The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutNotice PLANNER 9/17/2007 ,. W-p AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE STATE OF OREGON } }ss. } Ar;r~ Q,at@ ~8Cl@lved:1l~dt~ ,PllUlffi!W: GK ~ fovDLGD J - j 4- ~,LJ!, County of Lane I, Brenda Jones, being first duly sworn, do hereby depose and say as follows: 1. I state that I am a Secretary for the Planning Division of the Development Services Department, City of Springfield, Oregon. -2.1 state that in my capacity as Secretary, I prepared and caused to be mailed copies of Notice of Adoption to OLCO forLRP2007-00015 (See attachment "A") on September 19, 2007 addressed to (see Attachment "B"), by causing said letters to be placed in a U.S. mail box with postage fully prepaid thereon. . /11;( Brenda Jones Planning Secretary STATE OF OREGON, County of Lane Sede.rnbf;,/ ley, 2007 Personally appeared the above named Brenda Jones, Secretary, who acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be their voluntary act. Before me: . OFFICIAL SEAL DEYETTEKELLY NOTARY PUBUC. OREGON COMMISSION NO. 420351 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES AUG. 15, 2011 'I" K~ V My Commission Expires: 't -IS - / / +.' , s2 " Notice of Adoption THIS FORM MUST BE MAILED TO DLCD WITHIN 5 WORKING DAYS AFTER THE FINAL DECISION PER'ORS 197.610, OAR CHAPTER 660 - DIVISION 18 ;: For DLeO Use Only Jurisdiction: Springfield Local file number: LRP 2007-00015 Date of Adoption: 9/17/2007 Date Mailed: 9/19/2007 Date original Notice of Proposed Amcndment was mailed to DLCD: 7/19/2007 . , . . D Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment D Zoning Map Amendment D Other: D Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment ~ Land Use Regulation Amendment D New Land Use Re'gulation Summarize the adopted amendment. Do not use technical terms. Do not write "See Attached". In 2004, the City received a technical assistance grant (TA-U-05-175) from DLCD to perform an audit of the Sprinafield Development Code (SDC). The City hired Chris Eaton of Eaton Plannina to perform the audit in 2005. The Plannina Commission and Council directed staff to revise the structure ofthe SDC without policy changes. The attached reformatted SDC is generally based upon the "Model Development Code. & User Guide for Small Cities." Describe how the adopted amendment differs frorn the proposed amendrnent. If it is the same, write "SAME". If you did not give Notice for the Proposed Amendment, write "N/A". There have been some minor formattina .and text revisions. None of these changes rise to the level of a policy change.. Plan Man Changed from: N/A Zone Map Change~ from: N/A Location: N/A. Specify Density: Previous: N/A Applicable Statewide Planning Goals: 1 to: N/A to: N/A , Acres Involved: N/A New: N/A Was and Exception Adopted? DYES ~NO DLCD File No.: . . Did the Department of Land Conservation and Development receive a Notice of Proposed ~endment.....~ , Forty-five (45) days prior to first evidentiary hearing? . If no, do the statewide planning goals apply? If no, did Emergency Circumstances require immediate adoption? rg]. Y~s DYes [j Yes o No o No o No Affected State or Federal Agencies, Local Governments or Special Districts: None Local Contact: Gary M. Karp, Address: 225 Fifth Street Zip Code +4: 97477-. Phone: /541) 726-3777 Extension: , City: Snringfielrt Email Address.~~arD{Q)ci.s~rin~field.or.us ADOPTION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS This form must be mailed to OLCO within 5 workin!! davs after the final decision per ORS 197.610, OAR Chapter 660 - Division 18. I. Send this Forin and TWO (2) Conies of the AdoDted ~endment to: ATTENTION: PLAN AMENDMENT SPECIALIST DEPARTMENT OFLAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT 635 CAPITOL STREET NE, SUITE 150 SALEM, OREGON 97301-2540 2. .submit TWO (2) copies the adopted material, if copies are bounded please submit TWO (2) complete copies of documents and maps. 3: . Please Note: Adopted materials must be sent toOLCD not later than FIVE (5) working days following the date of the final decision on the amendment. -, 4., Submittal of this Notice of Adoption must include the text of the amendment plus adopted findings and sup~lementary information. ' ". , , 5. The deadline to 'appeal will not be extended [fyou submit this notice of adoption within five working days of the final decision. Appeals to LUBAmay be,fi!ed within TWENTY-ONE (21) days of the' date, the Notice of Adoption is sent to OLCO. 6. In addition to sending the Notice of Adoption to OLCD, you must notifY persons who participated in the local hearing and requested notice of the final dec~sion. 7. Need More Copies? You can copy this form on to 8-1/2xllllreen DaDer onlv; or call the OLCO Office at (503)373~0050; or Fax your request to:(503) 378-5518; or Email your request to mara.ulloa@state.or.us- ATTENTION: PLAN AMENDMENT SPECIALIST. J :\pa\paa\forms\form2word.doc revised: 717/2005 ' , . 'J CITY OF SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT 225 FIFTH STREET SPRINGFIELD, OREGON 97477 , ',; , NOTICE OF DECISION . . ;: SPJ'~INGFIEI,[t CITY COUNCIL September 19,2007 September 17, 2007 September 17, 2007 LRP 2007-00015 City of Springfield ; ."-- 1,.;-".' :.,. f". ", ~ ",I .1' MAILING DATE OF NOTICE: DATE OF DECISION: EFFECTIVE DATE: JOURNAL NUMBER: APPLICANT: I NATURE OF REQUEST I AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND REFORMATTING THE SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE, ADOPTING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. I PURPOSE OF THE AMDNEMENTS The SDC was adopted in May, 1986. In the 21 years since its adoption, the City has made piecemeal amendments to the SDC to implement both State and local planning mandates and local planning priorities. Over time, these SDC amendments have resulted in a document that has become cumbersome and difficult to understand for both staff and potential developers. In order to address these issues, the City contracted with Eaton Planning Services to perform an audit of the SDC in early 2005. That project was funded by the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) with a Technical Assistance Grant. The results of the audit were reviewed by the Planning Commission and Council in Spring 2005. Staff was authorized to proceed with the SDC Edit and Reformat Project in order to make the SDC more contemporary and user-friendly. Staff established a technical advisory committee to assist with the project. The proposed reformatted SDC is generally based on a layout used for the "Model Development Code for Small Cities" and converts the current 44 articles into 6 chapters. The proposed reformatted SDC also places current text describing various standards into tables, combines Subdivision and Partition regulations into one Section and reduces redundant language, for example, "consistency with the Metro Plan" is placed in one location and deleted from each individual zoning district description. The proposed reformatted SDC does not include any "policy" changes, such as additions to use lists or new development standards. These issues will be addressed later this year or early next year, in work sessions with the Planning Commission and Council. I PROCEEDINGS AND DECISION I On June 5, 2007, the Planning Commission held a work session and' public hearing on this matter. There was no public testimony. The Planning Commission voted 5-0, with 2 absent to advise the Council to approve the proposed SDC amended and reformatted Ordinance. In July, due to the size of the document, staff provided the Council an opportunity to become familiar with the ' reformatted SDC in advance of this scheduled public hearing. Staff is requesting the adopting Ordinance include an emergency clause for this reason and in order to meet the time line for Lane County adoption, which is scheduled in October. Lane County' must adopt amendments to the SDC as specified in the Intergovernmental Agreement which gives the City zoning authority between the city limits and the urban growth boundary. On September 17, 2007, the City Council held a work session and public hearing on this matter. There was no public testimony. The City Council voted 6-0 to approve SDC amended and reformatted Ordinance ADDITIONAL INFORMATION . ~. .. .~ If you have questions concerning the amendment or the decision of the City Council in this matter, please contact Gary M. Karp, Senior Planner at 541.726.3775. E-mail address: qkaroilVci.sorinofield.or.us. The adopting ordinance, along with supporting staff reports and documents, are available for review between 8:00AM and 4:00PM, at the Development Services Department counter, Springfield City Hall, at 225 Fifth Street. These documents can be e-mailed to interested parties if an e-mail address is provided. IAPPEAL' All parties, are advised that a Notice of Intent to Appeal conforming to the requirements of the Oregon Revised Statutes 197.830(9) shall be filed on or before the 21st day after the mailing date of this notice. All parties are further advised to consult an attorney or land use consultant regarding their appeal. AGE'NDA:ITEM SUMMARY Meeti.... Date: September 17,2007 Meeting Type: Work/Regular Session Department: Development Services ,,\ Staff Contact: Gary M. Karp b1 ~ a;.,\ S P R I N G FIE L D Staff Phone No: 726-3777 \~' C I T Y C 0 U N C I L Estimated Time: 15 minutes/I 0 minutes ITEM TITLE: PROPOSED AMENDlVlENT AND REFORMAT OF THE SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE. ACTION REQUESTED: ISSUE STATEMENT: ATTACHMENTS: DISCUSSION: Conduct a work ses,sion and hold a public hearing and ado'pt or not adopt: AN ORDrNANCE AMENDrNG AND REFORMATTrNG THE SPRrNGFlELDDEVELOPMENT CODE, ADOPTING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. The Council directed staff to proceed with the Springfield Development Code (SDC) Edit and Refonnat Project in Spring 2005, The attached amended and refonnatted SDC is the result of that project. Attachment I: StatT Repon, Findings and Order Attachment 2: Proposed Refonnatted SDC Attachment 3: Ordinance Amending and Refonnatting the SDC The SDC was adopted in May, 1986. In the 2 I years since its adoption, the City has made piecemeal amendments to the SDC to implement both State and local planning mandates and local planning priorities. Over time, these SDC amendments have resulted in a document that has become cumbersome and difficult to understand for both staff and potential developers. In order to address these issues, the City contracted with Eaton Planning Services to perfonn an audit of the SDC in early 2005. That project was funded by the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Developm'ent (DLCD) with a Technical Assistance Grant. The results of the audit were reviewed by the Planning Commission and Council in Spring 2005. Staff was authorized to proceed with the SDC Edit and Refonnat Project in order to make the SDC . more contemporary and user-friendly. Staff established a technical advisory committee to assist with the project. The proposed refonnatted SDC is generally based on a layout used for the "Model Development Code for Small Cities" and convens the current 44 anicles into 6 chapters, The proposed refonnatted SDC also places current text describing various standards into tables, combines Subdivision and Panition regulations into one Section arid reduces redundant language, for example, "consistency with the Metro Plan" is placed in one location and deleted from each individual zoning district description, The proposed refonnatted SDC does not include any "policy" changes, such as additions to use lists or new development standards. These issues will be addressed later this year or early next year, in work sessions with the Planning Commission and Council. On June 5, 2007, the Planning Commission held a work session and public hearing on this matter. There was no public testimony, The Planning Commission voted 5-0, with 2 absent to advise the Council to approve the proposed SDC amended and refonnatted Ordinance, In July, due to the size of the document, staff provided the Council an opponunity to become familiar with the refonnatted SDC in advance of this scheduled public hearing. Staff is requesting the adopting Ordinance include an emergency clause for this reason and in order to meet the time line for Lane County adoption, which is scheduled in October. Lane County must adopt amendments to the SDC as specified in the Intergovemmental Agreement which gives the City zoning authority between the city limits and the urban growth boundary. ATTACHMENT 1 . STAFF REPORT, FINDINGS AND ORDER Attachment 1-1 , MEMORANDUM CITY OF SPRINGFIELD DATE OFWORKSESSION/PUBLlC HEARING: June 5,2007 FROM:. Gregory S. Mott, Planning Manager Gary M. Karp, Planner III PLANNING COMMISSION TRANSMITTAL MEMORANDUM TO: Springfield Planning Commission SUBJECT: Amendment and 'reformat of the Springfield Development Code, City,of Springfield, Applicant Case Number - LRP 2007-00015 ISSUE Conduct a work session and a public hearing on the proposed amendment and reformat of the Springfield Development Code (SDC) and decide whether to advise the City Council to approve, approve with amendments or deny the application. DISCUSSION The SDC was adopted in May, 1986, In the nearly 21 years since its adoption, the City has made piecemeal amendments to the SDC to implement both state and local planning mandates and local planning priorities, Over time, these SDC amendments have resulted in a document that has become cumbersome and difficult to understand for both staff and potential developers, In order to address these issues, the City contracted with Eaton Planning Services to perform an audit of the SDC in early 2005. That project was funded by the Oregon . Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) with a Technical Assistance Grant. The results of the audit were reviewed by the P'lanning Commission and City Council in Spring.200S. At that time, the Planning Commission recommended. and the City Council endorsed, proceeding with this SDC Edit and Reformat Project in 'order to' make the SDC more contemporary and user-friendly, Staff established a technical advisory committee and has updated the Planning Commission several times durin9 the course of this project. The proposed amended and reformatted SDC is generally based on a layout used for the "Model Development Code for Small Cities" and converts the current 44 articles into 6 chapters: Chapter 1, Introduction: explains the relationship of the SDC to the State-wide Planning Goals and the Metro Plan; Chapter 2, General Provisions, contains the SDC's purpose and . applicability. enforcement regulations and a discussion of application fees; Chapter 3. Land Use Districts, discusses the City's Official Zoning Map and lists all Base Zoning Districts, Overlay Districts and Plan Districts and. base development standards; Chapter 4, Development Standards, contains both development standards not listed in Chapter 3 and specific development standards for certain uses; Chapter 5, Land Use Applications, discusses the development review, the public hearing and appeals 'processes, and lists the procedures for land use, limited land use and other required applications; and Chapter 6. Definitions, contains de~Qitions' for terms used throughout the Code, The proposed amended and reformatted SDC also places current text describing various standards into tables, combines Subdivision and Partition regulations into one Section and reduces redundant language, for example, "consistency with the Metro Plan" is placed in one location and deleted from each individual zoning district description: The proposed amended and reformatted SDC does not include any "policy" changes, such as additions to use lists or new development standards, Policy issues and other potential text revisions that may be addressed after adoption of the SDC amendment and reformat are included in Attachment 3, RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the proposed SDC amendment and reformat based on the attached findings. ACTION REQUESTED Advise the City Council, by motion and signature of the attached order and recommendation by. the Planning Commission Chairperson, to approve the proposed SDC amendment and reformat at their public hearing on July 2, 2007 (First Reading), ' ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1: Staff Report. Findings and Order Attachment 2: Proposed Amended and Reformatted Springfield Development Code Attachment 3: List of -Potential Policy Issues and Text Revisions 1-2 ATTACHMENT 1 STAFF REPORT, FINDINGS AND ORDER PROPOSED SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT AND REFqRMAT APPLICANT City of Springfield - Jo. No. LRP 2007-00015 REQUEST Amendment and Reformat of the Springfield Development Code (SOC). BACKGROUND The SDC was adopted in May, 1986. In the nearly 21 years since its adoption, the City has made piecemeal amendments to the SDC to implement both state and local planning mandates , and local planning priorities. Over time, these SDC amendments haye resulted in a Cioc'ument that has become cumbersome and difficult to understand for both staff and potential developers. In order to address these issues, the City contracted with Eaton Planning Services to perform an audit of the SDC in early 2005. That project was funded by the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) with a Technical Assistance Grant The results of the audit were reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council in Spring 2005. At that time, the' Planning Commission recommended, and the City Council endorsed, proceeding with this SDC Edit and Reformat Project in order to make the SDC more contemporary and user-friendly. Staff has updated th'e Planning Commission several times during the course of this project The amended and reformatted SDC is generally based on a layout used for the "Model Development Code for Small Cities" and converts the current 44 articles into 6 chapters, The proposed amended and reformatted SDC also places text describing various standards into tables, combines Subdivision and Partition regulations into one Section and reduces redundant language, for example, "consistency with the Metro Plan" is placed in one location and deleted from each individual zoning district description. The proposed amended and reformatted SDC does not include any "policy" changes, such as additions to use lists or new development standards. " SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE CRITERIA FOR SDC AMENDMENTS SDC 8.030 of the Springfield Development Code establishes criteria that must be met in order to approve this request "In reaching a decision on these actions, the Planning Commission and the City Council shall adopt findings which demonstrate conformance to the following: (1) The Metro Plan; (2) Applicable State statutes; and (3) Applicable . State-wide Planning Goals and Administrative Rules." ' (1) The Metro Plan;" "The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan [Metro Plan] is the official long- range general plan (public policy document) of metropolitan Lane County and the cities of Eugene and Springfield. Its policies and land use designations apply only within the area under the jurisdiction of the Plan. The Plan sets forth general planning policies and land use allocations and serves as the basis for the coordinated development of programs concerning the use and conservation of physic'al resources, furtherance of assets, and development or redevelopment of the metropolitan area." P. 1-1 1-3 Staff ReSDonse and Findinq: This is an amendment and reformat of an existing specific regulation, th'e SOC. The SOC adopted in 1986 and the 60 plus amendments to the document since that time have complied with the Metro Plan policies. ,The intent is to'make the SOC more contemporary and user- friendly, with no "policy" changes, Therefore, the proposed amended and reformatted SOC has no effect on, nor is it'affected by Metro Plan policies, "(2) Applicable state statutes," CHILD CARE FACILITIES ORS 657 A.250 Staff ReSDonse and FindinQ: The proposed amended and reformatted SOC includes the change i,n terminology from "day care" to "child care"'based on a recent amendment of ORS 657 A.250, which regulates child care facilities in Oregon. This use is found in various use lists in proposed Chapter 3 and requires special siting standards as specified in proposed Section 4.7-125. Staff discussed this ,issue with the Planning Commission at a work session on January 17, 2007. The Planning . Commission agreed with staff that the change in terminology was not a "policy" issue. This is an amendment and reformat of an existing specific regulation, the SOC, The intent is to make the sot more contemporary and user-friendly, with no "policy" changes. However, the proposed amended and reformatted SOC is now consistent with the "child care" terminology contained in',ORS 657 A.250. POST ACKNOWLEDGEMENT PROCEDURES' ORS 197.610 "197.610 Local government notice of proposed amendment or new regulation; exceptions; report to cornmission. (1) A p'roposal to amend a local governrnent acknowledged comprehensive plan or land use regulation or to adopt a,new land use r'egulation shall be forwarded to the Director of the Department of Land Conservation and Development a,t least 45 days before the first evidentiary hearing on adoption. The proposal forwarded shall contain the text and any supplemental information that the local government believes is necessary to inform the director as to the effect of the proposal. The notice shall include the date set for the first evidentiary hearing. The director shall notify persons who have requested notice that the proposal is pending. (2) When a local government determines that the goals do not apply to a particular prqposed amendment or new regulation, notice under subsection (1) of this section is not required. In addition, a local governrnent may submit an amendment or new. regulation with less than 45 days' notice if the local government determines that'there are emergency circumstances, requiring expedited review. In both cases: (a) The amendment or new regulation shall be submitted after adoption as provided in ORS 197.615 (1) and (2); and (b) Notwithstanding the requirements of ORS 197.830 (2), t~e director ora'ny other 1-4 person may appeal the decision to the board under ORS 197.830 to 197.845...." ." ., Staff Resoonse and Findinq: The ORS dted above applies to the Department of Land Conservation and Development (OLCO) notification as required as part of the processing of this amended and reformatted SOC. The City sent notice for the proposed amended and reformatted SOC via FedEx to the OLCO on April 19, 2007. The notice included the proposed amended and reformatted SOC with commentary and background information. The notice needed to be received by OLCO by April 22, 45 days prior to the first evidentiary hearing (before the Planning Commission) scheduled for June 5, 2007. FedEx acknowledged OLCO receipt of the proposed amended and reformatted SOC on April 20, 2007. Therefore, the OLeO notice process cited above complies with ORS 197.610, "(3) Applicable State-wide Planning Goals and Administrative Rules." GOAL 1: CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT - OAR 660-015-0000(1) GOAL 2: LAND USE PLANNING OAR 660-015-0000(2} , GOAL 3: AGRICULTURAL LAND OAR 660-015-0000(3} GOAL 4: FOREST LANDS OAR 660-015-0000(4} GOAL 5: NATURAL RESOURCES, SCENIC AND HISTORIC AREAS, AND OPEN SPACES OAR 660-015-0000(5) , GOAL 6: AIR, WATER AND LAND RESOURCES QUALITY OAR 660-015-0000(6} GOAL 7: AREAS SUBJECT TO NATURAL HAZARDS GOAL 8: RECREATIONAL NEEDS OAR 660-015-0000(8) GOAL 9: ECON()MIC DEVELOPMENT OAR 660-015-0000(9} GOAL 10: HbUSING OAR 660-015-0000(10} GOAL 11: PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES OAR 660-015-0000(11} GOAL 12: TRANSPORTATION OAR 660-015-0000(12) GOAL 13: ENERGY CONSERVATION OAR 660-015-0000(13} GOAL 14: URBANIZATION OAR 660-015-0000(14) GOAL 15: WILLAMETTE RIVER GREENWAY OAR 660-015-000(15} , GOAL 16: ESTUARINE RESOURCES OAR660-015-000(16) , GOAL 17: COASTAL SHORELANDS OAR 660-015-000(17) 1-5 GOAL 18: BEACHES AND DUNES OAR 660-015-000(18) GOAL 19: OCEAN RESOURCES OAR 660-015-000(19) Staff Resoonse and Fin~inas: Goals 1-15, This is an amendment and reformat of an existing specific regulation, the SDC, The intent is to make the SDC more contemporary and user-friendly, with no 'policy" changes, ,Therefore, except for Goal 1 , the proposed amended and reformatted SDt has no effect on, nor is it affected by the State-wide Planning Goals (2 through 15). Goals 16-19 These goals do not apply because there are no coastal, ocean, estuarine, or ' beach and dune resources within thEi City's jurisdiction. The SDC adopted in.1986 and the 60 plus amendments to the document since that time have complied with the State"wide Planning Goals. In this case, there are no State-wide Planning Goals or Administrative Rule which apply to this amended and refor[Tlatted SDC other. than compliance with Goal 1 , Citizen Involvement, pertaining to public notice, Notice of Planning Commission and City Council public hearings were printed in the Register Guard and placed on the City's web site on or before May 26, 2007. In addition, in April 2006, a questionnaire concerning this project was mailed to forty-three area architects, engineers, landscape architects, land surveyors and planners, Only two replied and those comments were deemed , to be "policy" issues that will be addressed separately from this proposed amended and reformatted SOC: Therefore, other than Goal 1 , no other Statecwide Planning Goals apply to the proposed amended and reformatted SOC.' CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION/REQUESTED ACTION Staff has demonstrated criteria of approval listed in SDC 8,030: (1) Metro Pian policies; (2) State statutes; and (3) State-wide Planning Goals and Administrative Rules either do rioi appiy to, or this proposed amended and reformatted SDC minimally impacts, the criteria. Staff recommends tne Planning Commission:-approve the attached Order and forward the proposed amended and reformatted SOC to the City Council with a recommendation for adoption, h 1-6 . . BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMIS~,JN OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON JO. NO. LRP 2007-00015 NATURE OF THE APPLICATION. In Spring 2005, the Planning Commission recommended, and the City Council endorsed, proceeding with the SDC Edit and Reformat Project in order to make the SDC more contemporary and user- friendly. The amended and reformatted SDC is generally based on a layout used for the "Model Development Code for Small Cities" and converts the current 44 articles into 6 chapters, The proposed amended and reformatted SDC, also places text describing various standards into tables combines Subdivision and Partition regulations into one Section and reduces redundant language: for example, "consistency, with the Metro P,lan" is placed in one location and deleted from each individual , zoning district description, The proposed amended and reformatted SDC does not include any "policy" changes, such as additions to use lists or new development standards, 1. On April 17, 2007.the following application was accepted: Jo. No. LRP 2007-00015 - City of Springfield, Applicant - Springfield Development Code Amendment and Reformat. 2, The application was initiated and submitted in accordance with Section 3.050 of the Springfield Development Code, ,Timely and sufficient notice of the public hearing. pursuant to Section 14.030 of the Springfield Development Code, has been provided, '. 3, On June 5, 2007 the Planning Commission held a work session and public hearing on tlie , proposed amended and reformatted SDC, The Development Services Department staff notes and recommendation together with the oral testimony and written submittals ,of the persons testifying at that hearing have been considered and are part of th!, record of this proceeding, CONCLUSION ,On the basis of this record.-the proposed amended and reformatted SDC is consistent w'lth the cr'lteria of Section 8.030(1-3) of the Springfield Development Cod.::, This general finding is supported by the specific findings of fact and conclusion in Attachment 1, Staff Report and Findings, ORDERlRECOMMENDAT10N. It is O,RD, E,,~i?f;r spriogr"" p'"o'og Comm""" thot 'pp;o,,' of JO. NO. LRP 2007-00015, be ~ y /3 ~OMMENDA TION for approval forwarded to the Springfield City Council. Pla;rrirrg Commission Chairperson , . ATTEST AYES: C) NOES: Q ABSENT: A ABSTAIN: 0 H . . ATTACHMENT 2 PROPOSED REFORMATTED SDC Attachment 2-1