HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 01 Development Code Update Project status_3_15_21_CC_WS_AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: 3/15/2021
Meeting Type:Work Session
Staff Contact/Dept.:Mark Rust
Staff Phone No:541-726-3654
Estimated Time: 50 Minutes
S P R I N G F I E L D
C I T Y C O U N C I L
Council Goals: Encourage Economic
Development and
Revitalization through
Community Partnerships
ITEM TITLE: DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE PROJECT – QUARTERLY CHECK IN
ACTION
REQUESTED:
This meeting is an opportunity for staff to provide the Council an update on the
project status and for the Council to ask questions, provide input, and give feedback
on the Development Code Update Project process. Staff would like input on if the
Council would like to review the draft code sections prior to releasing them for
public review and comment. Or is the Council comfortable with staff reviewing the
draft codes sections with the Governance Committee prior to releasing for public
review.
ISSUE
STATEMENT:
Staff will give the City Council an update on the Development Code Update Project.
The Purpose of the Development Code Update Project is to change the Springfield
Development Code to support efficient, timely, and clear development review. The
updated Development Code will support Springfield’s economic development
priorities and will honor Springfield’s hometown feel now and in the future.
ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1: Council Briefing Memo
Attachment 2: Presentation slides
Attachment 3: Spectrum of options for Siting and Design Standards
Attachment 4: Development Code Update Project Schedule (3/16/21)
DISCUSSION/
FINANCIAL
IMPACT:
Background
Staff last presented to the City Council on this project on October 5, 2020. At this
meeting staff gave the Council an update on the progress of both Phase 1, Housing,
and Phase 2, Employment Lands of the Development Code Update Project. A
Communication memo was sent to Council on January 5, 2021 summarizing the final
rule making adoption for middle housing that directly impacts the Phase 1 Housing
portion of the Development Code Update Project.
Discussion
Staff reengaged with the Housing Technical Advisory Committee for the Housing
phase of the project. Staff, together with the feedback from the Housing Technical
Advisory Committee, has revised the draft housing code sections to be in
conformance with the new state middle housing rules and is working to finalize the
code sections for public review. Staff plans to release these draft code sections for
public review in June 2021.
Staff is working on the code revisions for the Phase 2, Employment Lands, of the
Development Code Update Project. Staff is working with other city staff and the
appointed Employment Lands Technical Advisory Committee on draft employment
lands code sections that will also be ready for public release in June 2021.
Next Steps
Staff will continue making progress on the Development Code Update Project and
anticipates releasing draft public review sections of the code in June 2021. The next
regularly planned quarterly check in with Council is planned for June 2021.
M E M O R A N D U M City of Springfield
Date: 3/15/2021
To: Nancy Newton, City Manager COUNCIL
From: Tom Boyatt, Community Development Director
Mark Rust, Senior Planner
BRIEFING
MEMORANDUM
Subject: Development Code Update Project–Quarterly Check In
ISSUE
Staff will give the City Council an update on the Development Code Update Project.
The Purpose of the Development Code Update Project is to change the Springfield Development
Code to support efficient, timely, and clear development review. The updated Development
Code will support Springfield’s economic development priorities and will honor Springfield’s
hometown feel now and in the future.
COUNCIL GOALS/
MANDATE
Encourage Economic Development and Revitalization through Community Partnerships
BACKGROUND
Staff last presented to the City Council on this project on October 5, 2020. At this meeting staff
gave the Council an update on the progress of both Phase 1, Housing, and Phase 2, Employment
Lands, of the Development Code Update Project. A communication memo was sent to Council
on January 5, 2021 summarizing the final rule making adoption for middle housing that directly
impacts the Phase 1 Housing portion of the Development Code Update Project.
Staff has continued to meet with the Housing Technical Advisory Committee and the
Employment Lands Technical Advisory Committee. Additionally, staff met with the
Governance Committee on January 20, 2021 to get feedback and direction on how to ensure the
development code amendments would be consistent with the Springfield Comprehensive Plan.
The issue of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan was discussed in the January 5, 2021
communication memo to the Council including a flowchart specifying different options for
addressing the consistency question. The direction received from the Governance Committee,
which is the same as the input also received from the Housing Technical Advisory Committee
on this issue, is to proceed with adopting bridge language into the Comprehensive Plan in the
interim, until a comprehensive update to the Residential Land and Housing Element is
completed in the future.
DISCUSSION
Phase 1 – Housing code
The housing phase of the Development Code Update Project is nearing the public review draft
step. As you may recall we released a public review draft of housing code sections in February
of 2020. Since the adoption of the new Oregon Administrative Rules (OARs or rules)
implementing House Bill (HB) 2001 included provisions that were not anticipated when we
released the previous draft code, staff has revised the housing code to be in conformance with
the new OARs. Even though the draft rules are fairly prescriptive in detailing the manner in
which a city must implement the new middle housing legislation, there are some areas of
flexibility allowed. The main areas for local decisions around flexible implementation are
discussed below.
Attachment 1, Page 1 of 5
As discussed in more detail in the January 5, 2021 communication memo to Council, there are
two major options for cities in implementing the new adopted rules. A city can choose to adopt
the state Model Code or adopt their own regulations under the Minimum Compliance Standards.
The state Model Code is available for cities to adopt wholesale if a city doesn’t want to
or doesn’t have the capacity to go through the process of modifying/amending their
code to be in conformance with the Middle Housing regulations. The Model Code also
will be directly applied to a city if that city does not adopt its own code changes by June
30, 2022.
The Minimum Compliance Standards in the rules are fairly prescriptive and are
therefore likely to have a significant influence on the approach to middle housing
regulations. The Minimum Compliance Standards establish the standards that a city
must meet to be deemed compliant with the provisions of HB 2001. The standards
constitute the range of reasonable Siting and Design Standards that local governments
may adopt to regulate the development of middle housing. These standards are intended
to allow cities more flexibility than the standards included in the Model Code.
Density and lot size
One area of flexibility centers around lot sizes (or density) for triplexes and fourplexes. There
are two main paths to choose within the rules, the Minimum Compliance Standards and the
Model Code provisions.
The Minimum Compliance Standards allow a city to limit triplexes to 5000 square foot
lots and larger and fourplexes to 7000 square feet and larger. These are the largest lot
minimum sizes that a city can require.
The Model Code provisions do not have any limitation on minimum lot size for these
two middle housing types. Rather under the Model Code provisions triplexes and
fourplexes would be allowed on the same size lot that allows a detached single-family
home.
In discussions with the Housing Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) it was generally agreed
that Springfield should pursue implementing the minimum lot sizes as allowed in the Minimum
Compliance Standards. Staff intends to propose this option in the new public review draft code
while explaining that this is an area that flexibility could be provided.
One potential option for providing flexibility in the lot size, or density, is around affordable
housing. A “deeper affordability” option would allow a density bonus for a housing project if a
certain number of the units were committed to being provided at a defined affordability
threshold. An example might be that instead of being limited to a triplex or a fourplex, up to six
units could be allowed if half (or all) of the units were affordable to households earning nor
more than 60% of the area median income. This concept has not been fully vetted and could be
considered further through the public outreach step of the project.
Defining Housing Types (attached vs. detached)
A second area of flexibility in the rules is in how certain housing types are defined. The Model
Code requires duplex, triplex and fourplex units to be attached. The Minimum Compliance
Standards allow a city to define “plexes” to include detached units in addition to attached units.
Similarly, for the cottage cluster housing type the Model Code only allows multiple cottages on
one lot. But a city could choose to also allow each cottage being on their own lot (similar to our
current cluster subdivision provision). This option could provide additional opportunity for fee
simple ownership of a dwelling.
Attachment 1, Page 2 of 5
Staff will present some figures representing some potential different configurations illustrating
these differences in the presentation slides (Attachment 2).
Parking
Parking is a topic that generates a lot of input. The Minimum Compliance Standards specify a
maximum amount of parking that a city can require.
The Minimum Compliance Standards allow a city to require no more than 1 space per
unit for triplexes and fourplexes, or 3 total off-street spaces for a triplex and 4 total off-
street spaces for a fourplex.
In contrast the Model Code specifies that a total of only one off-street parking space is
required for a triplex or fourplex.
The OARs give a city the ability to allow for on street parking credits as well as reducing the
parking requirement to zero if desired. Based on the discussion with the TAC, staff has included
the maximum parking requirement, together with allowing on street parking credit that is
already allowed the development code. Staff anticipates that this will be a topic of debate
through the public outreach and hearing process.
Siting Standards and Design Standards
The OARs allow a city to require Siting Standards and Design Standards. Both terms are
defined in the rules.
Siting Standards relate to the position, bulk, and scale of the housing on the lot.
Examples include such things as setbacks, lot coverage standards, height, parking
requirements, utility standards, and access.
Design Standards relate to the arrangement, orientation, materials, appearance,
articulation, or aesthetics of the housing.
The standards allowed through the rules and Model Code are considered “safe harbor” rules that
meet the statutory test of not causing unreasonable cost or delay to permit middle housing.
For Siting Standards, the rules allow three options:
1. Require the standards provided in the rules or Model Code. The rules specify minimum
compliance provisions related to triplexes or fourplexes. For the other middle housings
types the Model Code is relied upon for the Siting Standards that are acceptable as not
causing unreasonable cost or delay.
2. Implement standards that are less restrictive than what is in the rules or Model Code.
3. Go through the Alternative process and make findings for each standard that is different
from what is in the rules or Model Code.
For Design Standards there are four options:
1. Require what is allowed in the Model Code.
2. Implement standards that are less restrictive than what is in the Model Code.
3. Use the same clear and objective standards that are applicable to detached single family
structures in the same zone.
4. Go through the Alternative process and make findings for each standard that is different
from what is in the Model Code.
Attachment 1, Page 3 of 5
Through consideration of the input from the TAC on these standards, staff in planning to include
a combination of the Minimum Compliance Standards and Model Code standards in the public
review draft code. Generally, the Siting Standards are proposed at the minimum compliance
standard level and the Design Standards are proposed at the Model Code level of standards. See
Attachment 3 for a table illustrating the spectrum of options for the Siting and Design Standards.
Alternative Siting or Design Standards Process
The alternative option for including additional Siting or Design Standards that are outside of the
safe harbor provisions specifically allowed by rule is to pursue the alternative standards process.
This process would include writings findings based on the established set of criteria in the rules
to justify to the state that the additional standards should be allowed and would not individually
or cumulatively cause unreasonable cost or delay to the development of Middle Housing. Staff
has not contemplated pursuing this option at this point. However, discussions around standards
such as solar setbacks may warrant further conversation and consideration of this option.
Phase 2 – Employment Lands (commercial and industrial) code
The Employment Lands Technical Advisory Committee for Phase 2 has convened four times
and will continue meeting to discuss new draft code for the employment lands chapters of the
Development Code. The Employment Lands phase of the project includes Site Plan Review,
Infrastructure Standards, and Development Standards that are also applicable to housing
development.
Planning staff is working integrally with other city staff on the infrastructure standards sections,
as well as the other sections. The infrastructure standards are proving to be technically complex
considering state law requirements for clear and objective standards for housing. Specifically
related to stormwater management there are competing requirements to meet state and federal
regulations that complicate the drafting of standards.
Phase 3 – Other Code Sections (“Everything else”)
Staff has not yet begun Phase 3 of the project. See the discussion below under the Timeline
heading below. When Phase 3 is initiated it will include many sections of Development Code
that are not being amended during Phases 1 and 2. Examples of some of the sections that have
been highlighted for needed updates include the following:
5.7-100 - Annexations
5.13-100 - Master Plans
5.19-100 - Tree Felling Permits
3.3-500 - Hillside Development Overlay District
Project Schedule
According to the overall project schedule as revised (Attachment 4, revised version 3/16/21)
staff is on track with the project phases. Staff will proceed with Phase 3 in the fall of 2021.
Phases 1 and 2 will move into public outreach and the public hearings process in the spring and
summer of 2021.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
This meeting is an opportunity for staff to provide the Council an update on the project status
and for the Council to ask questions, provide input, and give feedback on the Development Code
Update Project process. Staff would like input on if the Council would like to review the draft
code sections prior to releasing them for public review and comment. Or is the Council
comfortable with staff reviewing the draft codes sections with the Governance Committee prior
to releasing for public review.
Attachment 1, Page 4 of 5
NEXT STEPS
Staff is scheduled for a work session with the Planning Commission on Tuesday March 16, 2021
to give them an update on the project and the input received from the City Council. Staff will
also be meeting with the Planning Commission in their capacity as the Committee for Citizen
Involvement (CCI). Staff is asking the CCI for approval of the revised project timeline (3/16/21
version), as part of the project Community Engagement Plan, that was previously discussed with
the Council at the October 5, 2020 work session.
Staff will continue to work on Phase 1, Housing, and Phase 2, Employment Lands, of the
Development Code Update Project. The city’s Technical Advisory Committee for Phase 2 has
been meeting virtually and will continue meeting to review new draft code for employment
lands.
Staff will continue working on planning for the public outreach efforts to engage the community
to receive feedback and input on the draft code sections. Staff is considering combining the
community engagement efforts on both the housing and employment lands phases. Staff
anticipates releasing public review drafts of the code sections for Phase 1 and Phase 2 in June
2021. As part of the public outreach staff is planning a virtual open house that will provide
information and receive input from the community. Additionally, staff is working on other
public outreach efforts.
Staff will provide the next regularly planned quarterly check in to the Council in June 2021.
Attachment 1, Page 5 of 5
3/5/2021
1
Quarterly Check In
Code Update Project
CityCouncil
WorkSession
March 15, 2021
Purpose
•The purpose of the Development Code Update project is to
change the Springfield Development Code to support
efficient, timely, and clear development review. The updated
Development Code will support Springfield’s economic
development priorities and will honor Springfield’s home
townfeel now and in the future.
2
1
2
Attachment 2, Page 1 of 13
3/5/2021
2
Objectives
1.Quick review of development applications
2.Easy to understand, clear, and user-friendly format
3.Straight forward processing path
4.Supports/furthers economic development
5.Beautiful city, encourage investment, and improve image
6.Complies with mandatory regulatory requirements
7.Implement the City’s adopted policies
3
House Bill (HB) 2001- Middle Housing
•Bill passed in 2019
•Department of Land Conservation and
Development (DLCD) – Rule advisory
committee (RAC), drafted rules (2020)
•Land Conservation and Development
Commission (LCDC) – Adopted new rules
December 9, 2020
4
3
4
Attachment 2, Page 2 of 13
3/5/2021
3
What is Middle Housing
•Duplex, Triplex, Fourplex, Townhomes, and
Cottage Clusters
•Large City – must allow duplexes on every
lot and allow the other middle housing
types “in areas”.
5
Housing Types - Duplex
6
5
6
Attachment 2, Page 3 of 13
3/5/2021
4
Housing Types - Duplex
7
Housing Types - Duplex
8
7
8
Attachment 2, Page 4 of 13
3/5/2021
5
Housing Types - Duplex
9
Housing Types - Duplex
10
9
10
Attachment 2, Page 5 of 13
3/5/2021
6
Housing Types – Triplex
11
Housing Types – Triplex
12
11
12
Attachment 2, Page 6 of 13
3/5/2021
7
Housing Types – Fourplex
13
Housing Types – Fourplex
14
13
14
Attachment 2, Page 7 of 13
3/5/2021
8
Housing Types – Townhomes
15
Housing Types – Cottage Cluster
16
15
16
Attachment 2, Page 8 of 13
3/5/2021
9
Minimum Compliance Standards
•Large Cities must allow duplexes on every
residentially zoned lot that a single-family home is
allowed.
•Large Cities must allow triplex, fourplex,
townhomes, and cottage clusters on all lots that
single-family homes are allowed, except:
•Goal protected lands (floodplain, landslide hazard, etc.)
•Master Planned communities
•Federally regulated lands
17
Performance Standards
•Allows analysis by cities
•Triplexes – 80% of lots
•Fourplexes – 70% of lots
•Townhomes – 60% of lots
•Cottage Clusters – 70% of lots
•Equitable distribution test
•Allowed on 75% or more of all lots in each
census tract
18
17
18
Attachment 2, Page 9 of 13
3/5/2021
10
19
Model Code
•Stand alone code that cities can adopt.
•Will be directly applied if a large city doesn’t
adopt its own standards by June 30, 2022.
20
19
20
Attachment 2, Page 10 of 13
3/5/2021
11
Siting Standards
•Related to position, bulk, scale
•Setbacks
•Bulk/scale (FAR)
•Lot coverage
•Height
•Parking requirements
•Utilities
•Public Facilities
21
Design Standards
•Related to arrangement,
orientation, materials, appearance,
articulation, or aesthetics
•Entry treatment
•Façade orientation
•Window coverage
•Driveways
22
21
22
Attachment 2, Page 11 of 13
3/5/2021
12
Design Standards
23
Alternative Siting or Design Standards
•Must not individually or cumulatively cause unreasonable
cost or delay to the development of middle housing
•The total time and cost of construction.
•The total cost of the land.
•The availability and acquisition of land.
•The total time and cost of permitting and fees.
•The cumulative livable floor area that can be produced.
•The proportionality of cumulative time and cost of the
proposed standard in relationship to the public need or
interest the standard fulfills.
24
23
24
Attachment 2, Page 12 of 13
3/5/2021
13
W E ARE HERE
25
QUESTIONS
26
25
26
Attachment 2, Page 13 of 13
Spectrum of Options for Implementation of Siting and Design Standards
Standard Option 1
Allow
Option 2
Encourage
Option 3
Incentivize
Defining Housing Types
Duplex, Tri/fourplex Limit to attached only -- Allow attached or
detached
Cottage Cluster Only allow multiple
units on one lot -- Allow individual units
on lots
Siting Standards
Lot sizes Use OAR minimums Lesser minimum No minimum
Triplex 5,000 sq. ft. lot Lesser minimum No min.
Fourplex 7,000 sq. ft. lot Lesser minimum No min.
Townhome 1,500 sq. ft. lot Lesser minimum No min.
Cottage Cluster 7,000 sq. ft. lot Lesser minimum No. min.
Building Height Use OAR maximum Higher maximum No maximum
Tri/fourplex 25 feet or 2 stories 30-50 feet
(depending on zone)
No max.
(certain zones)
Townhomes Same as SFD (30 ft.)
or 2 stories
35-50 feet
(depending on zone)
No max.
(certain zones)
Cottage Cluster None specified -- --
Lot Coverage/FAR Use OAR standard Higher maximum No maximum*
Tri/fourplex Same as SFD (45%) 50-60%
(depending on zone) No max.
Townhomes Same as SFD (45%) 50-60%
(depending on zone) No max.
Cottage Cluster No limit/not allowed -- --
*Limited by other development standards (ex. stormwater, setbacks, parking, etc.)
More Permissive More Restrictive
Attachment 3, Page 1 of 2
Design Standards Use OAR standards Lesser standards No Standards
Duplex None allowed
(or same as SFD) -- --
Tri/fourplex
Entry orientation,
windows, garage
width, driveway.
Lesser standards No standards
Townhomes
Entry orientation, unit
definition, windows,
driveway access and
parking
Lesser standards No standards
Cottage Cluster
Cottage orientation,
courtyard design,
community building,
pedestrian access,
windows, parking
design, screening,
garages and carports,
accessory structures,
existing structure.
Lesser standards No standards
Parking Use OAR standards Lesser standards (ex.
Allow on street
parking credit)
No parking standard
(along corridors?)
Triplex 3 spaces total Ex. 1-2 spaces total No requirement
Fourplex 4 spaces total Ex. 1-3 spaces total No requirement
Townhome 1 space per unit -- No requirement
Cottage Cluster 1 space per unit .5 space per unit No requirement
Solar Setbacks Require Solar
Setbacks for only
SD-D and Duplex
Require Solar
Setbacks only for
SD-D
No Solar Setbacks
More Restrictive More Permissive
Attachment 3, Page 2 of 2
Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4 Qtr 1 Qtr 2 Qtr 3 Qtr 4
Task 1: Project Management and Oversight
Task 2: Formation of Advisory Committee
Task 3: Develop Community Engagement Plan
Task 4: Implement Community Engagement Plan
Task 5: Conduct Audit of Housing Code Sections
Task 6:Draft Housing Code Sections
Task 7: Public Outreach for Housing Code Sections
Task 8: Adoption Process for Housing Code Sections
Task 9: Conduct Audit of Comm./Ind. Code Sections
Task 10: Draft Comm./Ind. Code Sections
Task 11: Public Outreach for Comm./Ind. Code Sections
Task 12: Adoption Process for Comm./Ind. Code Sections
Task 13: Conduct Audit of Other Code Sections
Task 14: Draft Other Code Sections
Task 15: Public Outreach for Other Code Sections
Task 16: Adoption Process for Other Code Sections
IMPLEMENTATION PROCESES
Council - Work Session or Communication Memo
Planning Commission - Work Session or Communication Memo
NOTE: The dashed lines and shadowed colored bars are the original timeline.
The brighter colored bars and bars outlined in red represent the revised timeline.
2023 20242022
Development Code Update Project Schedule (revised 3/16/21)
2019 2020 2021
IMPLEMENTATION
IMPLEMENTATION
IMPLEMENTATION
IMPLEMENTATION
Attachment 4
Page 1 of 1