HomeMy WebLinkAboutNotice PLANNER 6/4/2009
i1 . - If"
~~
/
"
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
STATE OF OREGON }
}ss.
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 for LRP2oo9-00001 Nodal
, Development Overlay McKenzie-Gateway MDR site (See attachment
"A") on June 4, 2009 addressed to (see Attachment "B"), by causing said
letters to be placed in a U.S. mail box with postage fully prepaid thereon.
L
Brenda Jones
Planning Administra e Specialist
STATE OF OREGON, County of Lane
./ 1 N;\Jj Y . 2009 Personally appeared the above named Brenda Jones,
Ado.inistrative Specialist, who acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be their
voluntary act. Before me:
.
OfFICIAL SEAL
DEVETTE KELLY
NOTARYPUBUC-OREGON
COMMISSION NO. 420351
tCf COMMISSION EXPIRES AUG, 15,2011
~~
My Commission Expires: <j lIs-III
f f
Date Received:-cil J#f
Planner: AL ' '
Fec:Ex. US Airbill
Express
.
= 8 b, .JJ 0 757 903 4
From ,....,._"..1Ift
0... June 4. 2009
Sender'lftKlEx
Account Number
1054-6085-6
.......,
N,,,,. Andv Limbird
.......1541 I 726-3610
~~CITY OF SPRINGFLD/DEV SVCS
""""'" 225 N 5TH ST
----'
""SPRINGFIELD
""le OR
~P 97477-4671
Your~IBilling_
IW:___"_"'_
OPTlOt'H
To
~~('Plan Amendment Specialist .......(503 1373-0050
r~~eoartment of Land Conservation and Development
Racipien(1
~;:~~;~~~~l Street NE. Suite 150
--
Add....
r;;;;;..,...~__.I.,...fedblDc-......ftdb"'*-'*--
"" Salem
""le OR
~P 97301-2540
Date. ~eceived: /." I 'f J ;!no'1 0368751909
, 1
Planner: AL
. Schedule a pickup at fedex.com
_ Simplify your shipping. Manage your account Access all the tools you need.
,~
>o..~
02_ _
~rir.In
4a Express Pockag. Service
q;"'Priority _ O"''''Sta>>d'''-,
.....e..o..-....,.., "-__..........
r'~.-r"'= ", "".-
O~~ .~ D~~Saver
L- ~::",,;:;II"''''''= --'''''-
4b Exp"'~fieth\~ce ~... ---l
o i::'2.t,'!.e~ 0 ~~S"S-
....~=:= .......,P'" -.,:.=
t ~~ckaging
rl<1...",
'f',,_.
O"''''P'k' 0"''''
=-~s::~...,..... Bo.-o:
~'~\...r":L
~.ID r5Dk
DQ~~~
...-......
r "1
~~
..
Z
D
..
~
-
..
z
-
z
;;
n
D
,
q
o
..
-
~
;;
Z
n
-
D
-
~
,
..
n
..
..
n
.
z
D
,
D
C
n
Z
~
D
-
~
Pat:btI- fWfIf ,501bs.
o [,:<l~'C'-....
.....,o....,N01_
0"''''
ToO.
0""""
.---....
6 Special Handling ...................1
o ~_~00I...., 0 ~~r:=:.. 0 ~~
~ta~~~~ ::=elor ==-
oOU"~ ..~............ .1
o No 0 r.e:..___ 0 ~,~ 0 ~~c:.... _I_lie
.-;;-::--- ...=:-...... 0 CargoAirctlftOnly
1 PaymenI ~ ~F.ilb.-c.".c..8CM1""'" ---,
~"""" 0 ",,;;en. 0 n;"p,rty 0 Cad,c." 0 c.oh/Cho,k
-.1ilI..,s.a..
1........
--..
"'""""
r....__
r...._
ToIIIOIdlndv.llllt
s
'::,,/ I. fJ.r;r.;,.~~~ ,,,..
8 Resident,l( b'~IYery Ilgnlture ttlons
t'7U
NoSilInlturt
O~~..
....~.
,
OirectSignlturt
0=.::::"
......,.....--
Indirect Sionlturt
o ......_--,.
Wa.'~....:
...-
...-NTtDJNUUoSRS
..
""'
JJl
N
.-
..,.........I......d-=t:tlnoI.~
15191
1 ~ I
, D In person D electronic D maiIdci '
S 2 DLCD
Notice of Adoption,
THIS FORM MUST BE MAILED TO DLCD
'" II Hll' 5 WORKING DAYS .<\FTER THE FINAL DECISION
PER ORS 197.610, OAR CHAPTER 660 - DMSION 18
.,"j
For '?~~~ ~~e. ~~Iy
Jurisdiction: City of Springfield Local file number: .LRP2009-00001
Date of Adoption: June 1, 2009 Date Mailed; June 4, 2009
Was a Notice of Proposed Amendment (Form 1) mailed to DLCD? VesDate: 2/12/2009
o Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment 0 Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment
o Land Use Regulation Amendment 0 Zoning Map Amendment
o New Land Use Regulation [g] Other: PAPA
-
Summarize the adopted amendment Do not use technical terms. Do not write "See Attached".
Adoption of Nodal Development Overlay District for -168 acres of northwest Springfield identified as the "McKenzie-Gateway
Medium Density Residential Site". The post-acknowledgement plan amendment is consistent with a Conceptual Development Plan
adopted for the area in 1994; amendments to the Metropolitan AreaGeneral Plan (Metro Plan) and Gateway Refinement Plan adopted
in 2005 (Commercial Policy and Implementation Action 5.0); TransPlan; and provisions of the approved RiverBend Master Plan.
Does the Adoption differ from proposal? Ves, Please explain below:
Only properties currently inside the Springfield City Limits were included in the adopted Nodal Development Overlay (approximately
168 acres). As properties within the contemplated nodal area request annexation to the city, the Nodal Development Overlay may be
applied on a case-by-case basis.
Plan Map Changed from: MOR, CC, MU to: MORlNOO; CC/NOO; MU/NOO
Zone Map Changed from: to:
Location: Riverbend Master Plan area, North Springfield Acres Involved: 168
Specify Density: Pre:-ious: 10-20 New: 12-24
Applicable statewide planning goals:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16' 17 18 19
~~DD~~0~~~~~D00DDDD
Was an Exception Adopted? DYES [g] NO
Did DLCD receive a Notice of Proposed Amendment..
45-days prior to first evidentiary hearing?
If no, do the statewide planning goals apply?
If no, did Emergency Circumstances require immediate adoption?
[g] Ves
DVes
DVes
DNa
DNa
DNa
OLeo file Na.
:.~ :".. , ~,
Date Received:~/'l~?
Planner: AL
Please list all affected State or Federal Agencies, Local Governments or Special Districts:
ODOT, Lane County, Lane Transit District
Local Contact: Andy. Limbird
Address: 225 Fifth Street
City: Springfield
Zip: 97477-
Phone: (541) 726-3784 Exte'nsion:
Fax Number: ,541-726-3689
E-mail Address:alimbird@ci.springfield.or.us
ADOPTION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
This form must be mailed to DLCD within 5 workin!! days after the final decision ,
per ORS 197.610, OAR Chapter 660 - Division 18.
L Send this Form ancl TWO,Comnlete Conies (documents and mans) of the Adonted Amendment to:
ATTENTION: PLAN AMENDMENT SPECIALIST
DEPARTMENT OF LAND CONSERV ATlON AND DEVELOPMENT
635 CAPITOL STREET NE; SUlTE 150
SALEM, OREGON 97301-2540
2. Electronic Submittals: At least one hard copy must be sent by mail or in person, or by emailing
larry.french@state,or,us. '
3. Please Note: Adopted materials must be sentto DLCD 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 tex1 bfthe amendment plus adopted fmdings
and supplementary information.
5. The deadline to appeal will not be extended if you submit this notice of adoption within five working
'days of the final decision. Appeals to LUBA may be filed within twenty-one (21) days of the date, the
Notice of Adoption is sent to DLCD.
6. In addition to sending the Notice of Adoption to DLCD, you must notify persons who participated in th,
local hearing and requested notice of the final decision.
7. Need More Copies? You can now access these forms online at http://www.Icd.state.or.us/. Please
print on 8-1I2xll !!Teen '030er only. You may also call the DLCDOffice at (503)'373-0050; or Fax
your request to: (503) 378-5518; or Emai1 yourrequesttolarry.french@state.or.us - Attention: Plan
Amendment Specialist.
Updated March 17,2009
Date Heceived:~1 ~~
Planner: AL .
'.
.-11
"
ORDINANCE NO. 6241 (General)
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD METROPOLITAN
AREA GENERAL PLAN (METRO PLAN) DIAGRAM BY ADOPTING A NODAL
DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DESIGNATION FOR APPROXIMATELY 168 ACRES
OF LAND WITHIN THE MCKENZIE-GATEWAY MDR SITE.
THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD FINDSTHAT:
WHEREAS, Section 5.14-100 of the Springfield Development Code (SDC) sets fort4 '
procedures for Metro Plan diagram amendments; and
WHEREAS, SDC Subsection 5.l4-120.B.I states:
"The City Council may initiate a Type I or Type II Metro Plan amendment at anytime.
Consideration of this type of amendment shall begin immediately thereafter..."; and
WHERE;AS, the Springfield Common Council adopted the amended RiverBend Master
Plan in June, 2006; and
WHEREAS, Condition #12 of the adopted RiverBend Master Plan approval states:
"The City Council hereby initiates the application of the Nodal.overlay Plan Designation
at the entirety of the McKenzie Gateway MDR Site as identified in the Gateway
Refinement Plan"; and '
WHEREAS, the subject area is depicted as Potential Nodal Development Area 7B 'on the
adopted Eugene-Springfield Transportation System Plan (TransPlan); and ' . '
WHEREAS, timely and sufficient notice of the public hearing on this Ordinance has
been provided in accordimce with SDC 5.2-115; and
WHEREAS, on April 21 ", 2009 the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the
plan amendment request. The Development Services Department staff notes including the
criteria of approval, findings and recommendations, together with the testimony and submittals
of the persons testifying at that hearing were considered and were part of the record of the
proceeding. After considering the record, the Planning Commission deliberated and voted 5 in
favor, 0 opposed, and 2 absent to forward a recommendation of approval to the Common
Council; and J
WHEREAS, on May 18th, 2009 the Springfield Common Council conducted a public
hearing to receive testimony and hear comments on this proposal. The Common Council is now
read y to take action on this proposal based upon the above recommendations and the evidence
and testimony already in the record, as well as the evidence and testimony presented at this
public hearing held in the matter of adopting this Ordinance amending the Metro Plan diagram.
. ,
Date Received:
Planner: AL
t/'I/~
.~ ';- ~
J
, '
"
Ordinance No. 6241 - Page 2
'NOW, THEREFORE, the Common Council of the City of Springfield does ordain as
follows:
Section 1: The above findings are hereby adopted as findings in support of this
Ordinance.
Section 2: The Nodal Development Overlay Designation is hereby adopted arid applied
to the subject properties within the McKenzie-Gateway MDR Site that are inside the current
Springfield city limits. The ~ubject properties are more particularly depicted and described in
Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
Section 3: Upon requests for annexation of remaining prope11y in the McKenzie-
Gateway MDR site, the City Council shall consider initiating the Metro Plan amendment process
for nodal development on a site-specific basis consistent with, RiverBend Master Plan Approval
Condition #12. '
Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this
Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction,
such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding
shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof.
Section 5: Notwithstanding the effective date of ordinances as provided by Section 2.110
of the Springfield Municipal Code 1997, this Ordinance shall become effective 30 days from the
date of its passage by the City Council and approval by the Mayor, or upon the date of its
acknowledgement as provided by ORS 197.625, whichever date is later.
Adopted by the Common Council of the City of Springfield this 1st day of June,
2009 by a vote of 5 in favor and 0 against.
ATTEST:
Approved by the Mayor of the City ~f\ri~~~h:;t~~ne
Mayor Y I
~hvn<-
City Record'@
,2009
~l[1JI(WUJ '1, ;WrRO~ED
f -. "fr" .-. ,....,..
",\1,) r'U, "'.: \
....l-~i~J, ~ ~,,,,,,
(IMF:.._S: _\ \ I.:::,.... ,
1.~G/\L CC}Ut\l~'~EL .
, ,
Pi'!teReceived:.A ~~f
P/1;lnner; AL f2'1-e'_____
"
Ordinance No. 6241 - Page 3
EXHIBIT A
NODAL DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY (NDO) IMPLEMENTATION AREA
),
!I
I '
;;
J _n__~'l
I ~ - nrmond Fe", Road , ,
. .~" . ... \ \~\
: I Be;tlini RO~ ~' " '^ "YX
II -~,
.IIIIJ'/-l-ri
lL..Ll1 IIU
InTI I -0, I
tu Ill'(!;' J
('::on1In::![W<-"
\ /'11111
~
~~=
00'/ Il~,
m,ru
~~ NOD Overlay District - Affected Area
w
r.
- - - Site Boundary
s
, ,
Date Received: ~~,lfl7,
, ,Planner: AL
Page 1 of 2 '
-'.. ::roo", '.'t'
Ordinance No, 6241 ,- Page' 4
Affected Properties:
EXHIBIT A (Continued)
'{i
I
~,II
"I,
Map 17-03-22-00, Tax Lots 100,200,903,904,3401,3402,3403,3500,3600,3700, 3800, 3900,
4000,4101,4102,4200 & 4300
Map 17-03-14-00, Tax Lots 1801 & 1900
I
, ' pate; Received: / /.~,
'Planner: Al~1 _h_,
I
I
]
,
I
I
I
I
I
1
,
,
Page 2 of ~
"
. -~
, Type IV Metro Plan Amendment
Staff Report and Findings
Hearina Date:
, April 21st, 2009
Planning Commission
Case Number:
, LRP 2009-00001
May 18th, 2009
City Council
Aoolicant
Prooertv Owners
Aoolicant's
Representative
N/A
City of Springfield
225 Fifth Street
. Spririgfield, OR 97477
, peaceHeallh'Oregon
Women's Care Properties LLC
City of Springfield
Date Submitted: January 29, 2009
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The subject area is contemplated for nodal development in planning documents adopted by the City,
including the Metro Plan, Tr:ansPlan, the Gateway Refinement Plan, and the RiverBend Mas/er Plan.
The Springfield City Council adopted the amended RiverBend Master Plan on June 19, 2006.
Condition #12 of the Master Plan approval reads: "The City Council' hereby initiates the application of
the Noqal Overlay Plan Designation at the entirety of the McKenzie Gateway MDR Site as identified in
the Gateway Refinement Plan.. The McKenzie Gateway MDR Site (now more commonly known as
RiverBend) was identified in a Conceptual Development Plan prepared by the City in 1994. Council
adopted Ordinance 6109 (amending the Metro Plan and Gateway Refinement Plan) on January 10,
2005 with the intent of preserving the potential for nodal development in the RiverSend neighborhood,
These adopted plan amendments set the stage for development of this area with the ,Sacred Heart
Medical Center and campus. '
Consistent with the adopted plan amendments and City Council's direction, staff are presenting the
nodal development implementation action for consideration by the, Plannin9 Commission and City
Council. The Planning Commission adopted a recommendation of su'pport for the proposal by a 5-0
vote atthe April 21, 2009 meeting.
REQUEST: ,
Staff are requesting . approval to implement the Nodal Development Overlay .District (NDO)
designation for approximately 168 acres of the PeaceHealth Campus, The NDO District would
supplement the zoning designations in the area, which include Community Commercial (CC), Mixed
Use Commercial (MUG) and Medium Density Residential (MDR). Current zoning for the affected
, properties is Medical Services (MS), CC and MDR. A Metro Plan Amendment at this time (not during
Periodic Review) is known as a Post-Acknowledgement Plan Amendment (PAPA).
SITE DESCRIPTION:
The affected properties comprise approximately 168 acres and are identified as Assessor's Map 17-
03-14-00, Tax Lot 1900; and Map 17-03-22-00, Tax Lots 100, 200, 903, 904, 3401-3403 and 3600-
4300, The subject properties include the developed Sacred Heart Medical Center site and ancillary
, ,
".....,
, Date Received: 6/~,?h?
Planner: AL
ATTACHMENT 1 - 1
..
buildings; the Women's Care Center; and vacant future development areas surrounding the hospital. '
The affected properties have no jurisdictional wetlands or inventoried Goal 5 natural or historic
resources. Although not an inventoried historic resource, a pioneer graveyard discovered during
excavation work at the south end of the subject area was surveyed and relocated in 2008.
The site is,within the Springfield Urbim Growth Boundary, and all the subject properties were
previously annexed into the City of Springfield. The subject properties are within the Gateway
Refinement Plan area. ' , , '
I
.1.
I
I
I
I
I
.~
I
I,
I
I
The affected properties are bordered on the east by the McKenzie ,River. The abutting properties to
the north and south are outside the City limits and zoned Low Density Residential (LDR). The areas
immediately west of the site are outside the City limits and zoned LDR and MDR.
This proposed plan amendment only affects properties currently inside the City limits., However, the
ultimate boundaries of the' RiverBend nodal development overlay area could logically include
properties on Deadmond Ferry Road, Game Farm Road and Baldy View Lane that are outside the
current City limits. As'these property owners request annexation, the City Council will have the
opportunity to incorporate the property into the RiverBend nodal development overlay area on a case-
by-case basis.
REVIEW PROCESS:
The proposed Metro Plan Amendment is a Type II Amendment because it is located inside the city
limits and is site specific. In accorda(lce with SDC 5.14-135.B and 5.14-140, a Type II Metro Plan
amendment inside the city limits shall be presented to the Planning Commission for consideration and
, recommendation, and tO,the City Council for final action. '
The City Council initiated the Nodal Development Overlay designation for the subject area by
adopting the amended RiverBend Master Plan in 2006. staff initiated this Post-Acknowledgement
Plan Amendment on January 29, 2009. A notice and supplementary information was mailed to the
Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) on February 12, 2009. . Representatives
, of the affected property owners (PeaceHealth and the Women's Care Center) were contacted directly
in mid-March prior to issuance of the hearing notice. The public hearing notice was mailed out on
April 1, 2009 to property owners within 300 feet of the proposed Nodal Development" Overlay District
implementation area per Section 5.2-115A 1-14 of the Springfield Development Code (SDC).
Advertised notice of the public hearing was pu.blished in the local newspaper (Register Guard) on
April 11tl1, 2009, as required in Section 5.2-115.8 of the SDC. , '
Since this application was initiated by the City Council, staff have responded to three teleph~'ne calls
requesting clarification on the proposed amendments and possible impacts to properties adjacent to
the subject area, No substantive concems were raised, Staff provided follow up written clarificati,on
to one caller who asked whether a conference center and hotel could be built, in the nodal
development area. One written comment i(l support of the proposal was .received from Bonnie
Ullmann of the Game Farm Neighbors (Attachment 6), '
At the Planning Commission public hearing on April 21, 2009, verbal testimony was submitted by
Philip Farrington; Land Use Planning' & Development Director for PeaceHealth. Mr. Farrington
expressed support for implementation of the nodal development designation, but noted that certain
nodal development overlay standards may pres,ent site design challenges. Mr. Farrington also stated
that, as other properti~s within the McKenzie-Gateway MDR site are annexed to the City, individual
property owners shouldn't have to bear the additional cost of implementing the nodal development
designation.
i
i
I
,
,
~ ",\,' .:-c .
. -.., "
!?flte Received: 61'~f
P/gnner: . AL '/ ~
,
I
I
, I
I
I
i
,
I
i
.l.TTA"UIU:'LTT '" "
As a result of the submitted testimony, the Planning Commission added Statement #4 on the Planning
Commission Recommendation (see Attachment 7) recommending that the City initiate the same
amendments to any of the subject properties that seek annexation and this plan designation,
METRO PLAN DESIGNATION:
The subject property is designated Commercial and Medium Density Residential as' shown in the
Metro Plan diagram. Specific Findings related to the Metro Plan are discussed in this report
METRO PLAN DIAGRAM AMENDMENT
CRITERIA OF APPROVAL - SDC5.14-135.C.1 and 2
'The fa/lowing' criteria shall be applied by the City Council in approving or denying a Metro Plan
amendment application: '
1. The amendment, must be consistent with the relevant Statewide planning goals adopted by the'
Land Conservation and Development Commission; and '
2, Adoption of the amendment must not make the Metro Plan intemally inconsistent.
CRITERIA OF APPROVAL - SDC 5.14-135.C.1
1. The amendment must be consistent with the relevant Statewide planning goals adopted by the
Land Conservation and Development Commission. '
STAFF FINDINGS RELATED TO COMPUANCEWITH GOAL 1: -
Goal 1 ,... Citizen Involvement: To develop a citizen' involvement program that insures the
opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process.
Finding 1: Goal 1 addresses the need to develop a citizen involvement program to ensure citizen '
involvement in all phases of the land use planning process. The Planning Commission and the City
Council will hold public hearings and accept testimony on the proposal. Through the procedures
established by the City, citizens have received notice of hearings in a generally published local paper
(Register Guard) and have the opportunity to be heard regarding the proposed plan amendment.
Notice of the public hearings was also given to property owners within 300 feet of the proposed Plan
Amendment area in accordance with SDC 5.2-115.A1-14 requirements. In addition, the provisions of
ORS 197.610 regarding local govemment notice of proposed amendment provided to the Department
of Land Conservation and Development has been observed. Since the proposed amendment
complies with the City's citizen involvement program and citizens have opportunities to be involved in
the procedure, the proposed amendment is consistent with Goal 1. '.
STAFF FINDINGS ,RELATED TO COMPLIANCE WITH GOAL 2:
Goal 2: Land Use Planning: To establish a land use planning process and policy
framework as a basis for aI/decision and actions. related to use of land and to assure an
adequate factual base for such decisions and actions.
Finding 2: Goal 2 requires that local comprehensive plans be consistent with the Goals, that local
comprehensive plans be internally consistent, and that implementing ordinances be consistent with
acknOWledged comprehensive plans. Goal 2 also requires that larid use decisions bi;! coordinated
with affected jUrisdictions and that they be supported by an adequate factual base.
": '. - "
. .,
. ~ ..';
, '.
Date ~eceived: o/"'r.)...J?
Planner: AL
ATTAr.HMFNT 1 - '-l
Because the proposed plan amendment does not affect properties outside the current city'limits, the
City sent referral notice of the proposed amendment to the City of Eugene and Lane County on April
8, 2009 extending "interested party" status to each government. The City sent the statutorily required
notice of the initial public hearing more than 45 days in advance to the state Department of Land
Conservation and Development, ensuring that they are given opportunity for. comment and review on
conformity to applicable statewide planning goals. The DLCD reviewed the submitted materials and
advised they do not have concems or objections with the proposed plan amendment (see Attachment
6), '
'-I-
\
I
Y
,
The Metro Plan and the SDC, as well as the Statewide Planning Goals and applicable statutes,
provide policies and criteria for the evaluation of comprehensive plan amendments, Compliance with
these measures, assures an adequate factual base for approval of the proposed Metro Plan
,amendment. As discussed elsewhere in this document, the proposed plan amendment is consistent
with the Metro Plan and the Goals.
I
I
I
i
i
, Amendments to the Metro Plan and the Gateway Refinement Plan adopted in 2005 and 2006 provide
for nodal development in the subject area, and are consistent with the proposed plan amendment.
The subject area is also identified as Site 7B on the adopted "Potential Nodal Development Areas"
map in TransPlan. Therefore, by demonstrating such compliance, the amendments, satisfy the
consistency element of Goal 2,
Finding 5: Goal 5 requires local governments to protect a variety of open space, scenic, historic, and
natural resource values. Goal 5 and its implementing rule, OAR Ch. 660, Division 16, require
planning jurisdictions, at acknowledgment and as a part of periodic review, to
(1) identify such resources;
(2) determine their quality, quantity, and location;
(3) identify conflicting uses; .
(4) examine the economic, social, environmental, and energy (ESEE) consequences that
could result from allowing, limiting, or prohibiting the conflicting uses; and
(5) , develop programs to resolve the conflicts,
i
I
,
j
I
I
I.
t\.,. 3'
... + ~ .
09te Received:~~?
P/gnner: AL
"TT A /"IUI,U::l.IT 1 _~" A
"
The subject properties are not on Springfield's acknowledged Metro Plan Goal 5 inventory. No
threatened or endangered species have been inventoried on the site, and no archaeological or
significant historical inventoried resources are located on the site', A pioneer graveyard discovered
during site excavation work at the south edge of the RiverBend Master Plan area was surveyed and
relocated in 2008.
The National Wetland Inventory and Springfield Local Wetland Inventory maps have been consulted
and there are, no jurisdictional wetlands warranting protection ,located on the site. A cluster of small,
non-significant wetlands (depicted on the Springfield Local Wetland Inventory, and identified as Site
M07 on the Springfield Natural Resources Study) are located near the northeast edge of the subject
area. These non-significant wetlands are not identified or contemplated for, protection in the
RiverBend Master Plan.
The McKenzie River is an ider)lified riparian resource .that abuts the east boundal)' of the subject
area. A riparian setback and conservation zone has been established within the RiverBend Master
Plan area. The proposed plan amendment is only applicable to existing and future urban
development areas within the RiverBend Master Plan Area, and will not have an adverse effect on
protection or preservation of this resource. Therefore, the proposed amendment does not alter the
City's compliance with GoalS. .
STAFF FINDINGS RELATED TO COMPLIANCE WITH GOAL 6:
Goal 6 - Air, W'1ter and Land Resources Quality: To maintain and improve the quality of
the air, water and land resources of the state.
Findin9 6: The purpose of Goal 6 is to maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land
resources of the state. Generally, Goal 6 requires that development comply with applicable state and
federal air and water quality standards. In the context of the proposed Metro Plan amendment, Goal
6 requires that the applicant demonstrate that it is reasonable to expect that applicable state and
federal environmental quality standards can be met.
The proposed plan amendment does not modify any of the Goal 6 related, policies of the Metro Plan,
nor does it amend the Regional Transportation Plan (TransPlan), .the Springfield Dev.e/opment Code,
.other applicable Goal 6 policies, or any regulations implementing those policies,. '
Most of the subject area lies within the 1"20 Year Time of Travel Zones and Zone of Contribution for
the Sports Way wellhead. The northeast edge of the subject area lies outside the mapped Zone of
Contribution for Springfield drinking water wells. Because most. of the area is regulated by the
Drinking Water Protection Overlay District, existing and future development must demonstrate
compliance with the City's Drinking Water Protection standards. The proposed_amendment does not
alter the City's compliance with Goal 6. - ,
STAFF FINDINGS RELATED TO COMPLIANCE WITH GOAL 7:
Goal 7 - Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards: To protect life and property from
natural disasters and hazards. ' '
Finding 7: Goal 7 requires that development subject to damage from naturaL. hazards and disasters
be planned and/or ~onstructed with appropriate safeguards and mitigation. The goal also requires
that plans be based on an inventol)' of known areas of natural disaster and hazards, such as areas
prone to landslides, flooding, 'etc. ' '
Date Received' ~/$!/,J.k>?
Planner: AL .
. .~ .....
ATTA"UUtarT 1 _ I:
,
'.1
,
I
I
Staff has reviewed the natural constraints map and the FEMA Floodplain Map in relation to the
subject area. The subject area is relatively flat and is not subject to landslide hazards. The eastem
half of the subject area is within the mapped FEMA 100 year floodplain. A McKenzie River floodplain
analysis prepared by David Evans & Associates in November, 2003 has updated the flood level
information for the subject area. Existing arid future development in the area must demonstrate
compliance with the Floodplain Overlay District provisions of the City's Development Code, including
establishing building floor elevations at least one foot above the calculated flood level. Therefore,
approval of the proposed Plan Amendment will not alter the City's acknowledged compliance with
Goal 7 through its adopted plans, codes and procedures.
STAFF FINDINGS RELATED TO COMPLIANCE WITH GOAL 8:
Goal 8 - Recreation Needs: To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state
and visitors and, where appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary recreational
facilities including destination resorts.
Finding 8: Goal 8 requires local governments to plan and provide for the siting of necessary
recreational facilities to "satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors" and,
where appropriate, provide for the sitirig of redeat/onal facilities including destination resorts. Staff
has consulted the Willama/ane 2G-year ParKs and Recreation Comprehensive Plan in relation'to Goal
, 8 compliance, The Willamalane 2G-year Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Plan was adopted by
the City of Springfield as part of the MetroPlan's compliance with Goal 8. According to Map 2 of the
Comprehensive Plan, two future park and recreation facilities are contemplated within theeastem half
of the subject area, which is identified for future residential development The proposed plan
amendment does not preclude the acquisition of public land for provision of recreational facilities,
including neighborhood and special use parks as noted in the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, the
proposed plan amendment does not alter the City's compliance with Goal 8.
I'
i"
I
I
I
I-
-I
STAFF FINDINGS RELATED TO COMPLlANCEWITH GOAL 9:
Goal 9 - Economic Development: To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state
for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's
citizens.
Finding 9: Goal 9 requires the city to provide adequate opportunities for a vari~ty of economic
activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of the citizens. Because the nodal development
overlay does not supplant the underlying commercial and mixed use zoning of the affected properties,
and nodal designation supports and encourages more intensive development of these, lands, the
proposed amendment will provide additional employment opportunities by allowing more inten~ive site
development thereby enhancing the city's capacity for economic development. , Therefore, the
proposed amendment further implements the City's compliance with Goal 9.
-.
STAFF FINDINGS RELATED TO GOAL 10:
Goal 10 - Housing: To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state.
, Finding 10: LCDC's Housing "goal requires cities to maintain adequate supplies of buildable lands for
needed housing, based on an acknowledged inventory of buildable lands,
The 1999 Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area Residential Land and Housing Study is Springfield's
most current adopted housing study related to Goal 10. The City of Springfield is also currently
undergoing a new Residential Lands Study that will analyze the housing inventory and projected
needs for the next 20 years. Preliminary findings of the Residential Lands Study suggest that there is
a need for ~dditio,nal housing within the 2010-2030 planning period. Some of the anticipated need
Qate Received:~~
Planner: AL Inn
",
"
could ,be met through increasing density of existing residential zones. The proposed amendment
'would increase allowable density levels within the subject area, thus providing more housing options
for Springfield residents. The residential component, of the subject area is zoned- MDR, and is
currently vacant. The nodal overlay would allow for housing densities to be increased up to 20%
above the base standards of the MDR District. Such action is clearly consistent with intent and
purpose ofGoal10.
STAFF FINDINGS RELATED TO COMPLIANCE WITH GOAL 11:
Goal 11- Public Facilities and Services: To plan and develop a timely, orderly and efficient
arrangement of public facilities and services as a frameworlc' for urban and rural
development
OAR 66G-011-0005(7)(a)-(d) Definition of Public Facilities:
(a) Water
(b) Sanitary Sewer
(c) Storm sewer
(d) Transportation
, ,
Finding 11:' This goal requires the provision of a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement of public
facilities and services. The subject area is located within the Springfield UGB and city limits, and
already contains a regional hospital facility and ancillary medical service buildings. The subject area
is accessed via recently-completed local and regional transportation improvements, inClUding the
Martin Luther 'King, Jr. Parkway extension, Cardinal Way extension, widening of Beltline Road, and
construction of RiverBend Drive. The proposed nodal development overlay will not affect the ability to
provide needed services to the subject area. All the required urban services are existing or available
to support future residential, commercial and mixed used. development on the subject properties. The
Metro Plan and associated facility plans have been acknowledged to confonn to Goal 11, thereby
ensuring that pUblic facilities and services are currently available to the subject site. Therefore, the
proposed amendment does not affect the Metro Plan's compliance with Goal 11. "
STAFF FINDINGS RELATED TO COMPLIANCE WITH GOAL 12:
Goal 12 - Transportation: To provide and encourage a safe, convenient" and economic
transportation system. ' ,
Finding 12: Goal 12 requires ,local governments to provide and encourage a safe, convenient and
economical transportation system. The proposed amendment involves about 168 acres of property,
of which approximately 50 acres is already developed with the hospital facility and ancillary buildings.
, The transportation analysis prepared for the RiverBend Master Plan contemplates build-out of the
subject area with a combination of commercial, residential and mixed-use ,~evelopment. Nodal
designation of the subject area was contemplated in the regional transportation plan adopted for,
Eugene-Springfield (TransPlan) and long-range plans ~dopted by the City. Implementation of the
nodal, designation for the subject properties is a logical progression of the recent and planned
transportation projects that directly or indirectly benefit the subject area, including: Pioneer ParKway
. roundabout and MLK Jr. ParKway Extension;' eastbound Beltline Road off-ramp from 1-5; Mure
Gateway/Beltline intersection improvements; RiverBend' Drive 'construction; arid installation of
signalized intersections on MLK Jr. Parkway at the intersections with RiverBend Drive, Cardinal Way
and Game Fann Road East '
In addition to street and intersection improvements, the subject propertil;!s will derive a direct benefit
from the new Bus Rapid Transit (EmX) line currently being constructed,to serve the Gateway area of
north Springfield. Provision of a highly efficient public transportation system is a key element of the
Date Received: 6/Y/.?H?
Planner: AL
...... 0.. .,~ \.~.
"
'..".
,.'
ATTA"'UU~J..IT 1 _ ~
nodal development concept. Two EmX line transit stops are slated for construction withlnthe subject
area - one near the intersection of MLK Jr. Parkway and RiverBend Drive, and another to serve the
Sacred Heart Medical Center.
I
,
.1
I
,
,
I
I
'Any significant intensification of development (beyond that contemplated in adopted plans and
studies) will, be subject to development review to assure existing transportation capacity is not'
exceeded. Therefore, the proposed plan amendment is consistent with Goal 12 and applicable local
implementing policies.
STAFF FINDINGS RELATED TO COMPLIANCE WITH GOAL 13: ,
Goal 13 - Energy Conservation: To conserve energy. Land and uses developed on the
land shall be managed and controlled so as to maximize the conservation of all forms of
energy, based upon sound economic principles.
STAFF FINDINGS RELATED TO COMPLIANCE WITH GOAL 14:
Goal 14 -Urbanization: To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to
, urban land use. .
1
I
I
I
I
i
I
\
I
I
Finding 13: The Energy goal is a general planning goal and provides Iim!ted guidance for
site-specific plan amendments. The proposed amendment has no direct impact on energy
conservation, though it would arguably: promote greater energy efficiency by enabling future
development at increased density levels and with more transportation options within the subject area.
. Therefore, the proposed amendment is consistent with, and does not alter; the City's continued
compliance with Goal 13,
Finding 14: Goal 14 requires local jurisdictions to provide for an "orderly and efficient transition from
rural to urban'land use". The subject area is within the UGB and the city limits of Springfield, and
within an existing urbanized area of the community, A portion of the subject area has been intensively
developed with a major hospital facility and medical campus. Therefore, Goal 14 is not applicable to
this application.
I
STAFF FINDINGS RELATED TO COMPLIANCE WITH GOAL 15:
Goal 15"'- Willamette River Greenway: To protect, conserve, enhance and maintain the
natural, scenic, historical, agricultural, economic and recreational qualities of lands along
the Willamette River as the Willamette River Greenway. '
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Finding 15: Goal 15 does not apply to the proposed plan am-endment because the subject aroa is not
, located within the Willamette River Greenway. However, similar protection measures 'for the
McKenzie River have been implemented through the development plans adopte~ for the subject area.
STAFF FINDINGS RELATED TO COMPLIANCE WITH GOALS 16-19:
Goal 16 through 19: (Estuarine Resources, Coastal Shorelands, Beaches and Dunes, ,and
Ocean Resources). ' ,
Finding 16: The subject site is not located within any coastal, ocean, estuarine, or beach and dune,
resources related area. Therefore, Goals 16-19 do not apply to this Plan Map Amendment
application. '
.-.
"
Olilte! ~eceived:
P/i!lnner; AL
~/;~f
r
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
..............,.,.,....- ..
CRITERIA OF APPROVAL - SDC 5.14-135.C.2
2. Adoption of the amendment must not make the Metro Plan internally inconsistent.
STAFF FINDINGS RELATED TO 5.14-135.C.2:
Finding 17: The application requests amendment of the Metro Plan diagram to implement a nodal
development overlay for approximately, 168 acres. This section of the application narrative addresses
the consistency of the amendment with the applicable policies of the Metro Plan, and to demonstrate
that adoption of the amendment will not make the Metro Plan internally incon~;stent as required by the
approval criteria in SDC 5.14-135.C.2.
This narrative only addresses those policies that apply to the proposal, and does not discuss those '
portions of the Metro Plan that: (1) apply only to- rural or other lands outside of the urban growth
boundary; (2) apply to land uses other ,than the current or proposed. designations for the site and will
not be affected by the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment; or (3) 'clearly apply only to specific
development applications such as site plan review submittals or subdivisions. In many instances the
goals, policies, and implementation measures apply to specific development proposals that will be
addressed through compliance with applicable City regulations during site plan review.
The Metro Plan Introduction, Section D provides the following definitions:
A !:loal as a broad statement of philosophy that describes the hopes of the people of the
community for the future of the community. A coal may never be completely attainable, but is
used as a point to strive for. -
An obiective is an attainable target that the community attempts to reach in striving to meet a
goal. An obiective may also be considered as an intermediate point that will help fulfill the
overall goal.
A policv is a statement 'adopted as part of the Plan, to provide a consistent course of action
moving the community towards attainment of its goals.
Except for the Growth Management Goals, which are addressed below, each of the Metro Plan
policies are addressed in the order in which they appear in the Plal1 Element section of the,Plan. .
Finding 18:
Metro Plan Element Growth Management
Policv 1: The,urban growth boundary and sequential development shall continue to be implemented
as an essential means to achieve compact urban growth. Provision of all urban services shall be
concentrated inside the urban growth boundary.
The proposed amendment satisfies this policy because the subject property is inside the UGB and city
limits and, as such, encourages compact urban growth. Urban services are available at sufficie[lt
levels to accommodate existing and future development. Implementation of the nodal development
overlay will encourage more compact and efficient land development, which is consistent with this
'policy. Future development within the affected properties will be subject to development review, and
any need for increased capacity will be addressed through this process, The City's development
review processes ensure that the appropriate level of services is available to serve existing and future
development. " ,
, ,
Date Received: 6/Y/.l<HJ?
Planner: AL
ATTA0~U~MT 1 _ Q
'.1
,
Finding 19:
Metro Plan Element: A. Residential Land Use and Housing Bement
I'
.1
I
I
I
I
Policv A,11: Generally locate higher. density residential development near employment or commercial
services, in proximity to major transportati~n systems or within transporlation-efficient nodes. '
The subject area contains an existing major employment center (regional hospital facility and medical
service buildings). Vacant commercial and mixed use properties within the subject area are expected
to generate employment opportunities as these sites develop. Additionally, the subject properties are
adjacent to the Gateway area, which is a focal point for employment and commercial activities in north
Springfield, The. GateWay area, including the subject site, is served by major transportation
connections that include 1-5, Beltline Road, MLK Jr. Parkway, RiverBend Drive, and Gateway Street.
The residential component of the RiverBend Master Plan area is planned to be medium density
housing, with additional opportunities for residential dwelling units in mixed use zones. Higher
dwelling unit densities are plarined adjacent to the hospital campus, which is consistent with the
principles of nodal development and policies listed in the Residential Land Use and Housipg Element.
As stated previously, the Gateway EmX bus rapid transit line is currently under construction and is
designed to serve the subject site and greater Gateway area of Springfield.. There are two transit
stops planned to serve the subject area, Provision of a highly efficient transit system that allows users
to quickly access nearby commercial and employment centers, downtown Springfield and Eugene,
and local educational institutions is consistent with nodal development principles and Metro Plan
Policy A.11.
Policv A.22: Expand opportunities for a mix of uses in newly developing areas and existing
neighborhoods through local zoning and development regulations.
I
,
I
I
I
I
,
I
The proposed amendment will not change the underlying commercial, mixed use, and medium
density residential zoning of the subject area. Implementation of nodal development designation
discourages low-intensity automobile-oriented uses and, instead, encourages mixed use development
and more compact, efficient land development. The proposed amendment is consiJ;tent with Policy
A.22 of the Metro Plan. ' ,
Finding 20: \ . .
Metro Plan Element: D, Willamette River Greenway, River Corridors, and WateIWays Bement '
Policv D,S: New development that locates along rivet corridors and wateIWays shall be limited to
uses that are compatible with the natural, scenic, and environmental qualities of _~hose water features.
The proposed amendment should not have an adverse effect on the existing and planned riparian
setbacks and conservation areas along the stretch of the McKenzie River that is adjacent to the
subject area. Adoption of the RiverBend Master Plan and subsequent development of the subject
area with the Sacred Heart Medical Center identified provisions for protecting and enhancing the
riparian zone within the subject area. Increased building setbacks, controlled public access (paved
pathways), and riparian re..;ul a;;on zones have been used in the subject area to ensure existing and
future development is compatible with the river'corridor. As new development is proposed along the
river corridor, it will be reviewed for conformity with the adopted Master Plan and riparian protection
policies and subject to approval by the City. Therefore, the proposed amendment is ,consistent with
Policy 0.5 of the Metro Plan. '
i
I
I
I
I
I
,
tl9te! Received: tfr/J-f
Pli'lnner: AL
, .
., ':, '. '. ~.
A TT A nuur:'-IT ..
1 n
.,
Finding 21:
Metro Plan Element: F. Transportation Bement
Land Use Policv F.1: Apply the nodal development strategy in areas selected by each jurisdiction that
have identified potential for this type of transportation-efficient land use pattem. '
'\
Land Use Policv F.2: Support application of the nodal development strategy in designated areas
through infonnation, technical assistance, or incentives.
Land Use Policv F.3: Provide for transit-supportive' land use pattems ,and development, including
higher intensity, transit-oriented development along major transit corridors and near transit stations;
medium- and high-density residential development within one-quarter mile of transit stations, major
transit corridors, employment centers, and downtown areas; and development and redevelopment in
designated areas that are or could be well served by existing or planned transit. '
Land Use Policv F.4: Require improvements that encourage transit, bicycles, and pedestrians in new
commercial, public, mixed use, and multi-unit residential development.
Land Use Policv F.5: IMthin three years ofTransPlan adoption, apply the NO, Nodal Development,
designation to areas selected by each jurisdiction, adopt and apply measures to protect designated
nodes from incompatible development and adopt a schedule for completion of nodal plans and
implementing ordinances.
Land Use Policv F, 19: Establish a BRT system composed of frequent, fast transit service along major
corridors and neighborhood feeder,service that connects with the corridor service and"with activity
centers, if the system is shown to increase transit mode split along BRT corridors, if local
govemmentsdemonstrate support, and if financing for the system is feasible.
The subject area is identified as Site 7B on the "Potential Nodal Development Areas for the Eugene-
Springfield Metro Area" map of TransPlan. By design, nodal development areas encourage
pedestrian, bicycle and transit-oriented transportation uses - something that has already occurred on
the Sacred Heart Medical Center site with construction of walking paths, bicycle" lanes and bike
parking areas, anc( existing and planned transit service. Future mixed, use, commercial, and medium
density residential development'in the subject area will be required to address these standards. As
stated previously, the planned EmX bus rapid transit line will serve the Gateway area including the
subject site (the Em)( Gateway line is projected to start service in 2010). Finally, the City previously
adopted amendments to the Metro Plan and the Gateway Refinement Plan in anticipation of nodal
development in ttie subject area, Implementation of the nodal development designation" for the
subject area is consistent with provisions of the adopted TransPlan and, therefore, is consistent with
Metro Plan Policies F,1 through F.5 and F.19.' -.
Finding 22:
Metro Plan Element; G. Public Facilities and Services Element
Policv G.1: &tend the minimum level-and full range of key urban facilities and services in an orderly
and, efficient manner consistent with the growth management policies in Chapter II-B, relevant policies
in this chapter and other Metro Plan policies.
The subject area is located inside the Springfield city limits and the UGB, All necessary infrastructure
and key urban facilities/services are present to serve existing development or are available to serve
\.', '
Date Received:_ 6/~/,?etJf
Planner: AL
ATTAr'I-IMI=MT l' _ 11
'.
"
future development in the subject area in conjunction with site plan review, Therefore, the proposal is
consistent with the above policy" " " '
METRO pLAN AMENDMENT CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION.
Staff finds that the proposed amendment meets the criteria of SDC 5.14-135.C.1 & 2. After review of
the adopted City land use plans and studies, evidence provided by staff research, existing uses in the
subject area, and the applicable criteria of approval, .'staff finds that the proposed Metro Plan
Amendment is appropriate for the subject area.
"
Ogle Received' t/;/J#tJ?
Planner: AL .
" ',!>,
.-.......^.............. -..
..
on
, ,
r..
NOD
AL IMPLEMENTATION FOR '
PLANNING CASE L~pC2KOEON9ZIE-GATEWAY SITE
, -00001
Springfield, OR
,"'
-l
-l
'"
')
r:::
.
~
n
!:
-l
310
III III
::J ,w
::1
,CD ;;:J
:: CD
)>16
,<'
'CD
.~
, ....
ok ..~'
--~ ':r~'
~~J ~
~;1f /
, ,
/
,',- -------,
,
,
,
,)
..
~
-'
~
~
f~
~ -
-P.'NGm~
j;. ..-
a~Eaow
" <
j
1hBT9 1JflJ -
Users no warrsnJlos Jhsl acco
srlslnn ~~mume 811 responsibility fO;""'"Y"Y' thIs product.
tI any srmr. I - oss or dam
of this product ' om sslon or posillonaJ' age.
. . nac;cufScy
~
[::l City L1mlta ' - - UG
o - - I B
,
-
A
,
..
NODAL IMPLEMENTATION FOR MCKENZlE-GATEWAY SITE
PLANNING CASE LRP2009-00001
Subject'Neighborhood
/
IJ \
f L "
I I:
"
I
" ,
I,:
l-
Ii
I.
/,
I'
I;,
+" :-
/:
/I
I"
Springfield. Ok
,?:l'tl
\.1"
>
(J
! 1
i~) ,----~
!: LJ_......:..._l. ,i
i .. ....,... ..~-- -,". '. ,_..j..,,'
iL.
I' J
~.............~ii-.
- '.q,;.; \\ I I \
. ",'"j.)"' .'-'-'.LTU.:III/r
.;: -'~.,..:!' .r ~-~.:: ! !I! I l-lltd
...-.. '; H~.f.:UUJJli
! ;....!;'i"T -r"' "L:.lL\u;ii0t;,,' H
.: -'.. ,.~.I .\i.~' 4;~-f;'~-='1
,.....;.j..,! ~'"~/.\1.I!I{r 1\
, ","L~.'~.! ; '>.Y~~. 1It111U.C AT
~~" ' ~'0:".
'LL:',':!.: __ ",
i L_., r'-' HWllllllfill EEl
1'1:1"...."::::r; -U.LU.J
. \, -; ~~' ~ '.r:~ l ..J.J...LLJJ
'..:...........1-><\..).1 I mrn
' ;'-1.., ....,.-! I
, .... i ~ I r I"! \'!
, ;., , , 1'1 rj r' 1"1lL....t ~r '.-" ffiEB
~t:_.i!1.'1n !;P!LtrF"""'I.;:.
.:'i,'r:r:,>;z'it'.'.r"" m-
i :::.:J ~~:.~<'-:d~l~l~_fir.II.1 J,\1" \
,~~'~~ ~:.:'~~~.i:':'dllU_I.U..:., ~
.ii~ ~Il I i~m"":P,lirIT iif
: ,,~;;;~t-'-~h",,' ..-----..... ji ~ I]
_', :,t""h'",_': f-L..l..{..i..iLL.L....."'-._.~'if~.,-- t:: T'-~-::.r"T-1;..' .....:: '1
I '11 ' . 1 ill "'_ jl: . _ - u.-t'j. Hr""'\" ~.J._., ,.... :'::'::.'
". \,; - rr-1Bt r.1~.T~r,1 ~ r~... _~..l.......l:..!;'fl.../..-';:.:.:,.t.......'~n~1...
.... ,'. ,/\,,\, r'l j=~ 11 i~J.+ : I L_~-!}.'L~'Qh~Jtlj~,:,l ".~
,'- . ~-~..-.__-,- __ ' . I I ' . ~~-, '-.j 'I .;' L,l~
,-. "'" ,.j: C..Jft',)r;[',' '/1{ '.dR' ,~llIilImTTrTrmaBffiffilri,,~:i~\lft:~-- ~
") I I:, . !~_.____ ---rr:. ~,:L_ ..~, :,' .~ .. '., ~ I Wl.L.LDIIIIIICt ,.,. t~~:: - t.....~.
~!~+!-'-"7-r'~~'-~O. . ",-:h1:j _'~. ;:: :M. 8) - \,~r(j:'~,:~~;lf7LU r-t'! .:....1I1'.J..-1 ",'" I~:..:..!.-
," ,,".'.. ''''''.'' [ ,-,,-,.~] i="--..-..... _ ~~";-;';;'O"".'''';'~'' T .. ,-=:._J..l,L-t1tiJ.g'." 'il: 'N'~~~
;'lj~1:.1Cf..jt.':';e{r'.l jt-~i:-.~.~ 1 ~ll,L/"~,,,,::jl':L~\ i~ I t:::_'L:......I~,........J,.J...j~L.tII1['~Ul7
_}.,.J;.-j-_.j...r.::,.. L lL__ -;;rt. ..,.... \, ._.:.jL.~J,._lt .....:.~""7 I '['l' ,~:-,\:-....~-:"C:~"T'"T-':'"lrl-~If~ :....,
...;,;-.....; I .~..-~. ;'..;1-1 -"'--'1/. trn-:1l-~ . .... .. J ..< ,~.t-r' rr-'r.,.:.-~: ;;,'UJ..l,..._ -"r':.:J.-"-/~ tj.,.~.~,f". , ~t..",.
..;;:~~.'~....'"1:.i..i~J Ii......:;:;:~., ~ '~-.- ,.~.I!r?".c..-:._u...L..:..;',rllr1F3l.::.i..',...':;..I~I:3....-f::....,r1.i 1 _Ut::tJt.:
'-i,,~i [fi.t"!i\:l!-.,-i t-..._J~:-<-..;.~..1%:.::1-1 . " \' ~.'~T~7TIlr.'I'::~;t ;..(l'l1ifrr-;~."j.'.:{r...\.L.L:.-J':j.'.1.+\;.r...'-j-I~;c+'J..:.~t.;:Jt.
.... ..-1.... .l;",:--~~;. !~". I 'i 't-r'...~ . '.'--'. -! ~1l' 1,1,...' -'. .l..Z.i. ..~..,.... -, .' "11-,..1"' L. ~l-I' i' Wj:'-11,.
.~t;':."~~T';'~"'! , . I 8.....~-l 1" t .". e,..o..'I" - l'l7'""jTrT~<-;- ,:.>-..l.,I.-Cl....:::li-R "..'\";.l:J~rr;r.r w.-
T.l,i'.'~;'~;.-t+~W:;./n,.i;'r...r.-...L;-t:..T1;.,..,.r.._ .._ . - 1':". ,1',.'>" ".n:'1"'r'c.;:-<!;1!r~~lJ""fIT..:l-~:.:.""":~-' ~_t~Ir-".~........-::"
.....'--,.........~~..wt.:.'",.........l....L.i.!..:.."'jL:i..r.r" .J- " ..,..[,.,...j .. L1:::' ~\.'-l _....L...-.,.,....,.l .l.~::l 1.- r'.. .
(U!I.i-.::rJf,1"}S::}:lf:qiT:t:T'4'JJi~1.=ff:.IL+;i"1"~! ;'~..; :=-..-~-~\''';~1.::-.''.::'.:-.-"'... ~_. -,' -.,..:;-: t:~1[['L;'-:: r;~~"'r...l-" ~.;,r-~ -;~.i~:
SPA~I>l~E~ Then,'.,. no ~~.:s rha;acccmpany this product C UGB 0 Outside, of City Umils
. Users assume aD responsibillty for Bf1Y b.ss or damage ~ r~
......~ ans;ng from any etror, omission or positional inaCCIJIBCY ~ Site BoundaTY L..-I 'Mthin City Limits
""'::EGOH of this product D'Tax Lots
t~~r ' ,poo
(-1
U
, ,
,
"
. '.':1" ';-.~-r-: ::.::::
,I !
,
.-..,
\~.
I
I
,
- ,
, ~......
.,.....
.. ,
l
, ' ,
IITDlN~J1Q.~Yl~
,
~ \.
"
"
'"'
Date Received:
Planner: AL
"""
-,
A"T""T"A"'IIIIr'"I.I"T" n '"
NODAL IMPLEMENTATION FOR MCKENZlE-GATEWAY SITE
PLANNING CASE LRP2009-00001
Subject Area
, I' --..
,@, II,'
'-.,' :,- '/I'
, --" -- -~~-=--~~!"IT.~NA'!lO~~~_W~Y':-'::=-==:
"
-...
\\
\\
\
\
\
" \.
I
,-
; '_. l'
. ~- -
-'j.
- "---. -'c-- _. _:.........:....~
BELTlINE RD '
U,I I I I J Cc
-UI I L~
- '.. .- -I
-- - ---. -..- - ----
. ._......_-,--, --',
. I
"',>-.11 I I I I 1 I I
'(/'\ (CARDINAL WAY
'.> v')," I I I I f 11
;/X\/).;'<>'f~
'\,''' ~ '<yr' '>\j
:>~~~)~<<>
~~~~-> <-~~< /
~~~~ '~;:~~.>~~~
v/,..' \
, . /' ,-' \,
J1IT[~ jB
lliflli~'
'fHHJ S:X'=~ \ '~
ill1JJ ~14 /~0'
.1 ,I ,I I. 1 '--j-~ ~~" ' \ tm",
.:::--=~~:::::' :--~r-\ LLr< \ /.>-' I I I
Spr~N~~ ~-- 0- . .. t ... """"'ct
IItcU'"'...... no wananlles Ula accompany tiltS 1"""'.....
~~ as!f.l!me all responsibJ7itylar any Joss or damage
iIIlrIr ~ 'anst~g fn:iin 'any etrot; omis:sion or poS6onal inao:uracy
....' ofllllSproduct. '
OREGON : Date Received:
Planner: AL
~A/)PP9
, C UGB 0 Outside of City Limits
~ Site Boundary 0 Within City Limits
o Tax lots
o . !SOD 1.DOO
.-....
ATTAI"I-IUlO'MT ? _ ':I
'.
I
I
Ud.4...~ .........,....:aATJ:WAy 1n.6u.",.Ad ....o..~.).ILJi.... ~.Iri!..I,~......&LSITlI:
"'V.l."~ LUAL a,,4'1.Da..OPMXNr PI.AN
, r
'"' ~~~E FA 1M RD EAST 1
UGB
~
'. '---- -
CAMPUS
INDUSTRIAL
,
"
,,,-)
c
a:
>'
a:
a:
:
~
,I
",1':
,
I
"
"
"'" ""'" tlllll
.
800 1D60.
"
"
i~~
,
J
, VICINITY MAP
Date Re~eived:-&9" '
Planner: AL '
..........11"'1111..........,. n ..
~ ,
.
The City Council of the City of Springfield finds that:
A., Article 8 of the Springfield Development Code sets forth criteria for .~f:.."'uent plan
diagram and text amendments.
B. On April 21, 2003 The Springfield City Council "yy.uled Gateway Refinement Plan
amendments by adopting ordinance 605L .
C.The April 21, 2003 Gateway Refinement Plan amendments were appealed to the Land
Use Board of Appeals and to the Oregon Court of AppeaJs.
D. On August 19,2004 the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) remanded the Gateway
Refinement Plan amendments to the city for 'additional findings in respect to Statewide
Planning Goal 9 (Economic Development), Goal 12 (Tran.,IM;"";on) and, as ~cted
by the Court of Appeals, consistenCY with MetroPlim policies regarding auxiliary l,Ise8
in the residential designations. '
R Subsequent to the LUBA remand, the Springfield City Council 'Wl'~lledthe record on
Metro Plan diagram amendment, Journal Nurnber 2002-08-243 and Gateway ,
Refinement Plan amendment, Journal Number 2002-08-244 and initiated amendments
to the Springfield Development Code, Journal Number LRP2004-Q020 and Springfield
Commercial Lands Stody, Journal Nwnber LRP2004-0021.
F.. Timely and sufficient notice of the public hearing, pursuarit to Section 14:1130 of the
Springfie1d Development Code was provided. '
G. On November 16, 2004 a public hearing on the Gateway Refinement Plan amendment
was convened and concluded. The record of the proceedings was left open for seven
days followed,by a seven day period of all participants to submit rebuttal. The
applicant Was given .two additional days for rebuttal. The Development Services staff
notes, including criteria of Rl'Y<U'.J, findings, and recommendations, together with the '
testimony and submil1als of those persons testifYing at the hearing or in writing, have
been considered and are part of the record of the y' ~~~rling.,
Page 1 of 13
In 0/05
t"..,. '..
Date Received: "/r.?#P9
Planner: AL
ATTAI"\.IUI=MT A _ 1
, '
)
Ii On December 9, 2004 the Springfield Planning Commission voted :live in favor, one
opposed and one abstaining to forward a recommendation that the City Council
approve the Gateway Refinement Plan amendments with conditions.
1. On Janumy 10,2005, the Springfield~ity Council. ""y....oo the pubic hearing to accept
oral argument and deliberate. The City Council voted 5 in favor, 1"
opposed and 0 abstaining to approve the Gateway Refinement Plari
ordinance and declaring an emergency.
1. Evidence exists within the record and the findings atlachoo hereto as Exhibit B that the
. y.vyv..Jmeets the requirements of Article 8 of the Springfield Development Code.
NOW, TIIEREFORE, TIm CITY OF SPRINur illLD DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section I: The Gateway Refinement Plan is hereby amended to reflect the text
changes depicted in Exhibit B;the Gateway Refinement Plan diagram is hereby amended to
rciJe'cl the changes "Pi" v .ed by the Council in the concurrent Metro Plan Diagram
amendment. . ,
Section 2: The above findings (A through J), and the findings set forth in ExhI"bit C
attached hereto and inev, jM"ted herein by reference are hereby adopted in support of the
Gateway Refinement Plan amendments.
Section 3: This Ordinance replaces Ordinance 6051, adopted by the,City Council
on April 21, 2003: .
Section 4:. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or pcirtion of this
Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent
jurisdiction, that portion shall be, deemed a '~parate, distinct and independent provision and
that holding shall'not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ~ce.
Section 5: This Gateway,Refinement Plan amendment is subject to the conditions of
loyy'" ..J atbIched hereto in Exhibit A.
Section 6: It is hereby found and determined that this Gateway R_~,,".ent Plan
, amendment is a matter affecting the public health, safety and welfare and that an emergency
llM"1i." w exists and that this ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its passage by the
Council an!i "yy.Vyal by the MayllC.
ADvr U:.U by the Common Council of the City of Springfield by a vote of 5
for and ---L against and 0 abstaining on this 10th day ofJanwii'y, 5.
W _
~~~ ...
, , . -~-='-
City Record .
REVIEWED & APPROVED
~~. L'~'
DATE:
OFFICE OF CI
Attest:
, Page 2 of 13
'. ,: . 1110/05'
O~t~ Received: ' 6;: j'__A
,: Planner: AL --.!!:f-~_,
ORDINANCE NO.
6109
..
,
~
,
L..IU1.USU A'
Conditions of GateWay Refinement Plan Approval
(Jo.No.'s 2002-08-244)
CUHU.11.l0N 1:
Master Plans for property at the McKenzie-Gateway MDR site that propose to
employ the Mixed Use Commercial D~trict (MUC) and/or the Medical Services .
District (MS) shall include a vehicle trip monitoring plan as a component of a
Complete application submittal The approval of the plan shall be a requirement of
Master Plan approval .
Trip generation ~timates used to create the trip moJiitoring plan shaD be performed
using assumptions 'and methods which are consistent,with those employed in the ,
traffic impact analysis submitted to the City of Springfield on October 29, 2004 in
support ofMeiro Plan and Gateway Refinement Plan amendment applications (City ,
Journal Numbers 2002-O~243 & 2002-08-244) , .
. ,
Traffic generated by land uses within Master Plan boundaries where the MS and
MUC zoning distriCts are proposed in Phase 1 of the development shall, prior to,
2010, be limited to a maximUID.ofl,457 PM Peak Hour vehicle trips. Beginning in
2010 for Phase 2 of the development, such traffic shall be limited to 1,840 PM Peak
Hour vehicle trips. PM Peak Hour vehicle trips are defined as the total of ..._:..:"'g
pIus e:riting trips measured for the PM Peak HoUr of Adjacent Street Traffic.
Subsequent Site Plan Review applications for sites within the Master Plan
boundaries shall be in compliance with the approved trip monitoring plan.
Any proposal that would increase the number of allowable PM Peak-HoUr v~cle
trips. for the MS and MUC area beyond the above specified Iimits shall be processed
as a refinement plan amendment Dr a zoning map amendment or Master Plan
a....~u ,,,J PlU'3Ulintto SDC 37.040 or Master Plan modification ......,...antto SDC
37.040 and 37.060(3) and regardless of which type of process is sought, each shaD
demonstrate compliance with applicable provisions of the Transportation PI9nning
Rule for such proposal '..
CONDmON 2:
Prior to occupancy of the first phase of any hospita; located at the Gateway MDR
site as approved by a future Master Plan, a portion of TransPlan project 727
(chapter3, page 31, Dec 2001 adopted version and as adopted by City'of Springfield
Ordinance N~ 5990, dated September 17, 2001) shaD be construi:ted by the '
applieant. The portion of the project to be constructed by the applicant is ,
, concePtually described as roadway and traffic signal improvements at the Pioneer '
Paolo" '"J/OR-126 Eastbound Ramps to:
;.". ~ ..' '~>'
P~3~of13
UlOID?
Date f~eceived: 6fr/.h>d!
Planner: AL
ORDIN!NCE NO. 6109
ATTAr.HMFNT 4 - ~
.
.....--
.'
1. Maintain two southbouud through lanes on Pioneer Parkway at the OR 126
eastbound ramp terminal :"'~~o~l:dion;
2. Provide two southbound left turn lanes on Pioneer Parkway at the OR 126
eastbound ramp terminal intersection;
3. Widen the eastbound on ramp to provide two lanes to accept the two
eastbound turn lanes described above in Number 2. These two on ramp
lanes will merge to one lane prior to merging with OR 126 traffic eastbound.
4. ' Widen the eastbound OR 126 off ramp to three lanes for a minimum distllnce
of300 feet west 'of Pioneer Parkway; and '
5. Any net:e:!lsuy signal modifications to accommodate Numbers 1.... above.
The funding for these improvements shall come from_PeaceHealth;s financial
responsibility for air-site tranSportation improvements as described in the
8lU1exation agreement dated June 4, 2002, Lane County Recorder's numher 2002-
043161, hetween the applicant and the City of SprlDgfield. 'To the extent that these
funds are determined to be insufficient to perform the above descn"bed
improvements, the applicant shall be responsible for the additional funding needed.
Any snbsequent Master Plan application for property at the Gateway MDR site that
proposes to apply the MSand/or MUC zoning district shall include specific design
Ii...,,:....gs for the above described improvements, which shall be submitted to ODOT
'for &t't'ou.'al. OnOT apt'ou,'.J. of the proposed design shall be a condition of Master
Plan approvaL '
CONDmON3
The master plan required by Residential Element Policy'l3.0, by the Annexll;tion
1\,........ent dated May 29lh, 2002, Recorder's Reception No. 2002-043161, Lane
County Deeds and Records and by the Annexation Agreement dated June 7, :~001,
, Recorder's Reception No. 2001-034714,'Lane County D~s and Records for .
property owned by PeaceHealth, a Washington pon~prof"rt corporation, on the date
of Council approvai of plan amendments2002~08-"243 and 2001-08-244 shall include
a hospital as a component of the, master plan.
Further, the hospital and other master plan development on the property referenced
in this condition shall be phased lIS" follows: ".
No uses will occur before 2008. Phase 1 will occur between 2008,and 2010 and'is
llinited to uses generating no more than 1,457 PM Peak Hour vehicle trips. Phase 2
will op'en no earlier than 2010 and/or fonowing construction of the Gateway ,
" Street/Beltlili.e Road intersection improvements and, will be limited to nses
generating no more than 1,840 PM Peak Hour vehicle trips for all development on
properties redesignated by this ordinance. These phases may occur earlier if needed
transportation facilities are in place or if required mobi1ity stllndanls are lowered,
providedmobi1ity standards are maintained.
, "Page"4,of 13
1/10/05
Date Received: q};/Hdi
Planner: AL '
O~INANCE NO. 6109
ATTAr~U~~T . _ .
",
.
, CUJ.u.lu.lON 4
In the event that a master plan with a hospital fails to gain ar r- ", al by the City
, Council by May 29, 20117 the City Council will initiate amendmenu to the Metro,
PIan and the Gateway Refinement Plan to reviSe the documenu to adequately plan
for development of the Gateway MDR site without a hospital. . .
CUJ''il-l.luON 5
Prior to occupancy of the firSt phase of any hospital located at the Gateway MDR .
site as approved by a future Master Plan, the applicant shall construct a portion of
the Beltline RoadlGa~~"~J' Street Intersedion project, which is a component of
, TransPlan Project 606 (chapter 3, page16, July 2002 adopted version). Tht; portion
of the project to lJe constructed by the applicant is a traffic signal at the BeltIine
Road /Hutton Road intersection. '
CONDmON 6
Development on property at the McKenzie-Gateway MDR site where the MS andior
MUC zoning district are applied shall be ,subject to the following condition: '
Any Subdivision or Site Plan Review application approval that relies upon
transportation facility improvemenu to support the subject development shall be in
compliance with an approved Master Plan. If the subject transportation
improvemenu are not open to travel by the motoring public at the time they are
needed to support the Subdivision or Site Plan Review development, the appnival
shall be subject to the enf~..~_eut and revocation proceedings of Springfield
Development Code 1.050(1) and (2). '
'-
-,..,
\ ,
. \ 'I ".~' - ,
ATTACHMENT 4 - 5
Date Received: ~1(/~1
. Planner: AL
OIqJINABCE NO. 6109
Page 5 of 13
1/10/05
'.
EXt1.usIT B
Gateway Refinement Plan Text Amendments
(Jo.No.'s 2002-08-244)
Amend Residenti3I Element Policy and Implementation Action 2:
Ensure availability of adequate supplies of land appropriate
for low-, medium-, and high-density residential development,
MRi-taiBan.""',;,,ately the aistL" LLRee _BgLrP_;
,1\mR aDd BDR desi!;Boted IBBds, eORsEteDt with Meft>B PIBB
aDoeaBouswhiIe allowin!!! for an anpropriate mix of . '
commercial. emnlovment and residential uses.
. .
Amend Residential Element Policy and IImplementation Action 12.0:
, ,
, Allow limited rezoning of land within the "McKenzie-Gateway
MDR site" to MedieaI Services ("MS") on land desilmated
CommunitY Commercial or Mixed Use on the Metro Plan
di8l!Tlllll. and rezonin!!! to Mixed Use Commercial ("MUC"'l on
land desiJmated Mixed Use on the Metro Plan di8l!l'3.m as "
imnlemented durin!!! a Master Plan and or durin!!! the Citv's
nodal imnlementation nroiect. neig",:,; . J, ~od eommeFeillJ., iD
order to preJJiote I'Ct....,L..,""d rehabilitatiOB ofhistorie
...''''....,...;,;..~ lIiat may othef'Wise 1 ,,,;:,, e BOil eonfarmiBg uses, to
pf'Omote limited pHIllie OF s.....: ......alie aeeess to IIBd ,iew of the
MeK-elllcie River, IIBd to lIlI"',.... (",.. ... avisioR of serviees
.... ...;':;:eeIIy iDte.ded i8 mel:l......$ offu:~..... . "",idenB iD this
lIf'ell;
Amend ResideRtial Element Policy and Implementation Action 12.1:
f.u<"~~ to NC will hI,! aDowed rOF up to 3 aeFeS (Total) of '" ,;"d
1Imtl,,~d.:a the :MeKemBe Cateway MDR Site _deF tile foll;,,,.~,,..
pnvisisRS: .
aT---H-. r'-... .."-~l Pelfllested f",,.. ...__alling shaH fAlDt ou'-aeolleetoF
_...-~..,-:..J thtIt is eitheF ~ OF plmmed'iD aB. adopted C>>P
far the MeKt!lIlcie CBte>fI.sy MDR Site, OF thtIt' elll'f'i!utly
bemeF!l the site. '
II) Preposed ZORe ehllBges shaD he reviewd .,,, I ,,: a TYI'e m
pf'8eedure HI aeeoFdllBee with Araele 3 of the SDC IIBd shlllI he
eonsistent with lIlI pf'8\-:..:"'.... "f SDC !..rtiele 12 Zouing lK.t" :et
IIBd (WeF~' Distriet CIumges.
Page 6 of13
1/10/05
, Date Received:' 6/;/;p-o?
Planner: AL
ORDINANCE NO. 6109
ATTA('I.H..II=MT A _ I:
c) This lJ ..e of r ....""-1:0.1; shall Dot II... .......-and 1IDtil at least ;IS
pllf'eeBt of the 9B'-~'::.;.,'~"1 dweLl> """'::"'1If'e eoBStmeted
(!Jasell aD 9B aveJ'llge of 1S dwelliBg ~ p.... ........).
Redesimation of a total of 99 aCl"ellland within the citv limits
at the McKenzie/Gatewav MDR site to Commnnitv
Commercial andior Mixed Use throueh the Metro PlaJ!
amendment nrocess shall be allowed and shall be imnlemented
bv annlication of Mixed Use Commercial ("MUC") or Medical
'Services ("MS") zonine district throu!!h Master Plan annrovaI
and/or durin!! the Citv's nodal imn]ementation nroieet.
Amend Residential Element Policy and Implementation Action 12.4:
NC uses laellted l\itIHn the MeKeBrie Catewuy MDR Site shall meet
f;D' ... --",." ,-",.' .. ISDG'Ftiel
the 8 8W1Bgl"rv'i~II7r~:.u.:..-utlI;.t:'~,.:;.-ca-';;":"";'i"lo:.JjViSI9B58. " ......... e
.lit
tt) Th: maHmllm D"".. ...I:a af BUy single NC lIse shall Dot eneed
i,OOO square feet; .
t) rUm!; oreas shall not be lisible from,the MeKeBrie River
..,,~.kr 9Bd shall lie screened f.-"... ...Jblie streets in II m..........."JHeh
de..~ "'""~ obsetlre visibility of the use; 9Bd,
t:) r:Jblie-....._-... to the MeKeBrie River shaH be PFilvided hy NC
u..... ..tdttiBg the ripo~-~ .~tbBek.
IB addition to all anplicable standards and provisions rel!Ulatin~
develonllient in Sprinl!field. any development adiacent to the
McKenzie River or McKenzie River rinarian setback shall nrovide
, public access to the McKenzie River or McKenzie River rinarian,
setback. Surface narkine; areas shall uot be visible from the"
~eKenzie River corridor and shall be screened from oublic streets.
. Add new Residential Element Policy arid Implementation ActionI2.5:
, MU districts within the McKeilzie-Gatewav MDR Site shall
meet the nrovisions of SDC Article 40.
Add new Residential E1e~ent Policy and Implementation Action 126:
Within the citv limits at the McKenzie-Gatewav MDJ!
Subarea. the Medical Services ("MS") zoninl! district shall
imnlement the Communitv Commercial desimation if nart of
an annrilved Master Plan for develonment of a maior medical
faCllitv. The adooted Master Plan shall demonstrate that th~
subiect ntonertv will be able to accommodate the number of
homin.. units within the ranl?e for the MDR land uoe .
desi~~tio~ in the Metro Plan and Gatewav Refine~ent Plan.,
,;, '.."
Page 7 of 13
If] 0105
, 'Date RE!Ceived:4/JoPf
Planner: AL'
. ORDINANCE NO. 6109
ATTACHMENT "4 - 7
..
In addition to meetinl!' the standards of the SDC at the time of
Master Plan a___" J'..I. the City Council mayartach snecific
. conditions on all develoDment within the MS or MUC zones
, .includinl!' but not lim.ited to buildinl!; hei!!ht and setbacks.
, Amend Residential Element Policy and Implementation Action 13.0:
,
A CD' OF Master Plan shall be approved-,-uuder a TypeJI-IV
review process, for the areas lai1!er than 5 acres within the cn.v
limits at mBflped as the "McKenzie-Gateway MDR Site" on
the Refinement Plan diagram. subseouent to annexation and
prior to a......"''",L'" =J-urban development of any portion of
the-site Master Plan area. ' ,
Delete 13.1 Residential Element Policy and Implementation Action 13.1:
The City shall begi.. i'........:,.-;.::a:: af a CDP by J '-'"''"'"''-J 1, 19~, IIBd
shsJIllpprove a CD' BO later tlllIB Jaly 1, 199~. ,!B tile mterim, a CDP
may be s ,{ 'JJ,:,/f. ~~, by tile mitial developeI' of," r".-1:",," oCtile site. f.
City iBitiated CJ}' shall :"'-"-.:.'e mllet ff'om the affeCted 1"'-'>....",,/
O"'BeFS, IIBt BfIpropriate publie agelll::ies. '
Amend Residential Element Policy and Implementation Action 132:
The CDP shall be prepared by lIB eB.,:...,."., aBd,oBe of the
folle",mg: - lIB arekiteet, IIlBdseap.. ...-":"':~eet OF pL" ;C'" ,t,
.._..IE'.. .,~...., b
1".................~........- .
A Master Plan' for the McKenzie-Gatewav MDR site shall be
preDared bv a desitm team that shall include. as determined bv"
the Director. the followinl!' consnltants: architeCt. landsc:ane
architect. civil eDlrlneer. I!8Otechnic:a1 enl!'ineer.acoustic
enmeer. certified arborist.. transportation enmeer and a
consultant to address riDarian issues.
Amend GRP Residential Element Policy and Implementation Action 133:
All development within the McKenzie Gateway MDR Site,
shall be consistent with ail approved g)p..Master Plan. Aft
BfIpF&".'ed oW may be modified by tile iBitial developel', a
subsequeBt de\'e1opeF, OF tile Citr, Ululel' a Type R FeView'
JlFoeess.
Page 8 of 13
III 0/05
Date Received;~~f
Planner: AL
.~ - ~ ~ '.~, ;.
, ,
ORDINANCE NO. 6109
ATTA~~M~NT 4 _ A
.
Amend Residential Element Policy and Implementation Action 13.4:
The COP In addition to the requirements of SDC Article 37, ,
the Master Plan shall address, at a minimum, the following
development iJisnes:
a) Preservation and e,nhancement ofnatuJ"a1 assets identified in
this Rdinement Plan;
b) Access and 'cii"culation needs;
c) Access to arterial and collector streets;
d) ~ Provision of public facilities and services;
e) Development needs offuture users;
1) LlI~ti6B ofaFeas llll'geF th_ one ~,"'-" ...,...tSed-f~'-a'~
lilies, inekuiin..",:.:':-hoFh80d .,~..ciaIt
f19 Provision of open space areas; and
gIl) Public access to the McKenzie River.
~end Residential Element Policy and Implementa,tionAction 13.5:
.\pplielltioll5 fOF the inialll Cl)P ::- fz:- JllbstBntial modifielltioDs to liB
"'.....-.""M-~r IJi addition to the reouirements ofSDc Article 37. the
initial Master Plan annlication in the McKenzie-Gal." a.' MDR site
shall include a concentual street man and biCYcle and nedeStnan
circulation svstem nlan for all annexed propertY in the McKenzie-
Gatewav MDR site and shall be exempt from the requiremeuts of
Section3.050(2)(b) of the SDC.
Delete Residential Element Policy arid Implementation Action 13,6:
The COP shllll L ......:.>le8t with the 1;01113 _d policies of the Metro
, Pltm _dof this Refinement Pilla.
Add new Residential Element Policy and Implementation Action 13.6:
, ,
:Master Plan annlications for pronerty within the McKenzie-Gatewav
MnR ,ite submitted nrior to the Citv's comnletion of nodal -
devel~'ument assessment and implementation shan identitv all areas,
within one-ouarter mile of proposed, transit stations as hein!!' subiect
to the nrovisions ofthe Nodal DeVelonment <h-erlav District (1NDOl.
Anv ornDOsed uses. densitv and desi1m in the identified nodal
develonment area shall compIv with the Standards' of Snrinl!field
Develooment Code articles 40 and/or 41 with the followin!!' excention:
Uses in the MS'and MUC Districts may he exemnted from soecific '
prOvisions of Articles 40 and Articles 41 and residential and erou~
care facilities in the MDR district may be exemoted fnim soecific
provisions of Article 41 if the teSpecn.;e exemptions are consbtent
',.' ~--
'Page 9 of 13
VIOIOS
"
,
Date Received :
Planner: AL
~/r/J#r
, ,
ORDINANCE NO. 6109
,ATTACHMENT 4 - 9
with the Pumose of the Nodal DeveloDment Overlav District and the
exemDtions are aDDroved bv tJie City Conncil as Dart of a master nlan..
In the event that the City Council determines that nodal develoumen~
is aDurouriate for the identified nodal area. the D. uu..~. shall be ~
desilmated to INDO and all subsequent land use auulicationsshan
comDIv with INDO standards contained within articles 40'andlor 41,
exeeut as exemuted above. In the eventthat the City Conncil
determines that nodal develoDment,is inaullrOllriate for areas
identified as such on the master plan, those areas shall be chanl!ed
throul!h a Tvne n IIrocess, to reflect the underlvinl! MS or MUC
zonin!! and any use, density or desi". on the master ulan that does not
, comllIv to underIvinR zoninR desi".ation shall be chan!!ed
a~"... ':inl!:ly. All subseQUent land use auulications shall comoIv with,
the standaTds required in the underlyin!! zoninl! district.
Add ne~ Residential Element Policy and Implementation Action 13.7:
Page 10 ofB
1/10/05
Master Plans for nropertv at the McKenzie-GatewavMDR site that
prouoseto annIv the MUC and/or MS zonin!! district nursuant to
Residential Policies aud Imnlemeutation Actions 12.1 and 12.6 shall
be subiect to the followinl!' reauirements:
1. An annroved trill mOli.itorin!! IIlan shall be a reauirement of
Master Plan anllroval .
2. The trin monitorinll: nlan shall demonstrate comllliance with all
conditions 'contained within anulicable IIlan amendment adontion
!'rdinance(s), and triu-!!:eneration estimates shall be nerformed
usinl!' assumutions and methods which are consistent with those
emnloved in the ulan amendment traffic imnact analvsis.
3, Traffic !!enerated hv land uses within the Master Plan bonndaries
where the MS and MUC zonin!! districts that are nrooosed in
Phase 1 of the Development sha]]~ prior to 2010. be limited to a
maximum of 1,457 vehicle trius. Becinnin!!"in 2010 for Phase 2 of
the Develooment. traffic !!enerated from site develonment withi:J!
the snbiect districts shall be limited to 1.840 PM Peak"Hour
, vehicle trius. Vehicle triDs are defined as the total of enterinl! nlns
exitin!! trin i as estimated or measured for the PM Peak Hour of
Adiacent Street Traffic. This trin monitorinl! ulan limits allowed
land uses to be consistent with the ulanned function, cauacitv and
Derfonnance standards of affected transnortation facilities.
4. SubseQUent Site Plan Review auulications for sites within the
Master Plan boundaries shill be in comuliance with the auuroved
triu monitorinl! IIlan.
:", ;..~). ~. ': "."...
Date Received:-il Jd1'1
Planner: AL
ORDINANCE NO. 6109
ATTArl,m~MT .d ,_ 1 n
" , ,
5. Anv nronosal that would increase the number of allowable PM
Peak-Honrvehicle trips for the MS'and MUC area beYond the
limits snecified in section 3 above shall be nrocessed as a
refinement nlan amendment, a ronin!! man amendment or Master
Plan annrovaI pursuant to SDC 37,040 or modification nursuan~
to SDC 37.040 and 37.060(3) and l"Cl!:anlless of which tvoe of
nrocess is soul!"ht, each shall demonstrate comnliance with
auulieable urovisions of the TranslJOrtation Plannin!!' Rule for
such nronosaL
Delete Residential Element Policy and Implementation Action" 14.0 through 14.8 (no
change since April 21, 2003 Council approval):
H.O }. Devell 1'''' ",L\fta PI_ (D-.\l') shall It.. "'....>c~..',Ji,""'.,iL.,:;.
TYIle n r .."~,..,, preeCBs, prior to deveL I' ,oc,.oc,t lIppFoval f...- """":J
..~.~~,.. .lfthe aF"",,, ...a....:d as the "M~eKi!llZie Cateway l.IDR Site'~ OB
the Ref." _=_d Plail Diagmm, _d shaR Dot h. "-rr.-.,:ed uBless it is
eODsiSteat with aD _pp.-o'<':d CI>P. The iBteIit of the DAP is to previde
FeSol11fioD Df signifielHlt develoPBll9lt iss'ues at a seale ed level of
specificity that arc iBL.--,,-j"',,-c~ to the CI>P aDd Ez: Plan lC'\'elli. .\11
D \P' haR m; I'ID to the '"rl"'-="" -.., . .-.... '
.... ss eo 8 :\~f,: ....fow...-:..'~:..::...-....:.:..:....:tn3":'
1 t.1 D,\l"s shall addFCSs the foil.",':"" ':wclopment issues, at a
mi:ni1A1lIB:
a) 'Pro,";:~c;=:f :Idelluate cireulatioD for the Dcvc!ap"..,~t Area,ed
its adjv~6 p>c~.._.-;';15, iBela:diBg de~a;;';~... oiright of l'i'1IJ' fOF
future sweets aDd patJm"ays sIl_ aD the f.,:.I :.I".,:ed CI>P;
b) PrwisioD of coordiBated CHeBSioD of puhlie faeilities to serve the
site _d s...-.-.,,,,nding properties; ed
e) lBl.~"r_..-...fan, to thl. ...~""""" ..~<o...~ px-.Iletieahle, OfBatuFBI
lIllSets ideDtified iB this RefiBemeBt PIe, .md OD the BJlpFoved <;:DP.
H.2 DAl": shaR iBelude the foDowiB.g"iDfoFfBlItioB~ ,;,!..,...: "'0" "oof
"\II signifielHlt site fetiuf'es, iBeludiBg lInUuageways, rri~ting
'''Cgc.tB.tiOB, IIIld othel. :.:...:...~-.:u-.H lI:S5eis as idelftified ill this R.dft...;.:.:.u....N."~
. Pltmt
PflIposed huilding L ~,:....-:atst
I'-:.., ~ ' led OpCB spaees BDd le~.i_~'r .i Bf'east " "
IL..:-....:...6 ~t...~;~ of BBY ideDtified Dstu.FBI !In-rdS; ~., fer
de\_L......ent lIithiB the 1110 JeaF f1, , aiiL"Il; PflIposed aceess aDd
eireulatiOB, iBeIa:.L...6 . Balls, drives, pa':':"6 lIFeBS; ed bicyele ed
pedCBtriaD patllways; aDd alll.Jl.~.- .....;....;..Ied laDd uses.
Page 110(13 '
1/10105
H.3 If the DAP ".'" ".:,0 Jes with. all Site P-lsn R_",~_". .ltaDdaFds of the
SDC, suhsCflll<o"";; )'~.':"';~ted DSCB that eomill'lD to the 1),:\.1> shaD Bot
l'ClluiFe additioDal site pL... . ~,~ew. (This imp~ ","c.,,1ahoD' aehOD is
iBtl9lded to simplify the devel'r ,,,, "''';''':.1:.1 :"",'91 proeess for large,
" ,
.'
, Date F(eCeived:---f&'/~f ,
Planner: AL
ORDINANCE NO. 6109
ATTACHMENT 4 - 11
I..'
-
phltSed devcl, i!"" '" lJ by aDowiBl;; a sllftieie&tly detailed n...1' t.:. "",..et
both DAP ad Site PIIIL. .<"'l'...:.,"""-".,..~
1104 DAP's shall be eoBSistea.t ...tI1 the llpIKoyed CDP, ad
l'Iith the policies of the 1\'1$0 PM _d altIUs REi":"" .;,,, "L~
PJ&B.
11.5 Site PMS for p ",-Ld ofadevel:>".,d afca shall
eoBfo.~ ....;th-.'"- -"....,wed D.U', provided, howe\'eF, that
the DAP mayL. ........ '::1ied ItS J. ..~lted-;.. ;.....lemeatatioa.
aeRoa H.6. , ,
11.6 SBbS~b~1 modifieatioM llfD.'.l"~ ~haU-t... .--"/~.",,,d
_def Type II procedure, iB. aeeore,,,,,,, "" -".:Jt Artiele :3 of the
SDG.-
11.7 TL.. w.:-~:,.-.,.....->>evt.:,';,,-,-...t ARa for MDR desigB&ted ares shall
he S aeFe5. '
11.8 The miBimlHll si;.... ;0.- :B.eveL.. ,,_ ...t-AF=,~ =.-y-be
reduced, if appmed by the DeVelopment Seniees Il:.-""I....j
~ iBdFrillBal ius" (,~","'J, oH:Ih..-CO ;:a..}dffieiefi:t ~;ae&Bt led;
oWDenhip pattcmB, I"" ..o~,;,-..o.-,-L,,-, Of ahuttiBg etistiB.g
,uses prohibit eOBsolid&tioB of pareels to aeL.:"'f'" a 5 aere
'1"\_._1,___.. ,<! \rea.
~"r-.-- ..
I
I
I
I
,
i
I
Amend Residential Element Policy and Implementation Action 15.1:
Development density may be transferred from natural assets
and recreational pathways identified in the Natnrill Assets,
Open SpacelScenic Areas, and Recreation Element, or from
proposed shared open spaces, to bnildable portions of the
development area, provided that the gross density of the
development area does not exceed 20'dwll, ad the aet deDllity
h b Hila" " -.. oJ t ' "5 oJ ' th .'
OD t e B. J14.o, r~"-"-- aes B8 ..,_.....;._~... WB. e manmum.o
!Jensitv nermitted in thennderIvinl! zone.
Add new Residential Element Policy and ImplementationAction 19.0:
;Densitv bonuses allowed under Residential Element
Imnlementation Actions 15.1 and 16.3 mav be allowed
consistent with an approved Master Plan pursuant to SDC
Article 37 within the McKenzie-Gatewav MDR Site. '
I
I
I
I,
I
I,
Amend Co=erciaI Element Policy and Implementation Action 5.0 (reVised since April
21, 2003 Council approval):' ,
ProVide for futnre annronriatelv nlauned Mixed Use. Communitv
Commercial and nodal development desil!nated an:all _ " ,,"":',1 : ;,-lteed
....=".-~l development iB. the M J'; "", DeDllity ResideRtiol
dl!\'e1opmeat area east of Game Farm Road.. within the City Limits at
Page]2~f13'
l/J 0105
pate ReceiV~fI;~/ ~f
f'lpnner: AL -
, -
ORDINANCE NO. 6109
I
i
,
ATTAf"UUl:~IT II _1?
'.
the McKenzie-Gatewav MDR site as identified in TransPIan a~
notential nodal de'velonment sites.
Amend Commercial Element Policy and Implementation Action 5.1:
, N" """.>X ~ the 3 aeFeS of NC U~~. ~""'" he zonetlll5 pari of the MedilHB
Density R....:.:,,"'tiaI anD. This FeZOnm!; shsJI nothe Dl'l'"".:d lIfttiIat,
lesst 25 r ".~""d of the etieipated total dwelliu......;... ill the BRa Bre
eOmltrneteJ. ::'.e nei&hhorhood eOBUBcreislllJ'eB shat! ll: ,zed ill B
10Mon that pI ...~..Ld the least L..-..d'::<.; noise, ed 1igh,::..,;;~,nDiets
with adjacent Fes:a~....~:.1IlISes. (properties inventoried ill the Histone
ResolH'ees Elcmmt 1I5 5igDifiesn'~.,...".....~.... "'''':1 he rezoned to NC ed
al'e llxempt from this Pl"'-:":,oh) Rezonml!: ofIand within the city
limits at the McKenzie-Gatewav MDR site to Mixed Use Commercial
("MUC") and Medical Services ("MS") shall be allowed to imnlement
the Mixed Use and/or Community Commercial nlan desi!!Dations.
Zone chanl!:es shall demonstrate the ability to meet the demand for
commercial lands identified in the Snrinldield ,Commercial Lands
Studv (SCLSl nolicv I-B. Commercial uses allowed in :l!lDinl!: districts
pursuant to GRP Policv 5.0 above shall be subiect to Master Plan
annroval and shall be nlanned in a manner to minimize traffic. noise.
and Iil!:htinl!: conflicts with adiacent res:identi:il uses.
Amend Tl'liIl>jM.....;on Element Policy and Implementi:tion Action 13.0:
Future transportation system development in the McKenzie-Gateway
Campus Industrial and the 180 acre MDR sites should occur as
needed in conjimction with CI and MDR, MUC and M& development.:
Amend Public Facilities Element Policy and Implementation Action 2.2:
)
Require the consideration olthe use of..: '",.." 'drainage facili~es that
store and retain runoff in the McKenzie-Gateway Campus IndUStrial
site, and within the city limits in the pmposedllmR aRB east of Came
FII1"Bl Read 80atk McKenzie-Gatewav MDR Site., Require the
consideration of the use and enhancement of natural storm '.' ..~...
drainage features as part of the overall storm water systems in those
areas.
Page 13 of 13
VIOIOS
Oat", {,0ceived:
Planner: AL '
r.h/,JfP1
I I
ORDINANCE NO. 6109'
ATTACHMENT 4 ~ 13
'.
lJ1
I
I-'
:1" ~,i},;"'~": 'll' .. "" 'e.-",' .
1".."'" )1',,;> .
"'.'..";' "., rans an.. ,
;"~l ~~ l_'4il :,q,::--l- ,I<' r."~"_ :-J"/' '.. f
Legend
Potential
Nodal Development Areas
for the
Eugene-Springfield Metro Area
Nodal Development Areas
Urban Growth Boundary
Ar"..1d"nllrl"dlllnDd.ldll\lalapmanlalll...mllonlkl.rIIld
tghlWlIpaltlntl&lfDrlhl.tvpoofllndulllpatlern. Olhllr
.nt.. lUll d.slgl'1l1llld IDr nod.1 d.velopmlnl m.v .IIP be
IDurxltDhllvepotantllllorn!>dIlJd"".llIpm~nr.
~
l-j
~
n
::r::
~
tI:l
Z
l-j
Notl!l: This mllp r5111~trntJWlllnd should bll used lor
reference onlv. The map depicts approximate loclltlans Df
plstlng 11M propo.llld public: fllcilltie5 and hmd t/l1J5. .
!;)at~_&ecei'Jer! .
Planner: AL
c6/~~;p,
-----.------------- --- - ------------ ----
From: MOTT Gr~gory , .
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 9:48 AM
To: LIMBIRD Andrew
,Subject: . FW: Springfield PAPA 001-09: Amending Gateway Refinement Plan
"
Andy,
Go ahead and place the email train from Ed into the record,. Wherever
your staff report mentions '
correspondence or comments from the public and interested parties be sure
and identify that DLCD
reviewed this proposal and had no comments.
gmott
From: Ed Moore [mailto:ed.w.moore@state.or.usJ
Bent:, Tuesday, March 24, 2009'9:40 AM
To: MOTT Gregory;. MOORE Ed W (OR)
Cc:, LIMBIRD Andrew
Subject: RE: Springfield'PAPA 001-09: Amending Gateway Refinement Plan
Greg,
your correct, Gloria's comments are directed at Exhibit, B. Given your
clarification, we have
no comments on the proposed PAPA.
Cheers,
Ed
Ed Moore AICP
So Willamette Valley
Regional Representative
DLCD Springfield Office
644 A Street
Springfield, OR 97478
971...239.9453
ed.w.moore@state.or.us www.oregon.gov/LCD
>>> On 2009.03.23 at 15:47, in message
<CIEID2BFDOE40040BA644474C38411A6D5AOB78801@spifs030.Springfieldl.net>,
MOTT Gregory <gmott@ci.springfield.or.us>' wrote: ' '
Ed, ,
Thanks for the opportunity to review Gloria's comments. I'm assuming her
comments are
directed at Exhibit B in our notice ,of proposed amendment. That exhibit
is an ordinance
adopted ,by Council in 2005 as, part of a remand ordered by LUBA on a
proposal to amend '
the Gateway Refinement Plan to allow the development of the RiverBend
campus. We're
not proposing to change any of that ordinance; we provided it as context
to the one policy in
that document that requires this site
development. We are not
<. : "'\.,.. "';:
to be redesignated' for
Date Received: ~/~/:J4'd'l
Planner: AL ' ,
nodal
ATTAf'l.llllOMT r:. ~ 1
~ .;
\
proposing to ,change the distribution of the, underlying zoning nor ,are we
proposing to,
change the, permitted uses except to prohibit some commercial- activities
that are currently ,
permitted but will be prohibited upon redesignation as nodal overlay.
Thanks again.
Greg Mott
i
"
I
I
I
I
,
From: Ed Moore [mailto:ed.w.moore@state.or.us)
Sent: Monday, 'March 23, 2009 10:31 AM
To: MOTT Gregory
Subject: Fwd: Springfield PAPA 001-09: Amending Gateway Refinement Plan
Greg,
I
I
I
I
As we' discussed, let me know if, you would like me to submit these
suggestions as part of
the official record. don't see any of them as deal stoppers; but per our
no surp,rises
agreement and given, the late date that I received them I don't feel the
need to submit them if
they would delay your adoption.
Ed
Ed Moore AICP
So Willamette Valley,
Regional Representative
DLCD Springfield Office
644 A Street '
Springfield, OR 97478
971.239.9453
ed:w .moore@state.or.us<mailto:ed.w.moore@state.or.'us>
www.oregon.goviLCD<http://www.oregon.gov/LCD>
>>> On 2009.03.20 at
, <49C38B8A.6954.00FC.0@lcd.state.or.us>,
Gardiner wrote:
Hi, Ed. Sorry my comments are so late.
12 :26,
Gloria
in
message
Monday 3/23 is the fax deadline.
My comments are on the amendments in Exhibit B.
deletion; a suggested
addition is in bold.
) , is a suggested
Residential Element Policy and Implementation Actions
Action 2: 'I recommend revising as follows to ensure consistency with
Goal lO:Housing,
OAR 660, division 8, and the needed housing statutes in ORS,chapter 197:
,
I
I
I
"EnsuJ:e availability of [adequate) needed supplies of land for low-,
medium-, and high-
........
Date! Heceived:__~ i~"
Planner: Al ~~e._L ,
ATTAr"UUI=MT I: _ ?
. . .
.~
~
I
/
"
density residential development while allowing for an appropriate mix of
commercial,
emplo~ent and residential uses."
"Adequate" is too vague and undefined. This' policy should be clearly
consistent with
Springfield' 5 obligation to ensure a supply, of land in the UGB to meet
the housing needs of
all of its residents according to its housing land needs analysis.
Action 12.6: I recormnend revising, the last sentence as follows for
consistency with the
Goal 10:Housing, OAR 660, division ,8, and the needed housing statutes in
ORS chapter
197:
"In addition to meeting ,the standards of the SDC, at the time of Master
Plan approval, ,the
City ,Council may attach specific conditions on all development within the
MS or MaC -
zones including but not limited to building height and' setbacks. The
standards, conditions,
and procedure for needed housing shall be clear and objective and shall
not have the effect,
either alone or cumulatively, of discouraging needed housing through
unreasonable cost or
delay. "
This policy should make clear that there is a limit on the standards and
conditions that City ,
Council may impose on approval of'needed housing in this plan area. As
written, it suggests
that the city may use any standards and impose any conditions on needed
housing ,
development.
Action 15.1: As drafted, this
residential density on
development sites 'that contain natural resources or open space.
policy provides that
housing units may be moved from unbuildable Goal 5 resource areas,
recreatj,onal
pathways, or shared open space, to buildable areas of the devel~pment, at
the same '
maximum density as the base zone.
'land in the .
development area to residential, there is no place to put the transferred
units; the buildable
part of the site can currently be developed up to the maximum density for
the base zone.
The only way to truly transfer density from one part of a site to another
is to take the
calculated number'of units for the unbuildable area' and transfer them to
the buildable'area;
" ~ - ". ":, '.'
"densi ty transfer~ provision decreases
The
-.
However, unless the city re-zones more
Oat€, i'(cCeived:~/J#11
Planner: AL
/'
ATTAr.I-IMl"MT F; - ':l
'.
which means allowing a higher density in the buildable portion of
site (i.e., clustering
the allowed housing on the buildable portion of
the unbuildable
portions from development), .so that the site's overall dens.ity doesn't
fall below the base
zone standard. This is what. some .cities' PUD regulations do.
.1
I
I
I
I
i"
I
I
I
I
1
I
~
Gloria Gardiner I Urban Planning Specialist
.Planning Services Division
Oregon Dept. of Land Conservation and Development
635 Capitol Street NE, Suite 150 I Salem, OR.97301-2540
Office: (503) 373-0050 ext. 282 I Fax: (503) 378-5518
gloria.gardiner@state.or.us<mailto:gloria.gardiner@state.or.us> I.
www.oregon.gov/LCD<http://www.or~gon.gov/LCD>
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
,
'.
I
I
i
I
, ,
'\" . ~
, .
Date, Received: ~It/~L
Planner: AL .
ATTAr~U~MT ~ _ A
~.
'.
From: Bonnie Ullmann [ullmann@uoneuro.uoregoh.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, April 08', 2009 11:48 AM
To: LIMBIRD Andrew
Subject: Planning Case LRP 2009-00001
Dear Mr. Limbird and members of the Planning Commission and City Council,
,.
. I would like to lend my support to implementing a Nodal Development
OVerlay
District for any portions of the Gateway Refinement Plan area. In
particular,
at this time, I support the overlay on the southern portion of the'
PeaceHealth
property.
My reasoning for support of this planning designation is that I believe
it
will lend a more viable commercial and residential area in 'the long run.
It
will benefit the Game Farm Neighbors area by implementing design
standards for
commercial land. This will improve the overall liveability of the Game
Farm
area by addressing traffic issues and community cohesiveness.
An attractive and viable development plan will go. a ways toward
compensation
of the Game ,Farm neighborhood for the great increase in population,
traffic
and decreased attractiveness of our properties since the boom' in
development
interests in our home area.
I have been educating myself by having participated in Springfield
.citizen
planning committees that addressed the idea of nodal development in our
neighborhood. I believe nodal development to be a tremendous strategy for
long-term, far-reaching good planning that ultimately will be beneficial
to.
the Game Farm Neighbors area. I sincerely believe that the long term',
residents of the area should have the. advantage of city planning that
demonstrates' foresight at this point in time.
Springfield's commitment to nodal development is very encouraging and I
am
fully behind the.. concept. Please let me know .if I can help in the
process.
Please add my support to the written record for the public hearing.
Sincerely,
Bonnie Ullmann
Bonnie Ullmann
ullmann@uoneuro.uoregon.edu
. .- ..' >. ... '\ \ .'
Dat~ Received:~H./~1
Planner: AL
ATTACHMENT 6 - 5
'.
3350 Oriole Street
Springfield, OR 97477-7551.
USA
541-520-0921 Mobile
541-747-7580 Message/home
541-747-7580 FAX
541-346-4506 Work
",", .,
.. 'T"'T"A "IIII~"''T ~ t'!'
l/
Date Received:~~ If
Planner: AL 7
')
I
.1
I"
I
I
"1 .'
I
I
,
,
'1
1
I
,
I
,
I
I
I
I
. i
,
I
I
. . . ...
"
RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL '
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMiSsiON
OF THE '
CITY OF SPRlNGFIE\p
'~
...:..' .
METRO PLAN DIAGRAM AMENDMENT
IMPLEMENTATION OF NODAL DESIGNATION
Case Number. ~009-00001
(
(
(
(
(
RECOMMENDATION TO
lliE CITY COUNCIL
NATURE OF THE APPLICATION . .
The proposed Metro Plan amendment will implement a Nodal Development OVerlay District (NDO) designation
for approximately 170 acres of the Riverbend area of northwest Springfield, which includes the existing Sacred
Heart Medical Center and campus. The NOO designation wlll be supplementary to the current Commercial,
mixed use, and medium density residential zoning for the subject area.
. '
1. The above referenced plan amendment action was initiated by the City Council upon adoption of the
amended RiverBend Master Plan in June, 2006. Timely and sufficient notice of the public hearing,
pursuant to Springfield Development Code Section 5..2-115, has been provided..
I .. ..
2. The plan amendment action is consistent with provisions of the adopted Metro Plan, TransPlan and
Gateway Refinement Plan as described in the attache~ staff report .
3.' On April 21, 2009, the Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding the proposed plan
amendment The' DevefopmentServices 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 the record of this proceeding.
4. On the basiS of testimony submitted at the April 21 , 2009 Planning Commission public hearing, the
Planning Commission recommends that upon subsequent requests for annexation of remaining property in
the McKenzie-Gateway MDR site, the City w1lfinitiate the amendment process for nodal development
, consistent with RiverBend Master Plan Condition #12. .
CONCLUSION
On the basis of this record, the proposed amendment is consistent wilh the criteria of SDC Section 5.14-
135.C,1 &2. This general finding is SLlpported by the specific findings of fact and conclusion in the Staff Report
and Findings, . .' . ..... "
RECOMMeNDATION .
The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council to approve the plan amendment as
. recommended herein, Case Number 009-00001, at their May 18, 2009 meeting.
~~,..
}llanning c;~~r:ion Chairperson
ATTEST:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
!S"
I?
:J..
()
Date Heceived:
Planner:AL
, t/1~1
Planning CDmmlssioifOriler',,
LRP2OC19-Orioo3.
April 22, 2009 '
p~ 1 of!
.,1
i
ORDINANCE NO.
(General)
,
,
'10'
I'
I
1
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
,I
!
i
I
.I
1
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
i
1
I
I
I
\
I
!
I
I
I
1
\
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD METROPOLITAN '
AREA GENERAL PLAN (METRO PLAN) DIAGRAM BY ADut' lu'iG A NODAL
DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DESIGNATION FOR APPROXIMATELY 168 ACRES
OF LAND WITHIN THE MCKENZIE-GATEWAY l\1DR SITE.
THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD FINDS THAT:
WHEREAS, Section 5.14-100 of the Springfield Development Code (SDC) sets forth
procedures for Metro Plan diagram amendments; and
WHEREAS, SDC Subsection 5.l4-120,B.l states: '
"The City Council may initiate aType] or Type n Metro Plan amendment at anytime.
Consideration of this type of amendmeni shall begin immediately thereafter..."; and
WHEREAS, the Springfield Common Council adopted the amended RiverBend Master
Plan in June, 2006; and
WHEREAS, Condition #12 of the adopted RiverBend Master Plan approval states:
"The City Council hereby initiates the application of the Nodal Overlay Plan Designation
at the entirety of the McKenzie Gateway MDR Site as identified in the Gateway
Refinement Plan"; and .
, .
WHEREAS, the subject area is depicted as Potential Nodal Development Area 7B on the
adopted Eugene-Springfield Transportation System Plan (TransPlan); and
WHEREAS, timely'and sufficient notice of the public hearing on thisOrdmance has
been provided in accordance with SDC 5.2-115; and
WHEREAS, on April 21 st, 2009 the Planning Comniission held a public hearing on the
plan amendment request. The Development Services Department staff notes including the
criteria of approval, findings and recommendations, together with the testimony and submittals
of the persons testifying at that hearing were considered and were part of the record of the
proceeding. After considering the record, the Planning Comniissiondeliberatel:! and voted 5 in '
favor, 0 opposoo, and 2 absent to fOIWard a recommendation of approval io the COffiIl!.on
, Council; and "
WHEREAS, on May 18th; 2009 the Springfield Common Council conducted a public
hearing to receive testimony and hear comments on this proposal, The Common Council is now
ready to take action on this proposal based upon the above recommendations and the evidence
and testimony already in the record, as well as the evidence arid testimony presented at this :
public hearing held in the matter of adopting this Ordinance amending the Metro Plan diagram,
I
I
I
I
I
\~- ._~~:. " '.
" '
I
I
.1
I
Dated.:leceived: ~A~f
Planner: AL '/ ,.
&'T"""I"&l'\ln.r-I.''T"'" ..
It '"~
NOW, THEREFORE, the Common Council of the City of Springfield does ordain as
follows:
Section 1: The abov.e findings are hereby adopted as findings,in support of this
Ordinance,
Section 2: The Nodal Development Overlay Designation is hereby adopted and applied
, to the subject properties within the McKenzie-Gateway MDR Site that are inside the current
Springfield city limits, The subject properties are more p'articularly depicted and described in
Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, '
Section 3: Upon requests for annexation of remaining property in the McKenzie-
Gateway MDR site, the City Councilshall consider initiating the Metro Plan amendment process
for nodal development on a site-specific basis consistent with RiverBend Master Plan Approval
Condition #12. '
Section 4: If 'any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this
Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of cOlnpetentjurisdiction,
such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding
shall.not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof.
Section 5: Notwithstanding the effective date of ordinances as provided by Section 2.110
of the Springfield Municipal Code 1997, this Ordinance shall become effective 30 days from the
date ofits passage by the City Council and approval by the Mayor, or upon the date of its
acknowledgement as provided by ORS 197.625, whichever date is later.,
Adopted by the Common Council of the City of Springfield this
2009 bya vote 'of in favor and ,against.
day of
Approved by the Mayor of the City of Springfield this
day of
,2009
ATTEST:
Mayor
City Recorder
:lEVIEWUJ ,q, ilPPI10HD
'&" TT() ,- )-..
'~~~_~~;~~ ~ \ ~,~
l);\TE': __S:..ll \ \ 1:\"\ '
i E-Gl'lL GOUr'ISEL
Date Heceived' '/r~?
Planner: AL
ATTAf"lUUt:'lIT 0 I')