HomeMy WebLinkAboutNotes, Meeting PLANNER 10/3/2008
MEMORANDUM
.
.
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
DATE OF HEARING: October?, 2008
TO:
FROM:
Springfield Planning Commission
Gary M. Karp, Planner III
PLANNING COMMISSION
TRANSMITTAL
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Springfield Development Code (SDC) Amendments Case Number LRP 2008-
00011, City of Springfield, Applicant
ISSUE
The proposed SDC amendments address the following topics: Streamlining the Master Plan
review process (Section 5.13-100); updating' Fire regulations in the Drinking Water Protection
(DWP) Overlay District (Section 3.3-200); and addressing additional Scrivener's errors found in
various sections after adoption of the reformatted SDC.
DISCUSSION
The proposed Master Plan amendments address staffs concerns regarding the current Master
Plan review process by: better defining this process which allows long term phasing of
development proposals; requiring an initial Type II rather than a Type III review procedure for
smaller development proposals or those proposals which limit impacts on adjacent properties
and infrastructure - the Development Services Director has the authority to raise any Type II
review application to a Type III; requiring a neighborhood meeting hosted by the applicant to
inform the neighbors of the applicant's proposal prior to formal application submittal; assuring
application completeness bYorequiring a Pre-Submittal Meeting prior to formal application
submittal; requiring specific Preliminary and Final Master Plan review processes; and redefining
the categories of the Master Plan Modification process. The proposed amendments to the DWP
Overlay District, due to updated Fire regulations, were proposed jointly by the City's Fire and
Life Safety Department and the Springfield Utility Board. The proposed amendment of
Scrivener's errors is the second, and hopefully last, SDC amendment of this type regarding the
Development Code reformatting process adopted last year.
Staff distributed a copy of the proposed Master Plan amendments to private sector planners
who have submitted past Master Plan applications for comment The proposed text includes
responses to comments submitted to date and comments from the Planning Commission's
September 16,2008 work session (see Attachment 1).
RECOMMENDATION/ACTION REQUESTED
Advise the City Council, by motion and signature of the attached order and recommendation by
the Planning Commission Chairperson, to approve the proposed amending Ordinance at their
public hearing on November 17, 2008.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1: Preliminary Master Plan Review Procedure Discussion
Attachment 2: SDC Amendment Staff Report Date Received" /d () 3 O'~
Attachment 3 Recommendation to City Council .
Attachment 4: SDC Section 5.13-100 Master Plans Planner: GK
Attachment 5: SDC Section 3.3-200 Drinking Water Protection Overlay District
Attachment 6: Various Sections - Scrivener's Errors
.
.
Date Received: jO oJ 00
Planner: GK .
Jr
.
.
ATTACHMENT 1
PRELIMINARY MASTER PLAN REVIEW PROCEDURE DISCUSSION
Backaround.
At the Planning Commission work session on the proposed SDC amendments held on
September 16, 2008 staff was asked to prepare a discussion regarding the level of review of the
Preliminary Master Plan application. The current initial review procedure is Type III. Under this
procedure, the Director has the discretion to raise the application to a Type IV review. Staff
proposes an initial Type II review procedure for the reasons cited below. Under this procedure,
the Director has the discretion to raise the application to a Type III review, an option that
currently applies to all Type II SDC applications.
Justification for the initial TVDe II Review Procedure. .
The proposed text (Section 5.13-116A.) states that if a Metro Plan amendment is required (Type
IV Review), that application must be processed prior to the submittal of a Master Plan
application. During the review process for the Metro Plan amendment, in order to comply with
applicable State-wide Planning Goals, Metro Plan policies and Oregon Revised Statutes, staff
evaluates the big picture items such as whether there are public facilities available to serve the
property, transportation capacity issues, etc. Then, once the plan designation and zoning are in
compliance, an applicant is entitled to submit a development application to the City. However, if
a Metro Plan amendment is not required, then those issues have already been addressed. The
primary development applications, Site Plan Review and land division are Type II. applications,
which the Director can raise to a Type III review procedure.
The purpose of the Master Plan is to allow for phased development to occur for at least 7 years,
with the possibility of timeline extensions. The Site Plan Review process also allows for phased
development. However the Site Plan approval is applicable for a period of two years, with the
possibility of a one year extension. Aside from the approval timeline, the other major difference
between the Site Plan Review and Master Plan applications is that in the case of the Master
Plan, the SDC standards in effect at the time of the Preliminary Master Plan application
submittal apply during the life of the Master Plan.
The City has processed 6 Master Plan applications since these regulations were added to the
SDC in 1994. All of these applications were processed under the Type III or in some cases,
Type IV review procedure. However, Peace Health Riverbend and Marcola Meadows both
required Metro Plan amendments. Both these and MountainGate all impacted adjacent
residential properties and if these applications were to be processed under the proposed
amended regulations, the Director would raise the level of review from Type II to Type III, due to
impacts on adjacent properties, complexity, etc.
.... ..~ .,..
Additionally, in proposed Section 5.13-110, the submittal of Master Plan applications for 3-5
acres would be allowed because staff became aware of the need of a non-profit to require a
'Ionger approval timeline than the 2 years permitted under the Site Plan Review process to
accomplish their development goals. In this case, the current 5 acre minimum development
area would not allow this non-profit to utilize the Master Plan Review process. Whether a Type
II or Type III review procedure would be required is unknown at this time.
Finally,.in ~,adiii.o,n. f9n~e potential for additional Master Plan applications due to the pro~o~ed }O 0 J 0<;;
reduced development areas, there may be cases where the development area may b~1^'lthln an -
. . 'OeceI'Je",.-
iJe..le " K
Planner: G
'.
ATTACHMENT 1 - 1
.
.
entirely commercial or industrial zoned area and the proposed development may have limited
impact on the adjacent properties, utilities, etc. These applications would be reviewed under the
initial Type II procedure.
Review of the TVDe I - TVDe IV Review Procedure Process.
SDC 1.2-120 states: "All applications required by the Springfield Development Code are
decided by using Type I, /I, 11/, and IV review procedures. The procedure "type" assigned to
each application governs the decision-making process for that application.
Type I Decisions. These staff decisions are made without public notice and or a public hearing.
A mailed notice of decision is sent to the applicant.
Type /I Decisions. These staff decisions are made after public notice, but without a public
hearing, unless there is an appeal.
. Mailed notice is sent to the applicant and all property owners within 300 feet of the
proposal and applicable neighborhood associations. Notice is posted on the affected
property.
. Any noticed property owner or person may present written comments to the City which
addresses the relevant criteria of approval. The comments must be received by the City
within 14 calendar days from the date on the notice to give the commenter "standing" for
an appeal.
. A preliminary decision is made based on the information presented and conditions may
be imposed. A mailed notice of preliminary decision is sent to the property owner and all
parties who responded to the public notice.
. Any person with standing and the applicant may appeal the decision to the Planning
Commission or the Hearings Official.
. Some Type II decisions, for example, Site Plan Review and land divisions (Partitions and
Subdivisions), require a separate application for final approval.
Type III Decisions. Planning Commission (c/1y limits) or Hearings Official (urban services area)
quasi-judicial decisions are made after public notice and a public hearing.
Mailed notice is sent to the applicant and all property owners within 300 feet of the
proposal and applicable neighborhood associations. Newspaper notice is published.
Notice is posted on the affected property.
. The Planning Commission or Hearings Official is responsible for implementing the Metro
Plan, the Springfield Development Code and other applicable planning documents
through the review and approval of discretionary applications for land development, or
when the Director elevates a Type /I review to a Type 11/ review. At the public hearing,
any property owner or person may present oral or written comments which address the
relevant criteria and standards. When granting approval of an application, the Planning
Commission or Hearings Official may attach conditions beyond those necessary for
compliance with the Springfield Development Code.
.'
--\j.
Date Received; I (J 0 J 0 t;j
Planner; GK
. .~
..... :....,
'.;.-~
'.l~' -, 'j- ~ ~,
ATTACHMENT 1 - 2
.
.
. A mailed notice of decision is sent to all those who parlicipated in the public hearing. Any
person with standing and the applicant may appeal the Planning Commission decision to
the City Council or the Hearings Official decision to the Land Use Board of Appeals.
Type IV Decisions. City Council legislative decisions are made after public notice and a
recommendation by the Planning Commission to the City Council (2 public hearings).
. . Mailed notice is sent to the applicant and all properly owners within 300 feet of the
proposal and applicable neighborhood associations. Newspaper notice is published.
Notice is posted on the affected properly.
. At the Planning Commission public hearing, interested persons may present evidence
and testimony relevant to the proposal. The Planning Commission will make findings for
each of the applicable criteria and make a recommendation to the City Council.
. At the City Council public hearing, the staff will review the Planning Commission's
recommendation and provide other perlinent information for the City Council's
consideration. Interested persons will be given the opporlunity to present testimony and
. information relevant to the proposal. The City Council will make findings for each of the
applicable criteria and in doing so may uphold, modify or reverse a finding of the
Planning Commission. When granting approval of an application, the City Council may
attach conditions beyond those necessary for compliance with the Springfield
Development Code. The City Council's decision will become effective by passage of an
ordinance or resolution. .
. A mailed notice of decision is sent to all those who parlicipated in the public hearing. Any
person with standing and the applicant may appeal the City Council decision to the Land
Use Board of Appeals. >>
In summary, the notice requirement for both the Type II" and Type III review procedures are the
same, Under the Type II review procedure, those who submit written comments have standing,
are noticed of the decision and can appeal the decision. Under the Type III review procedure,
those who submit written comments as well as testify at the hearing have standing, are noticed
of the decision and can appeal the decision. The appeal of the Type II procedure goes to the
Planning Commission. The appeal of the Type III procedure goes to the City Council.
Fees.
The fee structure for the various Master Plan applications within the city limits is as follows:
Preliminary Master Plan Approval Type III
Master Plan Amendment Type I
Master Plan Amendment Type II
Master Plan Amendment Type III
Final Master Plan Approval
$18,814+634/acre*
$ 2,631
$ 5,297
$ 9,672
The fee is 10 percent of the paid Preliminary
Master Plan approval fee.
* Currently, there is no differentiation between a Type II or Type III Preliminary Master Plan
approval review process,
The Preliminary S.it~ Plan, Review application fee is $4,222 plus an additional fee based on the
proposed.squa'f~;J~e~~r,!~'pe!",ious surface. . . . 16 0 J ofi
Date ReceIVed.
Planner: GK
"
ATTACHMENT 1 - 3
.
.
Question: Should there be a reduced Preliminary Master Plan application fee for a Type II
application? If the Planning Commission opts for a Type II Preliminary Master Plan application
fee, it would require City Council approval by separate resolution.
Recommendation/Action Reauested.
Discuss this item and recommend to staff to either: keep the Type II process as the initial review
as proposed; or keep the existing Type III review process.
.-........ .
,
J
Date Received; f(] cJ Jog
Planner; GK
'.
...... '--
! '-.'..: \~
,'"f-.. ~: ,..,-H
'.
ATTACHMENT 1 - 4
.
.
ATTACHMENT 2
SDC AMENDMENT
STAFF REPORT
APPLICANT
City of Springfield - Case Number LRP 2008-0011
REQUEST
Springfield Development Code (SDC) Amendments - Section 5.13~ 100 Master Plans; Section
3.3-200 Drinking Water Protection (DWP) Overlay District; and various sections to correct
Scrivener's errors created with the adoption of the reformatted SDC.
BACKGROUND
1. Proposed Master Plan amendments. The proposed amendment of Section 5.13-100 Master
Plans arises from issues occurring during and after the review of the Marcola Meadows,
RiverBend and MountainGate Master Plan applications. The proposed amendment
addresses the following issues:
a. Incomplete applications - by requiring the same Pre-Submittal Meeting review process
that currently applies to Site Plan, Subdivision and Partition applications to also apply to
Preliminary and Final Master Plan applications (see Sections 5.13-115 and 5.13-132).
b. The lack of a formal Final Master Plan review process - by establishing a specific
Preliminary Master Plan application review process (see Sections 5.13-115 through
5.13-130) and a specific Final Master Plan application review process (see Sections
5.13-131 through 5.13-134).
c. The broad purpose statement - by stating that the Master Plan specifically applies to
phasing of development over several years (see Section 5.13-105).
. d. The appropriate level of review - by limiting the Master Plan process purpose to phasing,
the level of Preliminary Master Plan review can be reduced from an initial Type III/IV
procedure to an initial Type 11/111 procedure. The Final Master Plan application is
specified as a Type 1111 procedure (see Sections 5.13-115 and 5.13-131).
e. Broad Preliminarv Master Plan submittal requirements and approval criteria - by
establishing clearer Preliminary Master Plan submittal requirements and approval criteria
sections (see Sections 5.13-120 and 5.13-125).
f. VaQue reQulation - by deleting the reference to "basic underlying assumptions" that had
to be addressed during the Master Plan modification process (see Sections 5.13-120
and 5.13-135). .
g. Perceived lack of public involvement - by requiring the applicant to hold a Neighborhood
Meeting prior to Preliminary Master Plan submittal (see Section 5.13-117). .
2. Proposed Drinking Water Protection Overlay District amendments. The amendment to the
Drinking Water Overlay District is primarily necessitated by the recently adopted Springfield
Fire Code which supersedes the current Uniform Fire Code. This requires amending the
appropriate Fire Code references specified in this Section. In addition to the specific Fire
Code references, there are several instances where text is added from the current Uniform
Fire Code because the Springfield Fire Code does not have any requirements equivalent to
the inspection' and: record-keeping requirements (see Sections 3.3-235A.7., B.7., and C.5.).
.. -~~':" ,,":-rtiis'.isrie:cessary in.orderto preserve the existing inspection and record-keeping
. ,. :.1 ..;. fo 0"3 oft3
Date Received:
Planner: GK
ATTACHMENT 2 - 1
.
.
requirement for drinking water protection. The inserted text does not represent a policy
change since these requirements in the Uniform Fire Code have been and continue to be
the standard used for drinking water protection. Also, the phrase "hazardous materials that
pose a risk to groundwater" is changed to ,"hazardous or other materials that pose a risk to
groundwater." (See Sections 3.3-205 through 3.3-225 and 3.3-235) because while the SDC
defines hazardous materials according to Fire Code definitions, some materials that pose a
risk to groundwater (e.g., certain pharmaceuticals, fertilizers) may not currently be regulated
by this Section. This amendment is considered to be a clarification of current practice.
3. Proposed Scrivener's Errors amendments. The reformatted Springfield Development Code
(SDC) was adopted by the Springfield City Council on September 17, 2007. The
reformatting process was a substantial undertaking that resulted in the reorganization of
hundreds of Code regulations in what were formerly 45 "Articles" into 6 Chapters. The
volume of the reorganization task resulted in some unintentional omissions; some '
inaccurate references due to renumbering; and some errors in punctuation known as
Scrivener's errors. Thus, on December 3,2007 the City Council adopted the first round'of
what are called Scrivener's errors. The proposed SDC amendments in this staff report are
the second, and hopefully the last round of Scrivener's errors. The proposed amendments
do not include policy or policy implementation changes.
SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE CRITERIA FOR SDC AMENDMENTS
SDC 5.6-115 of the Springfield Development Code establishes criteria that must be met in order
to approve this request. "In reaching a decision on these actions, the Planning
Commission and the City Council shall adopt findings which demonstrate conformance
to the following: A. The Metro Plan; B. Applicable State statutes; and C. Applicable State-
wide Planning Goals and Administrative Rules." .
A. The Metro Plan;"
"The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan [Metro Plan] is the official long-
range general plan (public policy document) of metropolitan Lane County and the cities
of Eugene and Springfield. Its policies and land use designations apply only within the
area under the jurisdiction of the Plan. The Plan sets forth general planning policies and
land use allocations and serves as the basis for the coordinated development of
programs concerning the use and conservation of physical resources, furtherance of
assets, and development or redevelopment of tile metropolitan area." P. 1-1
Staff ResDonse and Findina:
The proposed Master Plan amendments involve proposed process changes discussed in
general in B.1., above and specifically in the proposed text in Attachment 4. The term "Master
Plan" is mentioned in the Metro Plan, but not in the context of Springfield's utilization of the
word. In the Metro Plan there is a reference to the Eugene Airport Master Plan and Local
Facility Master Plans. Springfield's use of the term "Master Plan" regards approval of phased
development for at least 7 years. The proposed amendment to the Master Plan regulations
concerns an existing process. When this process as added to the SDC in 1994, that application
addressed all applicable Metro Plan policies. Therefore, there are no applicable Metro Plan
policies that apply to this proposed amendment.
Date Received: }O OJ 00
Planner: GK
, '.~
..'
..""
'.
ATTACHMENT 2 - 2
.
.
The proposed Drinking Water Protection Overlay District amendments involve changes in the
Fire Code. There are no policy implementation issues regarding this amendment. While there
are goals, findings and policies in the Metro Plan's Environmental Resources Element, the
proposed Drinking Water Protection Overlay District amendments amend existing regulations
andregard Fire Code references/text only. When this process as added to the SDC in 2000,
that application addressed all applicable Metro Plan policies. Therefore, there are no applicable
Metro Plan policies that apply to this proposed amendment.
The proposed Scribner's errors amendments correct; they' do not seek to add, delete or amend
the intent, purpose or meaning of any of these provisions, regulations or standards. Nothing
about the original instruction from Council during the SDC Reformat Project allowed any change
to policy implementation; nothing about the reformatting end product contained any change to
policy implementation; nothing about any ofthese proposed corrections changes any policies or
the implementation of policies held forth in this Code. The Springfield Development Code
implements Metro Plan policies. The proposed amendments do not rise to the Metro Plan
policy level. The proposed amendments, as with the reformatted Code, continue to implement
the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan as demonstrated in the findings of
Journal LRP 2007-00020 adopted on September 17, 2007. Therefore, there are no applicable
Metro Plan policies that apply to this proposed amendment.
"B.) Applicable State statutes,"
Staff ResDonse and FindinQ:
As stated under criterion A., above, the proposed Master Plan amendments revise existing
procedure and the proposed Drinking Water Protection Overlay District amendments are
necessary due to changes in Fire Code regulations. The Scrivener's error amendments are
undertaken exclusively to correct omissions, reference citations and punctuation that resulted in
the reformatting of the Springfield Development Code. Nothing contained in any of these
proposed amendments is of sufficient magnitude, impact or effect to rise to the level of
assessment intended by the application of state statutes. Except as specified below in
response to ORS 197.610, there are no other applicable ORS that apply.
POST ACKNOWLEDGEMENT PROCEDURES
ORS 197.610
"197.610 Local government notice of proposed amendment or new regulation;
exceptions; report to commission.
(1) A proposal to amend a local government acknowledged comprehensive plan or land
use regulation or to adopt a new land use regulation shall be forwarded to the Director of
the Department of Land Conservation and Development at least 45 days before the first
evidentiary hearing on adoption. The proposal forwarded shall contain the text and any
supplemental information that the local government believes is necessary to inform the
director as to the effect of the proposal. The notice shall include the date set for the first
evidentiary hearing. The director shall notify persons who have requested notice that the
proposal is pending. .
(2) When a local government determines that the goals do not apply to a particular
-' -- ..prOPOS~d:al1'!~~dJ11~n~ ~r new regulation, notice under subsection (1) of this section iO 0
GatE: Receiveu: /0 J, 6'
Planner: GK
ATTACHMENT 2 - 3
.
.
not required. In addition, a local government may submit an amendment or new
regulation with less than 45 days' notice if the local government determines that there
are emergency circumstances requiring expedited review. In both cases:
(a) The amendment or new regulation shall be submitted after adoption as provided in
ORS 197.615 (1) and (2); and
(b) Notwithstanding the requirements of ORS 197.830 (2), the director or any other
person may appeal the decision to the board under ORS 197.830 to 197.845...."
Staff ResDonse and Findina:
Although these amendments have no direct impact or consequential degree of impact on the
Goals, staff FedExed the 45 day notice to Department of land Conservation and Development
(DlCD) prior to the first evidentiary hearing as required on August 22, 2008. The first
scheduled hearing will be held by the Planning Commission on October 7, 2008. The
Department will receive notice of Council adoption as specified in (2)(a) above.
"C. Applicable State-wide Planning Goals and Administrative Rules. "
GOAL 1: CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT - OAR 660-015-0000(1)
GOAL 2: LAND USE PLANNING OAR 660-015-0000(2)
GOAL 3: AGRICULTURAL LAND OAR 660-015-0000(3)
GOAL 4: FOREST LANDS OAR 660-015-0000(4)
GOAL 5: NATURAL RESOURCES, SCENIC AND HISTORIC AREAS, AND OPEN SPACES
OAR 660-015-0000(5)
GOAL 6: AIR, WATER AND LAND RESOURCES QUALITY OAR 660-015-0000(6)
GOAL 7: AREAS SUBJECT TO NATURAL HAZARDS
GOAL 8: RECREATIONAL NEEDS OAR 660-015-0000(8)
GOAL 9: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OAR 660-015-0000(9)
GOAL 10: HOUSING OAR 660-015-0000(10)
GOAL 11: PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES OAR 660-015-0000(11)
GOAL 12: TRANSPORTATION OAR 660-015-0000(12)
GOAL 13: ENERGY CONSERVATION OAR 660-015-0000(13)
GOAL 14: URBANIZATION OAR 660-015-0000(14)
GOAL 15: WILLAMETTE RIVER GREENWAY OAR 660-015-000(15)
Date Received: /0 0.3
Planner: GK
~
GOAL 16: ESTUARINE RESOURCES OAR 660-015-000(16)
....... ." .li1....'
ATTACHMENT 2 - 4
.
.
GOAL 17: COASTAL SHORELANDS OAR 660-015-000(17)
GOAL 18: BEACHES AND DUNES OAR 660-015-000(18)
GOAL 19: OCEAN RESOURCES OAR 660-015-000(19)
Staff ResDonse and Findina:
Goal 1 Citizen Involvement: The public hearings to consider these amendments were noticed in
the Eugene Register Guard on Monday, September 29, 2008. A public hearing on these
amendments was conducted by the Planning Commission on Tuesday, October 7,2008; a
public hearing on these amendments will be conducted by the City Council on Monday,
November 17, 2008. Specifically, In addition, there was a Planning Commission work session
held on September 16, 2008 and a City Council work session will be held on November 3,2008.
The proposed Master Plan amendment, specifically, SDC Section 5.13-117 adds language that
requires an applicant to schedule and hold a public meeting to explain the proposed
development to neighboring property owners prior to the public.hearing process. This allows the
public to be involved in a maior development while still in its early stages and complies
with/utilizes State-wide Planning Goal 1 , Citizen Involvement.
Goal 2 land Use Planning: Although these amendments are exclusively corrections to an
existing land use document, that document was adopted in compliance with the Goals;
implements an acknowledged comprehensive plan in compliance with the Goals; and therefore
furthers the state's interest in the proper and appropriate observation of land use planning goals
and guidelines.
Goals 3-15. Except for portions of the Master Plan process and the changes to the Fire Code
references in the Drinking Water Protection Overlay District, these amendments do not change
any of the provisions, standards or regulations in the recently reformatted Code. However,
nothing about these amendments rises to the level of assessment of impact or relation to the
Goals contemplated by the legislature or the Commission when post acknowledgment
provisions were adopted.
Goals 16-19. These goals do not apply because there are no coastal, ocean, estuarine, or
beach and dune resources within the City's jurisdiction.
There are no State-wide Planning Goals or Administrative Rules which apply to this amendment
or which this amendment seeks to implement other than compliance with Goal 1 , Citizen
Involvement, pertaining to public notice for these proposed amendments and the Master Plan
neighborhood meeting process. Notice .of Planning Commission and City Council work sessions
and public hearings were printed in the Eugene Register Guard and placed on thei City's web
site on September 29, 2008.
CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION/REQUESTED ACTION
Staff has demonstrated consistency with criteria of approval listed in SDC Chapter 5, Section
5.6-115; with Metro Plan policies; with State statutes; and with Shate-wide Planning Goals and
Administrative Rules.where such law applies to these amendments. Staff recommends the
Planning"Commi!:jsion: approve the attached Order and forward the proposed amendment of . a
. " Chap.tet~~~;' 4..,Aa;r1c:1,6bfthe SDC to the City Council with a recomme~~io~WMleoot!on. /0 03 G u
".,,,.. ..~...., .." , "<,.,, ." a e
- . '. . Planner: GK
ATTACHMENT 2 - 5
.
.
~ .M'. ./,
..t...~ . 0.", j.o""
Date Received' /0 OJ 00
Planner: GK '.
'.'
.
.
ATTACHMENT 3
RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCil
Before the Planning.Commission
Of the
City of Springfield
REQUEST TO AMEND THE SPRINGFIELD]
DEVELOPMENT CODE ]
NATURE OF THE APPLICATION
RECOMMENDATION TO
THE CITY COUNCil
The proposed Springfield Development Code (SDC) Amendments apply to Section 5.13-100 Master Plans;
Section 3.3-200 Drinking Water Protection (DWP) Overlay District; and various sections to correct Scrivener's
errors created with the adoption of the reformatted SDC as listed in the attached staff report.
The proposed Master Plan amendments address staft's concerns regarding the current Master Plan review
process by: better defining this process which allows long term phasing of development proposals; requiring an
initial Type II rather than a Type III review procedure for smaller development proposals or those proposals
which limit impacts on adjacent properties and infrastructure - the Development Services Director has the
authority to raise anv Type II review application to a Type III; requiring a neighborhood meeting hosted by the
applicant to inform the neighbors of the applicant's proposal prior to formal application submittal; assuring
application completeness by requiring a Pre-Submittal Meeting prior to formal application submittal; requiring
specific Preliminary and Final Master Plan review processes; and redefining the categories of the Master Plan
Modification process. The proposed amendments to the DWP Overlay District, due to updated Fire regulations,
were proposed jointly by the City's Fire and Life Safety Department and the Springfield Utility Board. The
proposed amendment of Scrivener's errors is the second, and hopefully last, SDC amendment of this type
regarding the SDC reformatting process adopted last year.
1. The above referenced application has .been accepted as complete.
2. The application was initiated and submitted in accordance with Section 5.4-105. Timely and sufficient notice
of the public hearing, pursuant to Section 5.2-115, has been provided.
3. On September 16, 2008 the Planning Commission held a work session regarding the proposed SDC
amendments..
4. On October 7,2008 the Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding the proposed amendments.
The Development Services Department staff notes and recommendation together with the oral testimony
and written submittals of the persons testifying at that hearing have been considered and are part of the
record of this proceeding. .
CONCLUSION
On the basis of this record, the proposed amendments are consistent with the criteria of SDC Section 5.6-115.
This general finding is supported 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 request as
recommended herein, CASE NUMBER LRP 2008-00011, at their November 17, 2008 meeting.
Planning Commission Chairperson
AlTESL :_: v. ;': :.",.- _
A. y' -ES' . '. '.:.:' .- -"I" "'C :
. 't... .....
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
Date Received:
Planner: GK
ATTACHMENT 3 - 1
.,
, . ~ .' I
. . '. . I... . ;~1, .
'-~~;) ~.'~. . .'
.
.
Date Received:!O 0] 0 g
Planner: GK
.
.
ATTACHMENT 4
SDC SECTION 5.13-100 MASTER PLANS
OVERVIEW
The proposed amendment of Section 5.13-100 Master Plans arises from issues occurring
during and after the review of the Marcola Meadows, RiverBend and MountainGate Master Plan
applications. The proposed amendment addresses the following issues:
1. Incomplete applications - by requiring the same Pre-Submittal Meeting review process that
currently applies to Site Plan, Subdivision and Partition applications to also apply to
Preliminary and Final Master Plan applications (see Sections 5.13-115 and 5.13-132).
2. The lack of a formal Final Master Plan review process - by establishing a specific
Preliminary Master Plan application review process (see Sections 5.13-115 through 5.13-
130) and a specific Final Master Plan application review process (see Sections 5.13-131
through 5.13-134).
3. The broad purpose statement - by stating that the Master Plan specifically applies to
phasing of development over several years (see Section 5.13-105).
4. The appropriate level of review - by limiting the Master Plan process purpose to phasing,
the level of Preliminary Master Plan review can be reduced from a Type III/IV procedure to
a Type 111111 procedure. The Final Master Plan application is specified as a Type 1/11
procedure (see Sections 5.13-115 and 5.13-131).
5. Broad Preliminarv Master Plan submittal reauirements and approval criteria - by
establishing clearer Preliminary Master Plan submittal requirements and approval criteria
sections (see Sections 5.13-120 and 5.13-125).
6. Vaaue reaulation - by deleting the reference to "basic underlying assumptions" that had to
be addressed during the Master Plan modification process (see Sections 5.13-120 and
5.13-135).
7. Perceived lack of public involvement - by requiring the applicant to hold a Neighborhood
Meeting prior to Preliminary Master Plan submittal (see Section 5.13-117).
The proposed SDC amendment establishes the following Master Plan review process:
1. Pre-Application Report application - the applicant asks questions of staff; staff responds in
writing and explains the review process (applicant submits/staff reviews);
2. Neighborhood Meeting (applicant's responsibility, including notice);
. 3. Pre-Submittal Meeting application for the Preliminary Master Plan application -
completeness review (applicant submits/staff reviews);
4. Preliminary Master Plan application formal submittal and acceptance (applicant
submits/staff reviews);
5. Preliminary Master Plan approval/denial (staff or Planning Commission decision).
. 6. Pre-Submittal Meeting application for Final Master Plan - completeness review applicant
submits/staff reviews);
7. Final Master Plan application formal submittal and acceptance (applicant submits/staff
reviews);
8. Final Master Plan approval/denial (staff) - The Final Master Plan application must be
submitted within one year of Preliminary Master Plan approval to be reviewed under Type
I or Type II procedure;
9. Recordation of a Memorandum of Final Master Plan approval and any additional
conditioned documents (applicant);
10..- F.inal Maste'r"Plan approval granted effective on date of recordation (applicant/staff); and
11. Submittal of the Subdivision and Site Plan Review applications to initiate the various
phases (applicant submits/staff reviews). Date Received: j (j tJ?, oS
Planner: GK
ATTACHMENT 4 - 1
.
..
Commentary. Current Section 5.13-100 is deleted in its entirety to make room for the
proposed amendments. However, the tenn "Master Plan" is currently mentioned In SDC
Sections 3.4-215 through 3.4-225 (the Glenwood Riverfront Plan District). This current version
will be placed in SDC Appendix until such time as the Glenwood Refinement Plan and the
Glenwood Riverfront Plan District are updated. Text proposed to be deleted is shown as: [sIFiKe
IhroldgRj. Language proposed to be added is shown as: lanauaae added.
[SeGti9R 5.13100 Master PlaRs
I 6.13106 Purpose
A.. .II. Master Plan is a compr-ehensi'/e plan that allo'lls phasin!! of a specific development area
o'/er several yeaFS for public, oommer-oial, industrial or residential sevelepment. .^. Master
Plan, in this Gentexl, is specific te this Cade ans is not consigereg ta be a refinement plan
ar any other siFRilar subset at the Metro Plan. By agdressin!! publio ser:vice impacts ang
development requirements at the time of approval of Master Plan, these impacts ang
r-eElllirements neeg nat be r-eaddr-essed at subsequent phases ang the develaper may rely
on tRe Mm:ter Plan apwaval in implemenlin!! the gevelopmenl.
B. The pllrpose af a Mae;ter Plan is to:
1. PraviEle preliminary approval for tRe entire Elevelopment area in relatian ta land
llses, a ran!!e of minimllrn to rnaximllrn potential intens~ies anEl dens~ies,
arran!!ernent of llses, and the looation of pllblic facilities and transportation systems
v.'hen a development area is proposed to be Elevelopeg in f'lhases;
2. Assur-e tRat individllal ph uses of a Elevelopment 'Nillbe coordinated wilh each other;
3. Pro'/iEle the apf'lliE:;ant an assurance af tRe City's eXf'lectation far tRe a'/erull
developrnent as a basis for Eletailed f'llannin!! and in'/estment by the Elevelof'ler.
C. The Plannin!! Cornrnission shall approve the Master Plan prior to City appro'Ial of a related
Subdivisian or Site Plan af'lplication; ho.....ever, the Mae:ter Plan may be reviewed
concurrently with a Zonin!! Map umenElmenl, Discr-etionary Use, Varianoe andlor any otRer
applioation ar appro'/al eouQht by the af'lplicant r-elated to the Master Plan. .
D. Sllbject to prior af'lpra'/al of a Musler Plun, a separute Subdivision or Site Plan applioation
shall be appr-oveEl for eaGR phase. The Master Plan shall ee tRe basis far the evaluation af
all phases of developrnent an any issues that ~ adElr-esses. PRases may be combines far
cansiElemtian.
E. ,^'f'lPfo'/al af a Master Plan is e#eoli'/e for up to 7 yeaFS; hO'....e'/er the apW-llveg Master Plan
time limit may be cxlenEled pUFSuant ta Seelion 5.13 135, ModifiGatfeFls Ie the Master .0/111'1
l1F1d $cheoo!e.
I 6.13110 Applisability
The Master Plan f'lr-oGess 11f'lf'llies when initiateEl 8Y an 11f'lf'llioant '....hen the followin!l GAteria are
met; .
, ',' Date Received: 10 OJ of)
'- . -" t',' ;',:.'1\" Planner: GK
'.
ATTACHMENT 4 - 2
.
.
A. Ttle E1e'ielopment ar-ea is IomEler one ownership; or
B. If the develol'lment ar-ea has Fl'llolltiple o'/mers. then all owners Elf resor-EI have consented in
writin!j to the Master Plan review I'lr-esess; and
c. . The development area is 5 aGres or !jreater.
D. Notwithstanding the feregoin!j, the Direslor may deterFl'line ttlat the proposed develol'lment
is inal3propriate as a Master Plan and the application will not 8e accepted.
I 6.13116 Re...ic.....
A. Master Plans are r-eviewed lolnder Type III procedlolre, lolnless the Dir-eslor deteFFl'lines that
the application ShOlolld be re','iewed as a Type IV decision by the City Council due to the
complexity of the applicatiElR.
B. A Pre Application Report apl'llication as specified in Sestion 5.1 100 is FCquireEl prior to
submittal of a Master Plan al3plication.
I 6.13120 Submittal Requirements
1'. Matter Plan shall contain all of the eleFl'lents prepar-ed in a clear and legible Fl'lanner necessary
to demonstrate that the pro'lisions Elf this Code are being fulfilled anEl thall include but not be
limited to the following:
t\. The exislin!j Metro Plan designation and zone classification.
B. A 'lisinity mal'l drawn to scale on a street base map.
C. !\ legal description of the property tEl!jether with a map E1ra'lln to scale E1el'lisling the legal
boundaries of the tlol8jesl property.
D. A topography map anEl narrative Elel'listing pr-esentlolses Elf ttle lanEl, existing strustur-es.
streets, significant ve!jetatiEln, wetlands. drainage ',\lays and other relevant natural and
Fl'lan Fl'lade features.
E. 1'. site plan showing locatien and type of all land uses proposeEl, apl3FElxiFl'late asrea!je anEl
approximate number Elf lolnits or square footage of lolses, aSjacent property b1ses and
relevant featblres.
F. The density or intensity of propEls eEl uses.
G. The Fl'laximblm hei!jht and eiz8 of proposed Strustlolr-eS.
H. l\ plolblic facilities I'llan shElwin!j existing and proposed slr-eets, utilities, sanitary sewer,
natlolral and l3il'led stOrFl'l E1rainage systOFl'l, water service, bike and peElestrian ways and
tFansitlocations.
I. Mal3s and narrative eho.....ing off site plolblic impr-ovements necossary tEl serve the proposed
Elo'lelopment and/or tEl mitigate iFl'lpasls to adjacent properly or plolblic faGilities.
.-.-.".- ." /j;;,<';.",;:, ~~~n:~C~~d: toO], 00
ATTACHMENT 4 - 3
J.
,L.
.
.
K.
Th,: DireGter "':<lY re~Uiril <ldsitie~<ll infeFm<ltien necess<lry te eV<llu<l!e the !}r.apesed
de.~le!}ment, Incluslng, but not limltes te: an ESEE <In<llysis, gee logy, seils, steFm....'ater
S<lnlt<lr:;t, tr~e. !}.reserv<ltien, historic<ll, <lrchm:Jological, aAs tmffic im!}ast. /\11 rel<ltes maps
excluding VICInity <lnd det<lil m<lps, sh<lllbe <It the S<lme sC<lle, '
Pr.avisio~s: if <lAY, ~r reserv<lticm, dedic<ltien, or use of l<lnd for publis'!}urIJoses, including,
but net limited te: nghts of way, e<lsements, p<lrks, o!}en s!}<lces, and schoel sites,
I',n o'ler-all sGhedule or descri!}tien of phasing; <lnd the develo!}meAt te eccur in e<lch
ph<lse. If ph<lsing <lltern<ltives <lre contempl<lted, these <llternaH'/es sh<lllbe descrised.
'^IA ff 't .. ' .
.. e,rG. e Sl e or eti'ler IRfr<lslruGture 1R1!}reVements <lre required, the applic<lnt sh<lll specif"
the 1I"':lng <lnd me~i'lo~ of se.curing lhe im!}revement, inclusing bond, letter of cr-edit, jeint '
depOSit er other security S<llISfaGtOry for said im!}rovement construGtien.
Designation of r-es!}onsibility for providing infmstruGtur-e <lnd services.
M.
N.
O. A gener-al scheclule of <lnnOlEation consistent with the !}hasing !}I<ln, if <l!}!}lic<lble.
I 6.13 125 Criteria
^ Master PI<l~}'1<lY be <l!}!}re'/~d !f the PI<lnning Commission finds th<llthe !}r.o!}osal conforms '""ith
all of the. folloulng <l!}prov<ll SrlteA<l. In the event of <l cenfliGt with aplJro'J<l1 criteri<l in this
SubseGtlon, the mor-e s!}ecific requirements <l!}ply,
.... ~ -' ~I ~~~)._
A
....
The .zoRing of the lJro!}erly sh<lll be sonsistent with the Metre PI<ln di<lgram andior
=C<lble Refinement Plan di<lsr<lm, Plan DistriGt m<lp, <lns Conceptual Development
,
B.
The request, <lS conditioned, shall conf.orm to <lp!}lic<lble S!}ringfield Develo!}meRt Code
requlr-ements, Metro Plan !}olicies, Refinement Plan, PI<ln DistAst, <lnd Conce!llual
De'/ele!}meRt PI<ln !}olicies.
C.
Prepeses on site and off site im!}rGvements, both !}ublis <lnd pA'/<lte, <lr-e sufficient te
<lC~or:nmodate.the pre!}~s?s !}h<lsed de'Jelo!}ment and <lny c<lp<lcity requirilmeAts of puslic
faGllltles plans, <lns prOVISions <lr-e maao to assure sonstruGtion of off site imprevements in
sonJunGtlon With a schedule of the ph<lsinS. '
TAe request sh<lll previde <ldequate suidanse for the design <lnd coordin<ltion ef futur-e
!}hases; , ,
D.
E.
Physi~<ll fe<ltures, i~cludins b~t not limites to steep slopes with unst<lsle soil or seolosic
conditions, ar-e<lS \\11th susceptibility te f1eesins, sisnific<lnt clusters of tr-ees <lAS shrubs
watercourses .she.....n on the 'NOL'.^! Map <lnd their <lssoci<lted rip<lA<ln <lre<lS, wetl<lnaS',
rock,outcropplngs and o!}en sp<lces <lnd are<lS of histOAQ <lnd/or <lr-ch<leolosiGaI
slSAlficance <lS may be s!}ecified in Section 3.3900 or ORS 97.740 760, 3ail.90li 9ali <lnd
390.23li 240 sh<lllbe pr.atected as specified in this Code or in State or Feaerall<lw; and
F.
Loc<ll public faQilities plans and 10Q<l1 street plans sh<lll not be asversely im!}acted by the
p';3poses de'Jelopment. .
- ~ .' ,
~ :::.: ..
Qale Received: /0 OJ 06
Planner: GK
\
ATTACHMENT 4 - 4
.
.
16.13130 Conditions
The Appre'lal J\utharity Fflay atlaGh reasanably neGessary Gemlitians te FfliniFflize negati'/e impacts
as speGmed in tRis Code te ensure that the !lFl3!1ased de'lelopFflent Gan fully Ffleet the Gr-iteriaof
Sectien 5.1 a 125, and may requir.e guarantees to ensure GompliaRGe. :\dditianally, the appro'/al
Fflay Gantain any Ganditiens neGessary ta iFflpleFflent the previsions at SeGlion 5.1 a 129 indudin!! a
sGhedule of fees and Ghar~es, a schedule af GomplianGe re'/ie'.... and the mElentto whiGh the
Master Plan is assi!jnable.
I 5.13136 Modifieations te the Master Plan and Sehedule
l\ppliGations fer phase FflodifiGalion al3proval whiGR are in substantial Gonformity '.vith an aI3Pr-e'/ed
Master Plan shall not be deemed a modifiGation of the !llan. Modifications to the Master PlaA
shall be precessed under the appliGable procedures described belaw to aFflend the Plan:
A. Modifications that" do not affect tho basic underlyin!j assuFflptions of the adapted Master
Plan and which are not determined to be similar to SubseGlion B. or C., below shall be
pr-oce!:sed as a ministeFial deGision by the DireGlor.
B. MadifiGations that ar-e signifiGant, but do not affeGl the basic underiyin!j assumptions af Ihe
appravee Master Plan, shall be !lFesessed under Type I1l3roseeur-e. These maeificatians
inGlude a request:
1. By tRe applisant for a shange at density allosation 'iI'ith in the density Fange allawed
in Ihe appliGable zening distriel;
2. By Ihe applisant far a Ghange te the alignment af ri!jht af way r-equireFflents of leGal
stmms;
3. By the ap!llisant or City fer a Ghange to the sizes or lesation of !lublis fasilities;
4. By the applicant for a sRange of ssheduled phasinQ beyond the al3Proved time limit
for the phased de'/elepFflent 'Nhen the proposed change affects the GonstruGlien of
ssheduleG !lublis impmvements;
,
6. By the City based on Ihe requir-ementto implement newly adoptee Slate or FeGeral
r-Elgulations;
6. By the applisant for a aRe lime mElensian af Ihe approveG time limit for up to thr-ee
years. The time line exteRsion will be granted provided tRe al3l3liSant has Fflade
r-ca!:onable I3ro!jmss in the impleFflentatian of the Master Plan and public services
and roGilities remain available;
7. By tRe ap!llisant ta alter signifiGant natural reSOblFces, wetlands, open space areas,
arshaeologiG and hiGloriG features beyond the SGope af the approved Master Plan;
OF .
8.
By the a!lpliGant for other FflodifiGations to Ihe approved Master Plan thatlhe
DireGlor eeterFflines to be similar 10 the modmGations specified in Ihis SubseGlian.
Date Received: 10 0 < 09
Planner: GK
".
1;~~. " oJ ,; .. ;-,..
"
ATTACHMENT 4 - 5
.
.
C. Modificatio~s which ~ffect the .~nderlying basic ass~mptions of the approved Master Plan
or that prohibit, mstnst or significantly affest its implementation shall be prosessed ~nder
the TYf3e IIlproced~r-e, and insl~de:
"
....
B.
c.
D.
E.
,'" . F. .
.... . ~ - -
1.
P. Z~ning Map amendment or DiscretionarJ Use application initiatee13y ti:1e
applicant;
:" .':lEl~est for the re alignment or re sesignalion of arterial or colleGlor str-eets
Initialed by the applicant;' , '
The inability of the City or the applicant to pr-evise essential f3ublis infraslruGlure;
fI, r-eq~est by the City based on the r-eq~imment to implement newly adopted State
or Federal mgulalionc;
2.
3.
4.
6.
6.
Appro'/al of t~e Master Plan shall ass~re the applicant the right to pr-eseee ...:ith the
de'lelopmentln s~bstantial conformity with the Master Plan, subject to any moeifications
as may be appro'/es as specified in Section 5.1::l 1 ::l5. Changes to Or-dinances policies
and standar-ds aeopted after the date of approval of the Master Plan shall not apply te
the de'Jelopment.
Pha~e approvals shall occ~r through the land di'Jision review process, as specified in
Sect!on 5.12 100, or the Site Plan revie"'J process, as specified in Section 5.17 1 gQ as
applisa13le. '
The .Master PI~n ~hall be !1m basis for the evaluation of all phases of development on
any Issues which It ads!essee:. fI,pf3r-eval of develof3ment phases '....i11 be llranted sulljest
to the terms and soneltlons of the Master Plan, b~t e:~bject to the applicable
Develof3ment Code f3rovisiens and City Ordinances on issues which the Master Plan
does not address.
. ~lotv:i:~standinllti:1e ~r-e?edinllPrGvi~ion, tRe City shall not be obligated to previde f3ublis
Imp~o. ements affostlnglmplementallon of the Master Plan if p~elis fl,Jnas are not
avallaele. .
The City shall not be req~ired to af3pr-ove develof3ment of any f3hase describOl:l in the
:r Plan If the apprG'/al violates applicable Federal or State statues or administrati'/e
: ,The a~~r-o'led Master Plan shall be r-ocorded at lane County Deeas ane Resor-ds and
. the_9nglrJalret~medtotheCitl'.] '.,,' . d 10 0 --, rcC'
.' _.' J U;;tl~ r\~celve : _ ~ v 0
, . , Planner: GK
ATTACHMENT 4 - 6
.
.
Commentary. The proposed subsections are listed below.
Subsections:
5.13-105
5.13-110
5.13-115
5.13-116
5.13-117
5.13-120
5.13-125
5.13-130
5.13-131
5.13-132
5.13-133
5.13-134
5.13-135
5.13-140
Section 5.13-100 Master Plans
PUl'Dose
Applicabilitv
Preliminary Master Plan - Review
Preliminary Master Plan -ADDlication Concurrencv
Preliminary Master Plan - NeiQhborhood MeetinQ
Preliminary Master Plan - Submittal Requirements
Preliminary Master Plan - Criteria
Preliminary Master Plan - Conditions .
Final Master Plan - Review
Final Master Plan - Submittal Requirements
Final Master Plan - Criteria. Recordation and Effective Date
Final Master Plan - PhasinQ Implementation
Final Master Plan - Modifications ..
Final Master Plan - Assurance to the Applicant and City Disclaimers
15.13-105 Purpose
Commentary. The "definition" of a Master Plan is clearer - the specific purpose is to allow
phasing of development over time.
A. A Master Plan allows ohasinq the develooment of a soecific orooerty over several years.
Commentary. The current purpose statements are revised to give them more substance.
B. The ourpose of a Master Plan is to:
1. Facilitate the review of multi-ohased develooments that are desired to be
develooed for more than 3 years and ensure that individual ohases will be .
coordinated with each other over the duration of the Final Master Plan:
2. Ensure that a full ranqe of public facilities and services are available or will be
orovided for the proposed ohased develooment and to olan the extension of
necessary public infrastructure in a timely and efficient manner:
3. Determine soecific land uses. a ranqe of minimum to maximum ootential intensities
of non-residential uses and a ranqe of minimum to maximum densities of
residential uses. the arranqement of uses, and the location of oublic facilities and
transoortation systems;
4. Identify the incremental and cumulatiye imoacts, includinq, but not limited to noise.
shadinq, qlare, utility caoacity and traffic. raised durinq the review of the proposed
develooment and consider alternatives for mitiqatinq these imoacts to affected
orooerties and public facilities:
, .
Date Received:
Planner: GK
to 03, 0 e
: ~::;} ..:~., 1ii~:.
ATTACHMENT 4 - 7
.
.
5. Provide the propertv owner an opportunitv for the concurrent review of
discretionary land use decisions: and
6. Provide the property owner with the assurance needed over the lona term to plan
for and execute the proposed development.
1 5.13-110 Applicability
Commentary. The current SDC Master Plan review process implies there is a two-step
process, but is not specific. The proposed review process is formalized into two distinct steps -
the Preliminary Master Plan and the Final Master Plan.
A. Approval of a Master Plan is a two-step process that includes Preliminary Master Plan
Approval and Final Master Plan Approval. This process applies when the followina
criteria are met:
1. The propertv is under sinale ownership: or if the propertv has multiple owners, all
owners of record consent in writinQ to the Master Plan review process; and.
Commentary. There is no change to the current 5 acre minimum, except that there may be
situations where a person owns less than 5 acres and desires more time to develop than is
currently allowed by the Site Plan Review process, which is 2 years, with up to a one year
extension. There is no change to the current maximum allowable time line of 7 years, unless an
extension is requested and granted as discussed in Section 5.13-135.
2 . The property is 5 acres or Qreater and the applicant desires development to be
phased over a period not to exceed 7 vears.
EXCEPTION: The Director mav allow an exception to the 5 acre minimum, if the
applicant requests phasinQ for more than 3 vears.
Commentary. Originally, the Master Plan process was adopted in the 1980's to apply to
MountainGate, a residential development. Most recent Master Plan applications have involved
either commercial or commercial/residential mixed use. Subsection B. lists proposed
development options that may occur in a number of zones or mix of zones.
B. A Master Plan mav include public. commercial. industrial or residential development. or
anv combination thereof.
15.13-115 Preliminary Master Plan - Review
Commentary. There is a change proposed for the level of review for a Preliminary Master
Plan. Currently, a Type /II procedure (Planning Commission review) is required for all Master
Plan applications. A Type /I procedure is proposed because the intent of the Master Plan
process is similar to a Site plan application, which is a Type /I review. The difference between
the two applications is that Site Plan approval is good for 2 years and the Master Plan approval
is good for 7 years and the Site Plan Review application requires more specific information.
A.
The Preliminary Master Plan shall be reviewed under Tvpe II procedure.
Date Received: 10 OJ 06
Planner: GK
'<,'1'
"
ATTACHMENT 4 - 8
.
.
EXCEPTIONS: The Preliminarv Master Plan shall be reviewed under Tvpe 111 procedure
if:
1. The Director determines that the proposed development is:
a. Complex andlor
b. Mav have potential impacts on public facilities. includina. but not limited to
availabilitv and capacity. andlor other properties. includina. but not limited to
noise, and traffic: andlor
2. The applicant chooses to submit concurrent Tvpe III procedure applications as may .
be permitted in SDC 5.13-116.8.
B. Prior to the submittaf of a Preliminarv Master Plan application:
Commentary. The "Pre-Application Report" process is currently used to allow the applicant to
ask staff an unlimited number of questions regarding the proposed development. No change is
proposed regarding the use of this process.
1. A Pre-Application Report application. as specified in Section 5.1-120.8.. is reauired
prior to the formal submittal of the Preliminarv Master Plan application.
Commentary. A Master Plan is a complex application. Requiring the Pre-Submittal Meeting
application will allow Staff to evaluate the Preliminary Master Plan application for completeness,
prior to formal submittal by the applicant and the start of the State-mandated 120-day review
time line.
2. A Pre-Submittal Meetina application. as specified in Section 5.1-120.C.. is reauired
prior to the formal submittal of the Preliminarv Master Plan application.
I 5.13-116 Preliminary Master Plan - Application Concurrency
Commentary. Currently, there is no prohibition on concurrent Metro Plan diagram and/or text
amendment applications, but past City practice has been that any required Metro Plan diagram
and/or text amendment application was approved prior to the submittal of the Preliminary Master
Plan application. The text in Subsection A., below continues this past practice.
A. If the applicant reauires or proposes to chanae the Metro Plan diaaram andlor text. the
applicant shall applv for and obtain approval of a Metro Plan diaaram andlor text
amendment prior to the submittal of the Preliminarv Master Plan application. The Metro
Plan diaaram andlor text amendment may also reauire amendment of an applicable
refinement plan diaaram or Plan District Map.
B. The Preliminarv Master Plan mav be reviewed concurrentlv with other Tvpe 111 apolications
includina a Zonina Mao amendment. Discretionarv Use, Maior Variance. or a Willamette
Greenwav development application.
Commentary. Currently, SDC Section 5. 13-105C. states: "The Planning Commission shall
,approve ]he MfJ.st(Jr F:lan prior to City approval of a related Subdivision or Site Plan
.;.:, :: ".' /0 0] 06
. "', Date Received:
d.. Planner: GK
"
ATTACHMENT 4 - 9
.
.
application. . .." This language now specifically refers to the "Final" Master Plan. There is no
change to the intent of this requirement.
C. Subdivision and/or Site Plan applications that initiate the various phases of proposed
. development shall not be submitted concurrently with the Preliminary Master Plan. These
applications shall not be submitted until Final Master Plan approval is effective. as
specified in Section 5.13-133.
I 5.13-117 Preliminary Master Plan - Neighborhood Meeting
Commentary. During the Marcola Meadows Metro Plan diagram and Zoning Map amendment
process, the applicant voluntarily provided notice and held a neighborhood meeting to explain
the proposed development. This undertaking helped educate neighbors to the intent of the
proposal prior to the public hearing process. This is now a requirement for Master Plan
applications because it allows the public to be involved in a maior development while still in its
early stages and complies with/utilizes State-wide planning Goal 1, Citizen Involvement.
To provide the opportunity for early citizen involvement in the Master Plan review process. the
applicant shall provide notice and invite citizen participation by initiatina a Neiahborhood Meetina.
The meetina shall be scheduled after receipt of staffs response to the Pre-Application Report
application reauired in Subsection 5.13-1178.1.. and prior to the formal submittal of a Preliminary
Master Plan application. The meeting is not intended to produce complete consensus on all
applications. It is intended to encourage applicants to be aood neiahbors. The applicant shall be
responsible for schedulina and oroanizina the meetina. arranaina the meetina place. notice and all
related costs. City staff will attend the neiahborhood meetina in an advisory capacity to answer
auestions. The notice shall provide a brief description of the proposal and shall be mailed to those
property owners and residents within 300 feet of the proposed development. The meetina may be
held in arw public or private buildina capable of accommodating the proceedina. The buildina
selected should be in the vicinity of the proposed development. The applicant shall submit a
summary of the auestions raised and responses made at this meetina with the Preliminary Master
Plan application as reauired in Subsection 5.13-120N.
I 5;13-120 Preliminary Master Plan - Submittal Reauirements
Commentary. The submittal requirements Section is updated to incorporate certain aspects of
the Site Plan Review application in order to provide more specificity to the applicant.
The Preliminary and Final Master Plan applications shall be prepared by a desian team
comprised. at a minimum. of a planner. architect. civil enaineer. and landscape architect. The
applicant shall select a proiect coordinator. All related maps. excludina vicinity and detail maps.
shall be at the same scale. A Preliminary Master Plan shall contain all of the elements necessary
to demonstrate compliance with the applicable provisions of this Code and shall include. but not
be limited to: .
A. General Submittal Reauirements. The applicant shall submit a narrative aenerally
describina the purpose and operational characteristics of the proposed development.
The narrative shall include:
1. The existina Metro Plan desianation and zoning. Where the proposed Master Plan
site is within an overlay district. Plan District or Refinement Plan the applicable
')'a~ditional standards shall also be addressed: JO 03 oS
. . .1,. Date Received: I'
Planner: GK
'.
ATTACHMENT 4 - 10
.
-
2. The location and type of land uses proposed;
3. The proposed number of residential units and/or square footaqe of commercial.
industrial and/or public uses:
4. The density or intensity of proposed uses. includinq applicable Floor Area Ratios
WARs); and
5. The applicant shall attach:
a. A map depictinq existinq zoninq and land uses within 300 feet of the
proposed Master Plan boundary:
b. A Vicinity Map drawn to scale depictinq existinq bus stops. streets.
driveways. pedestrian connections. fire hydrants and other
transPor1ationlfire access issues within 300 feet of the proposed Master
Plan site: and
c. A leqal description of the property within the proposed Master Plan
boundary.
B. A Site Assessment of the entire proposed Master Plan site that precisely maps and
delineates the existinq conditions on the site. Proposed modifications to physical
features shall be clearly indicated. Information required for adiacent properties may be
qeneralized to show the connections to physical features. A Site Assessment shall
contain the followinq information. as applicable:
1. A full size map depictinq the proposed Master Plan boundary toqether with
existinq lot/parcel lines;
2. The 100-yearfloodplain and floodway boundaries on the proposed Master Plan
site. as specified in the latest adopted FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps or
FEMA approved Letter of Map Amendment or Letter of Map Revision:
3. The Time of Travel Zones. as specified in Section 3.3-200 and delineated on the
Wellhead Protection Areas Map on file in the Development Services Department:
4. Physical features includinq. but not limited to siqnificant clusters of trees and
shrubs. wetlands as specified in Section 4.3-117. rock outcroppinqs and
watercourses shown on the Water Quality Limited Watercourse Nl/LQW) Map
and their riparian areas on file in the Development Services Department. In the
latter case. the name. location. dimensions. direction of flow and top of bank shall
be depicted. If the proposed Master Plan site is located within 150 feet of the top
of bank of any WQLW or within 100 feet of the top of bank of any WQLW direct
tributary. a Riparian Area Protection Report is required:
Date Received: 10 OJ, 06
Planner: GK
.. .,\'-,';:, ;:-:'-
~.;~~.~ "~"'I!l.i:'~
"
ATTACHMENT 4 -11
.
.
5. Soil types and water table information as mapped and specified in the Soils
Survey of Lane County. A Geotechnical report prepared by a licensed
Geotechnical EnQineer shall be submitted concurrentlv if the Soils Survey
. indicates the proposed Master Plan site has unstable soils and/or a hiQh water
table: and
6. ExistinQ elevations and contours.
C. A GradinQ Plan which includes: existinQ and proposed elevations and where 2 or more
feet of fill or QradinQ is anticipated for portions of or the entire proposed Master Plan site.
On hillsides. the plan shall show pad sites and their relationship to the public riQht-of-way
with existinQcontours at 1-foot intervals and percent of slope. In areas where the percent
of slope is 10 percent or more. contours may be shown at 5-foot intervals.
D. A Stormwater ManaQement Plan diaQram which includes the stormwater manaQement
system for the entire proposed Master Plan site and any impacts on adiacent properties.
The plan shall contain the followinQcomponents:
1. Roof drainaQe patterns and discharQe locations:
2. Pervious and impervious area drainaQe patterns:
3. The size and location of stormwater manaQement systems components.
includinQ but not limited to: drain lines. catch basins. drv wells and/or detention
ponds: stormwater Quality measures: and natural drainaQewavs to be retained
and/or modified: .
4. ExistinQ and proposed elevations. site Qrades and contours; and
5. A stormwater manaQement syStem plan with supportinQ calculations and
documentation as specified in Section 4.3-110 shall be submitted supportinQ the
proposed system. The plan, calculations and documentation shall be consistent
with the EnGineerinG DesiGn Standards and Procedures Manual.
E. A Wastewater ManaQement Plan with maps and a narrative depictinQ the location and
size of existinQ and proposed wastewater facilities with supportinQ calculations and
documentation consistent with the EnGineerinG DesiGn Standards and Procedures
Manual.
F. A Utilities Plan with maps and a narrative depictinQ the location and size of existinQ and
proposed water. electrical. Qas and telephone service: and the location of existinQ and
required traffic control devices. fire hydrants. street liQhts, power poles, transformers.
neiQhborhood mailbox units and similar public facilities. .
G. A Landscape Plan with maps and a narrative illustratinQ proposed landscapinQ for the
entire proposed Master Plan site. includinQ, but not limited to; where existinQ veQetation .
" .'is proposed for preservation, especiallv riparian and wetland areas and trees: installationjO 0] O<Z
. ._~... ,.. ..'.~ f."_ ~. 0..;.;.11:; t...~~t;~,::IVt:u.
.'!~:l :.; "~I';" . Planner: GK
ATTACHMENT 4 - 12
.
.
of vegetative buffering; street trees: general landscaping; and a percentage range for the
total amount of reguired open space. broken down bv the type of open space. public and
private. as applicable.
H. An Architectural Plan with maps. illustrative examples. including building elevations and
proposed building locations utilizing applicable SDC design standards. and a narrative
providing sufficient information to describe proposed architectural stvles. building heights
and building materials.
I. A Parking Plan and Parking Study.
1. A Parking Plan shall be submitted for all proposed development and shall contain
the following information:
a. The location and number of proposed parking spaces:
b. On-site vehicular and pedestrian circulation:
c. Access to streets. allevs and properties to be served. including the
location and dimensions of existing and proposed driveways and any
existing driveways proposed to be closed;
d. The location of and number proposed bicvcle spaces:
e. The amount of gross floor area applicable to the parking reguirements for
the proposed use: and .
f. The location and dimensions of off-street loading areas. if any.
2. A Parking Study. for other than single familv developments. with maps and a
narrative depicting proiected parking impacts. including. but not limited to;
proiected peak parking demand; an analvsis of peak demand compared to. or
use of. the proposed on-site and off-site supplv; potential impacts to the on-street
parking system and adiacent land uses; and proposed mitigation measures. if
necessarv.
J. An On-site Lighting Plan depicting the location and maximum height of all proposed
exterior light fixtures. both free standing and attached. .
K. A Public Right-of-Wav/EasementlPublic Place Map depicting the reservation. dedication.
or use of the proposed Master Plan site for public purposes. including. but not limited to;
rights-of-wav showing the name and location of all existing and proposed public and
private streets within or on the boundarv of the proposed Master Plan site. the right-of-wav
and paving dimensions. and the ownership and maintenance status. if applicable. and the
location. width and construction material of all existing and proposed sidewalks: pedestrian
access ways and trails; proposed easements: existing easements; parks; open spaces.
including plazas: transit facilities; and school sites.
'. '-,
,. -
Date Received: I Cl 0 3, oG
Planner: GK
);::~) : l:~l :11: I
. I
"
ATTACHMENT 4 - 13
.
.
L. A Traffic Impact Studv, as specified in Section 4.2-105.A.4. the scope of which mav be
established bv the Public Works Director. The Traffic Impact Studv shall contain maps
and a narrative depicting proiected transportation impacts. including. but not limited to:
the expected number of vehicle trips (peak. special events that mav be generated bv the
proposed development. and dailv); an analvsis of the impact of vehicle trips on the
adiacent street svstem; and proposed mitigation measures to limit anv proiected negative
impacts. Mitigation measures mav include improvements to the street svstem itself or
specific programs and strategies to reduce traffic impacts such as encouraging the use
of public transit. carpools. vanpools, and other alternatives to single occupant vehicles.
M. A Phasing Plan. The Phasing Plan shall illustrate the proposed location of buildings,
streets. utilities and landscaping. Phasing shall progress in a seguence that provides
street connectivitv between the various phases and accommodates other reguired public
improvements such as wastewater facilities, stormwater management. electricitv and
water. The Phasing Plan shall consist of maps and a narrative with an overall schedule or
description of on-loft-site phasing including. but not limited to: the tvpe. location and timing
of proposed uses. building locations; proposed public facilities including on-loft-site streets
and traffic signals or other traffic control devices and utilities with the designation of
construction and maintenance responsibility; estimated start/completion dates with a
proposed tvpe of financial guarantee to ensure planned infrastructure improvements will
occur with each phase or when reguired bv the City. aftected local agencv or the State -
the formal submittal of the guarantee typicallv occurs during the Final Master Plan review
process andlor implementation; a statement of the applicant's intentions with regard to
the future selling or leasing of all or portions of the proposed development (where a
residential subdivision is proposed, the statement shall also include the applicant's
intentions whether the applicant or others will construct the homes); and the relationship
of pedestrian and bicvcle connectivitv and open space reguirements to the proposed
phasing.
N. Neighborhood Meeting Summary. The applicant shall submit a summary of issues raised
althe neighborhood meeting as specified in Section 5.13-117.
O. A copv of all proposed and anv existing covenants. conditions, and restrictions that mav
control development. if applicable.
P. Annexation. A general schedule of proposed annexation consistent with the phasing plan,
if applicable.
Q. The Director mav reguire additional information necessary to evaluate the proposed
development. including, but not limited to a:
1. ESEE analvsis. as mav be needed to complv with Statewide Planning Goal 5.
Natural Resources for site attributes that mav not be on an adopted Citv inventory;
2. Wetland delineation approved bv the Oregon Department of State Lands shall be
submitted concurrentlv with the Preliminary Master Plan application, where there is a
wetland on the proposed Master Plan site; and
3. Historical andlor archaeological studies.
R.o. - Anv. concurrent land use applications as specified in Subsections 5.13-1168. I 0 0" nn
. '. " Uate Kecelved: ..> ~D
. 1'.'\" '\' ,....... PI GK
'-- "', . _.'" ,'...,. ,,,' . I anner:
;i;:', ..:..'!1.:.....;
"
ATTACHMENT 4 - 14
.
.
I 5.13-125 Preliminary MasterPlan - Criteria
Commentary. The Preliminary Master Plan approval criteria are clearer. For example, criterion
5.13-125 B. currently states: "The request, as conditioned, shall conform to applicable
Springfield Development Code requirements." This is too broad because it refers to any SDC
requirement. The following Subsections now connect specific aspects of the proposed
Preliminary Master Plan criteria to the applicable SDC Chapter and/or Sections. The SDC
defines "Approval Authority" as the Director, Hearings Official, Planning Commission or the City
Council.
A Preliminary Master Plan shall be approved. or approved with conditions. if the Approval
Authority finds that the proposal conforms with all of the applicable approval criteria:
Commentary. The current "Metro Plan diagram" reference is deleted because either the
applicant has recently applied for and obtained a Metro Plan diagram and/or text amendment,
and/or the "correct" designation is already in place. Therefore, there should be no need to revisit
Metro Plan policy as part of the Master Plan review process.
A. PlanlZone consistency. The existina or proposed zonina shall be consistent with the Metro
Plan diaaram and/or applicable text. In addition. the Preliminary MasterPlan shall be in
compliance with applicable City Refinement Plan. Conceptual Development Plan or Plan
District standards. policies and/or diaaram and maps.
Commentary. This criterion specifically refers to "all applicable standards of the zoning district"
which include building height, setbacks, specific design standards, etc.
B. Zonina district standards. The Preliminary Master Plan shall be in compliance with
applicable standards of the specific zonina district and/or overlay district.
Commentary. This criterion specifically refers to the required Traffic Impact Analysis from a
transportation system capacity aspect in relation to proposed phases, in addition to the
transportation standards contained in SDC Chapter 4.
C. T'ransportation system capacity. With the addition of traffic from the proposed
development. there is either sufficient capacity in the City's existina transportation system
to accommodate the development proposed in all future phases or there will be adeauate
capacity by the time each phase of development is completed. Adopted State and/or local
mobility standards. as applicable, shall be used to determine transportation system
capacity. The Preliminary Master Plan shall also comply with any conditions of approval
from a Metro Plan diaaram and/or text amendment reoardina transportation and all
applicable transportation standards specified in SDC Chapter 4.
Commentary. This criterion refers to current parking standards in SDC Chapter 4 Development
Standards that apply to specific transportation issues.
D. Parkina. Parkina areas have been desianed to: facilitate traffic safety and avoid
conaestion: provide bicycle and pedestrian connectivity within the property and to nearby
transit stops and public areas. The Preliminary Master Plan shall also comply with all
applicable vehicular and bicycle parkino standards specified in SDC Chapter 4.
"i.::" ~.r .,'
Date Received: /0 0.3 0 6'
Planner: GK
, ::: :,,' '.1:
ATTACHMENT 4 -15
.
.
Commentary. This criterion refers to current ingress-egress standards in SDC Chapter 4
Development Standards that apply to specific transportation issues.
E. Inqress-eqress. Inqress-eqress points have been desiqned to: facilitate traffic safetv and
avoid conqestion: provide bicvcle and pedestrian connectivitv within the propertv and to
adiacent residential areas. transit stops. neiqhborhood activitv centers. and commercial.
industrial and public areas: and minimize drivewavs on arterial and collector streets as
specified in this Code or other applicable Citv and State requlations. The Preliminarv
Master Plan shall also complv with all applicable inqress/eqress standards specified in
SDC Chapter 4.
Commentary. This criterion refers to current standards in SDC Chapters 4 and 5 that apply to
specific utility issues.
F. Availabilitv of public utilities. Existinq public utilities. includinq but not limited to. water.
electricity. wastewater facilities. and stormwater manaqement facilities either have
sufficient capacitv to support the proposed development in all future phases adequatelv. or
there will be adequate capacitv available bv the time each phase of development is
completed. The Public Works Director or appropriate utilitv provider shall detemiine
capacitv issues. The Preliminarv Master Plan shall also complv with applicable utilitv
standards specified in SDC Chapters 4 and 5.
Commentary. This criterion refers to current standards in SDC Chapter 4 Development
Standards that apply to specific physical feature issues.
G. Protection of phvsical features. Phvsical features. includinq but not limited to slopes 15
percent or qreater with unstable soil or qeoloqic conditions. areas with susceptibility to
f1oodinq. siqnificant clusters of trees and shrubs. watercourses shown on the Water Qualitv
Limited Watercourses (WQLWl Map and their associated riparian areas. wetlands. rock
outcroppinqs and open spaces and areas of historic and/or archaeoloqical siqnificance as
may be specified in Section 3.3-900 or ORS 97.740-760. 358.905-955 and 390.235-240
shall be protected as specified in this Code or in State or Federal law. The Preliminarv
Master Plan shall also comply with applicable phvsicalfeature protection standards'
specified in SDC Chapter 4.
Commentary. This criterion addresses a specific phasing issue that arose during the Marcola
Meadows Master Plan review process.
H. Phasinq Plan. The Phasinq Plan shall: demonstrate that the construction of required public
facilities will either occur in coni unction with. or prior to each phase. or there are
appropriate financial quarantees to ensure the phased public facilities construction will
occur. if necessarv: explain the timinq of construction and maintenance. and identify the
partv responsible for financinq and constructinq and maintaininq each phase. if necessarv.
Commentary. Compatibility and mitigation criteria are specifically addressed.
J. Adiacent use protection. The proposed Preliminarv Master Plan contains desiqn.
landscapinq/screeninq. parkinqltraffic manaqement and multi-modal transoortation
elements that limit and/or mitiqate identified conflicts between the site and adiacent uses.
Date Received: /C) OJ ag'
Planner: GK
';l,:'r
. <.
...t'..\
'.
ATTACHMENT 4 - 16
.
.
J. Mitiaation of off-site impacts. Potential off-site impacts includina. but not limited to noise,
shadina. alare. utility capacity and traffic, have been identified and mitiaated.
I 5.13-130 Preliminary Master Plan - Conditions
Commentary. This text is similar to text in Section 5.17-125, Site Plan Review Conditions.
The Preliminary Master Plan shall comply the criteria of Section 5.13-125 and with all applicable
provisions of this Code. To mitiaate identified on-site conflicts and impacts. the Approval Authority
may impose conditions. Certain conditions may reauire an adeauate financial auarantee in a
form acceptable to the City to ensure compliance.
I 5.13-131 Final Master Plan - Review
Commentary. Currently, there is no formalized "Final" Master Plan process; it's implied by past
practice. This Section establishes the "Final" Master Plan review process.
A. A Final Master Plan application shall be reviewed under Type I procedure. However, if the
Preliminary Master Plan approval was reviewed under Type III procedure. the Director
may reauire the Final Master Plan to be reviewed under Type II procedure.
B. A Pre-Submittal Meetina application. as specified in Section 5.1-120.C.. is reauired prior to
the formal submittal of the Final Master Plan application.
I 5.13-132 Final Master Plan - Submittal Reauirements
Commentary. Currently there is no time line for Final Master Plan submittal. The one year
time line is the same as the current Partition Plat submittal time line. Additionally, there is a time
line extension similar to the current Partition Plat submittal process because of the complexity of
most Master Plan applications. The Final Master Plan submittal packet is also described.
A. Within one year of Preliminary Master Plan Approval. the applicant shall submit the Final
Master Plan. The Final Master Plan shall illustrate the location of proposed buildinas.
streets, utilities. parkina and landscape areas. The Final Master Plan shall incorporate all
Approval Authority conditions of approval. The Final Master Plan application shall include:
1. A narrative that lists the conditions of approval. explains how each condition is met
and references the applicable Preliminary Master Plan maps, diaarams or plan
sheets that reauire revision:
2. The specific maps, diaarams. plan sheets or other documents have been revised
and/or demonstrate conformance with the Preliminary Master Plim approval: and
3. Any other information that may be reauired by the Director.
EXCEPTION: The applicant may reauest an extension of the Final Master Plan submittal
for UP to one additional year. The applicant shall submit the reauest for the extension in
writina to the Director no later than 30 days prior to the expiration of the Preliminary Master
Plan effective date. The applicant shall explain why the reauest is necessary and '
demonstrate. 0 he Final Master Plan a Iication will be submitted within the re uested
'.;~, ,,'~. ._:;:(~i:!.,J~>:~.,;' !~ 0 ()~ 0
Lh:.......... .\vL-L;:i\Jv.....
Planner: GK
........-..-.-.
"
ATTACHMENT 4 -17
.
.
extension time line. The Director mav !:Irant or amend the extension request upon
determininQ that the applicant is makin!:l prOQress on the Final Master Plan application.
Commentary. Requiring the Pre-Submittal Meeting application will allow staff to evaluate the
Final Master Plan application for completeness, prior to formal submittal by the applicant.
B. A Pre-Submittal MeetinQ application. as specified in Section 5.1-120.C" is required prior to
the formal submittal ofthe Final Master Plan application.
I 5.13-133 Final Master Plan - Criteria. Recordation and Effective Date
Commentary. There are two criteria for Final Master Plan approval.
A. Criteria. The Approval Authoritv shall Qrant Final Master Plan approval upon findinQ that:
1. The Final Master Plan substantiallv conforms to the provisions of the Preliminarv
Master Plan approval; and
2. All approval conditions have been met or can be Quaranteed to be met.
Commentary. Staff is aware of the cost and difficulty of recording the Final Master Plan as the
regulations are currently written. The recordation of a Memorandum of Final Master Plan
approval will reduce costs to the applicant.
B. Recordation. The applicant shall record a Memorandum of Final Master Plan approval in a
format approved bv the City Attornev and anv other required documents at Lane Countv
Deeds and Records and return a recorded copv of the Memorandum of Final Master Plan
approval all other applicable documents to the Development Services Department.
C. Effective Date.
1. Final Master Plan approval is effective on the date of recordation. the effective
date. for not more than 7. vears, unless modified as specified in Section 5.13-135.
Commentary. Currently. there is no language regarding an "end time" for Final Master Plan
approval.
2. The Final Master Plan remains in effect until the permitted development has been
constructed or the plan is modified. superseded or expires.
D. Once the Final Master Plan effective date is established. all persons and parties. and their
successors. heirs or assiQns. who have or will have anv interest in the real property within
the Final Master Plan boundarv. shall be bound bv the terms and conditions of approval of
the Final Master Plan and the provisions of this Section.
I 5.13-134 Final Master Plan - PhasinCllmplementation
Commentary. Subsection A. is from current Section 5.13-140.
A. The Final Master Plan shall be the basis for the evaluation of all phases of proposed
. de.velopm7.~t. 'incIUd~nQ Subdivision or Site 'Plan Review aool!P~ived; /0 0:3 06'
.' . :. .h Planner: GK
"
ATTACHMENT 4 - 18
.
.
B. Subdivision and Site Plan Review applications within the Master Plan boundary may be
. submitted on or after the Final Master Plan effective date.
Commentary. A Pre-Submittal Meeting application is currently required for all Subdivision and
Site Plan Review applications. This is not another layer of staff review. However, it is necessary
to determine Master Plan compliance and which Master Plan conditions of approval apply to a
particular development phase. Not all approval conditions may apply to a particular phase.
C. The Pre-Submittal Meetinq application process as specified in Section 5.1-120.C. for each
Subdivision or Site Plan Review application shall also address the Final Master Plan and
all applicable conditions of approval.
I 5.13-135 Final Master Plan - Modifications
Commentary. This Section specifically states that modifications are made to the "Final" Master
Plan. The current review categories remain, but the level of review is changed from Type 1//111 to
the proposed Type 1/11 because the "basic underlying assumptions" category has been deleted.
Additionally, the permitted Master Plan amendments are now limited to those listed below in
order to reduce the number of modification applications. If an applicant requests a modification
of an item that is not listed, then a new Master Plan application would be required. Finally,
Subsection D. is added to list those modifications for which no planning review is required.
A proposed Final Master Plan modification shall be processed under the applicable procedures
described below: .
A. The followinq modifications to a Final Master Plan shall be processed under Type I
procedure. These modifications include a request:
1. By the applicant for a chanqe of scheduled phasinq beyond the approved time limit
for the phased development when the proposed chan!:je does not affect the
construction of scheduled public improvements:
2. By the City based on the requirement to implement newly adopted State or Federal
requlations: or
3. By the applicant for a one time extension of the approved time limit for UP to 3
Years. An extension request shall be filed in writinq with the Director at least 60
days prior to the expiration of the initial 7 year period. If the applicant has made
reasonable proqress. as determined by the Director. in the implementation of the
Final Master Plan and public services and public facilities remain available to serve
the site. the time line extension will be qranted.
Commentary. This Subsection is based upon current text and adds specific thresholds in
certain situations. The level of review is reduced to a Type /I or Type 11/ procedure to be
consistent with the level of review for the Preliminary Master Plan application.
B.
The followinq modifications to the Final Master Plan shall be processed under Type II
procedure. unless the Director determines that the proposed modification should be
reviewed as a Type III procedure due to the complexity of the application or the need for
discretionary review. These modifications include a request: . /'00"'" 0 n
. ,.' Date Received: _ ..::> D
. '.,,::: ;" " .. Planner: GK
. . .~ , .
'.
ATTACHMENT 4 - 19
.
.
1. Bv the applicant for a chanae of density allocation within the density ranae allowed
in the applicable zonina district;
2. Bv the applicant for 10 percent or oreater increases or decreases in the overall
commercial. industrial or public floor area or the number of dwellina units;
3. Bv the applicant for increases or decreases in the amount of approved or reauired
parkina bv a factor of 10 percent or areater. The applicant shall provide a new
parkina analvsis related to the proposal;
4. Bv the applicant for a Zonina Map amendment or Discretionarv Use application
(when a buildina or use is proposed) that was not part of the approved Final Master
Plan;
5. Bv the applicant for proposals that would increase the number of PM peak-hour
vehicular trips bv 10 percent or more, except in cases where a trip cap has been
imposed on development of the property. Where such a trip cap is in effect. a
modification of the land use decision that imposed the trip cap shall be reauired. In
all cases. the applicant shall provide a Traffic Impact Analvsis supportina the
proposal:
6. Bv the City or the applicant when essential public infrastructure cannot be provided;
7. Bv the applicant for extension of the Final Master Plan time limit beyond the
maximum approved time limit of 7 years or the extension permitted in Subsection
B.3.. above. In no case shall the extension exceed 15 years from the date of Final
Master Plan approval as specified in Subsection 5.13-133.C. An extension
reauest shall be filed in writina with the Director at least 60 days prior to the
expiration of the initial 7 year period or any subseauentlv approved extensions.
The time line extension will be aranted provided the applicant has made
reasonable proaress in the implementation of the Final Master Plan and public
services and facilities remain available: or
8, Bv the applicant for a chanae to the approved Final Master Plan boundary.
C. Proposed Final Master Plan modifications other than those described in Subsections A,
and B.. above, shall reauire the submittal of a new Preliminarv Master Plan application.
D. The followina modifications to the Final Master Plan do not reauire subseauent land use
review and are allowed upon issuance of a buildina permit. if reauired:
1. Buildina interior improvements:
2. Exterior improvements associated with existina buildinas that do not involve a
chanae in floor area, subiect to all applicable base zone development and desian
standards and relevant conditions of approval as approved in the Final Master
Plan;
3.
Installation of new mechanical or electrical eauipment, or modification of existino
eauipment. subiect to all applicable base zone development and desian standards
.' and relevant conditions of approval as approved in the Final Master Plan;
.::.". . ;,"! ",' . Date Received; / (] oJ og
Planner: GK
,.:- \
"
ATTACHMENT 4 - 20
.
.
4. Routine maintenance of existina buildinas. facilities and landscapinq: and/or
E. A Pre-Submittal Meetina application. as specified in Section 5.1-120.C.. is reauired prior to
the formal submittal of the Final Master Plan modification application.
Commentary. Criteria are established for modifications.
F. For all Final Master Plan modification applications described in Subsections A and B.
above, the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with the followina:
1. Anv applicable Preliminary Master Plan criteria of approval specified in Section
5.13-125: and
2. Anv other applicable standard of this Code that may be reauired to iustify the
proposed modification. .
Commentary. This Subsection adds specific situations where additional Planning review of
Final Master Plan modifications is not necessary.
G. The Master Plan procedures in Appendix 3 reaardina Master Plan Modifications and/or
new Master Plans shall applv to properties within the Glenwood Riverfront Plan District.
Section 3.4-200. until these reaulations are updated.
I 5.13-140 Final Master Plan - Assurance to the Applicant and City Disclaimers
Commentary. The specific intent ofthis assurance is to protect the applicant from "new"
development standards for the first 7 year time line granted upon Final Master Plan approval
and one 3 year extension for a total of 10 years. Final Master Plan time line extensions that are
more than 10 years, and up to the 15 year maximum would be under regulations in effect at the
time of submittal of this additional time line extension.
A. Assurances to the applicant:
1. The' applicant is entitled to relv on land use reaulations in effect on the date the
Master Plan application was submitted. in accordance with ORS 227.178(3) for the
7 year approval time limit. with a sinale 3 year extension. or as otherwise previouslv
approved.
EXCEPTION: Anv time line extension proposed for more than a combined total of
10 years shall complv with land use reaulations in effect at the time of the time line
extension application submittal specified in Subsection 5.13-135.C.10.
2. The applicant shall have the riaht to proceed with development as lona as it is in
substantial compliance with the Final Master Plan and other reauired approvals and
permits. subiect to any modifications as may be approved as specified in Section
5.13-135.
Commentary. These Subsections appear in other Sections of the current SOC.
B.
City Disclaimers:
~. ..~: .~,..{, .-J:,:'
,'0(', . -~!rl-1f:-l
t'_. ,',.ol
Date Received: 10 03 06
Planner: GK
"
ATTACHMENT 4 - 21
.
.
1. The City shall not be required to approve development of anv phase described in
the Final Master Plan if the approval violates applicable Federal or State statues or
administrative rules.
2. The City shall not be obliQated to provide public improvements affectinq
implementation of the Final Master Plan if public funds are not available.
Commentary. Currently, SDC Section 3.4-200 Glenwood Riverfront Plan District utilizes the Master
Plan if an applicant desires to modify development standards. The Glenwood Refinement Plan Update
Project is now underway and will include a review of the Plan District development standard and the
process for modifying those standards. These standards will remain in effect to be utilized in the Plan
District until such time the Plan District is amended. These standards will be placed in SDC Appendix 3
and will be deleted upon the adoption of any amendment of the Plan District.
Appendix 3
Section 5.13-100 Master Plans
Subsections:
5.13-105
5.13-110
5.13-115
5,13-120
5:i 3-125
5.13-130
5.13-135
5.13-140
Purpose
Applicabilitv
Review
Submittal Reauirements
Criteria
Conditions
Modifications to the Master Plan and Schedule
Assurance to the Applicant
[ 5.13-105
Purpose
A. A Master Plan is a comprehensive plan that allows phasina of a specific development
area over several vears for public, commercial. industrial or residential development. A
Master Plan. in this context. is specific to this Code and is not considered to be a
refinement plan or anv other similar subset of the Metro Plan. Bv addressina public
service impacts and development requirements at the time of approval of Master Plan.
these impacts and reauirements need not be readdressed at subsequent phases and
the developer mav relv on the Master Plan approval in implementinQ the development.
B. The purpose of a Master Plan is to:
1. Provide preliminarv approval for the entire development area in relation to land
uses. a ranQe of minimum to maximum potential intensities and densities.
arranQement of uses. and the location of public facilities and transportation
systems when a development area is proposed to be developed in phases;
2.
-,
Assure that individual phases of a development will be coordinated with each
other; .
"
Date Received: /0 OJ, 06
Planner: GK
.....-
.
..':,f.'.t. .-
"
ATTACHMENT 4 - 22
.
.
3. ' Provide the applicant an assurance of the Citv's expectation for the overall
development as a basis for detailed plannina and investment bv the developer.
C. The Plannina Commission shall approve the Master Plan prior to Citv approval of a ,
related Subdivision or Site Plan application: however, the Master Plan mav be reviewed
concurrentlv with a Zonina Map amendment. Discretionarv Use. Variance and/or anv
other application or approval souaht bv the applicant related to the Master Plan.
D. Subiect to prior approval of a Master Plan. a separate Subdivision or Site Plan
application shall be approved for each phase. The Master Plan shall be the basis for the
evaluation of all phases of development on anv issues that it addresses. Phases mav be
combined for consideration.
E. Approval of a Master Plan is effective for UP to 7 vears: however the approved Master
Plan time limit mav be extended pursuant to Section 5.13-135. Modifications to the
Master Plan and Schedule.
15.13-110
ADDlicabilitv
The Master Plan process applies when initiated bv an applicant when the followina criteria are
met:
A. The development area is under 1 ownership: or
B. If the development area has multiple owners. then all owners of record have consented
in writina ,to the Master Plan review process: and
C. The development area is 5 acres or areater.
D. Notwithstandina the foreqoina. the Director mav determine that the proposed
development is inappropriate as a Master Plan and the application will not be accepted.
'15.13-115
Review
A. Master Plans are reviewed under Tvpe III procedure. unless the Director determines that
the application should be reviewed as a Tvpe IV decision bv the Citv Council due to the
complexitv of the application.'
B. A Pre-Application Report application as specified in Section 5.1,100 is reauired prior to
submittal of a Master Plan application.
...."--... .~~-- --
~~ ... i ~ .
. ;t.~!:." : .~~. . r
. .\.l ',;01
Date Received:
Planner: GK
/0 OJ. og
'.
ATTACHMENT 4 - 23
.
.
15.13-120
Submittal Reauirements
A Master Plan shall contain all of the elements prepared in a clear and leaible manner
necessary to demonstrate that the provisions of this Code are beina fulfilled and shall include
but not be limited to the followina:
A.
B.
c.
D.
E.
G.
The existin!:! Metro Plan desianation and zone classification.
A vicinitv map drawn to scale on a street base map.
A leaal description of the propertv toaether with a map drawn to scale depictina the leaal
boundaries of the subiect property.
A topoaraphv map and narrative depictina present uses of the land. existina structures.
streets. sianificant veaetation. wetlands. drainaae wavs and other relevant natural and
man-made features.
A site plan showina location and tvpe of all land uses proposed. approximate acreaae
and approximate number of units or sauare footaae of uses. adiacent propertv uses and
relevant features.
F.
The densitv or intensitv of proposed uses.
The maximum heiaht and size of proposed structures.
H.
A public facilities plan showin!:! existina and proposed streets. utilities. sanitary sewer.
natural and piped storm drainaae svstem. water service. bike and pedestrian wavs and
transit locations.
I.
Maps and narrative showina off-site public improvements necessary to serve the
proposed development and/or to miti!:!ate impacts to adiacent property or public facilities.
J.
The Director mav reauire additional information necessary to evaluate the proposed
development. includina. but not limited to: an ESEE analvsis. aeoloay, soils, stormwater.
sanitary, tree preservation, historical. archaeoloaical. and traffic impact. All related maps,
excludina vicinity and detail maps, shall be at the same scale.
K.
Provisions. if any. for reservation. dedication. or use of land for public purposes.
includina. but not limited to: riahts-of-way. easements. parks. open spaces. and school
sites.
L.
An overall schedule or description of phasina: and the development to occur in each
phase. If phasina alternatives are contemplated. these altematives shall be described.
M.
Where off-site or other infrastructure improvements are reauired. the applicant shall
specify the timina and method of securina the improvement. includina bond. letter of
credit 'oint de osit or other securi satisfacto for said im rovement construction. ~
uCili::i /-{ecelved: cr OJ. 00
Planner: GK
.1,"
"
ATTACHMENT 4 - 24
.
.
N. DesiQnation of responsibility for providina infrastructure and services.
O. A Qeneral schedule of annexation consistent with the phasina plan. if applicable.
15.13-125
Criteria
A Master Plan may be approved if the Plannina Commission finds that the proposal conforms
with all of the followina approval criteria. In the event of a conflict with approval criteria in this
Subsection. the more specific reauirements apply:
A. The zonina of the property shall be consistent with the Metro Plan diaaram and/or
applicable Refinement Plan diaaram. Plan District map. and Conceptual Development
Plan:
B. The reauest. as conditioned. shall conform to applicable SprinQfield Development Code
reauirements. Metro Plan policies. Refinement Plan. Plan District. and Conceptual .
Development Plan policies:
C. Proposed on-site and off-site improvements. both public and private. are sufficient to
accommodate the proposed phased development and any capacity reauirements of
public facilities plans: and provisions are made to assure construction of off-site
improvements in coni unction with a schedule of the phasinQ:
D. The reauest shall provide adeauate auidance for the desian and coordination of future
phases:
E. Physical features. includina. but not limited to: steep slopes with unstable soil or Qeoloaic
conditions: areas with susceptibility of f1oodina: siQnificant clusters of trees and shrubs:
watercourses shown on the WQLW Map and their associated riparian areas: other
riparian areas and wetlands specified in Section 4.3-117: rock outcroppinas: open
spaces: and areas of historic and/or archaeoloQical siQnificance. as mav be specified in
Section 3.3-900 or ORS 97.740-760. 358.905-955 and 390.235-240. shall be protected
as specified in this Code or in State or Federal law: .
F. Local public facilities plans and local street plans shall not be adverselv impacted by the
proposed development.
15.13-130
Conditions
The Aoproval Authority may attach reasonablY necessarv conditions to minimize neaative
impacts as specified in this Code to ensure that the proposed development can fully meet the
criteria of Section 5.13-125. and may reauire Quarantees to ensure compliance. Additionally. the
approval may contain any conditions necessarv to implement the provisions of Section 5.13-120
includina a schedule of fees arid charaes. a schedule of compliance review and the extent to
which the, Master Plan is assianable.
I -... ...,., ~.,
... ,-"
'. J,":. t.....
.., ...-...J
yr.
( S'
:'l~.: ;; !, .
.18\e Received: 10 0 J 08
Planner: GK
..
ATTACHMENT 4 - 25
.
.
15.13-135
Modifications to the Master Plan and Schedule
Aoolications for ohase modification aooroval which are in substantial conformity with an
aooroved Master Plan shall not be deemed a modification of the olan. Modifications to the
Master Plan shall be orocessed under the aoolicable orocedures described below to amend the
Plan:
A. Modifications that do not affect the basic underlvino assumotions of the adooted Master
Plan and which are not determined to be similar to Subsection B. or C.. below shall be
orocessed as a ministerial decision bv the Director.
B. Modifications that are sionificanl. but do not affect the basic underlvino assumotionsof
the aooroved Master Plan. shall be orocessed under Tvoe II orocedure. These
modifications include a reouest:
1. Bv the aoolicant for a chanoe of density allocation with in the density ranoe
allowed in the aoolicable zonina district:
2. Bv the aoolicant for a chanoe to the aliilnment of rioht-of-way reouirements of
local streets:
3. Bv the aoolicant or City for a chanoe to the sizes or location of oublic facilities:
4. Bv the aoolicant for a chanoe of scheduled ohasino beyond the aooroved time
limit for the ohased develooment when the orooosed chanoe affects the
construction of scheduled oublic imorovements:
5, Bv the City based on the reouirement to imolement newly adooted State or
Federal reoulations:
6. Bv the aoolicant for a 1-time extension of the aooroved time limit for uo to 3
years. The time line extension will be oranted orovided the aoolicant has made
reasonable orooress in the imolementation of the Master Plan and oublic
services and facilities remain available:
7. Bv the aoolicant to alter sionificant natural resources, wetlands. ooen soace
areas, archaeoloaic and historic features beyond the scooe of the aooroved
Master Plan: or
8. Bv the aoolicant for other modifications to the aooroved Master Plan that the
Director determines to be similar to the modifications soecified in this Subsection.
c.
Modifications which affect the underlvino basic assumotions of the aooroved Master
Plan or that orohibil. restrict or sianificantlv affect its imolementation shall be orocessed
under the Tvoe III orocedure, and include:
I.
Date Received"
Planner: GK .
/0 (7:!, o~
-t.(.t'". .~:;f,'1~.!'
.....-.--.---
"
. ATTACHMENT 4 - 26
4.
.
.
1.
A Zoning Map amendment or Discretionary Use application initiated by the
applicant:
2.
A request for the re-aliQnment or re-desiQnation of arterial or collector streets
initiated by the applicant:
3.
The inability of the City or the applicant to provide essential public infrastructure:
A request bv the Citv based on the requirement to implement newly adopted
State or Federal reQulations:
5.
A request bv the applicant for extension of the time limit of the Master Plan
beyond the approved time limit specified in Subsection 8.6.. above or the
extension permitted in Section 5.13-135. but in no case shall the extension
exceed 15 years from the original Master Plan approval date: or
6.
Other chanQes to the final approved Master Plan as requested by the applicant
that the Director determines to be similar to the modifications specified in this
Subsection.
15.13-140
Assurance to the Apolicant
A.
Approval of the Master Plan shall assure the applicant the riQht to proceed with the
. development in substantial conformity with the Master Plan. subiect to any modifications
as mav be approved as specified in Section 5.13-135. Changes to Ordinances. policies.
and standards adopted after the date of approval of the Master Plan shall not apply to
the development.
The City shall not be required to approve development of any phase described in the
, Master Plan if the approval violates applicable Federal or State statues or administrative
rules.
~,"l~.J
" ,~.. '.. t,.'".....,.;..: '.
;' ='~J ~ .
B.
c.
D.
E.
Phase approvals shall occur through the land division review process. as specified in
Section 5.12-100. or the Site Plan review process. as specified in Section 5.17-100. as
applicable.
The Master Plan shall be the basis for the evaluation of all phases of development on
any issues which it addresses. Approval of development phases will be aranted subiect
to the terms and conditions of the Master Plan. but subiect to the applicable
Development Code provisions and City Ordinances on issues which the Master Plan
does not address.
NotwithstandinQ the precedina provision. the City shall not be obligated to provide public
improvements affectinQ implementation of the Master Plan if public funds are not
available.
Date Received:
Planner: GK
10 03, oe
ATTACHMENT 4 - 27
.
.
F. The approved Master Plan shall be recorded at Lane Countv Deeds and Records and
the oriainal returned to the City.
. .'"
,- ~ ~. ~ -.
,..1::.' .... '.;~"'J .
ATTACHMENT 4 - 28
walt; Received;
Planner: GK
100] 08
'.
.
.
ATTACHMENTS
SDC SECTION 3.3-200 DRINKING WATER PROTECTION OVERLAY DISTRICT
Commentary. The amendment to the Drinking Water Overlay District is primarily
necessitated by the recently adopted Springfield Fire Code which supersedes the current
Uniform Fire Code. This requires amending the appropriate Fire Code references specified
in this Section. In addition to the specific Fire Code references, there are several instances
where text is added from the current Uniform Fire'Code because the Springfield Fire Code
does not have any requirements equivalent to the inspection and record-keeping
requirements (see Sections 3.3-235A. 7., B.7., and C.5.). This is necessary in order to
preserve the existing inspection and record-keeping requirement for drinking water
protection. The inserted text does not represent a policy change since these requirements in
the Uniform Fire Code have been and continue to be the standard used for drinking water
protection. Also, the phrase "hazardous materials that pose a risk to groundwater" is
changed to "hazardous or other materials that pose a risk to groundwater. " (See Sections
3.3-205 through 3.3-225 and 3.3-235) because while the SDC defines hazardous materials
according to Fire Code definitions, some materials that pose a risk to groundwater (e.g.,
certain pharmaceuticals, fertilizers) may not currently be regulated by this Section. This
amendment is considered to be a clarification of current practice. Only those specific
Sections being amended are listed below.
Section 3.3-200 Drinking Water Protection Overlay District
I 3.3-205 Purpose
A. The Drinking Water Protection (DWP) Overlay District is established to protect
aquifers used as potable water supply sources by the City from contamination.
This Section establishes procedures and standards for the physical use of
hazardous or other materials harmful to groundwater within TOTl by new and
existing land uses requiring development approval. The provisions of this Section
are designed to: '
1. Protect the City's drinking water supply which is obtained from
groundwater resources from impacts by facilities that store, handle, treat,
use, produce, or otherwise have on premises substances that pose a
hazard to groundwater quality; and
2. Provide standards for hazardous or other materials that pose a risk to
groundwater within the TOTl.
B. In order to accomplish this purpose, the DWP Overlay District includes methods
and provisions to:
1.
Restrict or prohibit the use of hazardous or other materials which are
potential groundwater contaminants; ,
2.
Set standards for the storage, use, handling, treatment, and production of
hazardous or other materials that pose a risk to groundwater within
TOTl; and
Date Received:- /0 03 06
Planner: GK
, '",,'- \'~ .
. ~ ," i
rl.,'
, '
"..,' ..
..
ATTACHMENT 5 - 1
.
.
3. Review new or expanded uses of hazardous or other materials that pose
a risk to groundwater.
I 3.3-220 Time of Travel Zones
A. The DWP Overlay District includes 4 TOTZ: 0-1 year; 1-5 years; 5-10 years; and
10-20 years. The locations of the TOTZ for each wellhead are shown on Drinking
Water Protection Area Maps on file with the City's Development Services, Public
Works, and Fire and Life Safety Departments; and Springfield Utility Board (SUB)
and Rainbow Water District (RWD).
. B. The areas within specified wellhead TOTZ are those drinking water protection
areas certified by the Oregon Health Division, under the Oregon Administrative
Rules that apply to Oregon's EPA-approved Drinking Water Protection Program,
in Oregon Health Division Delineation Certification #0002R, March 18, 1999.
C. In determining the location of a property within a TOTZ, the following criteria
apply: .
1. The Lane County Department of Assessment and Taxation maps shall be
used as a base map with the addition of TOTZ boundaries.
2. That portion of a tax lot that lies within a TOTZ is governed by the
restrictions applicable to that TOTZ. . .
3. Tax lots having parts lying within more than one TOTZ are governed by
the standards of the more restrictive TOTZ.
EXCEPTION: The Director may waive the requirement that the more
restrictive standards apply when all of the following apply:
a. Storage, use, handling, treatment, and/or production of hazardous
or otner materials that pose a risk to groundwater will not take
place within the portion of the tax lot having the more restrictive
. TOTZ standards; and
b. Storage, use, handling, treatment, and/or production of hazardous
or other materials that pose a risk to groundwater will not take
place within 50 feet of the portion of the tax lot having more
restrictive TOTZ standards; and
c. The tax lot is 20,000 square feet or larger.
4. A property owner may request the TOTZ be modified by submitting a
Zone Change application to the City. Any request for modification of the
TOTZ shall be accompanied by certification ofthe TOTZ as proposed to
be modified by the Oregon Health Division, under the Administrative
Rules ttiat apply to Oregon's EPA-approved Drinking Water Protection
Program.
... ~".. . e"
.~ ~ . ,'. "'jl.,r~! ~
Date Received: /0 0.3 (73
Planner: GK
._ . .l~.,
4" ~ ~. ,"'t
..
ATTACHMENT 5 - 2
.
.
I 3.3-225 Review
A. .. A DWP Overlay District Development Application is required when the criteria of
both Subsections A1. and 2., below are met:
1. A site is affected by one of the following:
a. There is a change of land use, occupancy or tenancy of a
property, including, but not limited to:. a change from vacant to
occupied; or
b. During the Building Permit process; or
c. In conjunction with any development application, including, but not
limited to: Site Plan review and Minimum Development Standards.
2. The action in Subsection A1., above will:
a. Affect the storage, use, and/or production of hazardous or other
materials that pose a risk to groundwater; or
b. Increase the quantity of hazardous or other materials that pose a
risk to groundwater that are stored, used and/or produced.
B. Prior to the submittal of a DWP Overlay District Development Application, an
exemption request may be submitted to the Director as specified in Section 3.3-
230B.1.
C. DWP Overlay District applications shall be reviewed under Type I procedures.
D. Prior to undertaking an activity covered by Section 3.3-225 A., the owner or
tenant shall submit a DWP Overlay District Application to the City for review and
approval. Applications shall include the following information:
1. A Hazardous Material Inventory Statement and a Material Safety Data
Sheet for any or all materials entered in the Statement imless exempted
under Section 3.3-230. Hazardous material weights shall be converted to
volume measurement for purposes of determining amounts - 10 pounds
shall be considered equal to one gallon as specified in [Uniform Fire Code
8001.18.1] Sprinafield Fire Code 2703.1.2.;
2. A list of the chemicals to be monitored through the analysis of
groundwater samples and a monitoring schedule if ground water
monitoring is anticipated to be required;
3. A detailed description of the activities conducted at the facility that involve
the storage, handling, treatment, use or production of hazardous
materials in quantities greater than the maximum allowable amounts as
stated in Section 3.3-235 A;
....-. "
Date Received: 10 030Q
Planner: GK
:) "'.
ATTACHMENT 5 - 3
.
.
4. A description of the primary and any secondary containment devices
proposed, and, if applicable, clearly identified as to whether the devices
will drain to the storm or sanitary sewer;
5. A proposed Hazardous Material Management Plan for the facility that
indicates procedures to be followed to prevent, control, collect and
dispose of any unauthorized release of a hazardous material;
6. A description of the procedures for inspection and maintenance of
containment devices and emergency equipment;
7. A description of the plan for disposition of unused hazardous materials or
hazardous material waste products over the maximum allowable amounts
including the type of transportation, and proposed routes.
E. For those development proposals requiring Site Plan Review (Section 5.17-100)
or Minimum Development Standards review (Section 5.15-100), applications may
be submitted concurrently. .
F. The Director shall review the application and make a decision based on the
standards contained in Section 3.3-235, after consulting with the Building Official,
Fire Marshall, Public Works Director, and the managers of SUB and RWD, as
appropriate.
I 3.3-235 Standards for Hazardous Materials within Time of Travel Zones
Applications shall comply with the following standards. Where the following standards are more
restrictive than the standards of the [Uniform] Sprinofield Fire Code, the following standards
apply:
A. 0 -1 year TOTZ Standards.
1. Within the 0-1 year TOTZ, hazardous materials that pose a risk to
. groundwater may be stored in aggregate quantities of no more than 500
gallons if in original containers not exceeding 5 gallons' in size. Within
that aggregated 500-gallon inventory, no more than 150 gallons of
hazardous materials that pose a risk to groundwater may be on the
premises in opened containers for handling, treatment, use production, or
dispensing on site. Hazardous materials that pose a risk to groundwater
are allowed only upon compliance with containment and safety standards
specified by the most recent Fire Code adopted by the City.
. A waiver of the 5-gallon maximum size may be given by the Director if
the applicant can demonstrate that a larger size container would pose
less risk to the aquifer.
2.
Unless exempted, all hazardous or other materials that pose a risk to
groundwater shall be stored in areas with approved secondary
containment in place [(Uniform Fire Cocle Articles 2 ancl BOQ3.1.3.3]
Sprinofield Fire Code 2702.1 and 2704.2.2). D' R . 10 O? oG'
ate ecelved: J
Planner: GK
.:.... ,- :.".' '.
;.~~:. ".:~.^~,'
..
ATTACHMENT 5 - 4
, ' ; ~ )
\' .
( lt~.
.
.
3. All new uses of Dense Non-Aqueous Phase Liquids (DNAPLs) are
prohibited.
4. Any change in type of use or an increase in maximum daily inventory
quantity of any DNAPL shall be considered a new use and prohibited.
5. The following certain types of new facilities or changes in use and/or
storage of hazardous or other materials that pose a risk to groundwater
are prohibited:
a. Underground hazardous material storage facilities;
b. Hazardous material product pipelines used to transport the
hazardous material off of the tax lot where it is produced or used;
c. Injection wells
EXCEPTION: Dry wells for roof drainage;
d. Solid waste landfills and transfer stations;
e. Fill materials containing hazardous materials;
f. Land uses and new facilities that will use, store, treat, handle,
and/or produce DNAPLs.
6. Requirements found in [(Uniform Fire Case /\l3l3snsix II E 3.2.13]
Sprinafield Fire Code 2704.2.2.5) for a monitoring program and [if!
80Q3.1.3.3 for] monitoring methods to detect hazardous materials in the
secondary containment system shall be met for all amounts of hazardous
or other materials that pose a risk to groundwater unless exempted.
7. The followina requirements [faund in Uniform Fire Cess .^.l3l3sndix II E
Sectien 3.2.7] for inspection and record keeping procedures for monthly
in-house inspection and maintenance of containment and emergency
equipment for all amounts of hazardous or other materials that pose a risk
to groundwater shall be met unless exempted: Schedules and procedures
for inspectina safetv and monitorinQ and emerQencv eauipment. The
. applicant shall develop and follow a written inspection procedure
acceptable to the Director for inspectinQ the facility for events or practices
which could lead to unauthorized discharaes or hazardous materials. An
inspection check sheet shall be developed to be used in coniunction with
routine inspections. The check sheet shall provide for the date. time. and
location of inspection: note problems and dates and times of corrective
actions taken: and include the name of the inspector and the
countersianature of the desianated safetv manaaer for the facilitv.
8.
Application of fertilizers containing nitrates are restricted to no more than
the amount recommended by the Lane County, Oregon State University
Extension Service for turf grass and are prohibited within 100 feet of a
wellhead. In no event shall a single application exceed one,half Round per
Date Received: 0 0.1 og
Planner: GK
.,
ATTACHMENT 5 - 5
.
.
1,000 square feet of area per single application or a total yearly
application of 5 pounds nitrogen fertilizer per 1,000 square feet.
B. 1-5 year TOTZ Standards.
1. The storage, handling, treatment, use, application, or production or
otherwise keeping on premises of more than 20 gallons of hazardous
materials that pose a risk to groundwater in aggregate quantities not
containing DNAPLs are allowed only upon compliance with containment
and safety standards specified by the most recent Fire Code adopted by
the City.
2. Unless exempted, all hazardous or other materials that pose a risk to
groundwater shall be stored in areas with approved secondary
containment in place [(Uniform Fire Code J'.rticlee 2 and 8003.1.3.3
Springfield Fire Code 2702.1 and 2704.2.2).
3. All new use of DNAPLs are prohibited.
4. Any change in the type of use or an increase in maximum daily inventory
quantity of any DNAPL is considered a new use and is prohibited.
5. The following certain types of facilities or changes in chemical use and/or
storage of hazardous or other materials that pose a risk to groundwater
are prohibited:
a. Hazardous material product pipelines used to transport the
hazardous material off of the tax lot where it is produced or used;
b. Injection wells.
EXCEPTION: Dry wells for roof drainage;
c. Solid waste landfills and transfer stations;
d. Fill materials containing hazardous materials;
e.' Land uses and new facilities that will use, store, treat handle,
and/or .produce DNAPLs.
6. Requirements found in [Uniform Fire Cede Appendix II !;; 3.2.13 for a
meRiterin!} J3ro!}ram and in 8003.1.3.3 for] Springfield Fire Code
2704.2.2.5 for a monitorinq program and monitoring methods to detect
hazardous or other materials in the secondary containment system shall
be met for all amounts of hazardous materials that pose a risk to
groundwater unless exempted.
7. The following requirements [f91md in Uniform Fir-e Code /\J3J3endix II E
Section 3.2.7] for inspection and record keeping procedures for monthly
/.. in-house inspection and maintenance of containment and emergency
. ,;. equipl1:tent for all amounts of hazardous or other materials that pose a risk
. .. . ._.~.....'"'. /0 <=>] 09
Planner: GK
..
ATTACHMENT 5 - 6
.
.
to groundwater shall be met unless exempted: Schedules and procedures
for inspectina safety and monitorina and emeraencv eauipment. The
applicant shall develop and follow a written inspection procedure
acceptable to the Director for inspectina the facility for events or practices
which could lead to unauthorized discharaes or hazardous materials. An
inspection check sheet shall be developed to be used in coni unction with
routine inspections. The check sheet shall provide for the date. time. and
location of inspection: note problems and dates and'times of corrective
actions taken: and include the name of the inspector and the
countersianature of the desianated safetv manaaer for the facilitv.
C. 5-10 year TOTZ Standards.
1. The storage, handling, treatment, use, production or otherwise keeping
on premises of more than 20 gallons of hazardous materials that pose a
risk to groundwater in aggregate quantities not containing DNAPLs is
allowed upon compliance with containment and safety standards
specified by the most recent Fire Code adopted by the City
2. All hazardous or other materials that pose a risk to groundwater shall be
stored in areas with approved secondary containment in place ([Uniferm
Fire Code AFticles 2 and 800d.1.d.d] Sprinafield Fire Code 2702.1 and
2704.2.2).
3. All new use of DNAPLs are prohibited.
4. Any change in type of use or an increase in the maximum daily inventory
quantity of any DNAPL is considered a new use and is prohibited.
5. The followina requirements [found in Uniform FiFe Code I\ppendi)! II E
Semien d.2.7] for inspection and record keeping procedures for monthly
in-house inspection and maintenance of containment and emergency
equipment for all amounts of hazardous or other materials that pose a risk
to groundwater shall be met unless exempted: Schedules and procedures
for inspectina safety and monitorina and emeraencv eauipment. The
applicant shall develop and follow a written inspection procedure
acceptable to the Director for inspectina the facilitv for events or practices
which could lead to unauthorized discharqes or hazardous materials. An
inspection check sheet shall be developed to be used in coni unction with
routine inspections. The check sheet shall provide for the date. time. and
location of inspection: note problems and dates and times of corrective
actions taken: and include the name of the inspector and the
countersiqnature of the desiqnated safetv manaqer for the facility.
D.
10-20 year TOTZ Standards. The storage, handling, treatment, use, production
or keeping on premises of more than 20 gallons of hazardous materials that pose
a risk to groundwater in aggregate quantities is allowed only upon compliance
with containment and safety standards specified by'the most recent Fire Code
adopted by the City.
!<T 01. oe
Date Received: _
Planner: GK
..
..~ .
'.
ATTACHMENT 5 - 7
.
.
'., ".",.
. , -. I' ",~'I
.... ,0'.
Date Received: /0 0] 0"0
Planner: GK
.
.
ATTACHMENT 6
VARIOUS SECTIONS - SCRIVENER'S ERRORS
OVERVIEW
The reformatted Springfield Development Code (SDC) was adopted by the Springfield City
Council on September 17,2007. The reformatting process was a substantial undertaking that
resulted in the reorganization of hundreds of Code regulations in what were formerly 45
"Articles' into 6 Chapters. The volume of the reorganization task resulted in some unintentional
omissions; some inaccurate references due to renumbering; and some errors in punctuation
known as Scrivener's errors. Thus, on December 3, 2007 the City Council adopted the first
round of what are called Scrivener's errors. The items listed below are the second, and
hopefully the last round of Scrivener's errors. The proposed amendments do not include policy
or policy implementation changes.
ADDITIONAL SCRIVENER'S ERRORS PART 2
Commentary. Proposed chanGes are hiGhliGhted. Revised text is underlined. {De/eted loxt is
within Bmekets 'llith 'strike out'?
I 3.2-210 Schedule Of Use Categories
Commentary. "Day Care Center' was previously changed to "Child Care Center" to be
consistent with State regulations, but the 'old SOC" listing for the use on collector and local
streets was inadvertently omitted. This is the only use in this Section thai is being amended.
,". . ...,_:;;:,':i.;:~~?/:~~~:t};:i!/.,;",.-:,,:;'.,.."'"
.Use Cate"ories/,Uses
Residential Uses
Child Care Center -13 or more children (abuttinq a collector
or local street Section 4.7-125
. , -' . .
""'-c,j,"':"',,.',
Q
.S'
~.
Commentary. Several footnotes are amended due to inadvertently deleted "old SOC" text
when creating the table and/or for clarity. The footnotes to the base zone development
standards are the only portion of this Section that is being amended.
I 3.2-215 Base Zone Development Standards
(1) 6.000 square feet in area for one duplex in the LOR District. This standard prohibits the division of
the lot/parcel to create separate ownership for each duplex dwelling unit.
(2) 10,000 square feet in area for one duplex in the LOR District as specified in this Section and
Section 4.7-140. This standard [is req~iree tel allow!! for the future the division of the lot/parcel to
create separate ownership for each half of the duplex [eweIliR!) ~Ril].
(3) The 45 percent coveraqe standard applies to covered structures onlv. On lotslparcels with more
than 15 percent slope or above an elevation of 670 feet, the maximum impervious surface inclusive
of structures, palios, and driveways, shall not exceed 35 percent, unless specified in Section 3.3-
500.
1141 In the MDR and HDR Districts. the buildinq heiqht may be increased to 50 feet as specified in
Subsection 3.2-240D.3.c.
.~.l.~,.,rt!;.~:,.~j~:; .~.'....,-
....~ .~' 1 '1 (",' I. . r ' .
:~., . ".... ,.',
Date Received: 10 OJ 0 ~.
Planner: GK
..
ATTACHMENT 6 - 1
.
.
I 3.2-235 Residential Manufactured Dwellings
Commentary. The text added was inadvertently deleted during the SDC Reformat Project.
The siting of manufactured dwellings in Low and Medium Density Residential Districts is permitted
subject to the provisions of this Section:
A. Manufactured Home - as a permitted use in manufactured home subdivisions,
manufactured dwelling parks and alllotslparcels zoned and designated Low and
Medium Density Residential provided that units placed on individuallotslparcels
outside of existina platted manufactured home subdivisions shall be Tvpe 1
classification and all density standards are satisfied. A Tvpe 2 manufactured home
mav be sited in manufactured dwellina parks. interior lots of existina platted
manufactured home subdivisions and in multi-familv developments.
Commentary. This CI Section requires amendment because the Master Plan is required. The
Master Plan currently in SDC Sections 3.4-215 through 3.4-225 (the Glenwood Riverfront Plan
District) will be addressed during the Glenwood Refinement Plan amendment process. No
amendment is required for Section 3.2-630 (Mixed Use).
. ,
I 3.2-440 CI District - Conceptual Development Plans and Master Plans
A Conceptual' Development Plan is required for all new CI Districts over 50 acres in size
approved after July 6, 2004, unless a Site Plan or Master Plan is proposed for the entire CI
District. A Master Plan [is reqllired] mav be submitted when phased developments exceeding
[ma] ~ years in duration are proposed. A Master Plan shall comply with any applicable
approved Conceptual Development Plan or upon approval of a Master Plan or Site Plan for the
entire CI District, the Master Plan or Site Plan may supplant and take precedence over an
approved Conceptual Development Plan. .Master Plan approval for a CI District site shall be as
specified in Section 5.13-100.
Commentary. SDC Section 3.2-310 (under recreational facilities) lists non-alcoholic nightclubs
as a special use; Section 4.7-205 limits where this use may be located. Section 3.2-610 (under
recreational facilities) lists this use and should have the'same reference. This is the only use in
this Section that is being amended.
I 3.2-610
Schedule of Use Categories
- ':":,.' ,', ,', ... .. 'Districts ' "":", .:
0',...' , .,
",.' '" ' Cateaoi'ies/Uses ,.MUC MUE MUR
.. "
Recreational Facilities: -, " '.' . ';.,
""," . ..j',.:. ,
Non Alcoholic Night Club (Section 4.7-205\ rP1S, P N
I 3.2-715 Base Zone Development Standards
Commentary. The Downtown Refinement Plan was amended in 2006. Specific setback
regulations in the Downtown Exception area were revised, but the SDC was never amended.
. i"~
. ..:.:.~ . *-,~.: .
Date Received: 10 oJ c!t;]
Planner: GK
:~ if"l~ ~.,..
..
ATTACHMENT 6 - 2
.
.
The following base zone development standards are established. The base zone development
standards of this Section and any other additional provisions, restrictions or exceptions specified
in this Code shall apply.
PLO Zonin District Re uirement
".,"
LoUparcel Coverage and
Planting Standard
None
Parking, driveways and structures shall not exceed 65 percent of the
development area. At least 25 percent of the development area shall
be landscaped, EXCEPTION: In the Downtown Exception Area, there
shall be no minimum lot coveraqe standards and no minimum planted
area exce t for arkin lots 6.
2,3 and4
Landsca ed Setbacks 1
Street Setback
Residential Pro e Line
Parkin and Drivewa
Maximum Building Height
5
PLO District abuts
Residential District
15 feet 6
20 feet 6
5 feet
None, unless abutting a residential district
When a PLO District abuts a residential district, the maximum building
height shall be defined as the height standard of the applicable
residential district for a distance of 50 feet measured from the
boundary of the adjacent residential zoning district. Beyond the 50
foot measurement, there is no buildin hei ht limitation,
(1) Where an easement is larger than the required setback standard, no building or above grade
structure, except a fence, shall be built upon or over that easement.
(2) When additional right-of-way is required, whether by City Engineering standards, the Metro
Plan (including TransPlan), or the City's Conceptual Street Plan, setbacks are based on
future right-of-way iocations. Dedication of needed right-of-way shall be required prior to the
issuance of any building permit that increases parking or gross floor area.
(3) Structural extensions may extend into any 5 foot or larger setback area by not more than 2
feet.
(4) In the Downtown Exception Area, there are no minimum setbacks for administrative offices
and other public uses listed under Section 3.2-710.
(5) Incidental equipment may exceed the height standards.
161 In the Downtown Exception Area. there shall be no minimum planted area except for parkinq
lots as specified elsewhere in this Code.
3.3-815 Schedule of Use Categories when there is an Underlying Residential,
Commercial, or Industrial District '
Commentary. Development in the. Urban Fringe -10 Overlay zone is limited. The proposed
amendments revises references to permitted development listed in Section 3.3-825, These are
the only uses in this Section that are being amended.
: ..Use Cate 0 .
Expansion or replacement of lawful uses permitted in the
underlying commercial or industrial district (Section 3.3-
825 H F.
Underl in Zonin District. . , .
Residential Commercial liidustrial
N P* P*
.,.' ,.-
Date Received:_{ 0 03 of)
Planner: GK
':,.1 __ ..~ .' . ,
. p""
"
ATTACHMENT 6 - 3
.
.
Expansion or replacement of lawful Discretionary Uses in
the underl in zonin district Section 3.3-825 M F.
New Permitted and Specific Development Standards in
the underlying zoning district within existing structures
Section 3.3-825 M F.
N
0*
0*
N
P*
P*
I 3.3-825 Additional Provisions
Commentary. Development in the Urban Fringe -10 Overlay zone is limited. The proposed
amendments to Section 3,3-815 were required due to the deletion of duplicative language in
current Subsection G. Therefore, Subsection H. becomes the "new" Subsection G. These are
the only items in this Section that are being amended.
[0. New permitted uses and expansions of permitted uses in commercial and industrial
distriGts shall demonstrate that the use 'Nill not gener.ate singly, or in the aggr-egate,
additional need for key urean services.]
[H] G. R.V. parks and campgrounds shall be located on land classified Public Land a'ld Open
Space (PLO) and be subject to the specific development standards specified Section
4.7-220.
I 3.3-910 Applicability
Commentary. The Thurston Grange was inadvertentfy omitted from the Historic Landmark
Inventory list.
B. On the adopted Historic Landmark Inventory within the City or its urbanizing areas,
including the following individually designated Historic Landmarks:
Historic Site! Structure.
Stevens and Perkins Buildin
I.O.O.F. Buildin
Pacific Power & Li ht Buildin
Southern Pacific Railroad De
Brattain I Hadle House
Stewart House
Dou las House
Thurston Gran e
Address.
330 Main Street
346 Main Street
590 Main Street
101 South A Street
1260 Main Street
214 Pioneer P . West
3362 Osa e Street
66 Street and Thurston Rd.
Commentary. The barbed wire standards apply in the residential, commercial and industrial
zoning districts, except as specified in notation (8).
-~ .' ~~ .
" .
"'j
.' t'. ~
...... ~
'It,",
_ ,~.~o.:.. . '.';"'.......";;1 v t:,;;\A.
I rJ (; J 0<;;;
Planner: GK
"
ATTACHMENT 6 - 4
.
.
Table 4.4-1
-, ' i, Base Heiaht bv Zonina District ' '
Yard Tvae Residential, Commercial , Industrial PLO' , MS '
Front Yardffi 6' 121 6' 6'/8'131 6' 6'
Street Side Yard 14\ 6' 6' 6'/8'13\ 6' 6'
Rear Yard 6' 6' 6'/8'131 6' 6'
Heioht Exceotions 8'/10' -151 8' 8' 161 8' N/A
Vision Clearance 2'h' 2%' 2'h' 2%' 2'h'
Area 17\
Barbedl Razor Yw yw yw Y/N (8) N
Wire/ Electric
(1)
(2)
The fence shall be located behind the front yard setback in all districts unless allowed in (2).
Fences may be allowed within the front yard setback as follows:
(a) 4' high unslatted chain Iirik - this standard does not apply to multi-family developments.
(b) 3' high sight obscuring fence.
In the Campus Industrial District the base height standard is 6'. In all other industrial districts, the
base height standard is 8'.
In the residential districts, a fence may be located along the property line. In all other districts, the
fence shall be located behind the street yard setback.
Situations where the base fence height may be exceeded:
(a) 8' in residential, commercial and the PLO Districts for public utility facilities, school yards and
playgrounds, provided that the fence is located behind the front yard and street side yard
landscaped area and outside of the vision clearance area. Residential districts abutting these
facilities, railroad tracks or residential property side and rear yards abutting streets with 4 or
more travel lanes, may have fences of 8' along common property lines and right-of-way.
(b) 10' for residential properties abutting commercial or industrial districts along common
property lines, and around permitted storage areas in residential districts. Yards of single-
family homes shall not constitute permitted storage areas.
(c) In residential districts, any fence located within a required setback, and which exceeds the
allowable fence height for that setback by more than 20 percent, shall be reviewed under
Discretionary Use procedure for fences as specified in Section 5.9-100.
Special standards in the Campus Industrial District:
(a) No fencing shall be pemnitted within 35' of a CI District perimeter or 20 feet of any
development area perimeter or within interior lots/parcels of development areas.
EXCEPTION: 3' maximum height decorative fencing or masonry walls may be permitted as
screening devices around parking lots.
(b) Chain link fences shall be pemnitted only when combined with plantings of evergreen shrubs
or climbing vines that will completely cover the fence(s) within 5 years of installation (as
certified by a landscape architect or licensed nursery operator).
(c) Painted fences shall match the building color scheme of the development area.
No fence shall exceed the 2'h' height limitation within the vision clearance area as specified in
Section 4.2-130.
Barbed wire, razor wire or electrified fencing shall be pemnitted atop a six foot chain link fence. The
total height of the fence and barbed wire shall not exceed 8'. These materials shall not extend into
the vertical plane of adjoining public sidewalks. Barbed wire or razor wire only fences are
prohibited. Electrified fencing shall be posted with warning signs every 24 feet.
EXCEPTIONS:
(a) In the PLO District in the Downtown Exception Area and in the MUC, MUE and MUR
Districts, no barbed razor wire or electrified fences shall be permitted. '
(b) In the residential districts, barb-wire and electrified fencing on lots/parcels less than 20,000
square feet, and razor wire on any lot/parcel, regardless of size, shall be reviewed under
Discretionary Use procedure as specified in Section 5.9-100, using the criteria specified in
Subsection C., below. , Date Received: 10 0:; Gg
Planner: GK
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
~ ':., ' . ,: i :.~ i .
ATTACHMENT 6 - 5
.
.
Commentary. The term "drainage" should be "storm water" and the text added to Subsection 6.
is for clarity.
14.3-110
Stormwater Management
E. A development is required to employ [erainage] stormwater management practices
approved by the Public Wor~s Director and consistent the Engineering Design
Standards and Procedures Manual, which minimize the amount and rate of surface
water run-off into receiving streams. The following [erainage] stormwater management
practices may be required in order to relieve demand on the City's piped drainage
system and to alleviate future costs of treating the piped discharge; to promote water
quality, to preserve groundwater and the vegetation and rivers it supports, and to reduce
I
peak storm flows: .
1. Temporary ponding of water;
2. Permanent storage basins;
3. Minimizing impervious surfaces;
4: Emphasizing natural water percolation and natural drainageways;
5. Preventing water flowing from the street in an uncontrolled fashion;
6. Stabilizing natural drainageways as necessary below drainage and culvert
discharge points for a distance sufficient to convey the discharge without channel
erosion, as permittedlallowed bv City. State and Federal reaulations;
7. On-site filtration or skimming of run-off, which will enter natural drainageways to
maintain water quality; and
8. On-site constructed wetlands.
Commentary. The SDC does not exempt solar collectors from the building height limit. If a
developer wants to go solar we require them to submit a Minor Variance application, which is a
disincentive for energy conservation. The proposed text allows rooftop solar collectors as
"incidental equipment". The definition of "Incidental Equipment" in Chapter 6 is also amended.
14.7-105
Accessory Structures
This Subsection regulates structures that are incidental to allowed residential uses to prevent
them from becoming the predominant element of the site.
A. Accessory Structure Groups. Accessory structures are divided into 3 groups based on
':. .~~~~~:~~ct.e~i,s~i~~..Acce~~9ry structures may be attached o~s;~a~~l~~,~~J:rimaryl do Jo G
. )jr. : ", . . Planner: GK
..
ATTACHMENT 6 - 6
.
.
1. Group A. This group includes buildings and covered structures for example,
garages, bedrooms or living rooms, including bathrooms that are not an
accessory dwelling unit as defined in Section 5.5-100, art studios, gazebos,
carports, greenhouses, storage buildings, boathouses, covered decks and
recreational structures. Agricultural structures as defined in this Code are
deemed Group A accessory structures if located on lots/parcels less than 2 acres
in size.
2. Group B. (Architectural extensions) This group includes uncovered, generally
horizontal structures for example, decks, stairways, in ground or above ground
swimming pools, tennis courts, and hot tubs.
3. Group C. (Incidental equipment) This group includes generally vertical structures
for example, flag-poles, trellises and other garden structures, play structures,
radio antennas, satellite receiving dishes and lampposts. This Qroup also
includes rooftop solar collectors. Fences are addressed in Section 4.4-115.
Commentary. The amendment specifies that duplexes are permitted only on comer
lots/parcels in the LOR District. This is the only item in this Section that is being amended.
14.7-140 Duplexes
A. A duplex mav be on located on comer lots/parcels of 6.000 SQuare feet in the
LDR District. unless as mav be permitted below. A corner duplex or duplex
lot[parcel in any residential district may be partitioned for the purpose of allowing
independent ownership of each dwelling unit, if each of the two resulting
lots/parcels meets the size standards specified in Section 3.2-215. Duplexes or
duplex lots/parcels eligible for this type of partition shall meet the partition
standards of Section 5.12-100 and the following:
14.7-190 Professional Offices
Commentary. The MUG District is added to the list. The intent was to include all primary
commercial districts. This is the only item in this Section that is being amended.
A. Professional offices in residential districts are permitted when:
1. The lots/parcels are adjacent to CC. MUC or MRC Districts; and
2. The majority of the square footage of the structure on the 10Uparcel is not more
than 100 feet from CC. MUC or MRC Districts. Where public-right-of-way
separates the residential district from the commercial district, the right-of-way
width is not counted in the measurement.
~ '.: .';". ,"'.,.:
Date Received; j 0 0], 66
Planner: GK
... .,
.' .
ATTACHMENT 6 - 7
.
.
I 5.1-120 Pre-Development Meetings
Commentary. This Section reflects amendments to the Master Plan review process in
Section 5. 13-100. The Pre-Application Report has been and still is required during the
Master Plan Review process. The Pre-Submittal Meeting is now required for the
Master Plan Review process in order to guarantee a complete application at the
initiation of the State mandated 120 day review time-line. These are the only items in
this Section that are being amended.,
Pre-Development Options. The City has established three pre-development processes to assist
prospective applicants through the application review process:
B. Pre-Application Report. The purpose of the Pre-Application Report is to give a prospective
applicant the opportunity to discuss an entire development proposal with City Staff. This
meeting is recommended for large and/or complex proposals to avoid unanticipated costs
or delay during the formal application process.
EXCEPTION: The Pre-Application Report is required for a Master Plan application as
specified in Section 5.13-115.
C. The Pre-Submittal Meeting. The purpose of the Pre-Submittal Meeting is to provide an
opportunity for the property owner, applicant and the development team to meet with City
staff to determine that an application is complete for processing prior to formal submittal to
the City. A complete application will facilitate the review process. The Pre-Submittal
Meeting will examine key elements of the application, including but not limited to:
transportation, stormwater management, sanitary sewer facilities, and landscaping. The'
Pre-Submittal Meeting is mandatory for all Site Plan Review, Subdivision, [aM] Partition
and Master Plan applications. The Pre-Submittal Meeting is required even if the meetings
specified in Subsections A. and B. have been utilized. Applications shall be reviewed by
the Director within 30 days of receipt to determine if they meet the requirements specified
in Section 5.4-105 and are complete. .
1 5.3-115 Appeals ofthe Director's or Hearings Official's Type II Decision
Commentary. In Subsection C., who is required to receive the notice of decision is now clearer
and consistent with State regulations.
C. Notice. The Director shall provide notice of the public hearing to the property owner,
applicant, if different, the appellant and all persons [previously noticed] who submitted
comments or reauested notice of the decision as part of the process leading to the
Director's.or Hearings Official's decision. The notice of the appeal hearing shall be as
. specified in Section 5.2-115.
15,14-110 Review
Commentary. The term "Pre-Application Conference" in Subsection A was changed to
"Development Issues Meeting" in 2005, but this reference was not revised at that time.
A. A [Pm .'\pplication Canfcrence] Develooment Issues Meetina is encouraged prior to a
formal Metro Plan' amendment application.
:'-!fJ . ~~ " Li.;".f-
. . /0 0") 00
Date Received; <.5
Planner: GK
':~ ',: 1,-, ,,',.;r, .: ~ '\.
"
ATTACHMENT 6 - 8
.
.
I 5.15-120 SDC Standards Applicable to MDS Approval
Commentary. Subsection H is amended to be consistent with the "old SOC' by adding
references to under grounding utilities (4.3-125) and to water service and fire protection (4.3-
130). .
H. The development shall connect to public utilities as specified in Sections 4.3-105,4.3-110,
[aM] 4.3-120. 4.3-125 and 4.3-130 and comply with the Springfield Building Safety Codes,
where applicable. Easements may be required as specified in Subsection 4.3-140.
I 5.15-125 Timelines and Conditions
Commentary. Two references are proposed to be changed requiring this Section to be
relettered.
The property owner and/or applicant shall comply with the standards specified in Subsection [Q,]
5.15-120 within 90 days of the Director's approval as follows:
A. Submittal of a Final Plot Plan within 30 days of the Director's approval that states the
starting date of all required improvements demonstrating compliance with all approval
conditions required to meet the standards specified in Subsection [D., below] 5.15-120.
Submittal of a Final Plot Plan shall include the following additional material, where
applicable:
1. The original recorded Improvement Agreement.
2. Any required ODOT Right-of-Way Approach Permit.
EXCEPTION: If the ODOT Right-of-Way Approach Permit cannot be obtained by
the time line specified in Subsection A., above, the Director may defer the submittal
of this document until the start of construction date specified in Subsection [A4.b]
C., below.
3. A copy of a recorded joint use access/parking agreement.
4. A copy of a recorded private easement or the original public utility easement.
[a].!;l. The signing of a Development Agreement by the property owner within 45 days of the
Director's approval of the Final Plot Plan.
[b]~.
The construction of the required improvements shall begin within 90 days of the MDS
decision. If this time line cannot be met, the applicant may submit a written request for a
time line extension as specified in Subsection [8] D., below.
!B]Q.
The Director may allow a one-time extension of the 90-day start of construction time line
specified in Subsection [A4.b] C., above due to situations including but not limited to,
required permits from the City or other agencies, weather conditions, and the unavailability
of asphalt or street trees. If the time extension is allowed, security shall be provided as
specified in Section 5.17-150. The time line extension shall not exceed 90 days.
[G],I;.
If the time line established in Subsection [A4;b] C., above is not met and the applicant has
not requested an extension as specified in Subsection D., abQve, t~en the ~ctor shall
. ,',. . Date ReceiVed: I 0 0"., ,.
'. . ;''',' Planner: GK
..
ATTACHMENT 6 - 9
.
.
declare the application null and void if the property is occupied and the property owner
shall be considered in violation of this Code.
[Q] E. If the time line established in Subsection [A4.-I:l] Q., above is not met and the applicant has
requested an extension as specified in Subsection D., above and that time line as not
been met, then the Director may require that the improvements be installed as specified in
Subsection 5.17-150.
15.16-120 Submittal Requirements
Commentary. Duplicative language regarding submittal requirements for Property Line
Adjustments in Subsection B.3., is deleted. The remaining Subsections are renumbered
accordingly. Consent language is found in reformatted Section 5.4-105B.2., which applies to all
applications, but is lot listed in this document.
B. The following additional information shall be submitted with the Preliminary Survey:
1. . A brief narrative explaining reason for the proposed Property Line Adjustment
and the existing use of the lots/parcels.
2. A copy of the current deeds for the lots/parcels.
[3. If the appliGant is not the property O'lmer, written perfRissisR frOfR all property
o'....nOFE is roquireEl.]
[4]~. A draft of the Property Line Adjustment deeds. For serial Property Line
Adjustments that are reviewed under Type II procedure, separate deeds shall be
prepared for each adjustment.
[5] ~. For serial Property Line Adjustments reviewed under Type II procedure, the
following shall be submitted:
a. A written explanation of the sequencing of adjustments; and
b. A diagram identifying each adjustment, in sequence, cross referenced to
the Property line Adjustment deeds required in Subsection 4., above.
I 5.20-120 Submittal Requirements
Commentary. The text proposed to be deleted in Subsection 5.j. is duplicative. Virtually the
same text is found in reformatted Subsection C.1.
C. The application shall include:
1. A legal description of the public rights-of-way, easement or Plat to be vacated
prepared by an Oregon Licensed Land Surveyor or other professional approved by
the Director;
2. The reason for the Vacation;
. ~; '..,', ,
L.!m6 Received: /00.] of;
Planner: GK
3.
The proposed u~l'l 9f the,property after Vacation;
'.
ATTACHMENT 6 -10
.
.
4. For citizen initiated Vacations of public rights-of-way or Partition and Subdivision
Plats, the petition of affected property owners;
5. A map prepared by an Oregon Licensed Land Surveyor or other professional
approved by the Director of the area proposed to be vacated. The map shall
show:
a. The date, north arrow, and standard scale;
b. The Assessor's Map and Tax Lot numbers of the affected properties and
adjacent properties;
c. A Vicinity Map on the Site Plan (Vicinity Map does not need to be to
scale);
d. All adjacent streets including street name, alleys, and accessways, and
right-of-way and paving widths;
e. All dimensions of existing public utility easements and any other areas
restricting use of the parcels, for example: conservation areas, slope
easements, access easements;
f. Existing dimensions and square footage of the lots/parcels involved;
g. Proposed dimensions and square footage of the lots/parcels involved
(applies to Vacations of undeveloped Subdivision Plats and right-of-way
Vacations);
h. For public easement and right-of-way Vacations, clearly show dimensions
of entire easement or right-of-way on or adjacent to the subject
lots/parcels. Also clearly show dimensions of that portion proposed for
Vacation, including square footage; and
i. For right-of-way Vacations, demonstrate compliance with the boundary
requirements of ORS 271.080 et seq.
U. TRe leQal dessription of the easemeRl, rillRt af way or Plat, or pOrtiOR
thereof, pr-oposed 10 be vasated.] .
Commentary. The proposed new Section and text explains a part at the current vacation
process. Vacated right-at-way has always assumed the zoning otthe abutting property.
15.20-140 Zonina of Vacated Ri!lht-of-Wav
Vacated riaht-of-way is incorporated into the abultina property. typically to the centerline.
Howeyer. in cases where only one abultina property dedicated riaht-of-way. all the vacated
riaht-of-way would be incorporated into that property. In any case. the vacated riaht-of-way
acauires the zonina of the abultina property. without the need of a separate Zonina Map
amendment. .
"I,
....",
,
Date Received: /0 o.J tlg
Planner: GK
..
ATTACHMENT 6 - 11
.
.
CHAPTER 6 DEFINITioNS
Commentary. The Downtown Exception Area was modified during the Downtown Refinement
Plan approval process in 2006. The SDC was not amended at that time.
Downtown Exception Area. An area defined by the Willamette River on the west, [4Q] !!lh Stre.et
on the east, the alley between north B and north C Streets on the north, and a line north of the
Southern Pacific Railroad tracks on the south. .
Commentary. The SDC does not exempt solar collectors from the building height limit. If a
developer wants to go solar we require them to submit a Minor Variance application, which is a
disincentive for energy conservation. The proposed text allows rooftop solar collectors and also
small satellite dishes as "incidental equipment". See also the amendment of Subsection 4.7-
105C, above.
Incidental Equipmenl Rooftop or pole mounted structures that cast insubstantial shadows or
have minimal visual impact, including, but not limited to: antennas, chimneys solar collectors.
small satellite dishes and flagpoles, but excluding [solar collectElFS am:.!] larqe satellite dishes
(See also Accessory Structure).
Commentary. The terms "major or minor" partition no longer apply. This definition is now
consistent with ORS 92.010(9).
Partition Pial A final map and other writing containing all the descriptions, locations,
specifications" provisions and information concerning a [major Elr minor] partition.
. .....vtl0 K0Leiveu;
Planner: GK
;0 C',] 0'2
ATTACHMENT 6 -12