranges and rent levels
which are commensurate with the financial capabilities of Oregon households and
allow,for theflexibilily crf'hou,sing location, type and density. '
ORDINANCE NO. 6407
i,iiiiiii, /ilii„/(C(%/�%!,„,,,/////fn///////i%/i/�/%�//l ii/%i///,.,.: ,. %/l f.v .,//,.//.�.. %//i// /////. iiiir//.r k ////i„,i////�%//,ii iiiiiii;,ii ii tiiiir ,✓/%//////�%%!,:: .. /. i ,. ,.
.,,,,,✓r,....ire i .iiiiir. 'ii.r r ii rr 1 a,,,ilii„//. .. Lr,..//,;. .iiiri iivi///i /�,i/ i ..,,., .......
EXHIBIT D, Page 5 of 7
1rr essence, all t)pes and densities c °hcrrr in, erre considered ''needed housing'.
• Gateway Plan — Minimize potential conflicts between residential and commercial
development. (Commercial Clement, Goal2)
« Gateway Plan -- Ensure availability c f an adequate supply of land appropriate for
Commercial development. (Commercial Element, Goal 3)
The SDC:”3.2-605A. describes the Mixed-(Ise Commercial District as fallows:
A. Mixed-Use Commercial District (MUG). The MUC District is established
where a mix (#'commercial with residential uses is compatible with existing nearby
uses. Development within the MUC District shall have a commercial dominance, with
residential and public uses also allowed. The primary development objectives of the
MGICDistrict are to expand housing oplaoriunities; allow businesses to locate in a
variety cf settings; provide options for living, working, and shopping environments;
„facilitate more intensive use of land while minimizing potentially adverse impacts; and
to provide options fear pedestrian-oriented lifrstyles. Development areas one acre or
more in size in the MUC District shall have f-outage on either an arterial or collector
street. Access to any MUC development area may be from a local street, if there is no
negative impact on cu#u.cent residential rases.
Development in Mixed Use Districts are required to conrply with stancicrrds that are intended to
minimize cor?flict.s between residential and commercial uses. As slated in .5DC" 3.2-625,, `Mixed
use zoning districts require special attention to building design because o f'the intermixing of
land uses and higher intensity cif development that can occur in these areas...' This code section
requires compliance with standards pertaining to building design, building orientation and
setbacks all aimed at ensuring compatibility among various uses, the scale and type of
residential and commercial uses allowed in the Commercial Mixed Use zone also serve to help
minimize potential conflicts. Per SDC;' 3.2-630 Mixed Use Development Standards - Specific,
potential conflicts are minimized due to a maxirnumfootprint for retail use and a minimum floor
area ratio (f"AR) fcrr^ all new development. The retail size limitation would prevent a large,
freestanding big box retail outlet. 7`he FAR will result in a compact land use pattern and reduce
conflicts ofien associated with large single story commercial buildings with expansive parking
areas. Per SSD(' 3.2-630, new development will preserve 10(' of
the new development preserve )% a 'the commercicxl land supply
while also allowing jbr residential development.
• Ccrtewcx)f flan - Provide for a .scrfe and efficient transportation system.for the Gateway
Refinement Plan area. (Transportation Element, Goal 1)
• Crcrtcway F'lccn - Provide for the ,scxfi arrd efficient movement cif pedestrians crud
hicyclists in the Gateway Refinement Plan area, (1 ransportation Element, Coal 0-)
Gateway Plan - Discourage use o ' local residential streets by commercial and
industrial tr^affic. (Transportation Element, Policy, 1)
o Limit access to arterials a, redevelopment occurs. (Transportation Element, Policy 4)
ORDINANCE NO. 6407
i„iii i,rG rr, ii//,.:i ..,i,,,,,.,.ri., ,//, .i ier,:/„///,/////,iild/// i/., lc..✓/✓////// G�//;` ,.,r,/i,r i i ,.,i„ .s i,,,i,//,ir,L.,, iii v /,i.,i, c/ ...iii i,i ,.,i.f,r, /iv,i,ri,ri,i,i.moi .,.,....,,..
EXHIBIT” D, Page 6 of 7
The subject property is close to Interstate 5 on b"ehline (arterial) and Game Farm Road
(collector) each with on-street bike lanes. The subject property is conveniently located near
transit and pedestrian corridors. The proposed Coning rlfap amendment does not propose any
changes to access to 1Jeltline Road or encourager use of' local residential streets. The zone
change to mixed-Use, Commercial will not adversely impact the safe and efficient tr-ansportation
system. Re
fcr to the Trczlfie Study prepared by David Evans and Associates distributed under-
separate cover.
• Gateway flan - Provide an adequate level of public sanitary sewers, storm drainage
.facilities„ and water and electric service in a timely and efficient manner in order to
support development consistent with adopted land use designations. (Public Facilities
Element, Goal 1)
The ..swbiect property is located in the City of Sj.wingfield and is currently provided adequate
levels ofpublic .services. The redevelopment of`the 13 av,e .site will enhance the effica`ent deliver-,
of public services."
Finding 3: The property lies within the adopted Gateway Refinement flan. The applicant has
identified policies in the Gateway Refinement Plan as amended by Ordinance 6051, However,
Ordinance 6051 was remanded to the City following appeal to the Oregon Land Use Board of
Appeals and Oregon Court of Appeals, and was never acknowledged. Ordinance 6051 was repealed
and replaced by Ordinance 6109 (adopted January 10,2005). Goal 2 of the Residential Element was
amended to state, "Ensure the availability of adequate supplies or land appropriate for low-,
medium-, and high-density residential development, while allowing for an appropriate mix of
commercial, employment, and residential uses." The other Gateway Refinement Plan policies cited
by the applicant are consistent with Ordinance 6109.
Finding 4: Rezoning of` the subject; property from LDR to MI.1C would be consistent with the
requested Metro Plan diagram and Gateway Refinement Plan diagram amendments initiated by the
applicant in Case 811-)9-000065-TYP4. 'Therefore, upon adoption of the enabling comprehensive
plan amendments, this requested rezoning meets the criteria for approval.
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 he provided concurrently with the development of the property.
Applicant's Narrative: "Public.facilities and services czre currently provided to the prolaerty. The
proposed zone change will broaden the range r�fpermitted uses and result in reekwelopment a the
.site at increased densities. Thea city and other.service providers erre capable of providing timely and
efficient public services."
Finding 5: The subject property has frontage on Game Farm Road along the northern and eastern
boundaries. Along the property frontages, Game Farm Road is classified as a collector street and is
fully developed 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. The subject property also has frontage on Beltline Road along
the southern boundary. In this location, Beltline Road is classified as an arterial street and is fully
developed with two vehicle travel lanes and a bicycle lane in each direction with a landscaped center
ORDINANCE NO. 6407
ori...... m,i ,i„� ,, ,of c,ii, ; i i,iii%..ic., „c,,, ,,, � oivi., ,ii,, ,oi•;:.,,,i i ..
EXHIBIT D, Page 7 of 7
median. The street has lane striping, street trees, street lighting, sidewalks, and piped stormwater
management facilities.
Finding 6: Based on the existing conditions in the vicinity, a full suite of public utilities and
services are available oil the perimeter of the subject property. f�utare development of the site with
either Low Density Residential or Mixed Use Commercial uses would be subject to the land use
approval process outlined in SDC 5.12-100 or 5.17-100, or other land use regulations acknowledged
to implement the city's comprehensive plan. If future redevelopment results in a need to increase
the capacity of existing infrastructure serving the property, mitigation would be required at time of''
development.
4. Legislative Zoning Map amendments that involve a Metro flan Diagram amendment shalt:
a. Meet the approval criteria specified in Section 5.1.4-100; and
Finding 7: The applicant has submitted a concurrent Metro Plan diagram amendment application in
Case 811-19-000065-TY114. The applicant's submittal materials, narrative, and findings in Case
811-1.9-000065TYP4, incorporated herein by reference, are intended to demonstrate compliance
with the approval criteria specified in SDC 5.14-135. The majority of the City Council finds that.
the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and cone change meets the criteria of approval Linder
SDC 5.14-135.5. Therefore,this criterion of approval is met.
b. Comply with Oregon Administrative Rule(OAR)660-01.2-0060,where applicable.
AJ)plic°anl'.s° Narrative: "Ihe Zoning Map amendment involves a Metra Plan Diagram
amendment being processed concurrently. hor evidence demonstratingy compliance with the
.Metra Plan amendment approval criteria,, please refer to the itaformation above regarding
SIA C 5.14-135B.2 criteria. The GS&ingft`eld 2035 Transportation System Plan is the City of
ISPringfields adopted and acknowledged Trans7)ortation k5ystem Plan (1V). The proposed
Metro flan amendment and related zone change require compliance with OAR 660-0.12-
0060(9)(a-c) showing, eomoliance with the Transportation Planning Rule ('TPR). Please
refer to the Tri ie,51uclj Prepctrecl by David Ei7atzs crttd Associates,�trbniitted under,s(c1.)ar*ate
co ver.
Finding 8: 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). The applicant's
Goal 12 Transportation findings, "Transportation Impact Study, and the findings Linder Coal '12 in.
Case 81 1-19-000065TYP4, incorporated herein by reference, demonstrate that the proposed
rezoning to Mixed Use Commercial complies with OAR 660-012-0060. Therefore, this criterion of
approval is met.
Conditions of Approval: SDC: Section 5.22-120 allows for the Approval Authority to attach conditions
of approval to a Zone 0hange request to ensure the application fully meets the criteria of approval. "There
are no conditions of approval required to bring the request into conformance with the criteria of approval.
Conclusion: Based on the above findings, the proposal for a zoning map amendment to rezone the
subject property from 1.,DR to MUC meets the criteria of approval under SDC; 5.22-1.15.0.1, 2, and 4.a.
Therefore,the 0.ity Council approves this application.
ORDINANU NO. 6407