HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021 03 16 AIS Code Update WS 3_16_21AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: 3/16/2021
Meeting Type: Work Session
Staff Contact/Dept.: Mark Rust/DPW
Staff Phone No: 541-726-3654
Estimated Time: 50 minutes
S P R I N G F I E L D
PLANNING COMMISSION
Council Goals: Encourage Economic
Development and
Revitalization through
Community Partnerships
ITEM TITLE: DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE PROJECT – QUARTERLY CHECK IN
ACTION
REQUESTED:
No formal action is needed or requested. This meeting is an opportunity for staff to
report to the Planning Commission on the City Council direction received at the
March 15, 2021 meeting and for the Planning Commission to provide input and
feedback on the Development Code Update Project process.
ISSUE
STATEMENT:
Staff will give the Planning Commission 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: Communication Memo
Attachment 2: Presentation Slides
Attachment 3: Spectrum of options for Siting and Design Standards
Attachment 4: Draft Revised Project Schedule (3/16/21)
DISCUSSION:
Background
Staff last presented to the Planning Commission on this project on October 6, 2020.
At this meeting staff gave the Planning Commission 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 on January 19, 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.
Staff anticipates releasing draft public review sections of the code in June 2021.
Staff will provide the next regularly planned quarterly check in in June 2021.
COMMUNICATION MEMORANDUM Meeting Date: 3/16/2021
Meeting Type: Work Session
Staff Contact/Dept.: Mark Rust/DPW
Staff Phone No: 541-726-3654
Estimated Time: 50 Minutes
S P R I N G F I E L D
PLANNING COMMISSION
Council Goals: Encourage Economic
Development and Revitalization
through Community
Partnerships
ITEM TITLE DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE PROJECT – QUARTERLY CHECK IN
BACKGROUND Staff last presented to the Planning Commission on this project on October 6, 2020. At
this meeting staff gave the Planning Commission 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 the Planning Commission on January 19,
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 19, 2021 communication memo 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.
As discussed in more detail in the January 19, 2021 communication memo, 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.
Attachment 1
Page 1 of 5
• 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.
Staff will present some figures representing some potential different configurations
illustrating these differences in the presentation slides (Attachment 2).
Attachment 1
Page 2 of 5
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 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.
Attachment 1
Page 4 of 5
NEXT STEPS Staff will also be meeting with the Planning Commission in its capacity as the
Committee for Citizen Involvement (CCI). Staff is asking the CCI for approval of the
revised project timeline (11/16/20 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 Planning
Commission in June 2021.
RECOMMENDED
ACTION
No formal action is needed or requested. This meeting is an opportunity for staff to
report to the Planning Commission on the City Council direction received at the March
15, 2021 meeting and for the Planning Commission to provide input and feedback on
the Development Code Update Project process.
Attachment 1
Page 5 of 5
3/5/2021
1
Quarterly Check In
Code Update Project
Planning Commission
Work Session
March 16, 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
town feel 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
WE 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