HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 02 CFEC Parking PacketAGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Meeting Date:
Meeting Type:
Staff Contact/Dept.:
Staff Phone No:
10/10/2022
Work Session
Sophie McGinley and
Sandy Belson/DPW
541-736-7135
Estimated Time: 30 Minutes
SPRINGFIELD Council Goals: Mandate
CITY COUNCIL
ITEM TITLE: CLIMATE FRIENDLY AND EQUITABLE COMMUNITIES RULEMAKING -
PARKING REQUIREMENTS
ACTION
REQUESTED:
Provide direction to staff on how to approach Phase 2 of the Parking Requirements
ISSUE
In response to Executive Order 20-04, the Department of Land Conservation and
STATEMENT:
Development (DLCD) adopted administrative rules that have wide ranging
requirements for metropolitan areas in Oregon. The City of Springfield is mandated
to comply with these requirements affecting land use and transportation.
This agenda item focuses on what the city must do to meet the parking
requirements of the administrative rules.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1: Memorandum
Attachment 2: Map of Areas near Frequent Transit
Attachment 3: PowerPoint Slides
DISCUSSION/
There are two main phases of the rules affecting parking:
FINANCIAL
IMPACT:
Phase 1: As of December 31, 2022, the City will no longer be able to require on-site
parking for any new development near frequent transit corridors or for some
specific types of uses.
Phase 2: By June 30, 2023, the City will also have a choice of removing all onsite
parking requirements for development in the rest of the Urban Growth Boundary
(UGB), or to take a multi -faceted approach to regulating parking in certain areas
and establishing parking management programs. Phase 2 includes three possible
pathways for implementation. Option 1 is to not require any on-site parking
anywhere in the UGB. Options 2 and 3 require significant funding and staffing,
and do not result in significant flexibility.
This work session aims to provide context for the new rules, information about
implementation, and options for how to proceed with phase 2 of complying with
DLCD's parking regulations. The financial impact of implementation of the parking
rules varies widely depending on which option the city pursues and the outcome of
legal review of the State's rules.
No matter which option Council chooses for Phase 2, there will likely be additional
costs for parking enforcement as the parking supply becomes more constrained in
certain areas. A preliminary estimate for the cost of parking education and
enforcement is: $645,000 first year; $450,000/year thereafter.
MEMORANDUM City of Springfield
Date: 10/10/2022
To: Nancy Newton COUNCIL
From: Sophie McGinley, Comprehensive Planner and BRIEFING
Sandy Belson, Comprehensive Planning Manager
Jeff Paschall, Community Development Director
Subject: Climate Friendly and Equitable Communities MEMORANDUM
Rulemaking Parking Requirements
ISSUE: In response to Executive Order 20-04, the Department of Land Conservation and
Development (DLCD) adopted the Climate -Friendly and Equitable Communities (CFEC)
administrative rules that have wide ranging requirements for metropolitan areas in Oregon. The
City of Springfield is mandated to comply with these requirements affecting land use and
transportation.
This agenda item focuses on what the city must do to meet the parking requirements of the
administrative rules.
COUNCIL GOALS/
MANDATE:
Council Goals: Mandate
BACKGROUND: In March 2020, Governor Kate Brown issued Executive Order 20-04
directing state agencies to take actions to reduce and regulate greenhouse gas emissions and
mitigate the impacts of climate change while also centering the needs of Oregon's most
vulnerable communities. In response, the Oregon Land Conservation and Development
Commission directed the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) to draft
updates to Oregon's transportation and land use planning rules. The Commission adopted
permanent rules on July 21, 2022. These rules set new standards for land use and transportation
plans in Oregon's eight metropolitan areas - Albany, Bend, Corvallis, Eugene -Springfield,
Grants Pass, Medford -Ashland, Portland Metro, and Salem-Keizer. The intent is to encourage
walking, biking, taking the bus, and switching to electrical vehicles. The rules also state an
intent to require that the city allow more dense developments in areas of "high quality transit
service", bring different land uses (housing, employment, shopping, and parks) close together,
and make them walkable. Staff provided a high-level overview of the CFEC rules at the
September 19 work session.
Parking rules:
This work session focuses on the parking component of the state rules. Some of the rules take
effect December 31, 2022; others require action by June 30, 2023. The rules aim to provide more
flexibility for developers to choose how much parking they would like to require. However, in
some cases, the rules limit the amount of on-site parking allowed.
There are two main phases of the rules:
Attachment 1, Page 1 of 6
MEMORANDUM 10/4/2022 Page 2
• Phase 1: As of December 31, 2022, the city will no longer be able to require a minimum
amount of on-site parkingl for any new development near frequent transit corridors. For
Springfield, frequent transit corridors are the Route 11 and the EmX. See Attachment 2
for a map of areas for which the City will not require on-site parking for new
development.
The City may not require more than one parking space per residential unit in
developments that have more than one dwelling on a single legally -established property.
The City also may not require parking for the following uses:
o Facilities and homes designed to serve people with disabilities;
o Childcare facilities;
o Single -room occupancy housing;
o Residential units smaller than 750 square feet
o Affordable housing (housing available to rent or buy by households with income
that does not exceed 80% of AMI, or spaces in manufactured dwelling parks
available for rent by households with income that does not exceed 100% AMI);
o Publicly supported housing (multi -unit rental housing that receives financial
assistance from the state or federal government);
o Emergency and transitional shelters for people experiencing homelessness; and
o Domestic violence shelters
Phase 2: The City has a choice of removing all onsite parking requirements for
development in the rest of the Urban Growth Boundary, OR to take a multi -faceted
approach to regulating parking in certain areas and establishing parking management
programs. Phase 2 includes 3 possible options for implementation. Option 1 is referred
to as the "do nothing" approach and requires repealing all minimum parking
requirements city-wide. Generally, options 2 and 3 require significant funding and
staffing, and do not result in significant flexibility. If the city opts for option 2 or 3, the
resulting Springfield Development Code amendments and parking management plans
must be effective by June 30, 2023. Amending the Springfield Development Code is a
land use decision and therefore would involve public hearings with the Planning
Commission and elected officials (Springfield City Council and Lane County Board of
Commissioners.) For the code amendments to be effective by June 30, the city would
need to identify the necessary amendments this fall and begin the public hearing process
this winter.
Springfield 2035 Transportation System Plan (TSP) and Development Code amendments:
Although the state's rules were recently adopted, Springfield has already laid the groundwork
for parking rules. The TSP was adopted in 2014 and includes policies that are explicitly intended
to reduce dependance on the single -occupancy vehicles very similar to the climate goals of the
CFEC rules. During 2016-2020, Springfield engaged with the community in an extensive
process to figure out the right balance of tools for Springfield to meet these TSP objectives —
Springfield was stricter than the CFEC rules require in some instances and more lenient in
others. Springfield lowered minimum parking requirements, added parking maximums2, and
increased opportunities for developers to seek "right sized" parking requirements that are outside
the code's limits. A few of these provisions, though not all, will help Springfield comply with
1 "Parking minimums" sets a minimum number of parking spaces provided on-site on conjunction with
development.
2 "Parking maximums" limit the number of off-street parking spaces that can be included in a development.
Attachment 1, Page 2 of 6
MEMORANDUM 10/4/2022 Page 3
CFEC rule requirements, such as Springfield's existing maximum parking requirements, bicycle
parking standards, and maximum block length requirements.
Local Implementation:
Phase 1 Implementation will consist of referring to the applicable state administrative rules and
approving eligible applications that propose less parking than the minimums outlined in the
Springfield Development Code. The city would not undertake code amendments at this time,
and developers and staff will refer to the state's rules in OAR Chapter 660, Division 12 until the
state provides additional information.
Phase 2 Implementation depends on the direction given by the City Council. Option 1 (the "do
nothing approach") would result in no minimum parking requirements city-wide.
Implementation could be similar to Phase 1, referring to statewide rules and providing
developers and staff the applicable resources to approve applications even if the applicant does
not include the on-site parking required by the Springfield Development Code. If Option 1 is
pursued, the already -adopted parking maximums would remain in place, however the parking
minimums would no longer apply.
Options 2 and 3 would require significant code amendments, funding, and staffing. Both options
would require:
• Reduced mandates3 based on shared parking4, solar panels, EV charging, car sharing,
parking space accessibility, on -street parking, garage parking.
• Unbundled parking5 for developments with five or more dwellings that are located near
frequent transit.
• The City may not require garages/carports.
• Removing on-site parking requirements in and near climate -friendly areas or adoption of
parking management policies; unbundled parking for multifamily units.
In addition:
• Option 2 requires implementing 3 out of the 5 following policies to manage parking per
OAR 660-012-0445 (1)(a):
(A) A requirement that parking spaces for each residential unit in developments that
include five or more leased or sold residential units on a lot or parcel be unbundled
parking. Cities and counties may exempt townhouse and rowhouse development from
this requirement;
(B) A requirement that parking spaces serving leased commercial developments be
unbundled parking;
(C) A requirement for employers of 50 or more employees who provide free or
subsidized parking to their employees at the workplace provide a flexible commute
benefit of $50 per month or the fair market value of that parking, whichever is greater,
to those employees eligible for that free or subsidized parking who regularly commute
3 "Parking mandates" means requirements to include a minimum number of off-street parking spaces with
development or redevelopment, or a fee -in -lieu of providing parking for residential development.
4 "Shared parking" means parking spaces used to meet the parking mandates for two or more uses, structures, or
parcels of land, to the extent that the owners or operators show the overall demand for parking spaces can
be met by the shared parking.
5 "Unbundled parking" means a requirement that parking spaces for each unit in a development be rented,
leased, or sold separately from the unit itself.
Attachment 1, Page 3 of 6
MEMORANDUM 10/4/2022 Page 4
via other modes instead of using that parking;
(D) A tax on the revenue from commercial parking lots collecting no less than 10
percent of income, with revenues dedicated to improving transportation alternatives to
drive -alone travel; and
(E) A reduction of parking mandates for new multifamily residential development to no
higher than one-half spaces per unit, including visitor parking.
• Option 3 requires implementing all of the following under OAR 660-012-0445 (1)(b):
(A) A repeal of all parking mandates within one-half mile pedestrian travel of climate -
friendly areas;
(B) A repeal of parking mandates for transit -oriented development and mixed-use
development;
(C) A repeal of parking mandates for group quarters, including but not limited to
dormitories, religious group quarters, adult care facilities, retirement homes, and other
congregate housing;
(D) A repeal of parking mandates for studio apartments, one -bedroom apartments and
condominiums in residential developments of five or more units on a lot or parcel;
(E) A repeal of parking mandates for change of use of, or redevelopment of, buildings
vacant for more than two years. Cities and counties may require registration of a
building as vacant two years prior to the waiving of parking mandates;
(F) A repeal of requirements to provide additional parking for change of use or
redevelopment;
(G) A repeal of parking mandates for expansion of existing businesses by less than 30
percent of a building footprint;
(H) A repeal of parking mandates for buildings within a National Historic District, on
the National Register of Historic Places, or on a local inventory of historic resources or
buildings;
(I) A repeal of parking mandates for commercial properties that have fewer than ten on-
site employees or 3,000 square feet floor space;
(J) A repeal of parking mandates for developments built under the Oregon Residential
Reach Code;
(K) A repeal of parking mandates for developments seeking certification under any
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) rating system, as evidenced by
either proof of pre -certification or registration and submittal of a complete scorecard;
(L) A repeal of parking mandates for schools;
(M) A repeal of parking mandates for bars and taverns;
Attachment 1, Page 4 of 6
MEMORANDUM 10/4/2022 Page 5
(N) Setting parking maximums consistent with OAR 660-012-0415(1), notwithstanding
populations listed in that section; and
(0) Designation of at least one residential parking district or parking benefit district
where on -street parking is managed through permits, payments, or time limits.
Implications:
The parking rules are complex, particularly Options 2 and 3. Put simply, pursuing Option 2 or 3
would result in the being able to require some on-site parking for much of the residential
development that would occur in the R-1 zone in areas outside of the %Z mile of the EmX or
Route 11 bus. The city would be able to require some on-site parking for industrial and maybe
some commercial development in the Jasper-Natron area. However, following Option 2 or 3
would require a lot of work and staff question if that level of control is worth the effort.
It is important to keep in mind that many developers will choose to provide on-site parking even
when it is no longer required. They may provide parking to make their developments more
attractive or because it is required by their lenders. Over time, with constraints on available
land, changes in how people move about the city, and changing technology, developers may
provide less area for parking allowing for more efficient development patterns.
Education and Enforcement:
Regardless of which option the City of Springfield pursues, people with vehicles may choose to
park in places where they should not park. If they park on the street in a manner that impedes
traffic, the police may need to take enforcement action. If they park on private property in an
area not meant for parking, the city's code enforcement officers may need to take enforcement
action. Therefore, there may be an increase in calls for code enforcement and police. Code
enforcement may need to increase outreach and monitor and enforce on-site (private property)
parking regulations and violations. Police enforcement may need to increase to monitor and
enforce on -street (public right-of-way) parking violations, including vehicles blocking access for
public safety.
Option 1 would allow the City to retain some of our existing policies and continue to manage
parking. However, the effects of these rules are unpredictable and may necessitate the creation
of a parking management plan in the future to deal with potential spill-over effects from certain
uses into the surrounding streets. The creation of such a plan would require funding, staff,
community input, and ongoing implementation.
Note:
The extent and complexity of the rules make them difficult to understand and fully grasp the
implications of implementation. While the City Attorney's Office is pursuing legal review of
the rules with other affected cities, the rules remain effective unless or until a court issues a stay
on the rules; the City Attorney's Office has advised staff to work toward implementation of the
rules in the meantime.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff seeks Council direction on how to approach Phase 2 of the Parking Requirements.
Staff recommends Option 1: not requiring minimum parking city-wide. This option is the
"cleanest" and most cost-efficient option to implement in Springfield. Although it would
ultimately require code amendments and increased education and enforcement, it would allow
Attachment 1, Page 5 of 6
MEMORANDUM 10/4/2022 Page 6
the city to maintain existing local policies and programs such as parking maximums and the
Downtown Parking Management Program. Additionally, Option 1 would continue to allow the
majority of uses to develop the same amount of parking currently allowed by the Springfield
Development Code.
Although Options 2 and 3 do not mandate the elimination of parking minimums city-wide, their
scope would reach the majority of the city—essentially rendering the geographical and use -
based flexibility minimal. Additionally, the costs of implementation for options 2 and 3 may be
significant and would require ongoing funds to comply. If Council would like to consider
Option 2 or 3, staff would prepare for a work session focused on implementation of that Option.
Attachment 1, Page 6 of 6
Attachment 2, Page 1 of 1
hF 4
Implementing Mandatory
Climate Friendly and Equitable
Communities Rulemaking
Parking Ganges
Parking Progress in Springfield
• Transportation System Plan
o Parking maximums
o Added flexibility
o Local incentives
• Downtown Parking Program
• Development Code Update Project
Set the groundwork for implementing new
parking rules
Attachment 3, Page 2 of 17
SPRINGFIELD
AQCGAN
SPRINGFIELD
. OREGON
PARK
DOWNTOWN
Parking Minimums
• Requirements to include a minimum
number of off-street parking spaces
with development or redevelopment
• Do not preclude developers from
adding more than the minimum
required
Attachment 3, Page 3 of 17
SPRINGFIELD
AQCGAN
Parking Maximums
• Limits on the number of off-street
parking spaces that can be included
in a development.
• Allow for less than the maximum to
be provided
• In certain cases, allow for more to be
built (if meeting certain conditions)
SPRINGFIELD
AQCGAN
Attachment 3, Page 4 of 17
Phases of Parking Rules
December 31, 2022
Phase 1: Near Transit and
Certain Uses
Electrical Vehicle
Conduits
This won't be covered itoday,
but is included in the Climate
Friendly and Equitable
Communities Rulemaking
Attachment 3, Page 5 of 17
June 30, 2023
Phase 2: Citywide
Approach
SPRINGFIELD
AQCGAN
Phase 1: Parking Near Transit and Certain Uses
• December 31, 2022
• Apply to development applications
submitted after December 31, 2022
• 0440 Cannot require parking for
development within 1/2 mile of frequent
transit corridors
• 0430 Cannot require parking for certain
uses
Attachment 3, Page 6 of 17
SPRINGFIELD
0 --
Near Transit
Legend
Properties within City
limits 0.5 miles from
frequent transit
corridors
Properties outside of
City limits 0.5 miles
from frequent transit
corridors
f -MWW-
AI -tar -b , Page 7 of 1, ,
Certain Uses
11IRR
• Cannot mandate more than 1 space/unit
for residential developments with more
than 1 unit
• No mandates for small units, affordable
units, child care, facilities for people with
disabilities, shelters
Attachment 3, Page 8 of 17
SPRINGFIELD
AQCGAN
The Phase 1 Rules DON'T
• Mandate existing developments to
reduce their on-site parking
• Prohibit providing parking along with
development
• Interfere with the City of Springfield
Parking Maximums
• Directly affect accessible parking
(Americans with Disabilities Act)
Attachment 3, Page 9 of 17
SPRINGFIELD
0 --
qW 'M
Implementation in Springfield
• After December 31, 2022, approve
applications for new development that
meet the criteria for Phase 1 Parking
rules
• Internal staff training
• Reference to relevant OAR
• Do not, at this time, require code
amendment process
Attachment 3, Page 10 of 17
SPRINGFIELD
SPRINGFIELD
AQCGAN
Phase 2: Citywide Approach
• 3 Options:
0 1) Repeal all parking minimums, city-wide
0 2 and 3) Keep some requirements, but make modifications and add new
requirements and programming
• Options 2 and 3 require significant funding and staff time and do not
provide significant flexibility
• Disclaimer: Still waiting for more information and legal guidance
pertaining to these options and their feasibility
Attachment 3, Page 11 of 17
SPRIMIGFIELD
OREGO N
Parking Regulation: Choosing a Pathway
Option 1
Options 2 and 3
660-012-0420
660--012-0425 through 0454
Reduce parking burdens — reduced mandates based on shared parking, solar panels,
EV charging, car sharing, parking space accessibility, on -street parking, garage
parking_ Must unbundle parking for multifamily units near frequent transit. May not
require garages/carports.
Repeal
Climate -friendly area parking — remove mandates in and near climate -friendly areas of
adopt parking management policies; unbundle parking for multifamily units
parking
mandates
Option 2
Option 3
enact at least three of flue {policies
all of the below
1. Unbundle parking for
No mandates for a variety of specific uses, small
residential units
sites, vacant buildings, studios/one bedrooms,
2. Unbundle leased commercial
historic buildings, LEER or Oregon Reach Code
parking
developments, etc.
No additional
3, Flexible commute benefit for
No additional parking for changes in use,
action needed
businesses with more than 50
red eve Iopnents, expansions of over 3D%.
employees
Adopt parking maximums.
4, Tax on parking lot revenue
No mandates within Ya mile walking distance
S. No more than A parking
of (Climate -Friendly Areas.
space/unit irMg t 3, P
91%4igngfeWstrict to manage an -street residential
multifamily development
parking.
SPRINGFIELD
AQCGAN
Choosing a Pathway
• Option 1- No minimum required parking city-wide
• Option 2- Limits parking and adds policies to manage parking
• Option 3- Limits parking further and requires at least one parking
management district
If choose to pursue Options 2 or 3, would need to begin work Fall 2022
Attachment 3, Page 13 of 17
SPRINGFIELD
AQCGAN
Options 2 & 3 both require
• Reduce mandates based on shared parking, solar panels, EV
charging, car sharing, parking space accessibility, on -street parking,
garage parking.
• Must unbundle parking for multifamily units near frequent transit.
• May not require garages/carports city-wide.
• In Climate Friendly Areas: remove mandates or adopt parking
management policies; unbundle parking for multifamily units
And...
Attachment 3, Page 14 of 17
SPRINGFIELD
AQCGAN
Additional Option Z - Parking Management Polices
• Enact 3 out of the 5 policies:
o Unbundle parking for residential units
o Unbundle leased commercial parking
o Flexible commute benefit for businesses with more than 50 employees
o Tax on parking lot revenue
o No more than 1/2 parking space per unit in multifamily development
• "Unbundled Parking" is a requirement that parking spaces for each unit in a development
be rented, leased, or sold separately from the unit itself.
Attachment 3, Page 15 of 17
SPRINGFIELD
AQCGAN
Additional Option 3 - Reduced Parking & Parking District
• All of the below:
o No mandates for a variety of specific uses, small sites, vacant buildings,
studios/one bedrooms, historic buildings, LEED or Oregon Reach Code
developments, etc
o No additional parking for changes in use, redevelopments, expansions of
over 30%
o Adopt parking maximums
o No mandates within 1/2 mile walking distance of Climate -Friendly Areas
o Designate district to manage on -street residential parking.
Attachment 3, Page 16 of 17
SPRIMIGFIELD
OREGO N
Questions
Attachment 3, Page 17 of 17