HomeMy WebLinkAboutPacket, DRC PLANNER 6/22/2020AGENDA
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
COMMITTEE
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
225 FIFTH STREET
GeRfeFeRceReem 615
Staff Review.• Tuesday, Juiy14,2020 A,00-10;00 am,
1. Zoning Map Amendment 811-20-000117-TYP3 811-18-000047-PROJ Marcola Meadows LLC
Assessor's Map: 17-03-25-11 / 17-02-30-00 TL: 2300 / 1800
Address: Marcola Rd. & 281h St.
Existing Use: vacant
Applicant submitted proposal to change zoning from MUC to MDR, PLO & CC
Planner: Andy Limbird
Meeting: Tuesday, July 14, 2020 9:00 — 10:00 virtual meeting via GoTo Meeting
2. Metro Plan Amendment 811-20-000118-TYP3 811-18-000047-PROJ Marcola Meadows LLC
Assessor's Map: 17-03-25-11 / 17-02-30-00 TL: 2300 / 1800
Address: Marcola Rd. & 281h St.
Existing Use: vacant
Applicant submitted proposal to change the comprehensive plan designation from Commercial to
Residential for 22.4 acres, and to remove the nodal development oveday from the property
Planner: Andy Limbird
Meeting: Tuesday, July 14, 2020 9:00 — 10:00 virtual meeting via GoTo Meeting
The Complete DRC Packet for this meeting is available online for you to review or print out
from the laserfiche website: httD://www.sorinafield-or.aov/weblink8/browse.asox
Marcola Meadows
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment Application
Submitted to: City of Springfield
Development & Public Works
225 Fifth Street
Springfield, OR 97477
Applicant/Property Owner: Marcola Meadows Neighborhood, LLC
9550 SW Clackamas Road
Clackamas, OR 97015
Applicant's Consultant: AKS Engineering & Forestry, LLC
12965 SW Herman Road, Suite 100
Tualatin, OR 97062
Contact:
Chris Goodell, AICP, LEEDAl
Email:
chrisg@aks-eng.com
Phone:
(503)563-6151
Applicant's Transportation Lancaster Mobley
Engineer: 321 SW 4`h Avenue, Suite 400
Portland, OR 97204
Contact:
Todd Mobley
Email:
todd@lancastermobley.com
Phone:
(503) 248-0313
Site Location: North of Marcola Road and west of 31" Street
Lane County
17023000; Adjusted Tax Lot 1800
Assessor's Map:
17032511; Adjusted Tax Lot 2300
Site Size:
±100 acres
Existing Springfield Medium Density Residential (MDR) and Mixed -Use
Land Use Districts: Commercial (MUC)
Existing Metro Plan Medium Density Residential, Commercial, and Nodal
Diagram Designations: Development (ND) Area Overlay
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment- City of Springfield Pagel
1. Executive Summary — Metro Plan Diagram Amendment
The Marcola Meadows site has been the subject of previous land use permits over many years, most
relevantly, a ±100 -acre Master Plan in 2008 (the Marcola Meadows Master Plan). In 2018, a Modification
to the Marcola Meadows Master Plan was approved by the City of Springfield. Most notably, the 2018
approval amended the zoning (±19.3 acres of Community Commercial to Mixed Use Commercial)
associated with the expired site plan for a home improvement department store. This land use action
resulted in a ±45 -acre Mixed Use Commercial (MUC) District and ±55 -acre Medium Density Residential
(MDR) District designation on site. Per the Springfield Development Code (SDC), development within the
MUC District shall have commercial dominance, with residential and public uses also allowed. Surrounded
by established residential neighborhoods and industrial properties, the site has seen several attempts at
commercial and residential development. Despite these attempts, the Marcola Meadows property has
sat vacant for many years. The lack of interest in mixed-use commercial development for the southern
portion of the site necessitates broader consideration of uses for this area.
In December 2019, a 170 -lot residential subdivision (for single-family detached homes) was approved for
the northernmost ±23 -acre portion of the property. Phase 1A of the subdivision is currently in the final
engineering plan review stage with an anticipated construction start date in the spring/summer of 2020.
With a recent final master plan modification submitted to resolve infrastructure sequencing and allow
continued progress toward construction plans, the northern portion of the site is now advancing with
single-family homes and a comprehensive street network aligned as envisioned by the Marcola Meadows
Final Master Plan.
Preceding this application, a property line adjustment and partition application were submitted to
facilitate ownership transactions and put financing mechanisms in place for needed improvements across
the site. Parallel to this financing effort, potential developers have influenced planned uses of the
southern portion of Marcola Meadows, potentially increasing the sites compatibility with existing nearby
uses. Implementing these planned uses will require modifications to the Marcola Meadows Final Master
Plan to align the housing and infrastructure efforts underway in the north of the site with several
specifically planned project elements to the south.
This Modification application is necessitated by planned changes in land use for the southern portion of
the site. A Metro Plan Diagram Amendment (from Commercial to Medium Density Residential) and Zone
Map Amendments are planned to provide for needed multi -family homes, a new school, a convenience
market/station, and a church site. An efficient site layout and appropriate mix of residential and
commercial uses will bring life to an existing urban property that is uniquely vacant in comparison to the
surrounding area. The Springfield community will benefit from the infill development and connectivity
this project provides. Additionally, this project will introduce multi -family homes to an area where there
are none currently. The Marcola Meadows Master Plan, as illustrated on the updated Preliminary Plans,
demonstrates an intentional community and contains a variety of housing types to serve a diverse housing
market and accommodate residents. In summary, this application involves the following significant
modifications intended to facilitate successful development of the subject site:
Summary of Modifications to Final Master Plan:
• Metro Plan Diagram Amendment (from Commercial to Medium Density Residential Designation)
• Distinct Zone Map Amendments (from MUC District to MDR, PLO, and CC Districts)
• Removal of the Nodal Development (ND) Area Overlay
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page
• Updates to the phase boundaries and nomenclature
• Renumbering of lots (to correspond with updated phasing)
• Updates to the approved stormwater drainage report
The Metro Plan Diagram Amendment is consistent with relevant goals and policies within the City of
Springfield's Comprehensive Plan and satisfy the SDC's applicable approval criteria for amendments.
This application includes the City application forms, written materials, and preliminary plans necessaryfor
City staff to review and determine compliance with the applicable approval criteria. The evidence supports
the City's approval of the application.
it. Site Description/Setting
The Marcola Meadows Master Plan site (adjusted Tax Lots 1800 and 2300) includes a total area of ±100
acres and a configuration based on a previously submitted Property Line Adjustment (PLA) application. A
recent Partition application (in process) divided the property into manageable parcels to begin master
implementation. The Preliminary Plans show the adjusted property boundaries of Tax Lots 1800 and 2300.
The property is flat and currently exists as a grassy field. It is vacant and fronts on Marcola Road to the
south and both 28th and W Street to the east. The property is currently classified with MDR and MUC
District zoning designations.
Table 1: Description of Surrounding Area
Area
Jurisdiction
Zoning
land Uses
North
City of Springfield
Public Land & Open Space
(PLO)
PublicAnstitutional (i.e.
educational facility)
Medium Density
Residential (MDR)
Residential
South
City of Springfield
Low Density Residential
(LDR)
Residential
East
City of Springfield
Light Medium Industrial
(UMI)
Industrial
West
City of Springfield
Low Density Residential
(LDR)
Residential
Community Commercial
(CC)
PublicAnstitutional (i.e.
medical facilities, future
church, etc.)
III. Applicable Review Criteria
The Springfield Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies and the Springfield Development Code are
applicable to the Master Plan Modification application package (wholly). The Oregon Statewide Planning
Goals and Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) are relevant to the Metro Plan Amendment application only.
If any of the findings for these items are needed for responses to other applications (e.g. Master Plan
Modification, Zone Map Amendment, etc.), they will be referenced specifically. This limitation applies to
this complete application narrative.
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page
OREGON STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS AND GUIDELINES (The Goals)
The following Oregon Statewide Planning Goals are applicable to this action:
• Goal I— Citizen Involvement
• Goal 2—Land Use Planning
• Goal 6 —Air, Land, and Water Resources Quality
• Goal 8— Recreational Needs
• Goal 9 —Economic Development
• Goal 10—Housing
• Goal 11—Public Facilities and Services
• Goal 12—Transportation
Goal 3 (Agricultural Lands) and Goal 4 (Forest Lands) are not applicable to lands within the City's
acknowledged Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and have been omitted for brevity.
Goal 5 (Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces) is not applicable because there
are no identified Goal 5 resources on the property and has been omitted for brevity.
Goal 7 (Areas Subject to Natural Hazards) is not applicable and has been omitted because the subject site
does not contain mapped areas of steep slopes 25 percent or greater or other known hazard areas.
Goal 13 (Energy Conservation) is not applicable because the amendment does not affect the City or County
goals or policies governing energy conservation.
Goal 14 (Urbanization) is not applicable because this application does not involve expansion of the
Springfield UGB, and thus analysis of the transition of rural to urban land uses is not relevant.
Goals 15 (Willamette River Greenway), 16 (Estuarine Resources), 17 (Coastal Shorelands), 18 (Beaches
and Dunes), and 19 (Ocean Resources) are not applicable because the subject site does not contain lands
described in those goals. Thus, the approval criteria have been omitted for brevity.
Goal I (Citizen Involvement)
To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be
involved in all phases of the planning process.
Response: Goal 1 calls for the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning
process. The City of Springfield has an established citizen involvement program. The
application will be processed according to Chapter 5 of the SDC, which involves the
development review process, public notification, public hearings, and decision appeal
procedures, as established in SDC Section 5.14-100 Metro Plan Amendments.
Goal 2 (Land Use Planning)
To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all decision and
actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual base for such decisions and
actions.
Response: This application will be processed by the City in accordance with SDC Chapter 5.14-100
Metro Plan Amendments. The City and County have acknowledged comprehensive plans
and land use development (zoning) codes that implement their respective comprehensive
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page
plans. The Eugene -Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) is the long-
range public policy document that establishes the broad framework upon which
Springfield, Eugene, and Lane County make coordinated land use decisions. The City and
other applicable governing bodies will review and process this application consistent with
the procedures detailed in the SDC.
This application provides an adequate factual basis for the City and County to approve
the application because it describes the current and planned future site characteristics
and applies the relevant approval criteria to those characteristics. Therefore, following
this process will ensure consistency with Statewide Planning Goal 2.
Goal 6 (Air, Water and Land Resources Quality)
To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land resources of the state.
Response: Goal 6 is implemented by Comprehensive Plan policies to protect air, land, and water
resources. Generally, these policies rely on coordination with the Department of
Environmental quality (DEQ) for their implementation. Specific standards related to the
project include requirements for addressing stormwater runoff, grading, and erosion
control standards related to site planning for specific project elements (e.g., a church,
school, and multi -family homes). This project does not involve alterations to the site or
the construction of improvements; therefore, after the final master plan is approved, the
site's physical appearance will remain the same. The portion of the property planned for
the Metro Plan Diagram Amendment is within the City's limit and is designated with
existing zoning until otherwise approved in the future. Thus, the application is consistent
with Goal 6.
Goal 8 (Recreational Needs)
To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the some and visitors and, where appropriate,
m provide for the siting of necessary recreational Facilities including destination resorts.
Response: Goal 8 is facilitated by the 2012 Willamalane Park and Recreation Comprehensive Plan.
Together with the Metro Plan, the provisions identify future needs for parks, a natural
area, and recreation facilities. This amendment will not affect the City's Comprehensive
Plan with respect to Goal 8 and its development regulations governing recreational needs
(e.g. open space, park dedication, fee in -lieu -of requirements, etc.). Therefore, this
application is consistent with Goal 8.
Goal 9 (Economic Development)
To provide adequate opportunities throughout the crate for avariety of economic activides viral
to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens.
Response: This area has been identified as appropriate for commercial and residential mixed -uses in
the Metro Plan. The Metro Plan Amendment from Commercial to Medium Density
Residential (MDR) will change the anticipated use of the portion of the property from
mixed-use to residential. The MDR District allows several commercial uses (e.g.
professional offices, home occupations, care facilities, etc.), providing potential economic
opportunities.
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Pages
The City's acknowledged Commercial and Industrial Buildable Lands Inventory and
Economic Opportunities Analysis (CIBL-EOA) identified a deficit of employment land,
including a need for four new sites that are between Sand 20 acres in size. The UGB was
expanded to address this deficit and acknowledged by the Land Conservation and
Development Commission (LCDC), effective March 5, 2019. In 2019, Springfield Ordinance
No. 6407 amended the Metro Plan Diagram by re -designating 13.6 acres of land from Low
Density Residential (UDR) to MUC —resulting in an additional surplus of acreage available
for commercial development, consistent with Goal 9.
Goal to (Housing)
To provide for the housing needs ofcitizens ofthe state.
Response: The Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element
addresses Statewide Planning Goal 10: Housing. The Springfield Residential Land and
Housing Analysis (RLHNA) serves as the City's residential buildable land inventory under
Goal 10. As documented in the RLHNA, there was a deficit in the HDR designation of 28
gross buildable acres needed to accommodate an additional 411 high-density multi-
family housing units. Additionally, Ordinance No. 6407 amended the Gateway Refinement
Plan area by re -designating 13.6 acres of land from UDR to MUC, removing that area as
part of the City's residential land inventory. As part of this application, the planned Metro
Plan Diagram Amendment provides approximately ±12.8 acres for high-density
residential homes, a needed housing element the City's land inventory currently lacks.
While the MUC district is a mixed-use district, it allows residential uses at higher
residential densities. The planned Metro Plan Diagram Amendment from MUC to MDR
will change the anticipated use of the propertyto residential from a variety of commercial
uses with provisions to include higher -density residential units. With that said, this
application allows needed housing at similar densities to what would be permitted
currently without a zone change. The residential re -designation of subject site will be
easily integrated into the vicinity, as the surrounding area to the north, east, and west is
generally characterized as residential.
As shown onthe Preliminary Plans,the Metro Plan Diagram Amendmentwill increasethe
supply of land available for housing at the MDR density. Therefore, this application is
consistent with Goal 10.
Goal 11 (Public Facilities and Services)
To plan and develop a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement ofpublic Facilities and services
to serve as a @arnev,ork for urban and rural development
Response: The Metro Plan Diagram Amendment and the Zone Map Amendment from MUC to MDR
will allow similar uses at similar intensities, as described above, and establish consistency
with the adjacent project site. Site improvements in conformance with an approved
comprehensive plan, as is the case here, result in orderly and efficient arrangement of
public facilities and services. Critical public facilities, including sanitary sewer, storm
water, potable water, and emergency services, were shown to be available to this site
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page
based on previous application approvals. Therefore, this application is consistent with
Goal 11.
Goal 12 (Transportation)
To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system.
Response: A Transportation Impact Study (TIS) prepared by Lancaster Mobley is included here as an
exhibit which demonstrates compliance with Goal 12 and applicable State, County, and
City transportation related requirements. Please refer to the TIS for further information.
The intended street and connectivity improvements encourage a safe, convenient, and
economic transportation system. Therefore, the application is consistent with Goal 12.
FINDINGS FOR TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RULE COMPLIANCE
Response: OAR 660, Division 12, is the Oregon Transportation Planning Rule (the TPR) adopted by
the LCDC. The TPR implements Goal 12, Transportation, and is an independent approval
standard in addition to Goal 12 for map amendments. OAR 660-012-0060(1) and (2) apply
to amendments to acknowledged maps, as is the case with this application.
The TPR requires a two-step analysis. First, under OAR 660-012-0060(1), the Applicant
must determine if the application has a "significant affect," as that term is defined in OAR
660-012-0060(1). The City may rely on transportation improvements found in
Transportation System Plans (TSPs), as allowed by OAR 660-012-0060(3)(a), (b), and (c),
to show that failing intersections will not be made worse or intersections not now failing
will not fail. If there is a "significant affect," then the Applicant must demonstrate
appropriate mitigation under OAR 660-012-0060(2), et seq.
OAR 660-012-0060 Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments
(I) 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
fadfity, then the local government must put in place .measures as
provided in section (2) ofthis rule, unless the amendment is avowed
under section (3), (9) or (10) of this rule. A plan or land use regulation
amendment significantly affects a transportation fadfity ifitwould:
(a) Change the functional classification of an existing o
planned transportation Facifity (exclusive of correction of
.nap errors in an adopted plan);
(b) Change standards implementing a functional classification
system; or
(c) Result in any of the effects fisted in paragraphs (A) through
(C) of this subsection based on projected conditions
measured at the end ofthe planning period identified in the
adopted TSP. As part of evaluating projected conditions, the
amount of traffic projected to be generated within the area
of the amendment may be reduced if the amendment
includes an enforceable, ongoing requirement that would
demonstrably Emit traffic generation, including, but not
limited to, transportation demand management. This
reduction may diminish or completely efitminate the
significant effect of the amendment.
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page
(A) Types or levels of travel oraccess that are
cadent with the fin ctionalclassificafion of an
existing or planned transportation Facility;
(B) Degrade the performance ofan existing or planned
transportation facility such that it would not meet
the performance standards identified in the TSP or
comprehensive plan; or
(C) Degrade the performance ofan existing or planned
transportation facility that is otherwise projected to
not meet the performance standards identified in
the TSP or comprehensive plan.
(2) If a local government determines that there would be a significant
effect' then the local government .oust ensure that allowed land uses
are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and
performance standards of the Facility measured at the end of the
planning period identified in the adopted TSP through one
combination of the remedies fisted in (a) through (e) below, unless
the amendment meets the balancing rest in subsection (2)(e) of this
section or qualifies for partial mitigation in section (11) ofthis rule. A
local government using subsection (2)(e), section (3), section (Io) or
section (11) to approve an amendment recognizes that additional
motor vehicle traffic congestion may result and that other facility
providers would not be expected to provide additional capacity for
motor vehicles in response to this congestion.
(a) Adopting .measures that demonstrate allowed land uses are
consistent with the planned function, capacity, and
performance standards of the transportation facility.
(b) Amending the TSP orcomprehensive plan to provide
transportation facilities, improvements or cervices adequate
to support the proposed land uses
consistent with the
requirements of this division; such amendments shall
include a funding plan or mechanism consistent with
action (4) or include an amendment to the transportation
finance plan co that the facility, improvemenq or service will
be provided by the end of the planning period.
(c) Amending the TSP to modify the planned function, capacity
or performance standards of the transportation facility.
(d) Providing other .measures as a condition of developtment or
through a development agreement or similar funding
.method, including, but not limited to, transportation system
anagementun
es or transportation
improvements. Local governmentsshall, as part of the
amendment, specify when measures
improvements
provided pursuant to this subsection will be provided.
(e) Providing improvements that would benefit modes other
than the significantly affected mode, improvements to
fadfidec other than the significantly affected Facility, or
improvements at other locations, if
(A) The provider of the significantly affected facility
provides a written statement that the system -wide
benefits are sufficient to balance the significant
AVO Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page
effect' even though the improvements would not
resultin consistency for all performance standards;
(B) The providers of Facilities being improved at other
locations provide written statements of approval;
and
(C) The local jurisdictions where Facilities are being
improved provide written statements ofapproval.
RESPONSE: The supplemental TIS prepared by Lancaster Mobley contains a detailed discussion of the
traffic impacts associated with the Marcola Meadows Master Plan site as envisioned and
any potential mitigation for the project as it relates to the Oregon Transportation Planning
Rule (TPR) found in OAR 660-012-0060. As described in the study, this project and the
associated traffic improvements will comply with OAR 660-012-0060 (1) and (2). Please
refer to the TIS for further information. Therefore, the criteria are met.
(4) Determinations under sections (1)—(3) of this rule shall be
coordinated with affected transportation Facility and service
providers and other affected local governments.
(a) In determining whether an amendment has a significant
effect on an existing or planned transportation facility under
subsection (1)(c) ofthis rule, local governments shall rely on
existing transportation facilities and serrices and on the
planned transportation facilities, improvements and services
set forth in subsections (b) and O below.
(b) Outside of interstate interchange areas, the following are
considered planned Facilities, improvements and services:
(A) Transportation facilities, improvements or services
that are funded for construction or implementation
n the Statewide Transportation Improvement
Program or a locally or regionally adopted
transportation improvement program or capital
improvement plan or program of a transportation
service provider.
(B) Transportation facilities, improvements or services
that are authorized in a local transportation system
plan and for which a funding plan or mechanism is
in place or approved. These include, but are not
limited to, transportation Facilities, improvements
or services for which: transportation systems
development charge revenues are being collected; a
local improvement district or
reimbursement
district has been established or will be established
prior to development a development agreement has
been adopted; or conditions of approval to fund the
improvement have been adopted.
(C) Transportation facilities, improvements or services
in a metropolitan planning organization (MPO)
area that are part of the area's federally -approved,
financially constrained regional transportation
system plan.
(D) Improvements to state highways that are included
as planned improvements in a regional or local
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page
transportation system plan or comprehensive plan
when ODOT provides a written statement that the
improvements are reasonably likely to be provided
by the end of the planning period.
(E) Improvements to regional andlocal roads, streers or
other transportation forifides or services that are
included as planned improvements in a regional or
local transpormton system plan or comprehensive
plan when the local government(s) or
transportation service provider(s) responsible for
the facility, improvement o e provides a
written statement that the facility,improvement or
service is reasonably likely to be provided by the
end ofthe planning period.
(c) Within interstate interchange areas, the improvements
included in (b)(A)—(C) are considered planned facilities,
improvements and services, exceptwhere:
(A) ODOT provides a written statement that the
proposed funding and timing of mitigation
measures a sufficient to avoid a significant
adverse impact on the Interstate Highway system,
then local governments may also rely on the
improvements identified in paragraphs (b)(D) and
(E) of this section; o
(B) There is an adopted interchange area management
plan, then local governments may also rely on the
improvements identified in that plan and which are
also identified in paragraphs (b)(D) and (E) of this
section.
(d) As used in this section and section (3):
(A) Planned interchange means new interchanges and
relocation of existing interchanges that are
authorized in an adopted transportation system
plan or comprehensive plan;
(B) Interstate highway means Interstates 5, 82, 84, 105,
205 and 405; and
(C) Interstate interchange area means
(i) Property within one-quarter .vile of the
amp terminal intersection ofan existing or
planned interchange on an Interstate
Highway; or
(i) The interchange are as defined in the
Interchange AreaManagement Plan
adopted as an amendment to the Oregon
Highway Plan.
(e) For purposes of this section, a written statement provided
pursuant to paragraphs (b)(D), (b)(E) or (c)(A) provided by
ODOT, a local government or transportation Facility
provider, as appropriate, shall be conclusive in determining
whether a transportation Facility, improvement or service is
a planned transportation faclfity, improvement or service. In
AVO Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 30
the absence of a written statement, a local government can
only rely upon planned transportation facilities,
improvements and services identified in paragraphs (b)(A)-
(C) to determine whether there is a significant effect that
requires application of the remedies in section (2).
RESPONSE: This section of the Transportation Planning Rule requires coordination with affected
transportations service providers. The City provides the roads that serve the subject
property; Marcola Road and 31m Street are designated as a Major Collector and a Minor
Collector, respectively, in the City TSP and are under City jurisdiction. The City has a duty
to coordinate with transportation facility and service providers and other affected
agencies, as applicable. Therefore, the criteria of OAR 660-012-0060 (4) are met.
FINDINGS FOR METRO PLAN COMPLIANCE
Response: SDC 5.22-115 requires compliance with applicable provisions of the Metro Plan when the
City amends its acknowledged comprehensive plan and land use regulations. This
application amends the City's acknowledged Zoning Map in a waythat is inconsistent with
the Metro Plan Diagram and therefore requires a Metro Plan Diagram Amendment.
Please see responses to Section 5.14-115 in this narrative addressing the planned
amendments to the Metro Plan Diagram and Section 5.22-115 for amendments to
Springfield's acknowledged Zoning Map. This application involves amendments resulting
in compliance with the Metro Plan and SDC.
SPRINGFIELD ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLANNING GOALS
The Metro Plan Diagram Amendment is consistent with, but not limited to, the following Springfield
Comprehensive Plan (2030 Plan) goals and policies.
Goal EG -I
Broaden, improve and diversify the state and regional economy, and the Springfield economy
in particular, while .maintaining or enhancing environmental quality and Springfield's natural
heritage.
Policy E.18
Coordinate transportation and land use corridor planning to include design elements
that support Springfield's economic and c unity development policies and
contribute to community diversity and inclusivity•
Response: This area has been identified as appropriate for commercial and residential mixed -uses in
the Metro Plan. The Metro Plan Amendment from Commercial to Medium Density
Residential (MDR) will change the anticipated use of the portion of the property from
mixed-use to residential. The MDR District allows similar residential intensities, to those
allowed in the MUC District, and several commercial uses (e.g. professional offices, home
occupations, care facilities, etc.), providing potential economic opportunities. Site
improvements in conformance with an approved comprehensive plan, as is the case here,
result in orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services, establishing
consistency with the adjacent area.
Policy E.24
AVC! Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 11
Evaluate and redesignate commercially-designared and zoned site in locations that
lack adequate transportation access and visibility to allow development of more
suitable uses.
Response: This application involves a Metro Plan Diagram Amendment to amend the designation of
a portion of the property from Commercial to MDR. Though this site has adequate
transportation access, it is surrounded by existing residential neighborhoods and
industrial properties. The amendment will allow more suitable uses on a large property
which has sat vacant in Springfield for many years. The successful implementation of the
Marcola Meadows Master Plan on this site will facilitate needed transportation
improvements and connectivity to this location, thereby increasing visibility and fulfilling
local needs by providing land for multi -family housing, a community school, and a church
site. Therefore, the re -designation of land involved in this application will benefit the
Springfield community.
Goal EG -5d
Be Prepared — Contribute to development of the region's physical, social, educational, and
workforce infrastructure to meet the needs oftomorrow.
Response: This application facilitates changes in land use to provide multi -family homes. A Metro
Plan Diagram Amendment (from Commercial to Medium Density Residential) and various
Zone Map Amendments are planned to provide for needed multi -family homes, a new
school, a gas station, and a church site. An efficient site layout and appropriate mix of
residential and commercial uses will bring life to an existing urban property that is
uniquely vacant in comparison to the surrounding area. Additionally, this project will
introduce multi -family homes to an area where there are none currently. The Springfield
community will benefit from the additional homes, various commercial/civic uses, and
connectivity this project provides. The community spaces, educational amenity, and
needed homes contribute diverse opportunities to the Springfield Community.
SPRINGFIELD RESIDENTIAL LAND & HOUSING GOALS
HG -I Plan for Growth and Needed Housing
Response: The RLHNA serves as the City's residential buildable land inventory under Goal 10. As
documented in the RLHNA, there was a deficit in the HDR designation of 28 gross
buildable acres needed to accommodate an additional 411 multi -family housing units.
Additionally, Ordinance No. 6407 amended the Gateway Refinement Plan area by re -
designating 13.6 acres of land from LDR to MUC, removing that area as part of the City's
residential land inventory. As part of this application, the planned Metro Plan Diagram
Amendment provides approximately ±12.8 acres for multi -family residential homes, a
needed housing element the City's land inventory currently lacks.
HG -2 Foster Housing Choice and Affordability
Policy H.10
Through the updating and development of each neighborhood refinement plan,
district plan or specific area plan, amend land use plans to increase development
opportunities for quality affordable housing in locations served by existing and
planned frequent transit service that provides access to employment centers,
shopping, health care, civic, recreational and cultural services.
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment —City of Springfield Page 12
Response: As shown on the Preliminary Plans, the subject area of the Metro Plan Diagram
Amendment is near the intersection of 28" Street and Marcola Road. The property is
suited for new multi -family housing due to its location near local shopping centers and
medical facilities (e.g. half a mile proximity). The location has existing access to transit
stops and adequate transportation and pedestrian facilities. Additionally, designing multi-
family residential housing near a planned future school and church site will increase
quality of life and fulfill local needs for residents.
HG -3 Encourage Housing Diversity& Quality Neighborhoods
Response: This project and associated Metro Plan Diagram Amendment (from MUC to MDR) will
encourage housing diversity and provide affordable housing options to the local
community. As stated in this goal interpretation, multi -family homes are needed to help
accommodate expected housing demand over the next 20 years. It is noted that though
single-family homes continue to be the preferred housing type for many households, to
some extent this preference can be met with affordable ground -related units (e.g.
townhouses, duplexes, triplexes, ground -level apartments, etc.). This application provides
for these types of housing opportunities. Furthermore, the Comprehensive Plan states
"other areas with significant capacity for development of multi -family uses include the
Marcola Meadows master planned nodal development areas." The lack of interest in
mixed-use commercial development for the southern portion of the site necessitates
broader consideration of uses for this area. Therefore, this application aims to provide
needed housing without ties to the provisions which necessitate commercial uses.
Policy 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 iniriated .vaster
plans.
Response: Though the site is surrounded by established residential neighborhoods and industrial
properties, the Marcola Meadows property has sat vacant for many years despite several
attempts at commercial and residential development. The lack of interest in mixed-use
commercial development for the southern portion of the site necessitates broader
consideration of uses for this area. Therefore, this application facilitates changes in land
use to provide land which allows a mix of housing types, including needed multi -family
homes. This application is a developer -initiated modification to the master plan intended
to successfully progress this area of Springfield by sensible use of the land.
CTFY OF SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE
CHAPTER 3 LAND USE DISTRICTS
Section 3.1-100 Official Zoning Maps
3.1-110 Zoning Map Amendments
A proposed change to the Official Zoning Maps is subject to the amendment process
described in Section 5.22-100.
AVC! Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 13
Response: As shown on sheets PO -05 and PO -06 within the Preliminary Plans, this project involves
amendments to the Springfield Zoning Map. Please see Section 5.22-100 for narrative
responses regarding the planned amendments and overlay removal on the subject site.
Table 3, below, illustrates a summary of the planned amendments.
Table 2: Existing and Future land Uses and Zoning Designations
Future
Existing Base
Existing Metro
Land Use
Future Base
Future Metro
Envisioned
Phase
Zoning District
Plan
Action
Zoning District
Plan
Land Uses
Designation
Designation
Existing Zoning
Future Zoning
Single-
Residential District
Medium Density
Adjust/
Residential District
Medium
Single -Family
Family
Residential;
Remove Split-
Density
Mixed -Use District
Phases (1-5)
Commercial;
Designations;
Residential
Medium Density
Medium Density
Residential (MDR)
Nodal
Remove ND
Residential (MDR)
ixed
mercial(MUC)
(ND)Area
Multi-
Mixed -Use District
Commercial;
Metro Diagram
Residential District
Medium
Multi -Family
Family
Nodal
Amendment;
Density
Mixed -Use
Medium Density.
Phase
Development
Zone Map
Residential
COmmerCldI(MUC)
(ND)Area
Amendment;
Residential (MDR)
Remove ND
Commercial
Mixed -Use District
Commercial;
Remove ND
Commercial District
Commercial
Convenience
Phase
Nodal
Market
Mixed -Use
Development
Community
Commercial(MUC)
(ND)Area
mmercial(CC)
School Mixed -Use District
Commercial;
Zone Map
Commercial District
Commercial
School
Phase
Nodal
Amendment;
01
Development
Remove ND
Public Land & Open
UC)
(ND)Area
Space(PLO)
Church Mixed -Use District
Commercial;
Zone Map Commercial District
Commercial
Church
Phase
Nodal
Amendment;
_U
Development
Remove ND
mercia
(ND)Area
3.1-115 Determination ofZoning District Boundaries
Where uncertainty exists relating to any zoning district boundaries shown on the
Official Zoning Maps, the Director sha8 determine the boundaries as specified in the
following criteria:
A. Lot/parcel Lines. Where zoning district boundaries are indicated a
approximately following lot/parcel fines, the lot/parcel fines are considered
to be the boundaries.
Be Multi -zoned Lot/parcels. Where a zoning districes boundary line divides a
lot/parcel and the boundary fine location is not otherwise designated by
ordinance or other action, the location of the boundary fine is determined by
use of the scale appearing on the Official Zoning Maps.
Response: As detailed on the Preliminary Plans and illustrated in the table below, the subject site is
designated with existing split -zoning and Metro Plan Diagram districts designated by
Ordinance No. 6195 & 6196 and updated through adoption of Springfield Planning
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 14
Commission Final Order on May 15, 2018. The determination of Commercial designated
acreage is significant to the Metro Plan Diagram Amendment from Commercial to
Medium Density Residential (e.g. acreage -based fee). As such, the Commercial designated
area determined by the above planning actions is ±45 acres; approximately ±22.45 acres
of the Commercial designation are planned for a Metro Plan Diagram Amendment to
Medium Density Residential.
O p
r
Section 3.2-200 Residential Zoning Districts
3.2-205 Establishment of Residential Zoning Districts
C. Medium Density Residential District (MDR). The MDR District applies
within the MDR designation and:
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 15
Zoning District
Zoning and
Overlays
Diagram Designation
Acreage
Tax Lot
Residential District
±54.70 -acre
±81.66 -acre ND
MDR/NDArea
2300
MDR
Area Overlay
Mixed Use District
±37.15 -acre
Commercial/ND Area
MUC
Tax Lot
Mixed Use District
±8.15 -acre
Commercial/ND Area
1800
MUC
O p
r
Section 3.2-200 Residential Zoning Districts
3.2-205 Establishment of Residential Zoning Districts
C. Medium Density Residential District (MDR). The MDR District applies
within the MDR designation and:
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 15
1. Establishes sites for residential development where primarily
multi Family dwellings are permitted and the densityrange is 14 m 28
dwelling units per net acre. Density fractions will be rounded up to
the next whole number. As specified in Section 3.2-215, Footnote 15,
MDR lot area and dimension standards may be reduced through the
subdivision application process in order to meet density standards.
EXCEPTION: The minimum and/or maximum density may be increased
to the Nodal Development Overlay District and transit
corridors as determined through the Refinement Plan
and/or Master Plan process.
2. Provides for a limited range of neighborhood uses that provide
services for residents.
Response: As depicted on the Existing Zoning sheet within the Preliminary Plans, a portion of the
subject site is currently designated with MDR District zoning. Additionally, a portion of
the subject site is planned to be amended with MDR District zoning, as illustrated on
sheets PO -05 and PO -06 and shown in Table 3. It is understood the lot area and
dimensions maybe reduced to meet density standards. The site complies with the density
range of 14 to 28 units per acre as demonstrated in Table 5. Please see the density
calculation and Section 5.13-135 for further narrative regarding compliance with density
standards.
In addition, the site is currently designated with ND Overlay and involves removal through
the Comprehensive Plan and Zone Map Amendment process. Therefore, the exception
above is not relevant.
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment — City of Springfield Page 16
3.2-210 Schedule of Use Camgories
Response: The site contains land designated as (and amended to) MDR District. As previously
mentioned, detached single-family and multiple family dwellings are planned residential
uses for the site and are permitted in accordance with the MDR District standards. The
criteria are met.
AVO Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 17
3.2-215 Base Zone Development Standards
Response: As shown on the Preliminary Plans, a portion of the site is designated with existing MDR
district. Additionally, a zone map amendment from MUC to MDR District affects area in
the southern portion of the site.
The base zone development standards listed above (e.g. lot area, street frontage,
setbacks, building height, etc.) will be reviewed for compliance at future site design
review. It is understood that in the MDR zoning district, lot area and dimensions may be
reduced through the subdivision process as long as density and open space standards can
be met. Approval of this application does not interfere with compliance with applicable
provisions, conditions, or goals intended from the modified final master plan. The subject
lots meets the minimum lot area and street frontage requirements of the MDR zoning
district; therefore, the planned amendments meet the most relevant criteria.
3.2-225 Base Solar Development Standards
AVO Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 18
Development Standard
Medium Density Residential
DR
Minimum Area
East-West Streets:
4,500 s . R IS
North-South Streets:
5,000 s . k IS
Minimum SaeerF. e
East-West Streets:
45 feet IS
North-South Streets:
60 feet IS
Duplex Corner Lots/Parcels
Min./Max. Area 1
6,000 s . 1 IS
Maximum Area
9,000 s . L
Minimum SfreerP4nnb e
East-West Streets:
45 feet 15
North-South Streets:
60 feet IS
Maximum Building Height (11)(12)(13)(14)(18) 35 feet
(1) 6,000 square feet in area for a duplex corner lot/parcel in all reddeneal dimricts. This
maad.rd may rely be increased as specified in (2), below.
(2) 10,000 square feet in the MR District as specified in this Section and Section 4.9-140.
9,000 square feet in area for a duplex corner lot/parcel In the SLR, MDR and HDR District
s specified in this Section and Section 4.7-140. These maximum areas shall apply only when the
Property.—e, intends to divide thel.t/parcel with the intent to create ..Pam..—.,.hip for each
half of the duplex.
(ll) See Section 3.2-225 for residential building height fimati... for solar protection. In the
SLR District, solar protection for abutting MR properties is required only for those loin/parcels
north fthe proposed development.
(12) Incidental equipment may exceed the height standards.
(13) Height fimitai ns within the Hillside Development Overlay District may be removed
provided the additional height dues art exceed 45 feet and the base residential solar standards are
met.
(14) In the MDR and HDR Districts, the building height may be increased to 50 feet as specified
in Subsection 3.2-240D.3.c.
(15) In the MDR and HDR Districts, lot area and dimensions may be reduced through the
subdivision application process as long as density and open space standards can be met.
(18) Special building height standards may be established in Nodal Development Overlay or
Otho special district standards (erg., Gleaaccol Man District), as determined through Refiaemem
Mae aad/..Master Mae pr.cexses aad/.r the permitted building height may be regdated by
umber .fstadex or floors.
Response: As shown on the Preliminary Plans, a portion of the site is designated with existing MDR
district. Additionally, a zone map amendment from MUC to MDR District affects area in
the southern portion of the site.
The base zone development standards listed above (e.g. lot area, street frontage,
setbacks, building height, etc.) will be reviewed for compliance at future site design
review. It is understood that in the MDR zoning district, lot area and dimensions may be
reduced through the subdivision process as long as density and open space standards can
be met. Approval of this application does not interfere with compliance with applicable
provisions, conditions, or goals intended from the modified final master plan. The subject
lots meets the minimum lot area and street frontage requirements of the MDR zoning
district; therefore, the planned amendments meet the most relevant criteria.
3.2-225 Base Solar Development Standards
AVO Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 18
A. Budding Placement for Solar Protection. All buildings in the LDR and MDR
Districts shall protect the solar access of neighboring residential lots/parcels
unless specified elsewhere in this Code.
1. Solar Setback Standard. The proposed building shall comply with 1
ofthe Subsections below.
a. Solar Setback. The solar setback of the shade point shall be
greater than or equal to the setback specified in Table 3.2-1
or as computed using the following formula.
SSB = (2.5 x SPH) + (N/2) _ 95
Where:
SSB = The solar setback (the horizontal distance between the shade
point and the Northern lot/parcel fine in feet, (See
Figure 3.2-A);
SPH = The height ofthe shade point in feet (See Figures 3.2-D and
E); and
N = The north -south dimension in feet' provided that a north -
south dimension more than 90 feet shall use a value of90 feet
for this calculation. Provided, the solar setback of the shade
point may be decreased 2.5 feet above the amount calculated
using the formula or Table 3.2-A for each foot that the
average grade at the rear property line exceeds the average
grade at the front property fine.
b. Alternative Standard: Maximum Shade Point Height. The
maximum height of the shade point shall be less than or
equal to the height specified in Table 3.2-B or as computed
using the following formula:
SPH — (2x SSB)- N + 150
5
provided, the maximum allowed height ofthe shade point
may be increased 1 foot above the amount calculated using
the formula or Table 3.2-2 for each foot that the average
grade at the rear property fine exceeds the average grade at
the front property fine.
C. Performance Option. The proposed building shall notshade
re than 20 percent of the south -facing wall of existing
habitable buildings, or, where applicable, the proposed
building will comply with Section 3B or 3C of the Solar
Design Standards. If Section 3B is used, the shade point of
the building shall be setback from the solar building fine 2.5
feet for every 1 -foot ofheight ofthe shade point
The solar setback for panhandle lots/parcels is calculated on the
north -south dimension of the pan portion of the lot/parcel. The
outhern-most lot/ parcel, with a north south dimension less than 60
feet in the pan portion of the lot/parcel shall have a restricted
building height of21 feet.
Exemptions. A building is exempt from the Solar Setback Standards
when any ofthe following conditions exist
AVO Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 19
Slopes. The lot/parcel on which the building is located has
an average slope 20 percent or more in a direction greater
than 45 degrees east or west oftrue south.
Pre-existing Shade. The building will shade an area that is
shaded by one or more of the following:
i. An existing or approved building or structure;
A topographic feature; or
u.. A -exempt tree that will remain after
development of the site. It is assumed that a tree
will remain after development if it is situated in a
required setback; or it is part of a developed area,
public park, or legally reserved open space; or it is
part oflandscaping required pursuant to this Code.
A duly executed covenant also can be used to
preserve trees causing the shade.
Insignificant Benefit The proposed building shades one or
more of the following:
i. A non -developable area, for example, designated
open space or streets, or a public use, which does
not need solar access (park land, street, public
facility) or similar uses.
rr. The wall of an unheated space, for example a
garage, excluding solar greenhouses and other
similar solar structures.
u.. Shade less than 20 square feet of south -Facing
glaang.
B. Building Height Restrictions for Solar Protection. In residential districts, the
maximum building height is determined by solar access considerations, as
specified in Section 3.2-215. No building is required to be less than 21 feet in
height when set back from the northern lot/parcel fine a minimum of 1/2 of
the north -south dimension. Where the HDR District abuts an LDR or MDR
District, the building height standard ofthe HDR Distrlccis 1 ofthe following:
Response: As shown on the Preliminary Plans, the residential area of the site is designated with MDR
District. Therefore, the standards of Section 3.2-225 are applicable to the northerly
residential portion of the site and the multi -family phase. To protect the solar access of
neighboring residential lots, new buildings must comply with the building height
restrictions and shade point calculations outlined above.
The following Solar Setback Diagram (Figure 1) illustrates a two-story house can meet the
required building setbacks but is unable to achieve the required solar setbacks upon the
shadow effect produced. Consequently, the solar setbacks effectively preclude most
forms of housing on these lots and thereby lead to unreasonable cost and delay to meet
these requirements. Pursuant to ORS 197.307(4), a local government may adopt and
apply only clear and objective standards, conditions, and procedures regulating the
development of housing, and may not have the effect of discouraging needed housing
through unreasonable cost or delay.
AVO Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 20
Figure 1: Solar Setback Diagram
Additionally, the Applicant received a waiver of solar setback standards (Exhibit H) for
several lots in the Phase 1A portion of the site. The waiver acknowledges that imposition
of the standards of Section 3.2-225 result in unreasonable cost of delay and specifies the
City's determination to waive these standards, consistent with ORS 197.307(4), for those
applicable lots.
This application demonstrates the imposition of solar development standards continue
to cause unreasonable cost and delay for the lots intended for residential use. Pursuant
to SDC 3.2-205, the intent of the MDR District is to "establish sites for residential
development where primarily multi -family dwellings are permitted." It is understood in
the MDR District the lot area and dimensions may be reduced to meet density standards.
As shown in Figure 1, the lots which meet building setbacks cannot meet solar setbacks.
In turn, to meet density, lot size may be reduced - and to meet solar setbacks, building
setbacks must be increased. A policy that increases property line setbacks and tightens
height restrictions is at odds with policies that attempt to increase urban density.
Furthermore, Section 3.2-225 imposes relatively steep costs in housing design and
restricts property rights.
The Springfield Comprehensive Plan discusses policies and implementation actions to
plan for growth and needed housing. Policy HA asserts Springfield will "continue to
identify and remove regulatory barriers to siting and constructing higher density housing
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment- City of Springfield Page 21
MARCOLA MEADOWS
sola, sema�a Po,—ia:
Lots:
Lot is
Lots 2-5 Solar Setback
SSB -Sm., SClb—k
SSB -12,5x28),(35/2) 75
SSB -(2.5x25)-(3512) -75
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
SPH=Sh,de Point Haigh(
N=Norm-south Lot Dimension
SSB -t 2,5
SSB -5
LANE COUNTY, OR
04/13/20
SSB-(25x5PH)r(N/2)-]5
Lot 3:
Lot S:
SSB=(2.5.30)'(40/2 d5
35B=(2.5x35)+)40/2)-75
SSB -20
SSB -20
West Elevation
,N
FL
PL
PL
'L PL
a
`
X
11
n- nn
avnn o
nam
re
7. �.
Additionally, the Applicant received a waiver of solar setback standards (Exhibit H) for
several lots in the Phase 1A portion of the site. The waiver acknowledges that imposition
of the standards of Section 3.2-225 result in unreasonable cost of delay and specifies the
City's determination to waive these standards, consistent with ORS 197.307(4), for those
applicable lots.
This application demonstrates the imposition of solar development standards continue
to cause unreasonable cost and delay for the lots intended for residential use. Pursuant
to SDC 3.2-205, the intent of the MDR District is to "establish sites for residential
development where primarily multi -family dwellings are permitted." It is understood in
the MDR District the lot area and dimensions may be reduced to meet density standards.
As shown in Figure 1, the lots which meet building setbacks cannot meet solar setbacks.
In turn, to meet density, lot size may be reduced - and to meet solar setbacks, building
setbacks must be increased. A policy that increases property line setbacks and tightens
height restrictions is at odds with policies that attempt to increase urban density.
Furthermore, Section 3.2-225 imposes relatively steep costs in housing design and
restricts property rights.
The Springfield Comprehensive Plan discusses policies and implementation actions to
plan for growth and needed housing. Policy HA asserts Springfield will "continue to
identify and remove regulatory barriers to siting and constructing higher density housing
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment- City of Springfield Page 21
types in the existing medium and high density residential districts." This application
upholds Policy HA and supports removal of the regulation based on the unreasonable
cost and delay of needed housing provided by the site.
Therefore, this application involves a modification to remove compliance with the
provisions of SDC 3.2-225 for all the lots intended for residential use within the Marcola
Meadows Master Plan site.
3.2-240 Multi Unit Design Standards
A. Applicability. In all residential districts, multi -unit development (3 or more
attached units) shall comply with the design standards of this Section. In
cases where the standards of this Subsection conflict with other standards in
this Code, the standards of this Section shall prevail.
B. Purpose. The purpose ofthis Section is to:
1. Promote the livability, neighborhood compatibility and public safety
ofmuld-unit housing in the community, and
2. Promote higher residential densities inside the urban growth
boundary that will utilize existing infrastructure and improve the
efficiency ofpnbfic services and facilities.
C. Review. All multi -unit developments shaft be reviewed as a Type II Site Plan
Review application as specified in Section 5.17-100. The Director may also
determine that a multi -unit developmentis subject to a Type III reviewwhen
itis in the public interest. In addition, the applicant may choose the Type III
Alternative Design procedure specified in Section 3.2-245 when proposing an
innovative design that may preclude compliance with some orall ofthe design
standards in this Section.
Response: This project anticipates future multi -family housing that will be required to meet the
design standards of this section. As specified above, compliance with the applicable
standards will be reviewed and determined at future Site Plan Review. Therefore, the
remainder of this section has been omitted for brevity purposes.
Section 3.2,300 Commercial Zoning Districts
3.2,305 Establishment of Commercial Zoning Districts
The following commercial zoning districts are established:
B. Community Commercial District (CC). The CC District establishes sites to
provide for a wide range ofretail sales, service and professional office use and
also includes all existing strip commercial areas.
Response: As described in this written narrative, a portion of the Marcola Meadows Master Plan site
is planned for religious activities and a local convenience store with a gas station. As such,
this application involves a zone map amendment from MUC to Community Commercial
(CC) District to implement a church and commercial phase in the southern area of the
site.
AVO Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 22
3.2-310 Schedule of Use Categories
The following uses are permitted in the districts as indicated subject to the provisions,
additional restrictions and exceptions specified in this Code. Uses not specifically
fisted may be approved as specified in Section 5.11-100.
"P" = PERMITTED USE subject to the standards of this Code.
"S"= SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS subject to special
locational and/or siting standards as specified in Section 4.7-100.
"D" = DISCRETIONARY USE subject to review and analysis under Type
DI procedure (Section 5.9-100) at the Planning Commission or
Hearings Official level.
SITE PLAN REVIEW SHALL BE REQUIRED, unless exempted
elsewhere in this Code.
Iul�l
Cate o es/Uses CC
Religious, Social, and Public
Institutions
Churches, temples
P
and weekly religious
schools
Automotive, Marine and Mobile/
Manufacmred Home Sales, Service,
Storage and Repair Section 4.7-115
Service Stations I P
Retail Sales(Section 4.7-230
Convenience Stores I P
Response: As noted above, religious uses are permitted in this district. Additionally, service stations
(including fuel stations) and convenience stores are permitted outright in the CC District.
The planned uses align with the criteria above.
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 23
3.2-315 Base Zone Development Standards
Response: As shown on sheets PO -05 and PO -06 within the Preliminary Plans, a zone map
amendment from MUC to CC District affects the southern portion of the site (i.e.
Commercial Phase and Church Phase). The base zone development standards listed
above, including setbacks and landscaping standards, will be reviewed for compliance at
a future site design review. Approval of this application does not interfere with
compliance with applicable provisions, conditions, or goals intended from the modified
final master plan. The subject lots meets the minimum area and street frontage
AVO Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 24
Development Standard
CC
Minimum Area
6,000 square feet
Minimum Street From e 1
50 feet
Ali Panhandle Lots/Parcels Minimum Street
40 feet
Frontage
Maximum Lot/Parcel Coverage
Lot/parcel coverage limited only by
standards in other Sections ofthis code.
Minimum Landscaping
Minimum requirements defined by
standards in other Sections ofthis Code.
Maximum Parking, loading, and vehicular
Lot/parcel coverage limited only by
circulation area coverage
I standards in other Sections ofthis code.
Landscaped Setbacks (2)(3)(4) and 5
Finny Street Side Yard, and Through Lot Rear Yard
Building Setback
10 feet
Parking, driveway, and outdoor storage
5 feet
setback
Interior Side, Rear Yard Setbacks, when Abutting Residential or CI districts
Building Setback
10 feet
Parking, driveway, outdoor storage setback
5 feet
Maximum Building Height 6
No maximum, except asspecified below
When abutting an LDR orMDR District to
Defined by the Maximum Shade Point
the north
Height requirement ofSeedon3.2-225A.1.b.,
r up to 50 feet south ofa northern lot/parcel
fine a plane extending south with an angle of
23 degrees and originating from the top of a
16 foot hypothetical fence located on the
northern lot/parcel fine.
When abutting an LDR or MDR District to
No greater than that permitted in the LDR or
the east, wxsy or south
MDR Districts for a distance of 50 feet.
(1) The Dream. may .pave the .equ6emem that buildable Cary lotr/pamelc have 6onmge on a public
street when all of the folio o:ng apply:
(a) Th.Imc/pamelc have been approved a. part ofaDevelopen.mAre. Mon, Sit. Plan,
Subd:v:c:on or Partition application, and
(b) Access has been guaranteed via a pdwte sneer or driveway by an irrevocable joint use/access
agreement as specified in Section 4.2-120A.
(2) There are no setback requirements for buildings in the Duvcumwn Exception Area.
(3) Where an easement is larger than the required setback standard, no budding or above grade
structure, except a fence, shall be built upon or over that .... meet.
(4) When addaonal righo-oGway:c eeguieed, whether by C:ry Errg:nee.:rrg manda.dc, rheMmo Plan
(including the TransPlau), or the Gly's Conceptual Sneer Plan, setbacks are based on future right -f -
way locations. Right-of-.vey shall be dedicated prior to the issuance of any building permit har
ircera.e.required parking.
(5)Architectural extensions may protrude into any 5 -foot or larger setback area by not more than 2
f t.
6 luddernalequipment ma exceed these height standards.
Response: As shown on sheets PO -05 and PO -06 within the Preliminary Plans, a zone map
amendment from MUC to CC District affects the southern portion of the site (i.e.
Commercial Phase and Church Phase). The base zone development standards listed
above, including setbacks and landscaping standards, will be reviewed for compliance at
a future site design review. Approval of this application does not interfere with
compliance with applicable provisions, conditions, or goals intended from the modified
final master plan. The subject lots meets the minimum area and street frontage
AVO Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 24
requirements of the CC Zoning District; therefore, the planned amendment meets the
most relevant criteria.
Furthermore, it is understood there are conditions of approval related to site access and
transportation improvements regarding the subject site (Church Phase). Please see the
TIS for further details.
3.2-705 Establishment of the Public Land and Open Space (PLO) District
A. Establishment of the PLO District includes the following categories:
1. Government uses, including public offices and facilities;
2. Educational uses, including high schools and colleges; and
3. Parks and open space uses including, pubficly owned metropolitan
and regional scale parks and publicly and privately owned golf
courses and cemeteries.
Response: As described in this written narrative, a portion of the Marcola Meadows Master Plan site
is planned for an educational facility. As such, this application involves a zone map
amendment from MUC to Public Land and Open Space (PLO) on the southern portion of
the subject site to implement a school.
B. The PLO District shall also be permitted on properties designated other than
Pubfic and Semi-Pubfic as specified in the Metro Plan, a refinement plan, or
plan district.
Response: As shown on the Preliminary Plans, this application involves a zone map amendment from
MUC to PLO on a portion of the subject site designated Commercial in the Metro Plan
Diagram. As stated above, the amendment is permitted.
3.2-710 Schedule of Use Categories
The following buildings and uses are permitted in this district as indicated subject to
the provisions, additional restrictions and exceptions specified in this Code.
'T" = PERMITTED USE subject to the standards of this Code.
"S"= SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS subject to special
locational and/or siting standards as specified in Section 4.7-100.
"D" = DISCRETIONARY USE subject to review and analysis under Type
DI procedure (Section 5.9-100) at the Planning Commission or
Hearings Official level.
SITE PLAN REVIEW SHALL BE REQUIRED, unless exempted elsewhere
in this Code.
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 25
P.ivaoe/Public Elementary S
and Middle Schools
Response: As noted above, educational facilities are permitted in this district subject to special
locational and/or siting standards as specified in 4.7-100. The criterion can be met.
3.2-715 Base Zone Development Standards
The following base zone development standards are established. The base zone
development standards of this Section and any other additional provisions,
restrictions, or exceptions specified in this Code shall apply.
Response: As shown on the Preliminary Plans, a zone map amendment from MUC to PLO District is
planned for the southern portion of the site intended for a school site. The base zone
development standards listed above (e.g. setbacks, lot coverage, landscaping, building
height, etc.) will be reviewed for compliance at future site design review. Approval of this
application does not interfere with compliance with applicable provisions, conditions, or
goals intended from the modified final master plan. There is no minimum lot/parcel size
in the PLO District; therefore, the subject lot affected by the planned amendment meets
the most relevant criteria.
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 26
Minimum Lot/parcel Size
Nove
Lot/parcel Coverage and Planting Standard
Parking, driveways and structures shall not
Geed 65 percent of the development area At
least 25 percent of the development area shall
be landscaped.
EXCEPTION: In the Downtown Exception
Area, there shall be no minimum lot coverage
standards and no minimum planted area,
except for parking lots 6.
Landscaped Setbacks 1 , (2), 3 and 4
Street Setback 15 feet 6
Residential Property Live
20 feet 6
Parking and Driveezery
5 feet
Maximum Building Height(5)
None, unless abutting residential dialect
PLO Dialect abuts Residential Dialect
When a PLO District abuts a residential
district, the maximum building height shall
be defined as the height standard of the
applicable residential district for a distance of
50 feet measured from the boundary ofthe
adjacent residential zoning district Beyond
the 50 -foot rneasurcrneny there is no building
he' htfirnitation.
(1) Where an eaeemem s large. rhea the required setback maada.d, ao build:og o. above grade
structure, except a fence, shall be boat upon or owl that easement.
(2) Whea addaonal .:gho-of-way s eeguieed, sshethe. by Cay Hag:aeeeag cmada.dq the Metro Mea
(including T.ansPlaub or the City's Conceptual Sneer Plan, setbacks are based on future right-alsray
locations. Dedication ofaeeded eight -f -.my shall be required prior to the issuance of any building
permit that iac.eases palma. or..... poor area.
(3) Structural extensions may extend into any 5 -foot or larger setback area by not more than 2 feet.
(4) In the Dorantoran Exception Area, there are no minimum setbacks for administrative offices and
other public uses listed under Section 3.2-710.
(5) Incidents] equipment may exceed the height standards.
(6) In the Dorantoran Exception A.ea, there shall be no minimum planted area except for parking lots
as specified .]wash... is this Code
Response: As shown on the Preliminary Plans, a zone map amendment from MUC to PLO District is
planned for the southern portion of the site intended for a school site. The base zone
development standards listed above (e.g. setbacks, lot coverage, landscaping, building
height, etc.) will be reviewed for compliance at future site design review. Approval of this
application does not interfere with compliance with applicable provisions, conditions, or
goals intended from the modified final master plan. There is no minimum lot/parcel size
in the PLO District; therefore, the subject lot affected by the planned amendment meets
the most relevant criteria.
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 26
Section 3.3-1000 Nodal Development Overlay District
3.3-1005 Purpose, Applicability and Review
A. Purpose. The Nodal Development (ND) Overlay District is established to
work in conjunction with underlying zoning districts to implement
transportation related land use policies found in TransPlan and in the Metro
Plan. The ND Overlay District also supports "pedestrian -friendly, mixed-use
development' as outlined in the Stare Transportation Planning Rule.
Design standards for the NO Overlay District are structured to foster the
essential characteristics ofpedestrian-friendly, human scale developmentthat
define "nodal development" These include:
1. Design elements that support pedestrian environments and
encourage transit use, walking and bicycling;
2. Transit access within walking distance (generally 1/4 .vile) of
anywhere in the node;
3. Mixed uses and a core commercial area so that services are available
within walling distance;
4. Public spaces, including parks, public and private open space, and
public Facilities that can be reached without driving; and
5. A mix of housing types and residential densities that achieve an
overall net density ofat least 12 units per acre.
It is important to note that the Nodal Development Overlay District works
using the design and development standards found in Section 3.2600Mixed-
Use Districts, as a basis for achieving pedestrian -friendly design. The overlay
district is needed to add those special standards and prohibitions that help
define a nodal development area under TransPlan.
Response: As shown on the Preliminary Plans, approximately±81 acres of the site is designated with
the Nodal Development (ND) Overlay (illustrated on Figure 2, below). This master plan
modification involves a Metro Plan Diagram Amendment from Commercial to MDR
Designation, affecting ±22.45 acres of the subject site. In addition, the planned Zoning
Map Amendments (to MDR, PLO, and CC Zoning Districts) provide for multi -family homes,
a school, and church site.
After removal of a portion of the Commercial Designation, there is ±10 acres of ND
Overlay remaining in the existing commercially designated acreage ofthesite and the rest
of the ND area would apply to residentially designated land (MDR Metro Designation;
MDR Zoning District). The area remaining Commercial on the Metro Plan Diagram is
intended for educational and public uses as described above and is planned to be
amended with respective City zoning districts.
Therefore, standards structured to foster the character of a Nodal Development node
such as "an overall net density of at least 12 units per acre' and required "mixed uses and
a core commercial area' are not conducive to the subject area. These sites provide a need
in the community and will be designed with open space, landscaping, public facilities, etc.
to facilitate many of the design elements listed above which support pedestrian
environments. However, the intent of the ND Overlay as described above is not
achievable throughout the Marcola Meadows Master Plan site.
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 27
Figure 2: Existing Metro Plan Diagram Designations
Furthermore, more than 50 percent of the site was commercial in the original Marcola
Meadows design and now residential land predominantly characterizes the site. As stated
above, the ND area is established to work in conjunction with underlying zoning districts
to support, "pedestrian -friendly, mixed-use development' and other specific standards
found in Section 3.2-600 Mixed -Use Districts. Those standards would no longer apply to
any of the master plan site as the site is amended to MDR, PLO, and CC Districts (e.g.
future zoning designations are associated with a Residential or Commercial Base Zoning
District and not a Mixed -Use Base Zoning District).
With that said, the purpose of the ND Overlay District is not implemented as intended.
The design characteristics listed in Section 3.3-1005, above, are affiliated with a mixed-
use and a core commercial area to encourage transit access and use within walking
distance to anywhere in the node. Therefore, because the Metro Plan Diagram
Amendment included in this application removes the Commercial Designation from a
considerable amount of the site, the ND Overlay District becomes superfluous in an area
significantly characterized as residential.
Further, Section 3.3-1015 states the location/boundaries of an ND area shall be applied
to the mixed-use centers or "nodes' and have near its center a commercial or
employment core area. Those locational standards are not suitable or consistent with the
planned modifications to the Marcola Meadows Final Master Plan. Therefore, the ND
Overlay is planned to be removed from the site, and the remainder of the section is
addressed for further demonstration that the design standards cause unreasonable cost
and delay, and the compatibility standards are not clear and objective.
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 28
s
Furthermore, more than 50 percent of the site was commercial in the original Marcola
Meadows design and now residential land predominantly characterizes the site. As stated
above, the ND area is established to work in conjunction with underlying zoning districts
to support, "pedestrian -friendly, mixed-use development' and other specific standards
found in Section 3.2-600 Mixed -Use Districts. Those standards would no longer apply to
any of the master plan site as the site is amended to MDR, PLO, and CC Districts (e.g.
future zoning designations are associated with a Residential or Commercial Base Zoning
District and not a Mixed -Use Base Zoning District).
With that said, the purpose of the ND Overlay District is not implemented as intended.
The design characteristics listed in Section 3.3-1005, above, are affiliated with a mixed-
use and a core commercial area to encourage transit access and use within walking
distance to anywhere in the node. Therefore, because the Metro Plan Diagram
Amendment included in this application removes the Commercial Designation from a
considerable amount of the site, the ND Overlay District becomes superfluous in an area
significantly characterized as residential.
Further, Section 3.3-1015 states the location/boundaries of an ND area shall be applied
to the mixed-use centers or "nodes' and have near its center a commercial or
employment core area. Those locational standards are not suitable or consistent with the
planned modifications to the Marcola Meadows Final Master Plan. Therefore, the ND
Overlay is planned to be removed from the site, and the remainder of the section is
addressed for further demonstration that the design standards cause unreasonable cost
and delay, and the compatibility standards are not clear and objective.
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 28
B. Applicability. The NO Overlay District applies m all property where NO
Overlay is indicated on the Springfield Nodal Overlay Map, unless the
property is an historic property as specified in Section 3.3-900. The NO
Overlay District requirements described in this Section apply to the following:
1. New development on vacant land.
2. New structures on already developed sites, including the conversion
of a parking area to a structure or detmohdon of a structure and
construction of a new structure.
3. An expansion of 50 percent or more of the total existing building
square footage on the development site.
4. The ND Overlay standards in this Section do not apply to a building
alteration.
5. Single-family dwelling units for which building permits were filed
prior to the designation of an area for nodal development are exempt
from Section 5.8-120 and from the standards of this Section for the
purposes of reconstruction if the dwelling unit is partially or
completely destroyed or ifthe dwelling undergoes renovation. Room
additions or other expansions typical ofa single-family use shall also
be allowed.
Response: The Marcola Meadows Master Plan site establishes design elements for new
development on vacant land. Upon approval of the Metro Plan Diagram Amendment and
Zoning Map Amendments included in this application, the ND Overlay will no longer apply
to the property. The following narrative demonstrates the standards of Section 3.3 cause
unreasonable cost and delay, and the compatibility standards are not clear and objective.
3.3-1010 Permitted and Prohibited Uses
A. Permitted Uses. The table below chows the schedule of allowed uses within
each base one. With some exceptions, the activities allowed within the base
.one are also allowed within the NO Overlay District. The NO Overlay
District adds the flexibility ofmixing compatible uses on a given site. Mixed-
use development is encouraged within the NO Overlay District. Certain aum
oriented uses listed in Subsection B. below, are prohibited within the NO
Overlay District.
B. Prohibited Uses.
1. Car washes.
2. Auto Parts stores.
3. Recreational vehicle and heavy truck sales/rental/service.
4. Motor vehicle sales/rental/service.
5. Service stations, including quick servicing.
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 29
6. Tires, sales/service.
7. Transit park and ride, major or minor.
EXCEPTION: Where there is a shared parking arrangement witch another
permitted use.
8. Agricultural machinery rental/sales/service.
9. Boars and watercraft sales and service.
10. Equipment' heavy, rental/sales/service.
it. Manufactured dwelling sales/service/repair.
Response: As noted above, mixed-use development is encouraged within the ND Overlay District.
However, upon approval of the Zoning Map Amendments involved in this application,
there will be no land designated MUC District. In addition to the School and Church
Phases, the Commercial Phase is intended for a convenience store and gas station
(depicted with a star in Figure 3, below). Per Section 3.3-1010, the ND Overlay prohibits
certain auto -oriented uses, presumably to encourage multi -modal transportation and
pedestrian centered development to achieve compatible uses in a mixed-use corridor.
However, with the reconsideration of land uses on this property, the planned uses forthe
Commercial Phase will be suitable to the area.
Figure 3: Planned Metro Plan Diagram Designations
A local convenience store and service station is envisioned to cater to local residents and
provide employment opportunities. Additionally, both uses are permitted outright in the
CC District. As such, the prohibited uses listed above impose undue hardship because the
compatibility standards are not clear and objective without a true "mixed-use corridor'
to be consistent with. Therefore, the ND overlay is planned to be removed from the site.
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 30
0
I
as
A local convenience store and service station is envisioned to cater to local residents and
provide employment opportunities. Additionally, both uses are permitted outright in the
CC District. As such, the prohibited uses listed above impose undue hardship because the
compatibility standards are not clear and objective without a true "mixed-use corridor'
to be consistent with. Therefore, the ND overlay is planned to be removed from the site.
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 30
3.3-1015 Location Standards
When establishing the location and boundaries ofa ND Overlay District, the following
criteria shall be considered:
A. The ND Overlay District shall be applied to the mixed-use centers or "nodes"
identified by the City in response to its responsibility under TmnsPlan.
B. AR parcels included within a ND Overlay District shall be located within 1/4
mile of a transit stop, and shall have near its center a commercial or
employment core area.
Response: Section 3.3-1015 states the location/boundaries of an ND area shall be applied to the
mixed-use centers or "nodes' and have near the ND area's center a commercial or
employment core area. The planned updates to the Metro Map Plan Diagram amend a
significant portion of the existing Commercial Designation onsite to MDR Designation
(shown in Figures 2 and 3). The planned updates to the Springfield Zoning Map amend all
of the MUC District to MDR, PLO, and CC Districts.
The location previously identified in the Metro Plan for the subject node is not consistent
with a "core area' as required above. Therefore, the locational standards described above
are subjective and are not suitable or consistent with the planned modifications to the
site. The area previously selected as a potential mixed-use center or "node" is currently
sitting vacant and the modifications involved in this application will provide necessary
connectivity and improvements to the community. As such, the ND Overlay is planned to
be removed from the site.
3.3-1020 Minimum Density and General Development Standards
The General Development Standards for Mixed -Use described in Section 3.2625
describe the pedestrian-Mendly and transit oriented design standards that apply to
mixed use and nodal development. These standards apply to development within the
NID Overlay District. In addition to those standards found in Section 3.2625, the
following apply:
Response: As stated in the narrative response above, upon approval of this application the subject
site will not contain land designated in the Mixed -Use Base District (e.g. Mixed -Use
Commercial, Employment, or Residential Zoning Districts). Therefore, the standards
found in Section 3.2-625 —'Mixed -Use District Development Standards — General' should
not be applied.
A. Minimum Density and FloorArra Ratio (FAR).
FAR .means the amount ofgmss floor area of all buildings and structures on
a building lot/parcel divided by the total lot/parcel area. A 2 story building
that covers 50 percent of a lot/parcel would have a FAR of 1.0. Typical
suburban FARs range from 0.3 to 1.0 in mixed-use centers.
1. Where the base one is UDR, new subdivisions shall achieve a
residential density of 6 units per net acre. Minimum
residential ntial density in MDR or MUR shall be 12 units per net acre; in
HDR it shall be 25 units per net acre. The combined net residential
density avithin a node or mixed-use center shall be 12 units per acre
or more.
Response: The minimum residential density required in the MDR District is achieved as shown on
the Preliminary Plans. Additionally, there is no land designated HDR District on the
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 31
property. The standard above can be met, though there is not a mixed-use center located
on the site.
Where the brae zone is NC, CC, MRC, MUC, or GO, the minimum
floor area ratio (FAR) is .40.
Response: As shown on the Preliminary Plans, the Church Phase and Commercial Phase are both
designated CC District. As such, the minimum .40 minimum FAR above would be relevant
(and would be reviewed for compliance at time of future site design review) for sites
within the ND Overlay. As demonstrated in this written narrative, the ND Overlay is
planned to be removed from the site. Therefore, the standards of this section are not
applicable.
Where the base our is IAII, CI or MUE, the minimum FAR is 0.25.
Response: The subject site does not contain land with the above zoning district designations.
B. Building Setback..
Buildings occupied by commercial and industrial uses shall be set
back a maximum of 20 feet from the street There is no .minimum
setback from the street for commercial and industrial uses.
Residential uses shall be set back a maximum 25 feet from the street.
Where the site is adjacent to more duan 1 street, a building is required
to meet the above maximum setback standards on only 1 of the
streets.
C. parking Between Buildings and the Street.
Automobile parking, driving, and .maneuvering areas shall not be
located between the main building and a street
For cites that abut a street, parking shall be located at the rear ofthe
building or on one or both aides ofa buadingwhen atleast40 percent
of the site frontage abutting the street (excluding required interior
yards) is occupied by a building and/or an enhanced pedestrian
apace.
Response: As shown on the Preliminary Plans, there is adequate building envelope to implement the
setbacks described above. The above requirements are understood (and would be
reviewed at time of future site design review) for sites within the ND Overlay. As
demonstrated in this written narrative, the ND Overlay is planned to be removed from
the site. Therefore, the standards of this section are not applicable.
3.3-1025 Specific Design Standards
A. Specific Development Standards for Single -Family and Mnld-unit Residential
Uses.
1. Detached Single -Family, Two -unit Attached Single -Family, and
Duplexes
a. Building Orientation and Connectivity to the Fronting Street
Dwelling units shall have a front door opening directly to the
fronting street. A minimum 3 -foot wide walkway shafl
connect the front door to the street The walkway shafl be
constructed of a permanent hard surface (not gravel) and
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 32
located directly between the street sidewalk and the front
door. This walkway shall not be part of the driveway area.
Garage Doors. Garage door placement and design shall
meet the following conditions:
n. Garage door openings Facing a fronting street shall
not exceed 40 percent of the width of the house
Facade.
nn. The garage Facade shall be set back a minimum of
4 feet from the house Facade. The minimum setback
of the garage facade is reduced to 0 feet -if the house
Facade has a porch, 50 square feet or more in size,
encroaching into the setback.
Windows. A minimum area of IS percent windows and/or
dwelling doors shall be required on Facades Facing fronting
streers, sidewalks, and multi -use paths (including garage
Facades). Gabled areas do entered to beincludedin the base
wall calculation when determining the .minimum 15 percent
calculation for windows/doors.
Design Variety. Each honer shall incorporate a minimum of
3 of the following 7 building design features. Applicants
shall indicate which options they are proposing on plans
submitted for building permits. While not all of the design
features are expressly required, the inclusion of as many as
possible is strongly encouraged.
Response: The specific design standards of Section 3.3-1025 for new homes add significant cost to
development and preclude most forms of housing on lots designed for single-family
homes. The concept of the ND Overlay is to facilitate pedestrian scale development when
more than 50 percent of a site is commercially oriented, in order to create a "non-
autocentric" community. In this case, the predominant use of the site is now residential.
Most the provisions above, especially those related to garage door openings and
setbacks, restrict home design without achieving the purpose of the ND Overlay defined
in Section 3.3-1005, above. It is explicitly stated the ND Overlay works in conjunction with
Mixed Use Districts and therefore should not be applicable to this site.
Compatibility. New detached single -Family, two -unit
attached single -Family, and duplexes constructed within the
ND Overlay District shall be generally compatible with
existing homes. The goal is to reduce the impact of new
development on established neighborhoods by
incorporating elements of nearby, quality buildings,
including building details, massing, proportions, and
materials. To foster compatible residential development at
the higher densities sought by this Section, the following
standards apply.
n. Front Yard Setbacks for Buildings in Established
Residential Areas. When an existing single -Family
residence is located within 25 feet of the subject site
and fronts on the same street as a proposed
building, a front yard setback similar to that of the
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 33
rest single -Family residence shall be used.
nearest
means the setback is within 5 feet of the
setback of the nearest single -Family residence. For
ample, if the existing single-family residence has
a frontyard setback of20 feet, then the newbuilding
shall have a front yard setback between 15 and 25
feet If there are 2 adjacent single -Family residences
fronting on the same
street, then a average
e. ent shall betaken using the 2 adjacent
residences. In no case shall the front yard setback
be less than 10 feet This standard shall not cause a
front yard setback to exceed 25 feet
Building Height Transition. Taller buildings shall
step-down to provide a height transition to existing
single story buildings. This standard applies to new
and vertically expanded buildings within 25 feet (as
measured horizontally) of an existing single story
building. The standard is met when the height of
the caller building or portion of the taller building
does not exceed the height of the shorter building
by more than 5 feet within the 25 -foot horizontal
zone. This horizontal zone is called the height
transition zone.
When the owner of an existing single story home
also owns an adjacent vacant lot/parcel, the height
transition zone between the vacantlot/parcel and a
new Wler building shall be 15 feetas measured from
the property line between the vacant lot/parcel and
the new building.
u.. Massing and Scale. The scale, proportions, .passing
and detailing of any proposed building shall be in
proportion to that of the block face where the
building will be located. Proposed new low density
residential development in the ND Overlay District
shall comply with the design guidelines shown inA
through C below.
as. Scale. Relate the size and proportions of
w structures to the scale of adjacent
buildings. Avoid buildings that in height,
width, or massing, violate the existing
scale ofthe area.
bb. Massing. Break up uninteresting boxlike
forms into smaller, varied .passes. Avoid
single monolithic forms that are not
relieved by variations in massing.
iv. RoofShapes. Relate new roof forms to those found
n the area. Avoid roof shapes, directional
orientation, pitches, or materials that would cause
the building to be out of character with quality
buildings in the area.
AVO Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 34
Response: The compatibility standards for new homes constructed in the ND Overlay District are not
clear and objective. This standard may not be applied under ORS 197.307(4) because the
phrase "generally compatible' is subjective. Additionally, this standard may not be
applied under ORS 197.307(4) because the phrases "nearby" and "quality' are subjective.
Multi -unit Residential Uses (including, but not fimimd to: attached
single -Family dwxlfings 3 units or greater, town -homes, row -houses,
triplexes, 4-plexes, apartments.
Multi -unit residential dwellings shall comply with the design
standards specified in Section 3.2-240 and Section 3.2625C.
Response: As stated in section 3.2-240, multi -unit development in all residential districts must
comply with the applicable provisions at time of site design review. As such, the Multi -
Family Phase will be reviewed for compliance with the applicable standards at time of
future site design review.
B. Specific Development Standards for Commercial, Industrial, and Mixed -
Uses.
Specific development standards for commercial, industrial and mixed -uses
within the ND Overlay District shall conform to those standards specified in
Section 3.2630.
1. Commercial and Civic Uses. Commercial uses shall comply with the
special development standards specified in Section 3.2630A.
2. Light Industrial and Campus Industrial uses. Industrial uses shall
comply with the development standards specified in Section 3.2-
630B.
3. Mixed -Uses. For mixed use developments, the dominant use of the
building or development (dominantis defined as the use represented
by the greatest Boor area) shall determine the applicable
development standards. If the dominant use is residential, the
applicable Subsection Section of 3.3-1025 Development Standards
For Single -Family And Multi -unit Residential Uses apply. If the
dominant use is commercial, Section 3.3-1025A. Development
Standards for Commercial and Civic Uses apply. Ifthe dominant use
is industrial, Section 3.3.105B. Development Standards for Light
Industrial and Special LightIndustrial Uses apply.
Response: The planned commercial and civic uses on site comply with the standards of section 3.2-
630A. Though the provisions specifically apply to Mixed Use Commercial development,
100 percent of the building footprint can be utilized for commercial use and does not
require mixed residential development. Therefore, the application complies with the
criteria above.
CHAPTER 5 THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS AND APPLICATIONS
Section 5.2-100 Pubfic Hearings Process
5.2-110 Hearing Body Jurisdiction
A. The Planning Commission shall hear:
Type II review procedure administrative appeals within the city
limits;
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 35
2. Type III review procedure quasi-judicial applications within the city
limits;
3. Type IV review procedure legislative applications that require a
recommendation to the City Council; and
4. Appeals as may be assigned by the City Council.
B. The Hearings Official shall hear:
1. Type II review procedure administrative appeals within the
City's urbanizable area and appeals of all expedited land division
actions as defined in ORS 197.360;
2. Type III review procedure quasi-judicial applications within the
City's urbanizable area; and
3. Appeals as may be assigned by the City Council.
C. The City Council shall hear:
1. Type III review procedure quasi-judicial appeals within the city
limits; and
2. Type IV review procedure legislative applications final decisions.
Response: This application involves a Metro Plan Diagram Amendment,Zone Map Amendments, and
Modifications to the Final Master Plan. It is understood the application will be processed
through a Type IV review procedure.
Section 5.14-100 Metro Plan Amendments
5.14-110 Review
A. A Development Issues Meeting is encouraged for citizen initiated
amendment applications.
Response: The Applicant met with the City Staff on March 11, 2020 to discuss the modifications
involved in this application, including the Metro Plan Amendment.
B. Metro Plan amendments are reviewed under Type IV procedures as specified
in Section 5.1-140.
Response: This application should be reviewed under Type IV procedure as specified in Section 5.1-
140.
5.14-115 Metro Plan Amendment Classifications
A proposed amendment to the Metro Plan shall be classified as Type I, Type II or
Type III depending upon the number of governing bodies (Springfield, Eugene and
Lane County) required to approve the decision.
A. A Type I amendment requires approval by Springfield only:
1. TypeI Diagram amendments include amendments to the Metro Plan
Diagram for land inside Springfield's city limits.
Response: The subject property is currently within Springfield's city limits. Therefore, this application
is a Type 1 Diagram Amendment and requires approval by Springfield only.
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 36
5.14-135 Criteria
A Metro Plan amendment may be approved only if the Springfield City Council and
other applicable governing body or bodies find that the proposal conforms to the
following criteria:
A. The amendment shall be consistent with applicable Statewide Planning
Goals; and
Response: As described in this written document, the Metro Plan Amendment is in compliance with
the applicable Oregon Statewide Planning Goals. The criteria are met.
B. Plan inconsistency:
1. In those cases where the Metro Plan applies, adoption of the
amendment shall not make the Metro Plan internally inconsistent
Response: As shown on the Preliminary Plans, the planned Metro Plan Diagram amendment will
impact and amend the designation of a single property in Springfield. The amendment
will not create an internal inconsistency or conflict with the remainder of the Metro Plan.
In cases where Springfield Comprehensive Plan applies, the
amendment shall be consistent with the Springfield Comprehensive
Plan.
Response: This Metro Plan Diagram Amendment shifts an underutilized portion of the Marcola
Meadows site designated with MUC District to a new MDR District designation. The Metro
Plan Diagram amendment is consistent with the Springfield 2030 Comprehensive Plan
goals and policies as demonstrated in this written document.
Therefore, the Metro Plan Diagram amendment is consistent with the approval criterion
of Section 5.14-135 and should be approved.
Section 5.22-100 Zoning Map Amendments
5.22-105 Purpose
The purpose of this Section is to provide standards and procedures for legislative and
quasi-judicial amendments to the Official Zoning Maps.
5.22-110 Review
Official Zoning Map amendments may be initiated by the Director, the Planning
Commission, the Hearings Official, the City Council or a citizen. Zoning Map
amendments shall be reviewed as follows:
Response: This application is initiated by the property owner of the subject site.
B. Quasi-judicial Zoning Map amendments involve the application of evsdng
policy to a specific factual setting, generally affecting a single or limired group
of properties and may or may not include a Metro Plan Diagram Amendment.
Quasi-judicial Zoning Map amendments are reviewed using Type III
procedure, unless aMetro Plan Diagram Amendment is required. In this case,
the Quasi-judicial Zoning Map amendment will be raised to a Type I V review.
Response: This application involves amendments to the Springfield Zoning Map and a Metro Plan
Diagram Amendment. Therefore, the application should be reviewed using a Type IV
procedure.
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 37
5.22-115 Criteria
A. Quasijudicial Zoning Map Amendments. The Planning Commission o
Hearings Official may approve, approve with conditions or deny a quasi-
judicial Zoning Map amendment based upon approval criteria C.I. through
3., below. The Planning Commission m Hearings Official shall make the final
local decision on all quasi-judicial Zoning map amendments that do not
include a Metro Plan Diagram Amendment.
B. Legislative Zoning Map Amendments and Quasi-judicial Zoning Map
Amendments Raised to a Type IV Review. The Planning Commission o
Hearings Official may make a recommendation to the City Council to
approve, approve with conditions or deny Zoning Map amendments and
Metro Plan Diagram Amendments based upon approval criteria in Subsection
C. 1. through 4., below. The City Council shall .hake the final local decision
n all Zoning Map amendments involving a Metro Plan Diagram
Amendment
Response: This written document, the Preliminary Plans, and supporting documentation
demonstrate compliance with the approval criteria in Subsection C.I.A. below. It is
understood the Planning Commission or Hearings Officer will make a recommendation to
the City Council as described above and the City Council shall make the final local decision
on this application as it involves a Metro Plan Diagram Amendment.
C. Zoning Map amendment criteria ofapproval:
Consistency with applicable Metro Plan policies and the Metro Plan
diagram;
Response: This application involves amendments to the Springfield Zoning Map and a Metro Plan
Diagram Amendment; as such, planned zoning updates must be consistent with the
intended Metro Plan Amendment.
Upon approval of amendment of the Metro Plan Diagram initiated by this application,
±22.45 acres of the Marcola Meadows Master Plan site will be designated MDR. The
planned Master Plan Diagram designation and amended zoning (to MDR, PLOS, and CC)
is consistent with the adopted Metro Plan policies and diagram. As such, it is understood
that prior to the approval of the Zoning Map Amendments, the Metro Plan Diagram
designation of the property shall be approved/amended as initiated by this application.
The approval criterion can be satisfied.
Consistency with applicable Refinement Plans, Plan District maps,
Conceptual Development Plans and functions] plans; and
Response: This written document demonstrates compliance with the applicable Plan District maps
and provisions of the SDC. The site is not associated with a Refinement Plan or Conceptual
Development Plan. The approval criterion is satisfied.
The property is presently provided with adequate public Facilities,
services and transportation networks to support the use, or these
frcifides, services and transportation networks are planned to be
provided concurrently with the development of the property.
Response: As shown on the Preliminary Plans, public facilities will be provided to serve the site,
including but not limited to stormwater management, sanitary sewer, municipal water,
and franchise utilities. The site is planned to be served by a comprehensive street network
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 38
that includes new public roadways and improvements. Infrastructure is planned to be
completed concurrent with the build out of each associated phase. The approval criterion
is met.
Legislative Zoning Map amendments that involve a Metro Plan
Diagram Amendment shall:
a. Meet the approval criteria specified in Section 5.14-100; and
b. Comply with Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-012-
0060, where applicable.
Response: The criteria above are not applicable. As noted above, this application includes a Quasi-
judicial Zoning Map Amendment and involves a Metro Plan Diagram Amendment.
Nonetheless, this written narrative demonstrates compliance with Section 5.14-100 and
the TPR.
5.22-120 Conditions
The Approval Authority may atrach conditions as may be reasonably necessary in
order to allow the Zoning Map amendment to be granted.
Response: It is understood conditions may be imposed by the Approval Authority to allow approval
of the application.
IV. Conclusion
The required findings have been made and this written narrative and accompanying documentation
demonstrate that the application is consistent with the applicable provisions of the City of Springfield
Development Code and Eugene -Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan. The evidence in the record
supports approval of the application and the City can rely upon it for its approval of the application.
AVC Marcola Meadows June 2020
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment— City of Springfield Page 39
City of Springfield
Development & Public Works
225 Filth Street
Springfield, OR 97477
Phone: (541) 726-3753
Fax: (541) 726-3689
Metro Plan Amendment
Type of Plan Amendment (Check One)
SPRINGFIELD
❑ Type C is a non -site specific amendment of the Plan.
Type II: changes the Plan diagram; or is a site-specific Plan text
Property Subject to the Amendment (if applicable)
Engineering & Forestry, LLC
55 SW Herman Road, Suite 100
atin, OR 97062
ie; (503)563-6151
Tax Assessor Map 17032511 / 17023000 Tax Lots) 2300 / 1800
Street Address No situs, northwest of Marcola Road and 31st Street Acres +/- 100 acres
Metro Plan DesignationMedium Density Residential, Refinement Plan Designation None
Commercial, and Nodal Development (ND) Overlay Area
Description of Proposed Amendment (Attach additional sheets if needed)
Please see the narrative documentwithin the application materials tordetailed information. The project invelves a
Metro Plan Diagram Amendment from Commercial to Medium Density Residential designation on an approximately
22.45 -acre portion of the site and includes removal of the Nodal Development (ND) Oveday Area from the Marcola
Meadows Master Plan subiect site.
Applicant/Owner Information
Applicant's Consultant: Chris Goodell; AKS Engineering & Forestry, LLC
Printed Name of Applicant Marcola Meadows Neighborhood,_ LLC -- Phone: (503) 563-6151
Applicant Signature
Mailing Address 12965 SW Herman Avenue, Suite 100, Tualatin OR 97062
Property Owner Sibmature Date JWi- !at o2f1 ad
Mailing Address 95505E Clackamas Road, Clackamas, OR 97015
For Office Use Only:
Case No. Received By
Date Accepted as Complete