HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 5466 03/06/1989
'~
(
.'
.
5466
(GENERAL)
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE BY AMENDING
PORTIONS OF ARTICLES 2 DEFINITIONS, 3 DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL AND LAND USE
DECISION PROCEDURES, 4 INTERPRETATIONS, 16 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, 18 COMMERCIAL
DISTRICTS, 19 BKMU BOOTH-KELLY MIXED USE DISTRICT 20 LMI, HI AND SHI INDUSTRIAL
DISTRICTS, 21 SLI SPECIAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, 25 WG WILLAMETTE GREENWAY
OVERLAY DISTRICT 29 UF-10 URBANIZABLE FRINGE OVERLAY DISTRICT, 31 SITE PLAN
REVIEW STANDARDS, 32 PUBLIC AND PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS, 35 SUBDIVISION
STANDARDS, 37 SIGN STANDARDS AND APPENDIX 1.
THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The following sections are hereby amended in accordance with
the proposed amendments which are more particularly described and set forth in
the staff report entitled Amendments to the Springfield Development Code. (See
Attachment A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference):
Section 2.020
Table 3-1
Section 4.010(1), ( 2), ( 3 ), and (4)
Section 4.020(1 )
Section 4.030
. Section 16.010
Section 16.020(7), (11), (16), (17), (21), (22) and (23)
Section 16.070(1) and (8)
Section 16.080(2)
Section 16.090(1)(c) and (2)
Section 16.100(2), (3), (4), (9) and (11)
Section 18.010(1) and (2)
Section 18.020(6)(n)-(t)
Section 18.070(14)
Section 18.090(6)
Section 18.100(1) and (2)
Section 18.110(3) and (5)
Article 19 Title Page
Section 19.010
Diagram 19-1
Section 19.040
Section 19.060
Section 20.020(4)(d)
Section 20.080(2)( c)
Section 20.090(1) and (2)
Section 20.100(4) and (5)
Section 21.040(2) and (9)
Section 21.110(1) and (2)
Section 25.050
Section 29.050(2)
Section 29.070(2)
. -1-
.
,
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 2
.
Section
Section
Section
Section
Section
Section
Section
Article
Section
Section
Diagram
Table
Section
Section
Section
Section
Section
Section
Table
Table
Table
Section
Section
Section
Section
Section
Section
Section
Appendix
31. 030(2)
31.030(3)
31. 040
31.110(1)
31.170(1) and (6)
31.180
31.190(1), (5) and (9)
32 Title Page
32.010(1) and (2)
32.020(1), (4), (7), (10)(b) & (c) (11), (12)(b) & (c) and (14)
32-A
32-1
32.030
32.040(1), (2), (3), and (7)
32.050
32.060
32.070
32.080(1) and (2)
32-2
32-3
, 32-4
32.090
32.100
32.110
32.120
35.090(1)(m) and (2)(f)
37.030(4) and (8)(a)
37.040(9) and (10)
1 Fees [Formal Interpretation]
Section 2: The findings of the Springfield Planning Commission, Final
Order No. 88-11-192, have been reviewed and are hereby adopted in support of the
adoption of these amendments. (See Attachment B attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference).
ADOPTED by the Common Council of the City of Springfield by a vote of -E-
for and ~ against this 6th day of ,March ,', 1989.
..
APPROVED by
March , 1989.
ATTEST:
the Mayor of the City of Springfield this Etb day of
E/fft?l/~
Mayor
1by4
.REVIEWED & AP, PROVED 7
A'-' TO FORM
:J:ec \.-\ ~ L.=r=.\..Jr L
DATE: ,,/\ f"<2(\--\ '1, \ ~1i\
OFFICE OF CITY ATTORNEY
CITY Or SPRINGFIELD
-2-
e.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 3
2.020 MEANING OF SPECIFIC VORDS AND TERMS.
CITY ENGINEER. An Oregon Registered Professional Engineer who is an officer
of the City and is charged with the supervision and construction of public
improvements and the enforcement of City ordinances as they relate to public
improvements or a duly authorized representative. The Transportation Manager
and Engineering Manager routinely oer~e aD repreoentati~eo of the City
Engineer.
DIRECTOR. The Planning and Development Services Director or the duly
authorized representative who is responsible for the administration and
interpretation of this Code and the Metro Plan and is the Chairperson of the
Development Review Committee. The Development Code Administrator routinely
serves as the representative of the Director.
DROP-OFF SPACE. A paved, clearly marked short-term (less than 20 minutes)
parking space, generally within 50 feet of a main entrance, separated from
required parking for staff and long-term visitors.
NEIGHBORHOOD PARK. A park which provides easily accessible recreation areas
serving neighborhood citizens and providing high density active or passive use.
These parks are traditionally from 5 acres to 15 acres in size.
PLANNINC AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT (aka PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT). The department responsible for the administration of this Code
and the implementation of the Metro Plan, that oer~es aD staff to the Planning
Commission.
PUBLIC VORKS DIRECTOR. The Director of Public Works or a duly authorized
representative. The City Engineer and the Transportation Manager routinely
serve as representatives of the Public Works Director.
USE, VATER DEPENDENT. A use that requires access to the Willamette River for
water-borne transportation, recreation, energy production, or source of water.
USE, VATER RELATED. A use that is not directly dependent upon access to the
Willamette River, ,but which clearly benefits from such access.
-1-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 4
TABLE 3-1
REVIEV PROCEDURE
ITEM
REVIEVED
Formal Interpretation of the Development Code
Expansion of a Non-Conforming Use
Annexation
Metro Plan Amendment
Amendment/Adoption of Refinement Plan Text/
Diagram & Development Code Text
Vacation
Discretionary Use
Maj or Variance
Minor Variance
Zoning District & Overlay District Changes
Appeal of the Decision of the Director
Appeal of the Decision of the Planning Comm.
Home Occupation
8eeurity Fence
WG Overlay District Development
HD Overlay District Development
FP Overlay District Development
HS Overlay District Development
Single Family Dwelling/Duplex Urbanizable Land
H Historic Overlay District Development
Site Plan Review
Site Plan Review - Minor Modification
Security Review
Lot Line Adjustment
Partition - Preliminary Plan
Partition - Final Map
Subdivision - Tentative Plan
Subdivision - Final Plat
Manufactured Home Subdivision
Mobile Home Park
Mobile Home Park - Space Line Adjustment
Mobile Home - Temporary Residential Use
Mobile Home - Commercial District
Mobile Home - Industrial District
Signs
Tree Felling
Solar Access Guarantee
CODE REVIEV
REFERENCE TYPE
4.020
5.020
6.020
7.020
*II
III
IV
IV
8.020 IV
9.020 IV
10.020 III
11. 020 III
11.020 II
12.020 III
15.010 III
15.010 IV
16.100 I
18.110120.090 I
25.040 III
26.040 II
27.040 I
28.040 II/III
29.040 I
30.040 Var.
31.040 I/II
31.100 I
31.100 I
33.020 I
34.020 II
34.080 I
35.020 II
35.080 I
36.030/35.020 II
36.030 II
36.060(5) I
36.120 I
36 . 150 I
36.180 I
37.020 I
38.020 I
39.020 I
-2-
~
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 5
4.010 GENERAL.
(1) The Director shall have the authority and responsibility to
interpret all terms, prOVISIons and requirements of this Code.
The Development Revie~ Committee (DRC) ohall be responoible for
ensuring that Cede requircmento affecting their respecti~c areas
of enpcrtioe are addresoeEl through the redel' precesseD 00
opccified in this Article.
(2) Interpretations ef construction standardo for private improvemcnts
or Firc and Life Safcty Standards shall be hcard by the Building
Board of Appcals in accordancc with Chapter I of thc Springfield
~ Interpretations concerning engineering, transportation,
building, fire and life safety issues will be made by the Director
in consultation with the Public Works Director, City Engineer,
Building Official or Fire Chief, as appropriate.
(3) The Director may adjust the dimension or location of a required
improvement of Article 31, Site Plan ReviewT or Article 32, Public
and Private Improvement Standards, provided that:
(a)
Scrious Significant locational or dimensional problems have been
identified with the installation of the required improvement; and
(b)
The intended effect
substantially met by
adjustmentlT and
of the required improvement can be ~
the proposed locational or dimensional
(c) The proposed adjustment is the mInImum necessary to alleviate the
identified dimensional or locational problemlT and
(d) Public safety and the adequacy of public improvements will be
reasonably assured based on review and comment by the Public Works
Director.
(4) The Director may waive the requirement that buildable City lots
have frontage on a public street when all of the following apply:
(a) The lot or lots have been approved as part of a Development
Area Plan, Site Plan, Subdivision or Partition application;
and
(b) Access has been guaranteed via a private street to a public
street by an irrevocable joint use/access agreement.
4.020 REVIEV.
(1) A request for aR formal interpretation of this Code shall be
reviewed under Type *II procedure, when such a rcqueot occurs
outoide another formal a~lication process.
-3-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 6
4.030 CRITERIA.
Use *!nterpretations shall be reviewed based upon the following criteria:
(2) The purpose and intent of the particular Section of the Code in
question and the applicable zoning district;
16.010 ESTABLISHMENT OF RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS.
(1) LDR LOV DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. The LDR District is
intended to implement the Metro Plan Low Density Residential
designation and establishes sites for Low Density Residential
development where the mInImum level of urban services are
provided. The maximum dwelling units per developable acre
permitted is less than 8 10, consistent with the provisions of
this Code.
16.020 SCHEDULE OF USE CATEGORIES.
USE CATEGORIES I
USES
DISTRICTS
LDR HDR HDR
(7)
Day care facilities (Section 16.100(4))
(a) Day Care Home - 1 to 5 children
SP SP SP
(b) Day Care Group Home - 6 to 12 children
PS* PS* PS*
(c) Day Care Center - 13 or more children
(abutting an arterial street)
s*
S*
S*
(d) Day Care Center - 13 or more children
(abutting a collector or local street)
D*
S*
S*
(11) Group Living Facilities (Section 16.100(7))
(d) Group care homes including congregate care
facilities with more than 5 persons
D*
s*
S*
(16)
Neighborhood and private parks, lcos than
5 acreo (Section 16.100(8))
D* D* D*
(17) Public/private elementary/middle schools
(Section 16.100(9))
(a) 1 12 Studcnto 1 to 5 students in a private home
(in a 24 hour period) p* p* p*
(b) ~ 6 or more students
SD* SD* SD*
(21) RVs as a residential use
-4-
.
.
.
, Ord i nance No. 5466
Page 7
16.070 OFF-STREET PARKING STANDARDS.
USE CATEGORIES
NUMBER OF SPACES
(1) Day Care facilities Centers
(a) Homc and Croup Home
1 for eaeh 1,000 square feet ef groos ~
area uoed for the facility in adElitien to
thc 2 spaces requircd for thc rcsidcntial
\i5€-r
(b) Center
1 for cach 400 s~uare feet of gross floor
arca, but in no caGC less than ~ spaees plus
1 additional parking opaee for caeh ful~
timc equivalent Elay care center ~erker.
1 drop-off space for each 700 square feet of
gross floor area, plus 1 long term space for
each 350 square feet of gross floor area.
(8) Public/Private
elementary/middle school
(a) 1 12 studento
1 fer eaeh 1,000 square feet of groos floor
arca used for the faeility in addition to
thc 2 opaces requireEl for the residential
\i5€-r
f&+ ~ ~ or more students
2 for each classroom, plus 1 for each 100
square feet of public assembly area but in
no eaoc lcos than '" encept that garages
shall not count as parking opaces.
16.080 SIGN STANDARDS.
The following sign standards have been established for residential districts:
(1) Each single family or duplex dwelling unit that has received Development
Approval for a home occupation shall be allowed one non-illuminated wall
sign of not more than 1 1/2 square feet.
(2) Each day care facility, subdivision, group living oit~ation bed and
breakfast facility, residential care facility, multiple family dwelling
complex, including a or mobile home park, shall be allowed one wall
sign or free standing sign-of not more than 12 square feet for one face,
or 24 feet for two or more faces. The maximum height for free standing
signs shall be 5 feet above grade. The maximum height for wall signs
shall be 20 feet above grade, provided that in no case shall a wall sign
extend above the building wall.
-5-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 8
16.090 FENCE STANDARDS.
(1) General.
(a) Except as specified elsewhere in this Code, In all
rcoidential districts fFences shall not exceed 6 fcct in the
height, enccpt standards listed below and shall be located-a8
follows:
1. Six feet, provided the fence is located behind the front
yard setback, the street sideyard setback and outside
the vision clearance area.
2. In the front yard oetback, fencc hcight shall bc 4 Four
feet within the front yard setback or street sideyard
setback fif an unslatted cyclone fence is usedt or ~
three feet within the front yard setback or street
SIdeYard setback fif a sight obscuring fence is usedt.
3. Fences ohall not enceed 2 1/2 Two and one-half feet iR
height in the vision clearance area in accordance with
Section 32.070 of this Code.
4.
Eight feet f~or public utility facilities, schoolyards
and playgrounds, fcneeo shall not encccd 8 fcct in
hcight provided that the fence ls located behind the
front yard and street sideyard planted area and outside
of the vision clearance area.
(b) In all residcntial districts, fFences shall be in accordance
with the screening standards of Section 31.160 of this Code.
(c) Every fence, whether or not approved as a result of Site Plan
Review, shall be maintained. in a conaition of gooa rcpair
aa& No fence shall ~ be allowed to become or remain in a
condition of disrepair including, but not limited to
noticeable leaning or sagging, missing sections or
substantial amounts of missing slats, broken supports, and
overgrowth of weeds or vines.
-6-
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 9
16.090 FENCE STANDARDS.
(1) General.
(a) Except as specified elsewhere in this Code, fences shall not
exceed the height standards listed below and shall be located
as follows:
1. Six feet, provided the fence is located behind the front
yard setback, the otrcet sideyard setback* and outside
the vision clearance area.
2.
Four feet
setback if
feet within
setback if a
within the front yard or street sideyard*
an unslatted cyclone fence is used or three
the front yard setback or street sideyard*
sight obscuring fence is used.
3. Two and one-half feet in the vision clearance area in
accordance with Section 32.070 of this Code.
4.
Eight feet for
and playgrounds,
behind the front
and outside of the
public utility facilities, schoolyards
provided that the fence is located
yard and street sideyard planted area
vision clearance area.
.
(b) Fences shall be in accordance with the screening standards of
Section 31.160 of this Code.
(c) Every fence, whether or not approved as a result of Site Plan
Review, shall be maintained. No fence shall be allowed to
become or remain in a condition of disrepair including, but
not limited to noticeable leaning or sagging, missing
sections or substantial amounts of missing slats, broken
supports, and overgrowth of weeds or vines.
4It *Deleted at the 3/6/89 City Council Meeting
-6a-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 10
(2) Review.
(a) A construction permit shall be required for all fences.
(b) Fences within the Willamette Greenway shall be reviewed under
Type III procedure (Discretionary Use).
16.100 SPECIAL USE STANDARDS.
(2) Churches.
(c) Churches shall abut an arterial or collector street and shall
bc designed to direct the flo6 of traffie away from local
streets, in accordance with Section 32.080, Access and Curb
Cut Standards.
(3) Cluster Development. In order to promote more economic
subdivision layout, to encourage ingenuity and originality in
subdivision design, to improve the quality of residential
development and to preserve open space and other natural
resources, cluster development allows reduced lot sizes and
setback standards for individual lots, without exceeding the
maximum density provisions of the applicable zoning district and
the Metro Plan. However, open-space may be included in the
determination of the developable area. Cluster development shall
occur in accordance with the dwelling unit use categories listed
in Section 16.020 of this Article and the subdivision standards
specified in Article 35 of this Code. Cluster development
standards do not apply to manufactured homes.
-7-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 11
(2) Review.
(a) A construction permit shall be required for all fences.
(b) Fences within the Willamette Greenway shall be reviewed under
Type III procedure (Discretionary Use).
(c) Six foot fences within the front yard setback shall be
reviewed under Type III procedure (Discretionary Use).*
16.100 SPECIAL USE STANDARDS.
(2) Churches.
(c) Churches shall abut an arterial or collector street.
(3) Cluster Development. In order to promote more economic
subdivision layout, to encourage ingenuity and originality in
subdivision design, to improve the quality of residential
development and to preserve open space and other natural
resources, cluster development allows reduced lot sizes and
setback standards for individual lots, without exceeding the
maximum density provisions of the applicable zoning district and
the Metro Plan. However, open-space may be included in the
determination of the developable area. Cluster development shall
occur in accordance with the dwelling unit use categories listed
in Section 16.020 of this Article and the subdivision standards
specified in Article 35 of this Code. Cluster development
standards do not apply to manufactured homes.
*Added at the 3/6/89 City Council Meeting
-7a-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 12
(4) Day Care Facilities Centers.
(a) Day Carc Homco and Day Carc Croup Homcs. Except as provided
in Subsection (4)(b):
1. Thc faeility ohall provide a play area in accordance
with Childrcns ServiceD Divioion (CSD) regulatiens. The
Day Care Center shall meet Childrens Services DivisIOn
(CSD) regulations.
2. Thc facility ohall be approvcd by CSD. The outdoor play
area shall be enclosed by a 6 foot high sight obscuring
fence. In addition, the Director may require up to a 10
foot landscape buffer from an outdoor play area if
conflicts with neighboring properties are identified.
3. Public sidewalks shall be installed in all cases where
there are curb and gutter streets.
4. The Day Care Center shall have a planted front yard
setback of 10 feet.
5.
Wherever possible, each Day Care Center site shall have
a circular drive for drop-offs. L-shaped drives or
street side drop-offs may also be approved.
(b) Day Care,Ccntero. Day Care Center proposals in LDR Districts
abutting collector and local streets shall be reviewed under
Discretionary Use procedures in accordance with Article 10 of
this Code. In addition, all of the standards of Subsection
(4)(a) shall be met.
1. Thc facility ohall providc a play arca in accordancc
~:ith Childreno Services Di~ioion (CSD) rcgulations.
2. Thc facility shall bc appro~ed by CSD.
3. Elrccpt for elristing strl:lctl:lres in Medium ana High
Dcnoity Reoidential Diotricts, the facility ohall abut
an arterial or collector street ana shall bc designcd to
direct thc flm: of traffic away from local streets, in
accordance with Scction 32.080, Acccos and Curb Cl:lt
8tandardo.
4. Encept for enioting otructurco in Mcdium and High
Dcnsity Rcoidential Districts, the facility ohall havc a
plantcd front yard oetback of 15 fect and planted oide
and rear yard sctbacks of 20 fcct.
-8-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 13
(9)
Public/Privatc Elementary/Middle Schoolo.
(a) ~ ochool providing educatioR for 13 or more studento within a
24 hour period shall abut en an arterial or eollector strect
and shall be designed to direct thc flov of traffic away from
local otreeto, in accordance with Section 32.0BO, Acceso and
Curb Cut Standards.
f&t Schools shall have a planted front yard setback of 15 feet
and planted side and rear yard setbacks of 20 feet.
(11) Professional Offices.
(a) Professional offices in residential districts shall be
permitted &aly when~
1. T~he lots are adjacent to, ana structurcs are not more
than 100 fect from CC or MRC Districts or Metro Plan
Diagram designationsl andT
2. The majority of the square footage of the structure on
the lot is not more than 100 feet from CC or MRC
Districts or Metro Plan Diagram designations.
3.
Exception: Lots having more than 200 feet of frontage
along Main Street east of 57th Street shall qualify for
professional offices provided that the majority of the
square footage of the structure is not more than 100
feet from Main Street.
Placement of profeooional offieeo in thoDe opecific areas
will hclp reduee thc incompatibilities that may result whcn
rcsidential and commcrcial ~ses are aEljacent to each othcr.
(b) A professional office exceeding 2,000 square feet of gross
floor area shall abut an arterial or collector street-aRd
ohall bc dcoigncd to direct thc flow of traffie a~ay from
local otreeto, in accordance with Section 32.080, Aecess and
Curb Cut Standards.
-9-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 14
(9) Public/Private Elementary/Middle Schools. Schools shall have a
planted front yard setback of 15 feet and planted side and rear
yard setbacks of 20 feet.
(11) Professional Offices.
(a) Professional offices in residential districts shall be
permi tted when:
1. The lots are adjacent to CC or MRC Districts or Metro
Plan Diagram designations; and
2. The majority of the square footage of the structure on
the lot is not more than 100 feet from CC or MRC
Districts or Metro Plan Diagram designations.
3. Enceptionl Loto having morc than 200 feet of frontagc
along Main Strcct cast of 57th Strcet ohall ~ualify for
professienal offieco pro~ided that thc majority of the
square footagc of the otructure is net mere than 100
feet from Main Strcct. *
(b) A professional office exceeding 2,000 square feet of gross
floor area shall abut an arterial or collector street.
*Deleted at the 3/6/89 City Council Meeting
-9a-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 15
18.010 ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS.
In order to implement the policies of the Metro Plan, regulate the use of
land, structures and buildings, and protect the public health, safety and
welfare, the following zoning districts are established in this Article:
(1) NC NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. The NC District is intended
to implement the Metro Plan Text addressing Neighborhood
Commercial facilities. This district designates sites to provide
day to day commercial needs and may include individual convenience
stores. of a small suppert populatien. This is typieally
aecomplisheEl by ccntering thcoe Neighborhood commercial centers
facilities typically include around a convenience store or market
with the poosible inclusion of and several personal service
establishments. This district should cover an area of not more
than 3 acres in size. Except for convenience stores or markets
which shall not have a gross floor area exceeding 3,000 square
feet, no individual business establishment in the NC District
shall exceed 2,000 square feet of gross floor area.
(2) CC COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. The CC District is intended to
implement the Metro Plan Community Commercial Center designation.
This district designates sites to provide for a wide range of
retail sales, service and professional office use. The market
arca for acti~ities being earricd eut in this district are
gcncrally iCity ~ide. This district also includes all existing
strip commercial areas. Encept for otrip commercial de~clepment,
thio diotriet should eover arcao bctvcen 3 and 20 acres in oize.
18.020 SCHEDULE OF USE CATEGORIES.
(6) Recreational facilities (Section 18.110(5)),
including but not limited to:
(n) Non Alcoholic Night Club
s
S
(R~) Parks, private and public
P
P
(~E) Pool halls
(~g) Skating rinks
P
P
P
S
S
(~E) Stadiums
P
P
(r~) Swimming pools
P
P
(e!) Tennis, racquetball and handball courts
P
P
-10-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 16
18.070 OFF-STREET PARKING STANDARDS.
USE CATEGORIES
NUMBER OF SPACES
(14) Shopping centers or malls 1 for each 250 square feet of gross
floor area, or a Traffie Study
exclusive -of covered pedestrian
walkways. feOnce a shopping center or
mall has been approved, no additional
parking shall be requiredtT unless
there is new construction.
18.090 SIGN STANDARDS.
(6) I-5 Oriented Shopping Centers or Malls of Greater Than 20 Acres.
(a) Free Standing Signs.
1.
Two free standing signs shall be permitted for each shopping
center or mall. The sign closest to I-5 shall be limited to
700 square feet per face, or 1,400 square feet for 2 or more
faces, with a maximum height of 50 feet above grade. The
other free standing sign shall be limited to 400 square feet
per face, or 800 square feet for 2 or more faces, with a
maximum height of 30 feet.
2. One additional free standing sign shall be permitted at each
vehicular entrance. Each sign shall be limited to 25 square
feet for all faces, with a maximum height of 20 feet.
(b) Wall Signs.
1. Wall Signs. In addition to the free standing signs specified
in Subsection (a) above, each mall may have wall signs at each
primary entrance. The total allowable area for all such signs
shall be 1,000 square feet. No single sign shall exceed 400
square feet.
2. Anchor Tenants With 50,000 or More Square Feet of Gross Floor
Area. Wall signs shall be permitted for each principal face
of the building, with a maximum of three wall signs per anchor
tenant. The maximum allowable sign area per face of building
shall be 300 square feet.
3.
Tenants With Between 5,000 and 50,000 Square Feet of Gross
Floor Area. Wall signage shall be permitted for each
sub-anchor tenant of not more than 200 square feet, whether or
not a separate entrance exists.
4.
Tenants with less than 5,000 square feet of gross floor area
may have one wall sign of not more than 12 square feet.
-11-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 17
18.100 FENCE STANDARDS.
(1) General.
(a) Except as specified elsewhere in this Code, fences shall not
exceed the height standards listed below and shall be located
as follows:
(b) In all commcrcial districts, fcnceo shall net encecd fi fect
in height, cnccpt as opecificd in Subocetion (1) (c) of thin
Section. No fcnce o~er 3 1/2 feet in height shall be placed
in a otreetDide yard Dctback.
1. Six feet, provided that the fence is located behind the
required front yard and street side yard planted areas
and outside of the vision clearance area.
fe+2.Eight feet f~or public utility facilities, schoolyards
and playgrounds, fcnccD Dhall not encccd 8 fcct in
hcight provided that the fence is located behind the
required front yard and street side yard planted areas
and outside of the vision clearance area.
3.
Barbed wire shall be permitted atop a six foot chain
link fence. The total height of the fence and barbed
wire shall not exceed 8 feet. Barbed wire only fences
shall be prohibited.
fa+4.In all commercial districts, fcnccs Dhall not eucccd 2
--~ Two and one-half feet in height within the vision
clearance area in accordance with Section 32.070 of this
Code.
(4E) In all commcrcial diotricts, fFences shall comply with the
screening standards of Section 31~160 of this Code.
(4~) Every fence, whether or not approved as a result of Site Plan
Review, shall be maintained. in a condition of good repair
aR4 No fence shall ~ be allowed to become or remain in a
condition of disrepair including, but not limited to
noticeable leaning or sagging, missing sections or
substantial amounts of missing slats, broken supports, and
overgrowth of weeds or vines.
-12-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 18
(d) Outdoor storage of materials shall be screened by a sight
obscuring fence. Partial screening may be permitted when
necessary for security reasons.
(2) Review Procedure.
(a) Security fences shall be rcvie~cd under Type I precedurc. A
construction permit shall be required for all fences.
(b) Fences within the Willamette Greenway shall be reviewed under
Type III procedure (Discretionary Use).
(3) Barbed Wire Fence Standards. In all eommcreial distriets, barbed
~irc shall bc permitted only atop a chain link fcnce ~ fcct in
height, providcd taat, vaen abutting public right of ~aYI
(a) The fence is not lecatcd in any rcquired setback area (5 fcet
for parking and otoragc and 10 fcct for buildingo)J
(8) Thc setback arca bctvcen thc fcncc and property linc shall bc
plantcd in accordance with Scetion 31.150, Planting
Inotallation Standards, if Site Plan Re~iev Standards apply.
-13-
.
.
.
'Ordinance No. 5466
Page 19
(3)
Business and Professional Offices and Personal Services - Day Care
Facilities.
(a) Day Care Homes and Day Care Group Homes.
1. The facility shall pro~idc a ~lay area in accordance
with ChilElreno Ser~ices Divioien (C8D) rcgulatiens. Day
Care Homes and Day Care Group Homes shall be permitted
only in a structure constructed and used for residential
purposes.
2. The facility shall meet bc appro~cd by Childrens
Services Division iCSDl regulations.
(b) Day Care Centers.
1. Thc facility shall provide a play arca in accordancc
with Childrens Services Di~ioion (CSD) regulations. The
Day Care Center shall meet Childrens Services DivisIOn
(CSD) regulations.
2. The facility shall bc appro~ed by CSD. The outdoor play
area shall be enclosed by a 6 foot high sight obscuring
fence.
3.
EltCeflt for eltisting structureD in Commcrcial Diotricto,
thc facility shall abut an artcrial or collcctor strcct
anEl shall be designeEl to direct thc flew of traffic away
from lecal strects, in accordaace with Scctien 32.080,
Acceos and Curb Cut Standards. Public sidewalks shall
be installed in all cases where there are curb and
gu tter streets.
4. Eltcept fer eldsting Dtructures in Commercial Districto,
thc facility Dhall havc a plaatcd front yard sctback of
15 feet and ~lanteEl side and rear yard setbaclto of 20
~ If possible, each Day Care Center site shall have
a circular drive for drop-offs. L-shaped drives or
street side drop-offs may also be approved.
(5) Recreational Facilities.
(a) Auditoriums, Bingo Parlors, Dance Halls, Non-Alcohol Night Clubs,
Hydrotubes and Skating Rinks shall not be permitted to abut a
residential district.
(b) Non-Alcohol Night Clubs shall locate at least 500 feet from an
established tavern. Taverns shall locate at least 500 feet from
an established non-alcohol night club.
-14-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 20
(3)
Business and Professional Offices and Personal Services - Day Care
Facilities.
(a) Day Care Homes and Day Care Group Homes.
1. Day Care Homes and Day Care Group Homes shall be
permitted only in a structure constructed and used for
residential purposes.
2. The facility shall meet Childrens Services Division
(CSD) regulations.
(b) Day Care Centers.
1. The Day Care Center shall meet Childrens Services
Division (CSD) regulations.
2. The outdoor play area shall be enclosed by a 6 foot high
sight obscuring fence.
3. Public sidewalks shall be installed in all cases where
there are curb and gutter streets.
4.
If possible, each Day Care Center site shall have a
circular drive for drop-offs. L-shaped drives or street
side drop-offs may also be approved.
(5) Recreational Facilities.
(a) Arcades,* Auditoriums, Bingo Parlors, Dance Halls, Non-Alcohol
Night Clubs, Hydrotubes and Skating Rinks shall not be permitted
to abut a residential district.
(b) Non-Alcohol Night Clubs shall locate at least 500 feet from an
established tavern. Taverns shall locate at least 500 feet from
an established non-alcohol night club.
*Added at the 3/6/89 City Council Meeting
-14a-
.
.
.
. Ordi nance No. 5466
Page 21
ARTICLE 19
BKHU BOOTH-KELLY MIXED USE DISTRICT
19.010 ESTABLISHMENT OF THE BKMU BOOTH-KELLY MIXED USE DISTRICT
19.020 CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
19.030 DEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN AND DESIGN STANDARDS
19.040. INTERIM USE STAND..\RDS RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE
19.050 LOT SIZE AND SETBACK STANDARDS
19.060 SCHEDULE OF USE CATEGORIES
19.070 HEIGHT STANDARDS
19.080 OFF STREET PARKING STANDARDS
19.090 SIGN STANDARDS
19.100 FENCE STANDARDS
19.110 SPECIAL USE STANDARDS
19.010 ESTABLISHMENT OF THE BKHU BOOTH-KELLY MIXED USE DISTRICT.
(3) This Articlc providc3 for the interim usc of cxioting buildingD in
thc BY~U District and for thc long term rcdcvelopmcnt of thc
cntirc BKMU District.
DIAGRAM 19-1
v
~
BOOTH KELLY PLANNING PROCESS
DISTRICT
DEVELOPMENT AREA
SITE
Conceptual...............
Development ':.:
Plan ......
.......
..... Detailed Development Area Plan............:....................
......Site Plan (Phase \)
.......Development Area Plan:::::'"
(etcJ ..........Site Plan (Phase II etcJ
~
-A
-15-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 22
19.040 INTERIM USES. RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE.
Interim
approvcd
19 1).
uoes may locatc in enisting bHildings providcd that there is an
Sitc Plan in aecordancc vith Articlc 31 of thio Code (sce Diagram
(1) "herc a building er group of buildings serve mere than one uscr, a
Sitc Plan may bC preparcd for all of the b~ilElings involved (Typc
II proccdHre). Parking needs shall bc determincd based on a
Traffic Study that projecto interim uoeo for thc buildingo at full
occupancy. Oncc thio Site Plan haD bcen approved, oubsequent
permitted uses shall not reqHirc additional Site Plan Review,
provideEl that no additional oquare foetage io constructed.
(2) Improvcmcnts shall be madc to the oitc in accordancc with the
approvcd Sitc Plan. Landocaping improvcmcnts may bc deferrcd fer
intcrim ~oco provided that an amount net marc than 10% of the
costs of all ethcr en site improvements and constrHction is
dcdicatcd to thc Booth Kelly Site Dcvclopment Fund, adminiotered
by thc Dirccter. Thc monieD accumulated in thio FunEl shall be
Hscd to inotall landocaping requircd by the approvcd Sitc Plan in
accordance with the Conccptual Dcvclepment Plan. After all
rcquired landscaping has becn inotalled, any leftover fundo shall
be retHrnca to thc developer.
-16-
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 23
.
19.060 SCHEDULE OF USE CATEGORIES.
(1) Thc following uoeo are pcrmittcd oubjcct to Sitc Plan Revie~ ap~reval,
unlcoo olleeifieally elrempted cloe""here in this .^.rticle. It is CJcpcctcd that
interim uses ef buildingo elrioting prior to the aEloptien of this Articlc ~ill
takc plaee until redevclopment of the entire BKMU District occurs uFlder an
approvcd Conccptual Dcvclopmcnt Plan. ~ The development standards of this
Article, Article 31, Site Plan Review, and any additional provisions,
restrictions or exceptions set forth in this Code shall apply to all
development in the BKMU District.
CATEGORIES/USES
PEm'.ANENT
INTERIM
(1) Residential uses (Section 19.110(1)) including
but not limited to:
(a) Cluster Development
S
I)
(b) Condominiums
S
I)
(c) Multiple family dwellings
S
I)
.
(2) Business and professional offices and personal
services (Section 19.110(2), including but not
limi ted to:
(a) Accountants P p
(b) Advertising agencies P p
(c) Architects, landscape architects
and designers P p
(d) Art studios, fine and performing p p
(e) Attorneys P p
(f) Banks, credit unions and savings and loans P p
(g) Barber and beauty shops p p
(h) Blueprinting P p
(i) Business schools P p
(j) Catering services P p
.
-17-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 24
CATEGORIES/USES
PBR.U~\NENT
(k) Clinics and laboratories
P
(l) Collection agencies
p
(m) Communications
P
(n) Day care facilities
s
(0) Dentists
P
(p) Detective and protective agencies
p
(q) Doctors
p
(r) Employment agencies
p
(s) Engineers and surveyors
p
(t) Financial advisors
P
(u) Funeral services
P
(v) Insurance
P
(w) Interior decorator and designers
p
(x) Labor offices
p
(y) Laundry and dry cleaners
p
(z) Locksmiths
P
(aa) Management and planning consultants
p
(bb) Newspaper office and production
p
(cc) Opticians
P
(dd) Photography studios
p
(ee) Printing
P
(ff) Psychologists and counselors
P
(gg) Public office buildings
p
(hh) Real estate brokers
P
(ii) Shoe repai r
p
-18-
INTERIM
p.
p.
p.
s
p.
p.
p.
p.
p.
p.
p.
p.
p.
p.
p.
p.
p.
F
p.
p.
p.
p.
p.
p.
p.
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 25
CATEGORIES/USES
(jj) Stenographers
(kk) Stockbrokers
(11) Tailors
(mm) Telephone answering services
(nn) Travel agencies
(00) TV and radio broadcasting studios
(3) Eating and drinking establishments, including
but not limited to:
(a) Cocktail lounges
(b) Delicatessens
(d) Sit down restaurants
(e) Taverns
(4) Recreational facilities (Section 19.110(3),
including but not limited to:
(a) Arcades
(b) Auditoriums
(c) Batting cages
(d) Bowling alleys
(e) Dance halls
(f) Docks and marinas
(g) Gyms and athletic clubs
(h) Hot tub establishments
(i) Hydrotubes
(j) Miniature golf
(k) Movie theatres, indoor
(l) Pool halls
-19-
PBR.U.MmNT
p
p
P
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
P
S
s
P
s
D
P
p
S
p
p
P
INTERIM
12
p
p
p
p
12
F
F
F
12
F
s
s
F
s
F
F
s
F
p
p
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 26
CATEGORIES/USES
(m) Skating rinks
(n) Stadiums
(0) Swimming pools
(p) Tennis, racquetball and handball
courts
(q) Velodromes
(5) Retail sales, (Section 19.110(4)) including but
not limited to:
(a) Antiques
(b) Apparel
(c) Art galleries and museums
(d) Art supplies
(e) Automobiles
(f) Bakeries
(g) Bicycles
(h) Boats
(i) Books
(j ) Cameras
(k) Campers
(l) Computers
(m) Convenience stores
(n) Department stores
(0) Drapery and fabrics
(p) Drugs
(q) Dry Goods
(r) Farmers markets and crafts fairs
-20-
PER.U...\NBNT
S
S
p
p
S
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
INTERIM
s
!l
s
!l
!l
!l
!l
s
!l
!l
s
!l
!l
s
p
!l
!l
p
!l
p
!l
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 27
CATEGORIES/USES
(s) Florists
( t) Furni ture
(u) Grocery
(v) Hardware
(w) Hobby shops
(x) Jewelry
(y) Luggage and leather
(z) Medical and dental supplies
(aa) Musical instruments
(bb) Novelties and gifts
(cc) Office equipment
(dd) Paint and wallpaper
(ee) Pottery
(ff) RVs
(gg) Sewing machines
(hh) Shoes
(ii) Small electrical appliances
(jj) Sporting goods
(kk) Toys
(ll) Transient merchants
(6) Social and public institutions, including but
not limited to:
(a) Community and senior centers
(b) Educational branch facilities
(c) Fraternal and civic organizations
-21-
PER.U..:\NBNT
p
P
p
p
P
p
p
p
p
p
P
p
p
P
p
p
p
p
s
p
p
P
INTERIM
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
s
12
12
12
12
12
s
12
12
12
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 28
CATEGORIES/USES
PER.U~YmNT
(7) Transient accommodations, including but not
limi ted to:
(a) Hotels
p
(b) Motels
P
(8) Transportation facilities, (Section 19.110(5),
including but not limited to:
(a) Bus terminals
D
(b) Heliports
S
(c) Helistops
S
(9) Warehouse commercial retail and wholesale sales,
(Section 19.110(6)), including but not limited to:
(a) Cold storage lockers
D
(b) Electrical supplies
P
(c) Floor covering sales
P
(d) Large electrical appliance sales
P
(e) Lumber yards and building materials
D
(f) Mini warehouses
o
(g) Outdoor storage areas/yards
S
(h) Plumbing and heating supplies and
contractors
s
(i) Unfinished furniture
P
(10) Campus industrial, including but not limited to:
(a) Manufacture and assembly of:
1.
Communication equipment, including
radio and television equipment. p
2.
Electronic components and accessories. P
-22-
INTERIM
B
B
B
s
s
p.
p.
p.
p.
s
s
s
s
p.
p.
p.
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 29
CATEGORIES/USES
3.
Electronic transmission and
distribution equipment. P
4.
Engineering, laboratory, scientific,
and research instruments. p
5.
Measuring, analyzing, and controlling
instruments. P
6.
Medical, dental, and surgical equipment
and supplies including prosthetic
devices. P
7.
Medicinal chemicals and pharmaceutical
products. p
8.
Musical instruments. P
9.
Office computing and accounting
equipment. P
10. Optical instruments, including lenses. P
11. Photographic equipment and supplies.
12. Watches, clocks, and related
components.
(b) Media productions, including but not
limited to TV and radio broadcasting
(exclusive of communications towers),
motion picture production and
newspaper/book publishing.
(c) Research development and testing
laboratories and facilities.
(d) Regional distribution headquarters.
(e) Corporate office headquarters.
(f) Business, labor, scientific and
professional organizations.
(11) Light-medium industrial and warehousing,
(Section 19.110(7) including but not limited to:
(a) Machine, metal, sheet metal, fabric,
finished wood manufacturing and assembly
-23-
PER.V~\NENT
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
INTERIM
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 30
CATEGORIES/USES
(b) Manufacture, compounding, processing,
packaging or treatment of bakery goods,
candy, drugs, perfumes, toiletries, soft
drinks and food products
(c) Wholesaling, warehousing, distribution
and storage
(d) Transportation equipment manufacture
and assembly
(e) Appliance manufacture and assembly
(13) Education, (Section 19.110(8)), including but
no t limi ted to:
(a) College level educational facilities
(b) Trade schools
(14) Public and private parks, (Section 19.110(9)),
including but not limited to:
(a) Pocket/Neighborhood Parks
(b) Community Parks
(15) Public utility facilities, (Section 19.110(10)),
including but not limited to:
(a) Communications facilities
(b) High impact facilities
(c) Low impact facilities
-24-
PER.U~\NENT
P
S
P
P
s
S
P
P
D
S
P
INTERIM
p.
p.
p.
p.
s
s
p.
s
I)
s
p.
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 31
20.020 SCHEDULE OF USE CATEGORIES.
(4) Secondary uses serving or related to on site industrial uses
(d) Day care facilities (primarily serving employees ~)
20.080 SIGN STANDARDS.
(1) Sign Height. The maximum height for all signs is 30 feet above
grade.
(2) First Story Businesses.
(a) Free Standing or Roof Sign. The total area permitted shall
be 100 square feet for one face or 200 square feet for 2 or
more faces. The sign shall be limited to one per business
and may be either a free standing or roof sign.
(b) Wall Signs. The total area permitted shall be one square
foot for each lineal foot of building perimeter wall for each
business, provided that each business shall be permitted a
minimum area of at least 150 square feet for all faces and
limited to a maximum of 300 square feet for all faces. A
maximum of 4 wall signs shall be permitted for each business.
(c) Multiple Signs. Two or more businesses may elect to use a
single sign, either free standing or roof. A total area of
40 square feet for one face or 80 square feet for 2 or more
faces shall be permitted for each business, provided that the
maximum area permitted for 5 or more businesses on a single
sign shall be 200 square feet for one face or 400 square feet
for 2 or more faces. The maximum height for this sign shall
be 30 feet above grade. This sign shall be in lieu of the
choice of signs specified in Subsection (2)(a) above.
-25-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 32
20.090 FENCE STANDARDS.
(1) General.
(a) Except as specified elsewhere in this Code, fences shall not
exceed the height standards listed below and shall be located
as follows:
f&}~In thc LMI, HI and SHI Diotricts, fences shall not
cncccd 8 Eight feet in height, provided that the fence
is located~ind the required front yard and street
side yard planting areas and outside of the vision
clearance area. No sight obscuring fence shall BC
placcd in thc streetside yard setback.
2. Barbed wire shall be permitted atop a six foot chain
link fence. The total height of the fence and barbed
wire shall not exceed 8 feet. Barbed wire only fences
shall be prohibited.
fa-t3.In thc
- cl[cecd
vision
of this
LMI, HI
2 1/2 Two
clearance
Code.
and SHI Diatricts, fences shall not
and one-half feet in hcight within the
area in accordance with Section 32.070
(~E) In the LMI, HI and SHI Diotricts, fFences shall comply with
the screening standards of Section 31:160 of this Code.
(4c) Every fence, whether or not approved as a result of Site Plan
Review, shall be maintained. in a condition sf good re~air
aaQ No fence shall R&t be allowed to become or remain in a
condition of disrepair including, but not limited to
noticeable leaning or sagging, missing sections or
substantial amounts of missing slats, broken supports, and
overgrowth of weeds or vines.
(~~) Outdoor storage of materials directly relatcd to a pcrmitted
U&e shall be screened by a sight obscuring fence. Partial
screening may be permitted when necessary for security
reasons.
-26-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 33
(2)
Review Procedure.
(a) Unlcss revicwed as ~art of Site Plan Rcview, barbcEl wire
fcncco ohall be revie~cd Hndcr Type I procedure. A
construction permit shall be required for all fences.
(b) Fences within the Willamette Greenway be reviewed under Type
III procedure.
(3) Barbed 'Iirc Fence StandarElo. In the LMI, HI and 8HI Districts,
barbcEl ~ire shall be permitted only atop a chain link fence e feet
in height, provided that, ~hen abutting a public right of way.
(a) Thc fence is not located in any re~uired sctback area (5 fcct
for parking and otorage and 10 feet for bHildings),
(b) The setback area bet~een thc fcncc and propcrty line shall be
planted in accordance ~ith Section 31.150, Planting
Installation Standards, if Site Plan Review Standards ap~ly.
20.100 SPECIAL USE STANDARDS.
(4) Secondary Uses - Day Care Centers.
(a) Day Care Centers primarily serving employees shall meet
Childrens Services Division (CSD) regulations.
(b) Public sidewalks shall be installed in all cases where there
are curb and gutter streets.
(c) If possible, each Day Care Center site shall have a circular
drive for drop-offs. L-shaped drives or street side
drop-offs may also be approved.
(4~) Other Uses - High Impact Public Facilities.
21.040 PRIMARY USES
(2) Day care facilities that meet Childrens Services Division (CSD)
regulations, cafeterias, recreational facilities, low impact
public utility facilities, and heliports and helistops serving and
constructed in conjunction with on-site development.
-27-
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 34
(2) Review Procedure.
(a) A construction permit shall be required for all fences.
(b) Fences within the Willamette Greenway be reviewed under Type
III procedure.
20.100 SPECIAL USE STANDARDS.
(4) Secondary Uses - Day Care Centers.
(a) Day Care Centers primarily serving employees shall meet
Childrens Services Division (CSD) regulations.
(b) Public sidewalks shall be installed in all cases where there
are curb and gutter streets.
(c) If possible, each Day Care Center site shall have a circular
drive for drop-offs. L-shaped drives or street side
drop-offs may also be approved.
(5) Other Uses - High Impact Public Facilities.
21.040 PRIMARY USES
(2) Day care facilities that meet Childrens Services Division (CSD)
regulations, cafeterias, recreational facilities, low impact
public utility facilities, and heliports and helistops serving and
constructed in conjunction with on-site development.
(9) Business Parks.*
. *Added at the 3/6/89 City Council Meeting
-27a-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 35
21.110 FENCE STANDARDS.
(1) General.
(a) Except as specified elsewhere in this Code, fences shall not
exceed the height standards listed below and shall be located
as follows:
fbt1.In thc SLI District, fcncco shall net eltceca B Eight
--feet in height, provided that the fence is located
behind the required the front yard and street side yard
planted areas and outside the vision clearance area. Ne
oight obocuring fencc shall be placcd in thc strectside
yard octback.
fat~In thc SLI District, fenceD Ghall not clCcccd 2 1/2 Two
and one-half feet in hcight within the vision clearance
area in accordance with Section 32.070 of this Code.
(e~) In the SLI District, fFences shall comply with the screening
standards of Section 31~160 of this Code.
(~~) Every fence, whether or not approved as a result of Site Plan
Review, shall be maintained. in a condition of good rcpair
aRd No fence shall ~ be allowed to become or remain in a
condition of disrepair including, but not limited to
noticeable leaning or sagging, missing sections or
substantial amounts of missing slats, broken supports, and
overgrowth of weeds or vines.
(2) Review Procedure.
(a) Unleoo re~ie~ed as part af Sitc Plan Review, barbed vire
fcncco shall bc rc~icwcd under Typc I precedurc. A
construction permit shall be required for all fences.
(b) Fences within the Willamette Greenway be reviewed under Type
III procedure.
-28-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 36
25.050 PERMITTED AND DISCRETIONARY USES.
Except for uses within the Greenway Setback Area, uses allowed in the WG
Overlay District are the same as those in the underlying districts. Any
change or intensification of use, or construction, that has a significant
visual impact All conotruetion, c}ctcrior renovation, repair and relatcd
activitieo, or Devclopment Approval which requireD a B~ilEling Permit from the
~ shall al&e require Discretionary Use Approval.
29.050 SCHEDULE OF USE CATEGORIES VHEN THERE IS AN UNDERLYING RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICT.
(2) Day Care (29.070(2))
(a) Day Care Homes
SP
(b) Day Care Group Homes
s*p
29.070 SPECIAL USE STANDARDS.
(2) Day Care Facilitieo. Day Carc Homcs afld Day Care Croup Homes
ohall providc a play arca in accordancc ~:ith Childrens Ser~ices
Division (CSD) regulationo and ohall bc approved by CSD. RESERVED
FOR FUTURE USE.
-29-
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 37
31.030 REVIEW'.
(2) Review.
PLOT PLAN - MDS* - TYPE I PROCEDURE
1. Change in use category or change of
use within a category of a commercial,
semi-public and public or industrial
regardless of size.
2. Expansion of a multi-family,
commercial, semi-public and public,
or industrial structure involving
less than 2,000 square feet of gross
floor area.
3. Expansion of any structure in the
interior of an industrial site
regardless of size which is not
clearly visible from a public street.
4. Paving an existing graveled parking
lot or expanding an existing paved
parking lot of less than ~ 24 spaces.
5. Low impact utility facilities.
PLOT PLAN - TYPE I PROCEDURE
1. Expansion of a multi-family,
commercial, semi-public or industrial
structure involving 2,000 square feet
or more but less than 4,000 square
feet of gross floor area.
2. New construction of a structure
involving less than 4,000 square
feet of gross floor area.
3. Sales display lots regardless of
area, including but not limited to
automobiles, boats and motor homes.
4. Paving an existing graveled
parking lot of ~ 24 or more spaces
or expanding an existing parking
lot by ~ 24 or more spaces.
tit * See Section 31.040 of this Code.
-30-
SITE PLAN - TYPE I PROCEDURE
1. New construction involving 4,000 or
more square feet of gross floor
with minimal potential impact on
residentially designated areas.
2. Expansion of any existing structure
when the expansion is 4,000 or more
square feet with minimal potential
impact on residentially designated
areas.
SITE PLAN - TYPE II PROCEDURE
1. Any expansion of development or
change in use with a significant
impact on residentially designated
areas.
2. Development Area Plans and
Conceptual Development Plans when
separate from Site Plan Review.
3. High impact public facilities.
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 38
31.030 REVIEV.
(3) An architect, landocapc architcct or engineer shall prepare plans
for developments that include new or expanded buildings 4,000
square feet or more of gross floor area, in all cases.
31.040 MINIMUM DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
(1) Minimum Development Standards (MDS) are intended to make it easier
for businesses to locate in or to expand existing structures. MDS
shall be applied in lieu of full Site Plan Review to ensure minimal
compliance with appearance and safety standards specified in this
Code and to reduce processing time for Development Approval.
(2) The following standards shall be .met prior to occupancy.
(a) The development shall connect to public utilities and comply
with the Springfield Building Safety Codes.
(b) Parking and circulation areas shall be graveled or paved.
Access points (i.e., curb cuts) determined to be unsafe shall
be blocked in the manner prescribed by the Public Works
Director.
(c) Trash receptacles and outdoor storage areas shall be screened
by a structure or enclosure permanently affixed to the ground.
(d) Required plot plans, development agreements and improvement
agreements shall be signed by the property owner and
recorded at the applicant's expense.
(3) The following improvements shall be completed in accordance with
Article 32 (Public and Private Improvement Specifications) of this
Code within two years of the date of Site Plan approval, provided
that security is provided in accordance with Subsection 31.040(5):
(a) Parking and circulation areas shall be paved and striped,
wheel stops installed and non-conforming curb cuts closed.
Closed curb cuts shall be replaced with curb, gutter and
sidewalk.
(b) Concrete sidewalks shall be installed where the site abuts a
curb and gutter.
(c) A four foot wide landscaped planter strip with approved
irrigation or approved drought resistant plants shall be
installed between the required sidewalk and parking areas or
structures. A combination of decorative fencing (e.g.,
wrought iron or masonry) and landscaping may be approved in
lieu of the four foot landscape strip where existing
conditions (e.g., the location of existing structures and
paved parking lots) warrant.
31-
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 39
(d) Street trees and street lights shall be installed.
(e) Exceptions.
1. Where well maintained asphalt paving exists, the
installation of sidewalks shall occur within five years
from the date of Site Plan approval.
2. Where the costs of improvements specified in Subsection
(3) above will exceed $10,000.00 (as demonstrated by the
applicant to the satisfaction of the Director), the
installation of such improvements shall occur within
three years from the date of Site Plan approval.
(4) All required improvements, including timetables, and improvement
agreements shall be specified on the Plot Plan and described in the
Development Agreement. All such Development Agreements shall be
recorded at the cost of the applicant to protect future buyers or
users of the property. To assure that improvements are installed
when specified in the Development Agreement, security approved by
the Director in the form of bonds, letters of credit or similar
financial mechanisms may be required.
~ 31.110 SECURITY AND ASSURANCES.
(1) All required improvements shall be installed prior to the issuance
of a Certificate of Occupancy or Final Building Inspection for the
development, except as specified in Section 31.040 of this Code or
that improvements may be deferred for good cause by the Director if
security in accordance with Subsection (3) of this Section is
approved to the satisfaction of the City Attorney.
.
-32-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 40
31.170 PARKING STANDARDS.
(1) Off-street parking spaces shall be provided for:
(a) All new construction and expansion of multiple family
residential, commercial, industrial and public and
semi-public uses in~ol~ing 500 square fcet or mere of groos
floor area vithin any 12 month period. If an existing
development is enlarged, new parking spaces shall be provided
in proportion to the increase only.
(b) Changes in use or the use category of an existing building or
structure.
(c) Exception: In the Downtown Exception Area, all lots and uses
shall be exempt from the parking space requirements of this
Article. However, if in the opinion of the City EngineeF
Director there appears to be a major traffic impact, the ~
Engincer Director may require a Traffic Study and parking may
be required based on the study. In any case, any voluntarily
installed parking shall conform to the design standards of
this Article.
(d) The Director and City Engineer may authorize a reduction in
the number of required parking spaces without a Variance:
1. Based on an approved Traffic Study approved by the City
Enginccr; and/or
2.
When the location of
impractical to provide
without demolishing all
alternative parking
available; and
a building on a site makes it
the number of required spaces
or part of the building, and no
arrangements are reasonably
3. Based on an affirmative finding by the Director that the
exception will have no negative impacts on neighboring
properties; and
4. All installed parking shall conform to the design
standards of this Article.
(6) Parking spaces in a public right of way may shall no~ be counted
as fulfilling a~ part of the parking requirements for a
development as follows:T For each 18 feet of available on-street
parking, there will be a 1/2 space credit toward the required
amount of off-street parking spaces. The developer shall be
responsible for marking anyon-street spaces.
-33-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 41
31.180 PARKING LOT DESIGN STANDARDS.
The following diagrams illustrate appropriate parking lot design in the City.
More detailed diagrams showing parking lot dimensions maintained by the ~
Enginecr Public Works Director will be provided upon request.
31.190 PARKING AREA IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS.
All parking areas shall conform to the setback, VISIon clearance, planting and
screening provisions of this Code and shall be completed prior to occupancy.
Required parking spaces shall be improved in accordance with the following
standards:
(1) Except as specified in Section 31.040(2)(b), Aall parking areas
shall have a durable, dust free surfacing of asphaltic concrete,
Portland cement or other materials in accordance with the Building
Safety Codes and approved by the Building Official.
(5) All spaces shall be permanently and clearly marked, unless it is
determined that the spaces should not be marked for safety
considerations.
(9) At least one secured bicycle rack, designed to hold a minimum of 3
bicycles of an approved design approved by the City Engineer,
shall be provided for each parking lot. Parking lots having more
than 15 automobile parking spaces shall be required to have one
additional secured bicycle space for each additional 15 automobile
parking spaces or fraction thereof. Bicycle parking areas shall
be visible and accessible, however, these areas shall not be
located within parking aisles, planting areas, or pedestrian ways.
-34-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 42
ARTICLE 32
PUBLIC AND PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT~ STMIDMIDS
32.010 GENERAL
32.020 STREETS STAN~\RDS - PUBLIC
32.030 STREETS ST.\NDARDS - PRIVATE
32.040 SIDEWALKS AND PLANTER STRIPS ST.\NDARDS
- -
32.050 STREET TREES STANDARDS
32.060 STREET LIGHTS ST.\NDARDS
32.070 VISION CLEARANCE AREAS ST.\NDARDS
32.080 ACCESS AND CURB CUTS STANDARDS
32.090 BIKEWAYS AND PEDESTRIAN TRAILS STAND~RDS
- -
32.100 SANITARY SEWERS STANDARDS
32.110 STORM DRAINAGE ST.\NDARDS
32.120 UTILIT~IES STAND.\RDS
PUBLIC AND PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS STANDARDS
32.010 GENERAL.
(1) The intent of this Article is to ensure that public and private
improvements are installed and serve development in accordance
with the Metro Plan. The Planning Commission, Hearings Official
or City Council may require additional improvements when necessary
to ensure compliance with the Metro Plan for development proposals
reviewed under Type III or Type IV procedures.
(2) Standardo Specifications for the construction, reconstruction or
repair of streets, sidewalks, planter strips and other public
improvements within the City shall be as opccified in accordance
with this Code, the Springfield Code, 1965 and the Standard
Construction Specifications on file with the City Engineer.
Standardo Specifications for private street improvements shall be
aD specified approved by 4R the Public Works Director Building
Safety Cod co and thio Codc. Other private improvements shall be
as specified in this Code and/or approved by the Building
Official.
-35-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 43
32.020 STREETS STANDARDS - PUBLIC.
(1) General Provisions.
(b) All lots and developments shall have approved access to a
public street unless a joint use/access agreement has been
approved by the City Attorney. This agreement shall provide
that it cannot be revoked or amended without the express
consent of the City. All streets and alleys shall be
dedicated and improved in accordance with this Article.
Development Approval shall not be granted where a development
will create dangerous or hazardous traffic conditions~
dctcrmined by thc City Engineer.
(c) A developer may be required to prepare a Traffic Impact
Study, to show how the design and installation of on-site and
off-site improvements will minimize identified traffic
impacts. The study shall be included with a development
application, in any of the following instances:
1. When requesting a Variance from the transportation
standardo specifications of this Code.
2.
When the City Engineer dctermincs that a land use will
generate 1,000 or more vehicle trips per day in
accordance with the Institute of Transportation
Engineers Trip Generation Informational Report.
3. When thc City Engineer determinco that the installation
of traffic signals may be warranted.
(d) The Director, in consultation with the Public Works Director,
may modify these specifications consistent with TransPlan and
the intent of this Code when existing conditions make their
strict application impractical or inconsistent with accepted
site planning or transportation planning principles.
-36-
.
.
. I
DIAGrw.l 32-A
Ordinance No. 54616,
Page 44 , '"
36' Street
>\
w
w z: ::.<:
::.<: z: C'. '-l
-l .< g ft ~ ':S
~.: -1 ~
~ w
w w ~ c
c ~
c:J l/)
V) ~
5~ 4'4- 5'~r 13' 13' r- 5~4' 1- 5'
.5' .51
55' R.O.W.
TYPICAL COLLECTOR STR~ET
CROSS SECTION
I (
,
> i
48' Street
~ w ~
w Z
~ Z g ~ -l
~ c;: ft -l ' ~
< -1 3:
~ w w
w w ::.::: a
c ::.::: .......
....... en V)
v). en
5~4"~ 5' 12' l'L'-!-- 12' ~ 5' 4~S'
.-, .5 r
. :>
671 R-0-14 .-.
.
TYPIC.n,L I1INOR ARTERLn,L STREET
CROSS SECTIm.1
37
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 45
TABLE 32-1
STREET RIGHT OF VAY AND CURB TO CURB vrDTH ST.\NDMIDS SPECIFICATIONS
(4) Functional Classification of Streets.
(b) MINOR ARTERIALS.
12. 2nd 3rd Strcet Ceuplet Pioneer Parkway West/East
(7) Centerline radii of mid-block curves generally shall not be less
than 500 feet on major arterials, 200 feet on minor arterials or
100 feet on other streets. Exceptions to these otandardo
may be granted when approved in accordance with Article 26,
Hillside Development Standards.
(10) Additional Right of Way and Street Improvements.
(b) Whenever a proposed land division or development will
increase traffic on the City street system and that
development has unimproved street frontage abutting a fully
improved street, that street frontage shall be fully improved
to City standards specifications.
I
I
(c) In subdivisions, an approved performance bond or suitable
substitute in a sufficient amount to ensure the completion of
all required improvements, including the installation of
sidewalks, prior to occupancy or Final Plat approval may be
required by the Directer or thc City Engineer and thc City
.\ ttorney.
(11) Where the City Engincer or the PUC determines that a development
adjacent to a railroad will result in the need-to improve a
railroad crossing, the developer shall bear the cost for such
improvements. When other property owners are benefited, other
equitable means of cost distribution may be approved by the City.
(12) Signs and Signals.
(b) Unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Director, ~the
developer shall be responsible for providing and installIng
all traffic control devices and street name signs. ~
Approved traffic control devices and street name signs shall
be indicated on the development plan and shall be appro~ed by
the City Engineer.
(c) Unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Director,
Wwhere thc City Engineer determincs that a proposed street
intersection will result in an immediate need for a traffic
signal, the developer shall bear the cost for such
improvements.
-38-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 46
(14) Except as approved as a Special Event or through the Encroachment
Permit process, no merchandise or equipment shall be stored or
displayed in the public right of way, including sidewalks.
32.030 STREETS STANDARDS - PRIVATE.
Private streets are permitted within Mobile Home Parks and singularly owned
developments of sufficient size to permit interior circulation. Construction
otandaras specifications for private streets shall be the same as for public
streets, unless otherwise approved through the Site Plan Review process. The
Approval Authority shall require a Homeowner's Agreement or other legal
assurances acceptable to the City Attorney for the continued maintenance of
private streets.
32.040 SIDEVALKS AND PLANTER STRIPS STANDARDS.
(1)
Sidewalks shall be constructed,
with City design stanElardo
Construction Specifications.
follows:
replaced or repaired in accordance
as oet forth in the Standard
Sidewalks shall be located as
(d) In new subdivisions in accordance with Article 35 of this
Code and as part of Site Plan Review in accordance with
Article 31 of this Code.
(2) All sidewalks shall be placed to conform to existing or planned
street grades as determined BY thc City Engineer.
(3) Sidewalk Widths - Major Arterials.
(a) 193' wide with flares along Main Street in the Downtown
Exception Area or as specified in the Downtown Planning Area.
(b) 7' vidc along Main Street eaot of 10th Street 10' wide along
South A Street in the Downtown Exception Area or as specified
in the Downtown Planning Area.
-39-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 47
(7) Planter Strips.
(a) In addition to planting required in accordance with Section
31.140 of this Code, planter strips ~ may be required. iR
thc design of a re~uirea side~alk as folloWSl Planter strips
are normally 4 feet in width.
1. Major artcrialo. None, cnccpt aD specificd in the
Do~ntovR Planning Area.
2. Minor arterialo and collcetera. A miRimum width of 4
fcct ohall bc re~uired.
3. Loeal otrecto.
a. PlaRter strips shall be optional on local streets
enccpt as moElified in Subocction b. belew.
b. Plantcr strips shall bc rc~uirca whcrc ncccooary to
maintain consiotcncy ~ith enioting planter otrips.
In this eaoe, the minimum 4 foot staRaara may be
varied to allew for conoiotency with c]ciotiRg
planter stripo.
(b) Planter strips shall be filled and surfaced with earth of
sufficient organic content to sustain plant materials and
shall be graded so as not to drain onto sidewalk surfaces.
Low ground cover, low shrubs and permitted street trees may
be planted in conformance with Section 32.070, Vision
Clearance StaRdards Areas. Bark mulch, ground cover, gravel
or brick may be used between plants and trees.
-40-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 48
32.050 STREET TREES STANDARDS.
In addition to required planting as specified in Section 31.140 of this Code,
street trees shall be' required for all developments approved under Type I,
Type II, III, or IV procedure in accordance with the otaRdards specifications
of this Section. Enceptieno from or modifieationo to thc strcet tree
rcquirement may be grantcd by thc City Engineer and the Director on a casc by
case basis if the location ef a propooed tree would serioHsly interfcre ~ith
utility lincs or traffic safety. The intent is to have tree-lined streets
throughout the City.
(6) Existing street trees shall be retained unless approved by thc
Director for removal during site development or in conjunction
with a street construction project. Any street tree removed shall
be replaced where possible.
(7) Existing street trees may meet the requirement for street trees
(i.e., approved trees with a minimum caliber of 2 inches) if
excavation or filling is minimized within the dripline of the
tree. Sidewalks of variable width, elevation and direction may be
used to save existing trees, subject to approval by the Director
and City Engineer.
(9) Street tree installation in the public right of way shall occur in
accordance with the Standard Construction Specifications. Where
there is no planter strip, street trees shall be placed in-the
required front or street sideyard setback.
32.060 STREET LIGHTING STANDARDS.
Street lighting design shall be in accordance with the Standard Construction
Specifications and shall bc appro~ed by the City EnginecF. The placement of
street lights shall be approved by the Public Works Director.
-41-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 49
32.070 VISION CLEARANCE AREAS ST~\RDS
(1) All corner lots shall maintain a clear triangular area adjacent to
intcroeeting otrects at each access to a public street and on each
corner of property at the intersection of two streets or a street
and an alley in order to provide adequate sight distance for
approaching traffic. The legs of the triangle shall bc 25 fcet in
lcngth as mcasured from thc intcroection of the pro~crty lines.
(2)
For loto abutting the interscction
lcgo of the triangle ohall be
interscction of the property line
right of way line.
of a otrcct with an alley, thc
12 1/2 feet mcasured from the
and thc cntensien of the alley
(J~) Except for items associated with utilities or publicly owned
structures such as poles and signs, and existing street trees, no
screen or other physical obstruction shall he permitted between 2
1/2 and 8 feet above the established height of the curb in the
triangular area. See Diagram 32-B.
(3) The clear vision area shall be in the shape of a triangle. Two
sides of the triangle shall be lot (property) lines for a distance
specified in this Subsection. Where the lot (property) lines have
rounded corners, the lines shall be measured by extending them in
a straight line to a point of intersection. The third side of the
triangle is a line across the corner of the lot joining the
non-intersecting ends of the other two sides. The following
measurements shall establish the clear vision areas:
TYPE OF INTERSECTION
MEASUREMENT ALONG
EACH LOT (PROPERTY)
LINE
Any Street
25 feet*
Any Alley
15 feet*
Any Driveway
10 feet*
* or larger, if warranted for safety reasons by the Public Works
Director.
-42-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 50
32.080 ACCESS AND DRIVEVAY SThNDARDS.
(1) Driveway Standards Specifications - General.
(a) Each property is entitled to one drivevay providing direct
an approved access to a public street or alley. Scparatc one
way ingress and egrcss drivc~ays and/or additional dri~e~ays
may be permittcd baoed upon a Traffic Impact Study or at the
diocretion ef the City Engincer.
(2) Driveway access to local streets is generally encouraged in
preference to access to streets of higher classification.
(a) Driveway access to arterial and collector streets ~ may
be permitted ~ if no reasonable alternative street access
existsT
(b) Drivevay acceos to cellccter strects shall bc permitted only
if no alternative street acceos cnists or where heavy use of
local streets is inappropriate due to traffic impacts in
residential areas.
(~~) Where a proposed development abuts an existing or proposed
arterial street, the development design and off-site
improvements shall minimize the traffic conflicts, anEl shall
direct traffic a,:ay from rcsidcntial arcao.
3. Additional improvements or design modifications
necessary to resolve identified transportation conflicts
idcntificd by the City Enginccr shall may be required.
-43-
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 51
TABLE 32-2
See Diagram 32-C
STANDMW DRIVEVAY DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS
DRIVEVAY DRlVEVAY TRANSITION DRIVEVAY
LAND VIDTH I-VAY VIDTH 2-VAY VIDTH THROAT DEPTH
USE MIN. MAX. MIN. MAX. MINIMUM
Single Family
and Duplexes n/a 12' 24'* 3' 3' n/a
Multi-family
Residential 16' 24' 35'* 5' 8' 18'**
. Commercial/
Public Land 16' 24' 35'* 8' 18'**
Industrial
16'
24'
35'* 8'
18'**
* Driveway widths and throat depths may be varied at the diocrction of the
City Engineer if no other reasonable alternative exists to accommodate on-site
development needs and traffic safety is not impaired.
** Measured from the curb line to the first stall.
.
-44-
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 52
TABLE 32-3
See Diagram 32-D
CURB RETURN DRIVEVAY DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS*
LAND USE
DRIVEVAY
VIDTH
MIN. MAX. **
DRIVEVAY
THROAT DEPTH
MINIHUH****
RADIUS OF
CURB
MIN. MAX. ***
Single family
and Duplexes
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mul ti-family
Residential
24'
30'
10'
20'
60'
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commercial!
Public Land
24'
35'
15'
~35'
60'
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industrial
24'
35'
15'
~35'
60'
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Curb return driveways shall be used where thc City Engincer has
dctermined that the driveway will serve more than 1,000 vehicle trips
per day in accordance with Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip
Generation Informational Report. Driveways that serve less than 1,000
vehicle trips per day shall be constructed with standard transitions.
** Wider driveways may be permitted if designcEl and stripeEl for merc than
2 traffie lancs to accommodate traffic demands and/or to improve
traffic safety.
*** Greater curb radii maybe permitted where high volumes of large trucks
are anticipated.
**** Measured from the face of the curb to the first stall or aisle.
-45-
r.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 53
TABLE 32-4
MINIMUM SEPARATIONS BETVEEN A STANDARD DRIVEVAY AND THE NEAREST INTERSECTION
CURB RETURN ON THE SAME SIDE OF THE STREET. *
LAND USE STREET TYPE
ARTERIAL COLLECTOR LOCAL
Industrial 200' 200' 150'
Commercial! 200' 100' 75'
Public Land
Multi-family 200' 100' 75'
Residential
Single-family 200' 50' 30'
Residential
and Duplexes
* Distances may be reduced at the discretion of the City Engincer in the
following circumstances:
1. Access is from a one~way street.
2. The driveway is marked "right turn entrance only", and designed to prevent
two-way traffic.
3. The driveway is marked "exit only" and is designed to prevent left turns.
4. In cases where an existing lot and/or use makes compliance with these
specifications unreasonable, a new driveway or an existing driveway
required to be relocated by this Code shall be placed at the furthest
point from the intersection curb return, considering both safety and
internal circulation requirements of the development.
(c) The mInImum offset between two local streets that do not have
left turn storage needs shall be 150 feet. The minimum
offset between two streets other than local streets shall be
determined by the City Enginecr Public Works Director.
Tables 32-5 and 32-6 discuss minimum offset standards
specifications where left turn storage needs are necessary.
In all cases, the minimum distances shall be the offset of
the centerlines of side streets or driveways. These minimums
may be increased at thc discrction of thc City EnginceF based
on traffic safety considerations.
-46-
,. ~"
.
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 54
32.090 BIKEVAYS AND PEDESTRIAN TRAILS STANDARDS.
32.100 SANITARY SEVERS STAND..'!.RDS.
32.110 STORM DRAINAGE STANDARDS.
32.120 UTILIT~ES STANDARDS.
35.090 FINAL PLAT DRAFTING REQUIREMENTS.
(1) The proposed Final Plat, shall contain the following information:
(m) Lots in subdivisions shall be numbered consecutively. Where
a plat io an aadition to a plat prcviouoly reeoraea, numbcro
of lota ohall begin ~ith number "1".
(2) Accompanying Data.
(f) A statement of water rights.
-47-
1 .~
.
.
.
· Ordinance No. 5466
Page 55
37.030 EXEMPT SIGNS OR OPERATIONS.
The following signs or operations shall be exempt from the Sign Permit
process, but shall adhere to the standards listed below:
(~~) Direetional sSigns, indicating traffic movements onto or within a
premise, not exceeding 6 square feet of surface area and 4 feet in
height. The number of signs permitted may be determined by the
Development Review Committee.
Renumber remaining Subsections
(9~) Temporary Signs.
(a)
Temporary signs and
removed within ~ 2
removal, a temporary
of 6 months.
support structures, if any, shall be
months of the date of erection. Upon
sign shall not be replaced for a period
37.040 PROHIBITED SIGNS.
The following signs shall be prohibited:
(9) Except for City approved transient merchants and special events,
portable signs including but not limited to sandwichboards and
readerboards.
(910)Other Signs.
-48-
~ ,(;1.\-
.
.
.
.
Ordinance No. 5466
Page 56
DEVELOPMENT CODE FEE SCHEDULE***
TYPE I REVIEW
ITEM
REVIEWED
Formal Interpretation of the Dcvelopment Codc
Home Occupation
Barbed Wire Fence
FP Overlay District Development
Single Family Dwelling
H Historic Overlay District
Site Plan Review - Plot Plan/Type I
Site Plan Review - Minor Modification
Time Extension For Certain Improvements
Lot Line Adjustment
Partition - Final Map
Subdivision - Final Plat
Mobile Home Park - Space Line Adjustment
Mobile Home - Temporary Residential Use
Mobile Home - Commercial/Industrial Districts
Signs
Tree Felling
Solar Access Guarantee
PROPOSED
FEE
S 25
25
No Add. Fee
No Add. Fee
No Add. Fee
No Add. Fee
100
50
50
50
No Fee
100+51l0t
25
25
100
Based on Value
No Fee
100
CODE
REFERENCE
4.020
16.100
18.110/20.090.
27.040
29.040
30.040
31. 030
31.100
31.110
33.020
34.080
35.080
36.020
36,.120
36.150/36.180.
37.020
38.020
39.020
TYPE II REVIEW
ITEM
REVIEWED
Formal Interpretation of the Development Code
Minor Variance
HD Overlay District Development (A)
HS Overlay District Development
H Historic Overlay District
Site Plan Review - Type II
Partition - Preliminary Plan
Subdivision - Tentative Plan (C)
Mobile Home Park
PROPOSED
FEE
$ 75
$ 75
200
(B)
100
200+10/acre
200
250+1O/lot
250+1O/space
CODE
REFERENCE
4.020
11.020
26.040
28.040
30.040
31.030
34.020
35.020/36.030.
36.030
-49-
q.l
ATTACHMENT B
BEFORE THE PLANNING COHHISSION
OF TilE
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT]
OF THE SPRINGFIELD ]
DEVELOPMENT CODE TO 1..
AMEND ARTICLES 2, 3, J
4, 1 6, 18, 1 9, 2 0 , ,J
21, 25, 29, 31,32, )
35, 3 7 PJ~D APPENDIX 1]
Jo. No. 88-11-192
RECOMMENDATION TO
THE CITY COUNCIL
NATURE OF THE APPLICATION
As part of the Second Annual Update of the SDC, the City is proposing
to amend portions of ARTICLE 2 DEFINITIONS; ARTICLE 3 DEVELOPMENT
APPROVAL It.ND L.LJ~D USE DECISION PROCEDURES; ARTICLE 4, INTERPRETATION;
ARTICLE 16 RSSIDENTIAL DISTRICTS; J..RTICLE 18 COM~E?CIAL DISTRICTS;
ARTICLE 19 3K~:U BOOTH-}~ELLY MIXED USE DISTRICT; J..RTICLE 20 LMI, HI
A..t-JD SHI DISTRICTS; J..RTICLE 21 SPECIAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT;
ARTICLE 25 VG VILLAMETTE GREENVAY OVERLAY DISTRICT; ARTICLE 29 UF~10
URBANIZABLE FRINGE OVERLAY DISTRICT; ,ARTICLE 31 SITE PLAN REVIEll
STANDARDS; ARTICLE 32 PUBLIC AND PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT ?TANDARDS;
ARTICLE 35 SUBDIVISION STANDARDS; ARTICLE 37 SIGN STANDARDS; AND'
APPENDIX 1 DEVELOPMENT ~O~~ FEES. ~
1. On Novembe.r 11, 1988,. the folloving amendment application vas
accepted:
City of Springfield Jo. No. 88-11-192 (See Attachment 1).
2. The application vas initiated and submitted {n accordance with
Section 3.050 of the Springfield Development Code. Timely and
sufficient noti~e of the public hearing, pursuant to Section
14.030 of the Springfield Development Code, has been provided See
Attachment 2).
( 3. On January 4, 1989, a public hearing to amend the Springfield
Development Code vas held. The Planning and Building Department
staff notes and recommendation together with the testimony and
submittals of the persons testifying at that hearing have been
considered and are part of the record of this proceeding (See
Attachment 3).
CONCLUSION
On the basis of this record, the requested amendment application is
consistent vith the criteria of Section 8.030 of the Springfield
Development Code. This general finding is supported by the specific
findings of fact an conclusion (See Attachment 4).
-1-
-s2-
.~\ I \
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission hereby recommends the City Council to amend
the Springfield Development Code as in"dicat,ed abMJvet...,(, .
---, \ \/ V' i i'
. ....j "'--.: L ~.
ATTEST
AYES:
NOES:
Planning Commission Chairperson
.s-
o
ABSENT: (
A~STAIN: 0
...~.:
-2-
~3
ATTACH;ENT 1
tfi
'tl .
~t:]'. 1\
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
PLPJ~NING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
225 FIFTH STREET
SPRINGFIELD, OREGON 97477
PHONE: (503) 726-3759
.11 J) en
. \l)
I
......
-
r
-..
~
rJ
a a
> >
.~ ~
~ t:'J
:> U)
n c:
n t:'
t:'J :::
"'0 H
~ +-3
~ +-3
0 t:j
0
ADO PTI ON OR AHENDHENr O'F REFINE.MENT PLAN
TEXT, REFI~XEN1' PLAN DIAGRAMS AND
DEVELOpMENT CODE TEXT APPLICATION
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL
so c 2",-r; At/f'lVIr'- '..'eOA-"i"E A/v1@-J!J.'rJ(~ f0477CrJf
OF SO C A2:fl C L,ef .2 3 4- /6 I S I q :2. c; :2 I :2 r- :2. 9
3~ ] 7 /~fV.tJ /t"Ppc:tJvlX' I' Oe;:VE3-0p/"1GNr CO(/EE t==e:e.f
APPLICANT NAME
ern q:: S,P~/,..JtirF'e-o
ADDRESS
;2.:>-r- FIFTH
SI'P./r-J<: FI eLl')
~
\ ) T12- e=:r
OR 9 )Lf"")l
PHONE: 72~ .J7S-'1
OVNER NAME
ADDRESS
PHONE:
THE UNDERSIGNED ACKN01JLEDGES /J:HAT 'THE INFORMATION IN TBIS APPLICATION
CORRECT AND ACCURATE. !/Z / I. .
A~PLICANT SIGNATURE . 1/crrtl/;/..!uav;;t ~
I / "'0
IF THE APPLICANT IS OTHEK THAN THE OVNER, THE O~~ER HEREBY GRANTS PERMISSION ~
FOR THE APPLICANT TO ACT IN THEIR BEHALF. a
O\lNER SIGNATURE
PLEASE ATT/-.CH THE NAME, ADDRESS, PHONE NUMBER AND SIGNATURE OF ANY ADDITIONAL
PROPERTY O\n~El\.
OVER
~4
c.-
o
C::
~
"'"
>
~
z
o
"- -...
-:-- ':'
'\.J }.J
}J to
Ct) 0:)
(\)
:> ~
(') t:j
(") (")
~ ~
"'0 ' H
t-3 <:
~ ~
a a
t:' t:'
.-< ><
I S 10') ICJ
~ ~.
:;:;:l
t:J
(")
~
H.
"'0
.-.3
Z
o
(
I
~; ~.11
~i:;" I.~
THE APPLICATION PACKET
A COMPLETE APPLICATION CONSISTS OF: .
1. A VRITTEN EXPLft~ATION OF TEE PROPOSAL.
2. BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAN APPROVE AN ADOPTION OR AMENDMENT OF REFINEMENT
PLAN TEXT, REFINEMENT PLAJ~ DIAGRAMS AND DEVELOPMENT CODE TEXT -REQUEST, THERE MUST BE
INFORMATION 'SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT VEICH ADEQUATELY SUPPORTS THE REQUEST. IF
INSUFFICIENT OR. UNCLELl\' DATA IS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT, THERE IS A GOOD CHANCE
THAT THE REQUEST VILL BE DENIED OR DELAxLD. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT YOU HI~E A
PROFESSIONAL PLANNER OR UND USE ATTORNEY TO PREPARE YOUR FINDINGS:
[] CONFORMM~CE VITH THE METRO PLAN;
[] CONFORMN~CE VITH APPLICABLE STATE STATUTES; AND
[] CONFORMANCE VITH STATE-VIDE PLANNING GOALS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RULES.
3. THE FILING FEE - A FILING FEE MUST ACCOMPAN~ ALL APPLICATIONS. THERE IS A $500.00
FEE FOR THIS REQUEST (TYPE IV REVIEV). APPLICATION FEES ARE NON-REFUNDABLE.
sf
',c.,!, :,;',-:,,;"',.,': "'...",...-' Y",
.... ..'
, ;;'; :': ;/;H:;..; ~:' .:< ",'::.',":,: <;", i..'
~:' . . ......;,. ~. :;' . -.J~ .'-\:>
.~~ .:-:~: . . '. " .......
Affidavit of PubW6ation
".'. "'~;" NOTICE OF,'; ",!. .... "
_ ;:.:'. PUBLIC HEARING;'-:'" ,"
~;::'.""t'[""""~h':arN~'!t:o:,"~...r.;t~""!I'ltC~hC:e:e;,O"p:.F.,,~'I~~TY:p""":'r'ihS'n ~Pe~gLAr~le~:i'e'b:r"dJ',I';'~''':"'':'''~I:v!'ia'e'n'tn......."'"',",,',:,,:...,,::,,..c...,,',":',.!,....,"'.,"'~..,'.'..'.,,:,.,',...,.,.:.,.'...',',:'...:.,:...,.":.",.."...,.'.',...,:.,..,.,.....,,,',.,:...-'.,..':""',.,,,. · .,. .. . . . ... . ., .. . . ....:....:.:. ... be,ng duly .w~r~ - .
:in~u~cm~~~~!~; ~~I ~~~:-,; ....,..... :;';::::i::~:.,;:t~~~}e1~{~?;b~!~c~i~Li~rl~~~1.in{~.~~.t".i:;.~;
nesday, January 4, '989, at by ORS '93.0'0 and '93.020; printed and pub1is~ed at Springfield in the
7:30 p.m. in the City Council
Chambers oflhe Springfield aforesaid county and state: that lhe, ,.' .' , '.
City Hall. 225 Filth S\reet~" NotiCti':of' Pu, blic" He,.aring
on the following, land, use '
. proposal.. ,. , ", Springfieid P limning.. Comini~sion
" Amendments to ':, : C . t' f'... . f . ld'
,,' ,:. the Springfield '," ,'... ,_' ..' 1. Y 0,: ~prJ.ng 1.~:' . ' .'. ' '
Procedures;}:(Artlcle:r 4';', In~ j;!3Y
terpreJation;~t!t' Artic\l;:5:L 16
Residej:\ti~'-J),istrjC.ts;' Art.~C1~
18~tConunefl:ial~. Districts;
>Ariicli'~19~BKM\f';i; Booth
)(~I)Y;l~MI~.ed;:!~" ,~$e~'.pisiriC:t
~~I~'e~ 2O~LM.I.:i~I~,,~n~t Sl1
,ln~ust~i~h~ig,i.1St!ic.ts;'(ArtiC L
,2lJl~9~.~~p',e.~J~'i'UQh~{.ln
dustnat ,lstncl:~Artlcle1+
UE"" 1 rtfanizablelFrin"
~rtislticfji:('Ai1ICle~~ ~ 1
,suet Revle~ sia'i'idards1
MiCl ~ ieu'U-aantfP 'iraf
,im'.-.iove....'."'... '"'Sfand~irds
Xrf.cl Sub~iyiSio'
sfiiidar c'e~3ta:Sr'"
Siandif s: ~iA>5};'e~dr 0
, "~""" .. ",,",.4,.~;.,' , ' -,..' PP.."..
2~1~~lQhPI~.~t~deJ:Ie..~'s~.:
i~~f......~,~" .$.'f p'rop~sa.lb.l.' s~..c..
tl~~..!.~~. b)'~,!t:'.e~"fl~nnin
CO~n:!J;5sion~!~7~ the:~ Co.m
mis,~icm:.' shall reconvene 0 ,;'''.
January 5. 1989/""":~;","",,.:,i,:,';;;r;:r.F:"<.
, . & ~._"'.I'''lath~''''''
:l"Dee....\'~. ......... .'
,';~ ..," .... .,.:".
,~ :. _.-...... .
.,..;:...
.." '~-:. ,
S6
: ..: ....
ATTACHME,NT3-
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
December 27, 1988
TO:
Planning Commission Members
COMMISSION
TRANSMITTAL
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
Greg Vintero,"'d, Planning and Building Director ;<0,.))
Gary H. Karp, Associat~"Planner 6/ 1
SUBJECT: Springfield Development Code Second Annual Update (Jo. No. 88-11-192)
ISSUE
Vhen the Springfield Development Code vas adopted in May of 1986, there vas an
agreement that the Code would be reviewed and updated on an annual basis. The draft
for your reviev is the second annual update.
DISCUSSION
Many of the proposed changes are housekeeping in nature or addres~ changes required
by recent court cases or state agency regulations.
The key issues are:
1. FORMAL INTERPRETATIONS ARE PROPOSED TO GO FROM TYPE I REVIE\1 TO TYPE II REVIE\1.
The interpretation of zoning ordinance provisions has been vieved by local
governments as an administrative function. Host ordinances provide for an
interpretation ~y th~ Planning Director. The person making a request is the
only person.. gi v,.en notice and an opportuni ty to appeal the in terpreta t ion. This
traditionil practice ~as been brought into question by the recent Land Use Board
of Appeals de~ision:K~nkel v. Vashington County (LUBA decision, 1988). The
formal interpretation ~ro~ess h~s been changed from a Type I process to a Type
II process so th~t ~bUtting property ovners can be notified and the City can be
in compliance vith the Kunkel decision.
2. DAY CARE. These reV1Slons reflect the changes made to ORSduring the last
legislative session concerning Day Care Homes and Day Care Group Homes. These
facilities are to be treated as single family homes. The Planning Commission is
proposing that Day Care Centers be revieved under Discretionary Use standards on
local and collector streets in the Lov Density Residential District.
3. SITE PLAN REVIEV MINIMUM DEVELOPMENT STAND~~DS. Staff has drafted language that
reflects the Chamber of Commerce's proposal. Any language revision made during
the public hearing process viII be added prior to City Council reviev.
4. SIDEVALKS IN SUBDIVISIONS. The installation of sidevalks has been add~d here
because of the City Council's recent decision to have sidevalks installed during
subdivision street construction.
~7
~. -..>~- .;.;. .J' .~. .
Page 2
5. TEMPORl.J\Y AND PORTABLE SIGNS. Temporary signs are proposed to be limited to 2
months rather than 6 months. In addition, "replacement of the same temporary
sign cannot occur for 6 months. Portable sand~ich board and reader board signs,
although they are not alloved, are being added to the prohibited signs list.
6. SIGN DISTRICT ADDITION. A ne~ "1-5 Oriented Shopping Center" sign sub-d:~trict
has been proposed.. The League of ~omen Voters have expres~ed their oppo~~:icn
to this proposed amendme~t (See Attachment A).
NOTE 1 : Recently adopted' DEQ regulations for ....as te tire storage \,'h i ch .....ere
discussed at the December 7 '\j,lork sessio:lvill not be included in this
update. Further study by staff is required. \1aste tire storage '\l'i 11
either be a separate amendment or part of the third annual update in late
1989 (See Attachment B).
NOTE 2: The folloving amendments have been added since the December 7 vork session:
An amendment has been made to Section 25.050 concerning the
"intensification of use" consistent ',d th OAR 660-20-005 (See Page 29).
In addition to the Minimum Development Standards of Article 31, other
portions of Article 31 have been added as "housekeeping" items (See Pa&-:s
30, 31, 33 and 34). Finally, due to a revision of ORS made during the last
legislative session concerning the issue of vater rights in land divisions,
a statement of vater rights vill be required as part of final plat approval
(See Page 47).
DESIRED ACTION
Approval and recommendation to the City Council of these proposals, or a modified
set of proposals.
There will be a vorksession with the City Council in late January or early February
and a public hearing as soon as practical afterwards.
50
-. .."
,;~..: ~':... :- ,.- -. "-"" --
~~::,i~~~_:'~':'~',"'~~:f;.~' ~..:i;-;~;..Y~ <:'~~-.: ~>.:< :;.,-
_::,..,~t .~::;::;'::/::::'{~~,-.". ...;.,; ". ~ "
.REGULAR SES~J.QN" ITEM'i
MINUTES [j:~ ~Osf t,h8f., Id
IIIL... . pnng Ie
r~ o..--;~~L<-/J
c1-I-P1 ~
--
Planning Commissil
~IEETING ROOH #2
SPRINGFIELD CITY HALL
225 FIFTH STREET
rl~: /"..0 ~:':<.-.:~ .'~
;~,~~~ ~
~IED!\ E SDA Y
jAr~UARY 4, 1989
5 : 30 P. ,."
PRESENT:
C 0 mm; s s ; 0 n e r s - Jon 2 t h 2. n S; e 9 1 e, J 2. C k Gis c h e 1, J e sse I~ a i Ii e, G :" e 9
Shaver, and Tom Atkinson. Eruce Berg has been appointed to the City
Council so his position is vacant. (He did attend the Work Session
but d; d not en t e r i n tot h e d i s c u s S ; 0 n .) Co mm; s s ion e r L y n d a Ray b 0 u 1 d
was absent.
Staff - Planning and Building Director Greg Winterowd, Development
Code Administrator Greg Mott, Associate Planner Gary Karp, Assistant
Planner Susie Smith, Economic Development Manager John Tamulonis,
Historical Coordinator Dia~a De3ey, and Assistant City Attorney Joe
Leahy.
Media - Jim Boyd of the Register Guard.
DINNER MEETING - 5:30-6:00
:
The Work Session began at 5:30 with an informal dinner meeting. During the
dinner meeting, Historical Coordinator Diane DeBey was introduced, and John
Tamulonis updated the Commission on the status of the depot project.
Tamulonis said interest has existed for a long time to relocate and renovate the
depot. He said more recently.strong community support has developed. He
discussed the Historical Commission's role;n the project, the, cost
considerations, and the pro~ess of demolition, if it becomes necessary.
Tamulonis d,isc'uss.ed who would use the building and included as possibilities the
Chamber of:Commercet:Willamalane, and performing arts groups. Siegle' said he
would provide Tamulonis with a letter supporting the use of the depot by
performing arts groups.,
Commissioner Maine asked about funding.. Tamuloni~ sai~. all but about 5100,000
i s a va i 1 a b 1 e for the pro j e c't; he, 1'; s t e d po s sib 1 est ate and n at; 0 n a 1 fun d ; n 9
sources. Tamulonis'ended.~is depot presentation by indicating he would probably
be back to the Commission for some kind of decision in February.
On another subject, Mr. Tamul on is as ked the Comm; s s i on to appo; nt a new
representative to the Community Development Advisory Committee, the group that
d i s t rib ute s the b 1 0 c k 9 ran t mo n e y . ( B r u c e Be r g \01' a s the P 1 ann i n 9 Co mm i s s ion
SPRINGFIELD PLANNING CO~1ISS]ON WORK SESSION
January 4, 1989 - 5:30 p.m.
Page 1
~-1
representative, but he will no longer hold the position since his appointment
to the City Council.)
\,! 0 R K S E S S ION
A. PRESEr~TATION FROI" SPRINGF1ELD DO\..'tHO\,,:H hSSOCJATI01~ AI~D CHAI.iBER OF cor''i!.'IERCE
Bob Smith, Springfield Chamber of Commerce, said the Chamber Land Use
Committee had met earlier in the day. They stand by the four subsections
of 31.040 that were rewritten during meetings earlier. He said there is
some feeling on. the Land Use Committee that the costs should be spread out
for more than two years; he suggested three to five years. Smith said the
businesses he has dealt with are concerned not about the standards but
about the limited time with which they have to meet the I'hnimum Development
Standards.
Mike Lewis, president of the Springfield Downtown Association, said they
have held several meetings that have included representatives from the
Chamber, the Planning Commission, the City Council and various businesses.
He said the goals of theSDA are similar to those of the City in that
everyone wants to see improvement. It is the SDA's position that the best
way for the improvements to happen is to let themarketp12ce take its
course. Lewis said the Minimum Development St2ndards have been tea
inflexible and are causing problems. He said the SDA supports a two year
moratorium on the change of use trigger that sets into motion the Minimum
Development Standards. He said Springfield has been changing in recent
years, and the changes will come voluntarily without th~ need for MOS.
-
Stu BurQe, board member of the Springfiela Downtown Association, said the
Code is counterproductive to the goals of the;City. He said, while he does
support standards that deal directly with health, safety and electrical
issues, he would like to see a window during the next couple of years that
allows for voluntary compliance.
Commissioner Shaver asked Lewis to be specific about what changes have
taken place in Springfield in recent years. Lewis said businesses have'
improved oa~heir own. He said he knows of several businesses that are
planningto.e'xp_>~nd in the near future. The cost of these expansions plus
meeting MDS'imm~diately are too cost-prohibitive.
Commissioner Shaver asked whether the Code and the MDS requirement had
anything to do with recent improvements. Mr. Burge said no, 'the
improvements were brought on by economic opportunities and not by the Code.
Discussion followed concerning how the City could be sure the minimum
standards would be met.
Commissioner Atkinson asked who should be responsible for completing the
MDS requirements if they are not voluntarily completed when the two years
SPRINGFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION
January 4, 1989 - 5:30 p.m.
Page 2
GO
are up. Mr. Burge indicated that the property owner should be responsible
after the two year moratorium.
Richard Carlscn~ member of the Springfield Do\.mto\.m Association Board, said
he supports MDS and has supported it since it was put in the Code. He said
what he did not support ,"-'as the trigger mechanism. He said the trigger
should not be change of use, but it should be when there is a major remodel
done on the site.
t,~ r. L e vii s, s aid i tis the SO A I sin ten t t hat t his m 0 r a to r i u m g 0 i n toe f f e c t
for all of Springfield and not just the downtown area.
B. FII~AL REVIEW OF DEVELOPI''lENT CODE ISSUES
Mr.Winterowd said there has been a special section added to the Code to
deal with signs in the South Gateway Commercial area. He discussed the
current sign Code and the proposed changes.
Martin Vahtra, representing General Growth of California, talked about the
number of signs that would be allowed if General Growth followed the one
sign per building approach of the curr:nt Code. He said one large
presentation would be much better than the possible 150 individual signs.
He pointed out that at the time the Code was put together, the sign portion
was not drafted with the needs ora large shopping mall in mind. He talked
about the importance or having a large sign facing 1-5 as a marketing tool
and described the proposed 200 square foot electronic reader board. He
discussed the shopping center's other sign requirements including wall
signs, th~ monument sign, and the primary entrance signs.
" ...
Sally Weston of the League of Women Voters said the current sign code was
written as it is to acknowledge previously existing signs in Areas A and
B. Discussion followed on this point. Weston said the League's position
was that 30 feet was sufficient to meet the mall's sign height
requirements. She said Valley River Center has not required a high, large
sign to be successful. She said the League was concerned not only about
the height but also about safety issues relating to the electronic reader
board flashing messages to passing cars on 1-5. She had no statistics to
back up this safety issue claim.
c.
ADJOURN TO REGULAR SESSION
SPRINGfIELD PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION
January 4, 1989 - 5:30 p.m.
Page 3
61
i~;-~.~;~~~~rG'(~;:,~.;c~~::,.::;:;i.;::.:.,.,c_"
- . ..... ~" .' .. ~
. -~ - "...<, 1:; .' ,'~.:'/~1~"~~:,,,: ":" >:.:.~
c . REGULAR SESSION, ITEM #:
MINUTES ~:~ ~~:i~~fjeld
r"ru/,,'~ o.'1?-p-'\.~ L<--:/
:1_/_04
C., e ( C~~
----- . . .
Plcnnir,g Ccmrr:lss;c
t-'iEE11~~G ROOI~ #2
S p ~ 11 ~ G FIE L 0 C 11 Y HAL L
225 FIFTH STREET
.- ~ ". ' r' .',
J '~J..J.." , -C /. . .: < -. . .J....~ . L.L...: ./"'...,
,-. , /. -..:......-
; -~ l. .' ~ r1'\..J-L:z:...--..
~: Co ~: ~\ E ~, ~;;, y
~;..r,U~.RY 4, ) 92?
5 : 30 ? !.L
Pi\ESENT:
Comm~~s;oners - JOi\c:.h2:l S~~gle, Jcck Gischel, Jesse 1'~a1i:e, ::'eg
Shaver, and Tom Atk~nson. ~ruce Berg has been appointed to the C~ty
Council so his position is vacant. (He did attend the ~ork Session
but did not enter into the di scuss i on.) Commi ss i oner Lynda Rc:ybould
was absent.
Staff - Planning and Building Director Greg Winterowd, Development
Code Administrator Greg Matt, Associate Planner Gary Karp, Assistant
P 1 a!'1:l e r S ~ s i e S m i t h, . E con 0 IT: i c De vel 0 p:n e n t ,.', a n a 9 e r J 0 h n Tam u Ion is,
". · - .: A -' c ' ~ - .;. "", . - - ..., - .. - -,,.J'. . ~ - t r'.. , · .. ,.. 1-" - 'J '\ - -
t1 '1 S L ... r i '... Co I 0 0 rei ;'1 Co \.. C r L.i1 Co ii : _: :: ::; : y, Co n ~ h S S is\.. Co fl \" 1 .. Y ,.... I. 101 I I ; .' v U '::
Lee-hy.
Media - Jim Boyd of the Register Guard.
Tamulonis said interest has existed for a long time to relocate and renovate the
depot. He sa i d more recant ly strong com;nun i ty support has developed. ,He
discussed the Historical Commission's role in the project, the cost
consideratio~s, and the pro~ess of demolition, if it becomes necessary.
Tamulonis,discussedwho"would use the building and included as poss'ibilities the
Chamber of .Commerce, 'h'illamalane, and performing arts groups. Siegle said he
would provide Tamulonis with a letter supporting the use of the depot by
performing arts grou~s.
Commissioner Maine asked about fundin.g., Tamulonis sa;9. all but about 5100,000
is . a va i 1 ab 1 e for the pro j e c't; he 1 i s t e d po s sib 1 est ate and n at ion a 1 fun din g
sources. Tamulonis ended his depot presentation by indicating he would probably
be back to the Commission for some kind of decision in February.
On another subject, Mr. Tamulonis asked the Commission to appoint a new
representative to "the Community Development Advisory Committee, the group that
d i s t rib ute s the b 1 0 c k 9 ran t m 0 n e y. ( B J" U C e Berg \\' a s the P 1 ann i n 9 Co mm i s s ion
S?Rll~GFlELD PL~'~N1I~G C01'iI1ISS10N \-,'ORK SESS1or~
JcnUct-Y ~, 1929 - 5:30 p.m.
Pc~e 1
{;3
representative, but he will no longer hold the position since his appointment
to the City Council.)
\-.1(: :. < 5 E S S } C'J
A. FRESErn~.T10q FROt.., S?~H~GFl ElD =='...'nc:\-,"~ .':S:,OC}.:,T1G:J {,;,'~D C~{.;.!-',SEK OF CCt"d,';t~C:
Sob Srrlith, Springfield ChcmJcr of CO;-;-i~erce~ said the Chamber' Land Use
Committee had met earlier in the day. They stand by the four subsections
of 31.0~0 that were rewritten d~ring meetings earlier. He said there is
some feeling on the Land Use Co~~ittee that the costs should be spread out
for more than t~'o years; he suggested three to five years. Smith said the
bus i n es s e she h c. s de a 1 t \\' i t h are' c c nee r n e d not a b 0 u t the s tan d a r d s but
a b 0 u t the 1 i iT! it: d t i ii! e wit h \-.' hie h the y h a \' e tOr.I e e t the I'i i n i ril U m 0 eve lop ii, e n t.
Standards.
Mike Lewis, president of the Springfield Downtown Association, said they
.have held several meetings that have included representatives from the
Chamber, the Planning Commission, the City Council and various businesses.
He said the goals of the SDA are similar to those of the City in that
everyone wants to see improvement. It is the SDA's position that the best
\>iay for the improvements to hep~en is to let the Tr,c.lak:tpl ace taKe its
course. Levds said tl":e Minir,'Jm Developrrerlt ,Standards have bee~ tC'J
inflexible and are causing problems. He said the SDA supports a two year
moratorium on the change of use trigger that sets into motion the Minimum
Development Standards. He said Springfield has been changing in recent
years, and the chang~s will come voluntarily without th~ need for MOS.
.
Stu Burae, board member of the Springfiela Downtown Association, said the
Code is counterproductive to the goals of the:City. He said, while he does
support standards that deal directly with health, safety and electrical
issues, he would like to see a window during the next couple of years that
allows for voluntary compliance.
Comm; ss i oner Shaver asked Lewi s to be spec; fi c about, what changes have
taken place in Springfield in recent years. Lewis said businesses have
improved on their own. He said he knows of several businesses that are
planning to expand.in the near future. The cost of these expansions plus
meeting MDS immediately are too cost-prohibitive. I
Commissioner Shaver asked whether the Code and the MDS requirement had
any th i n g to do wit h r e c e n t imp r 0 v e me n t s . t,~ r . Bur g e s aid no, the
improvements\-,tere brought on by economic opportunities and not by the Code.
Discussion followed concerning how the City could be sure the minimum
standards would be met.
Commissioner Atkinson asked who should be responsible for completing the
MDS requirements if they are not voluntarily completed when the two years
SPRINGFIELD PLAr~NING COr'11.nSSlOr~ \~ORK SESSION
January 4, 1989 - 5:30 p.m.
Page 2
{jt
are up. Mr. Burge indicated that the property owner should be responsible
after the t'fl'Q year lTloratorium.
R,'ch'-l-d (-l-lc.r", ~-~,h-'l- c': th- c-!.:,..,...::_;..J D"'''.'o'4r.,,'n "c,c."'Ir-,'c..t','c.n Cr,~l-rl c::~:j
c: c: _ "-' . I:, ':' II I..; t:' I I I '= _ _ ! I 1'= 1 ,-= I IJ ....' y, I I l .... ., . I -. _ _ \. ...... . I L,.. \.. ...., J" _ _ ,
h ....... '"-,- .,..' h' "ro-.o' .-.~~. :r- 't ".S .....,. ,'r. .~:::J (rrie ,',::) ,-:d
I.e SUPf-'OI \.S I'j...,l~ c..,.] ICS ~,ur-~Cl .';:".; I.. S II'l.-? 1 ...a ,.L.L I ~I;~ u.... . r.,," _c I
v,' hat he did n C' L Sup p 0 r t 'fI' C: s :. he t r i ~ ~ ~ r mE c h 2 n i s i.1 . He 5 c i d the t rig S E r
s h 0 U 1 d not bee h a n 9 e 0 f use, b'.1 tit s h 0 'J 1 d be v.' h E: nth ere i sam a j 0 r r e jjj 0: e 1
done en the site.
r.~ r. Levi i s s aid i tis the SeA' sin ten t t hat t his r.-,o rat 0 r i U i.l go i n toe f f E: C t
for all of Springfield and not just the downtown area'.
B. F 11~~L REV 1 EW CF JEVELOP!'~ENT (0:,( 1 ~ SUr: 5
Mr. Winterowd said there has been a special section added to the Code to
deal with signs in the South GateYl'ay Comrr,ercial area. He discussed the
current sign Code and the proposed changes.
Martin Vahtr2, representing General Growth of California, talked about the
number of sicns that would be allowed if General Growth followed the one
S .;: a n' p : r b' ' '"',' 1 a' ~ .., ,., - P !'I t. 0 - c h ~ r"' ~ ;.. e c .. ,- ,- : Yi + (" 0 dew ~ , a ,. ,..; C' ". : 1 ~ '''\..- &:l
. I ... WI II..... c:,... C \.; "'., -..'I_J.... _ . )1... _ ..,. ,_ .~I_
presentation wculd ~e much better than the possible 150 individ~al signs.
He pointed OLt th2t c.t the tirT,e the Coce ""as put tO~EthE:r, the sign pcrt1G!1
was not drafted ~ith the needs of a large shopping ~all in mind. He talked
about the importance of having a large sign facing 1-5 as a marketing tool
and described the proposed 200 square foot electronic reader board. He
discussed the shopping center'.s ~ther sign requirements including wall
signs, the~ monument sign, and the'primary entrance signs.
. ..
Sallv Weston of the League of Women Voters said the current sign code was
written as it is to acknowledge previously existing signs in Areas A and
B. Discussion followed on this point. Weston said the League"s position
was that 30 feet was sufficient to meet the mall's sign height
requirements. She said Valley River Center has not required a high, large
sign to be.successful. She said the League was concerned not only about
the height but also about safety issues relating to the electronic reader
board flashing messages to passing cars on 1-5. She had no statistics to
back up this safety issue claim.
C. ADJOURN TO REGULAR SESSION
SPRINGFIELD PLAr~NJNG COr,jf.jISSION \..'ORK SESSION
January 4, 1989 - 5:30 p.m.
Page 3
bS-
MINUTES '~~~:c':o~Of t,he" p~~~c.)~~;~
~ 'AY SpnngTleld Icrn:ng cmmlss:c
y-,.~ .
I '-A'-"_L.. .
rL-a LL:.: !^t..r.,,~ .:~
i'~ L ';: L....c...; "or~.c:::-.
COUHC I L CHAIJ1BERS
SPRINGFIELD CITY HALL
225 FIFTH STREET
WEDI~ESDft.Y
j.4NUARY 4, 1989
7:30 ?'1.
REGUL~.rt SES5! C:"l
PRES ENT:
C 0 m7:; s S ~ 0 n e r S - Jon at hen S i e 9 1 e, J a c k Gis c h e 1, ~ :: sse ~~ a ~ r1 e , G reg
Shaver~ and To~ Atkinson. Bruce Berg has been appointed to the City
Council so his position is vacant. Lynda Raybould was abssnt.
S,:~7; - ?la:'i~rg and Building Qirectoi Greg Wints!"C'wd, Develo~'rrent
C . · ..' .. G I'''' A '.. - .. G' K A.....
uCE.......::;;.,:-~s~ral.or 'rEg ',OL-'t, '$SOC1al.€ ,'ja,;.ner ."r)' arp, 'SSlSI.c.nl.
P' .... ,-'" -. . ~.:l S- -. t' h ....:, :.. .. .. ... C'.... , '...... 0 r n e v ~ .... 0 L e .. h v
I c: : ; r. ':: . .... ~ . _ !OJ' ,Co n.w r, S S I S l. Co j I ~ , l." .-, l. .. .J "" 1,.' ... Co '" .
~=_.' :: - S t e \' e COIl i E: 1" ':' f the S ~ r i ;1 9 f i € " j !~ e w ,r. j j i m coy d 0 f ". h e
Kt;1;t;r G~c.rd.
1. PLEDGE O~ ~LLEGIANtE
..
. , .. .
The Pledge of Allegiance was led bi Cdmmissioner Siegl~.
ELECTION OF COMMISSION CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR
. ..
2.
3.
MOTION: Commission~r Siegle moved that the Planning Commission elect Tom
Atkinson the Chair and Jesse Maine the Vice-Chair of the Planning
Commission for the ensuing year. Motion was seconded by Commissioner
Gischel. Motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Atkinson presided over
the. rema; nder of the meet i.n.9. ..,.. . ,!
~ d'<-<('~~",-, ~ tt.-:.. ~ ~~<';~10 ~ ~ ~ f.L.Je..t-
APPROVAL OF MINUTE~ -t, ~(:~..J# 1~ ~ (5 ~ ~ ~ "Ct.- .
/~ ~(~ ~J-<~~~,c--.d.Jr~)
There were no additions or corrections to the minutes. They were approved
as written.
4.
REPORT OF COUNCIL ACTION
Chairperson Atkinson said he had attended the January 3 meeting of the
Council. During that meeting, Bruce Berg was formally appointed to fill
the remaining term of Bill Morrisette, who v..'as recently elected t~ayor.
The new Council President is Lee Beyer. George Wojcik v..'as appointed
Council liaison to the Planning Commission, Berg was appointed Council
liaison to the Tree Board and to the Historical Commission. He was. also
SPRINGFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION MINU1ES
January 4, 1989- 7:30 p.m.
Regul~r Session - Pa;e 1
h7
a p poi n t e d tot he C 0 mm un i t Y De ve lop men tAd vis 0 r y Co mm i t tee. The C i t Y
Council also talked about the City budget situation.
5. BUSINESS FROI~ Tr~ .~UD}E!~CE
There v;as norle.
6 . LEG I 5 L AT i \' E PUS LIe r. [!;, R It ~ G
~.t~E'~DI'~ENTS TO THE SPRJI~GF]ELD DEVElc~r"IEqT CO!:,E (SD,A,) JO. NO. 8-3-1}-}92
5taff Reoort - Planning and Building Director Greg Wintercwd said there
-re m-ny ~l-np~s=d ch-~gps '~o t~~ C~~~' mnr. -re h~UCc~-Epl'"a ~h-~- -r~
o IC ~ I. I.' _ C.t '_ l. "_ ~:'..t: ~ ' _ ~ l.. C I. __,.':' ' .,'... I Ilt:1 ':' G....
two basic iSSUES to cover: 1.) to ~hat extent the ~inimum 8evelo~mEnt
Standards (!.mS) should be amended, and 2.) how to handle signs in the
area known as the South Gateway freeway commercial area.
Testimonv in Suooort - Mike Evans, 1071 Harlow Road, Springfield, said he
is a member or the Chamber of CCr.i;';'lerce Lane Use Commi ttee and a 1 so a
property owner in the Gateway area. He called the sign code changes
relati~g to the G,ctew2Y ar.ea ~'ell .tho~~ht o~t. H~ said t.r~e c:cr.ges ~::li.jld
make S1;n regulat'c~s cons'ste~t w1:h !nose Tor s1gns ~:r:n CT the Ga:s~2j
Hall area.
Concerning MDS, Evans said he supported the Chamber's recommendations 2S
they have been modified. He said the timing limitations for improvements
have been a problem, and there needs to be flexibility in unusual
situations. He said he believes ~~e City needs to maintain the standards.
He said personally he would not have put in his parking in a timely manner
if it had not been required by the'City. Evans said if there is going to
be elimination of standards, it could be the change of use trigger. He
also suggested that the City look into funding sources for business owners
(Lane County Road Funds or block grant monies) to help bring properties
up to Code. . .
Commissioner Sie'gle asked Evans if he thought Minimum DevelopmentStandards
are necessary to have improvement. Evans said yes.
Martin Vahtra, 2215 Aspenpark Court, Thousand Oaks, Cal ifornia, represented
General Growth of California, said he was in support of the changes to the
Development Code relating to signs. He said the current Code does not meet
the needs of a shopping mall. There is a portion of the Code about ]-5
businesses and a portion on malls, but the Code does not meet the needs
of a regional shopping center. Vahtra admitted that there has been some
compromise between what General Growth would like to have in the Code and
the pro p 0 s a 1 be for e the C omtn i s s ion ton i g h t . H owe v e r , he s aid the new
section of the Code will serve General Growth and the community very well.
SPRINGFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
January 4, 1989 - 7:30 p.m.
Regular Session - Page 2
bfJ
Discussion followed concerning free standing signs. They would not be
allowed for individual tenants in t~e ~all, but they would be allcw;d for
b .... - 'h,'c'n l....c~+e 0 p~j ,.,'+-, -+ t'~p ""211 I-:~J' ~-....~--".., ~_:~~,.,
US 1 n t: S S t:' S h . \..'.: ~ n c ::- L t: _ C ~ ,J _ II: " _ ".:-,.... ,., Ii-=.;, I L J .
CommiS51 ~er Vaine
the free"."." to be.
prefer 65 feet.
-,"ed ,.,c'., ~:,.,... ',.i-~t'.:l \",,",11".,4 -;:':: .~- ;':9'" ~~ '.- ~;.~~s
c _ I'i. ,I I '''f , " ' ~ ~ I C _ ~ _': . ,",..J __ _ _. ~ . I,' . ... _ _ _
V c h t r a S C -I d 5 0 - ~ j Tee t h' 0 L; ; ,:,j :' e -;-', i 2, C'.'~ :--' ~ \.,' C J i d
T est i m 0 !1 V in 0 D P 0 sit ion - Eve ,n e 1 ~ e:l, 2 4 2 9 Clear Vue ~ S p r i n 9 fie 1 d ~ spoke
on behalf of League of Women Voters of Lane County. She said in ]967 the
League .did a comprehensive si~, study. It was the consensus of the 250
me m be r 01- Q ani z at ion at t hat t i 1;, e t r. 2 t : r, ere s h Ct u 1 d be a 1 i i;j i t tot he s i : e
of signs '"'arid that signs not b= allo'.>:e-d to flash, move or rota:e. She
expressed tr:e League's safety c~~lcer.ns about the ~ropose.j e:cctronic rE=der
board s~gn f2cing 1-5. The Le2gue aij not think there ~as a need f~r a
separate subsection in the Code to deal with signs in the Gatew2Y Vall
area; it ~2Y cause confusion and be hard to administer.
Co mm i s s ~ en: r Gis c h e 1 ask e d t \ i e 1 s e n i f t!-i e Lea g u e had a r, J' ; ~ ; tis tic s to.: 2 c k
up their clai~ that electronic reader boards are a traffic hazard. She
said ne.
t~ i c h a e 1 G . l E ~d s , 511 ~\ =' rt h 71 s t , 5 ~ r i n 9 fie 1 d , i s pi- e sid e n t eft h e
Springf~eld Downto"m Ass:.ciation. Levds said the Ass::iation ci,j not
disaaree with the need for MDS but ~ith the time in which the standards
are ~equired to be completed.. He said the current iQflexibility of MOS
makes them anti-business. The Downtown Association believ~s the
'-marketplace will influence these changes. He said it d)~s not make'sense
to require people to meet the MDS when there is a chang~ of use within an
allowable use. If this change of use trigger is given a moratorium for
two years, the marketplace will prevail. He said this t~o year moratorium
request is for all of Springfield and not just downtown.
Commissioner Siegle asked what evidence there has b~an in the last few
years that the marketplace will prevail without the help of MOS. Lewis
said he ;s basing this position on his own experience and what he has seen
and heard from the businesses he deals with. S~egle said development
standards are necessary to see that improvements are made.
Rod Schultz, of Emerald Welding Supply, 3773 Main Street, Springfield, said
he did not know if he was for or aoain the MOS issue. He said the current
MOS requirements do not take into consideration an existing business that
is trying to make improvements as it goes along. He pointed out that
during earlier discussions of proposed changes to MOS, 31.040 (2)(b) on
paving the parking area was to have been moved to (3) and be allowed two
years for completion. Mr. Winterowd agreed with Schultz on this point.
Item (2)(b) will be moved and become (3)(e).
S PR I NG FIE LD PLAI~N 1 NG COI''''l1 S S I ON t.j I NUT E S
January 4, 1989 - 7:30 p.m.
Regular Session - Page 3
6;
Summation by Staff - Mr. Winterowd said that the Downtown Association is
opposed to change of use, but has said they would not mind expansion being
a trigger f'Jr !<DS. Staff's r-=CO;i"(-;-.e~,cction is based on :~.e Ch2::-;cer of
Commerce pr:~osal to delay l"equ~red c~~;;es for u~ to t\'.'o yecl"s. \,,'il",tel"(:\',.j
SlJ;:'port~~ .;'2 ChC:-~~I- c.f C::-:-:-.e!"ce r-=C=-~~;I':c~iC1 .:t>c)~t 7'.....,.jinq :0 ~-.c~c~.
the cost oi t~e private oW~Er, up to S2!OOO. he said t~e Cit~ needs to
find some v-.'ay to help fund expensES. He said it has not been his
e x per i e nee the t the mar k e t p 1 ace h' i 11 E :-, sur e t hat m i n i mum s tan d a r d s are ~, e t .
D i s c u s sic ~ 0 n r.m S - C 0 mm i s s ion e r S ~, (: \' e r s aid h e v-.' a son the P 1 a :'H'l i n a
~ommission that drafted the MDS two years ago. He said he is excited abouf
the' c h a n 9 e s J hat ha v e bee n mad e due t Qt.', D S, and now i s not the t i met 0 t a c k
off. He te:-med the recommendations cf the Chamber of Commerce excellent.
He sugges:ed :hat an extension could ~2 ffi2de from two years to three years
if certain dollar amounts were involved in a busiresses expansion costs!
e.g. S10,000 or S15,OOO. He went on to disc . ~ this proposal might
be administered.
Commissiansr Sieole talked abowt cU21it~ jife issues that a city has
to offer. He -said there is e~id-2flc'e of success from the current
developm~nt stanc:r.js, and he has no faith in IIletting the marketpl~ce
pre v Q i 1 ." ;-! e s" ~j :. e sup per t e d the C r; a i:': ~ e r I s r e c c r.1~ e n C a :. ion . H ~ s aid t. h e
City naeds :0 ~!~~ a look at sc~e scrt of miiching funds. He said t~e
MDS iss~2 is not one he is 9~ing to back down on. We need MDS and We need
to enforce them.
Commissioner Maine said the goals of improving th-e- im.?ge of-Springfield
are citizen goals and not just the goals of the .Pl~nning Commission. He
said MDS means Minimum Development Standards,.~~e smellest amount of work
a business must do-to do business inSpring~ffeld. Maine talked about the
need to have matching funds~available for public improvement.
Commissioner Gischel said he supported ~ms with the changes that have been
discussed. He supported the need to find funding to help businesses, but
said the Planning Commission is not the body to come up with the funds.
Chairman Atkinson said he agrees with most of what the other Commissioners
had said. He said he was tired of mediocrity and wanted to see the City
go beyond that. Concerning the SDA's proposal for a two year moratorium,
he said there needs to be a mechanism working before two years.
MOTION: Commissioner Shaver moved that the Planning Commission recommend
to the City Council that 31.040 involving Minimum Development Standards.
be rewritten to including the following changes: that (2)(b) on parking
and circulation areas should be changed to read that dangerous curb cuts
shall be closed. A section (3)(e) should be added and it should require
parking and circulation areas be paved and striped, and wheel stops
installed. An additional year shall be added to meet this requirement if
the cost of the site improvements not including the building exceeds
SPRINGFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
January 4, 1989 - 7:30 p.m.
Regular Session - Page 4
lO
510,000. Staff is to have the latitude in drafting the changes to ensure
internal consiste1cy. C~~mission2r Siegle seconded the ~cticn. I~otion
carried by a unanimous vote.
Discussion ~~ 5~C~2C~ - (o~rni5s~or~r Sie21e s2:d 55 feEt is too hic~, and
t hat a s i g n i 7) the Gat E W c. y 1.'1 a 11 are a d (, e s - r: 0 t nee d t 0 be i7"IO r e t h G n S b fee t .
Discussion followed concerning the rationale for having 65 foot signs in
Area B, nortr. of the Gate\\'ay I'~all area. Rob Adams, a former Commissiorier
said the rationale was that it was lithe businessman's right" to try to
II s nag" b u si ri: s s fro m the f r e e way by h 2 V i n g the h i g h s i 9 n s .
C 0 mm i s s ion erG i s c h e 1 sa; d i f s i 9 n sin Are a 3 are C 5 fee t, s i 9 ~ sin .~ rea
A should also be 65 feet in order to compete.
Co mm i s s ion e r S h a v e r s aid ~ d ~ e tot h e I - 5 s pee d and ;:> r 0 x i m i t Y i s sue, a
larger sign does make some sense. He talked about the visibility problem
created by the overpass if a sign is too low. He said if General Growth
would be satisfied with the 50 foot sign, the Commission should recom~end
that.
Commissioner ~aine thousht Sh~ver's s~:~estion has a :ood com~rcmise. He
s aid the... e i s nor e a son to h Co v e a, 55 {c;"c t s i g:1 i nth e G Co t e..... a y ~~ a 11 Co rea.
He said he supported 50 feet fer th~ 1-5 sig:1 and 30 feet for the others.
Chairman Atkinson sided with Gischel. He said a 65' precedent had been
set in the area. He wanted to see legislative consistency.
. . ~
Discussion followed concerning electronic message board"signs and the
frequency of the message change . Staff was directed to look into the
safety issue.
MOTION: Commissioner Siegle moved that the Planning Commission amend
18.090 (6)(a) td allow a maximum heighfof 50 feet for the 1-5 sign and
a maximum of '30 feet f~l' the other. ~~ction seconded by Commissioner
,Shaver. After brief discussion, the motion carried with a 3-2 vote.
Commissioners Gischel and Atkinson voted in opposition.
Discussion,followed concerning specific questions, comments and chances
individual Commissioners wanted to make prior to forwarding the Code
revisions onto the City Council.
Commissioner Siegle raised the concern about waste tires again. Assistant
Planner Susie Smith reported that while waste tires are an environmental
and a health hazard, they can now be recycled and can be considered an
energy resource. After brief discussion, Siegle said he was satisfied
with the information presented on this issue.
Chairman Atkinson raised the issue of having a relative come for a brief
vis it, par kin g and h ~ 0 kin g up the t r a vel t r ail e r i nth e d r i v e way. r'k .
SPRINGFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
January 4, 1989 - 7:30 p.m.
Regular Session - Page 5
7/
Winterowd said the definition of "temporary" must be worked on to
accommodate this situation.
t"iOTIOt~: C0Ii1;7l1ssiorler Shaver Tilo\'e.j that the Planning C(;:,:~,issic:l c:ccept cr,d
pc s son tOt:"1 e C i : / C c ~ n e il the :: c. 1 c n C e c ~ the S ~ t- ; n 9 fiE; G DE \ :: 1 Ct ~ ;"", o? ;1 t C Co ,j e
as amendEd cL;rij"l~ the E\'t"=ning. ihe :-:-,::~ion v.as c.mEilcej to c.5~: i.hc1. a
minority report be included in the staff report that goes to the Council.
l"lotion seconced by Siegle. 1.'lotion carried unanimously.
MOTION: Co~missioner Shaver moved that the Planning Commission ask the
City Counei.l to consider a partnership funding method of some nature for
public improvements in the Development Code. Second by Siegle. Motion
carried unanimously.
- - 10 Minute Recess - - - - -
7. BUSINESS FROM THE PLANNING AND BUILDING DIRECTOR
A. Uodate O~ G~~derson Easements - Greg Matt said he has contacted all
the uti 1 i tie s to see i f the e 0 s em en t s can be v a cat e don r~ r .
Gunderson's property. None of the utilities have an interest with
the exception or Rain~cw Water Di5~rict. The Cc~~ission asked Mott
to notify ~r. Gunderson of his f~rldings cnd provide him with cn
application. The Commission also requested that staff in the future
make sure that utilities do not reauire more th~n what is needed in
terms of easements. .
B. Anaelino's Sian - In response to Commission conce-r.ns, Mr. Winterowd
reported that the Angelino's sign had been put up without a permit.
The paperwork is going through on the sign now.
C. Community Identitv Sian/Main Street Trees - Mr. Winterowd referred
Comm; ss i oners to the memo ; n the packet. There was a bri ef
discussion centering around form~r Planning Commissioner Berg's
request for a street tree near the bus shelter despite safety
considerations. It was decided safety issues were more important
than aesthetics in this case; no action was taken.
D. Uodate on Golf Course at Alton Baker Park - Assistant Planner Susie
Smith passed out a map and a copy of a Register Guard article in this
matter. She explained that Lane County had contracted with [CO
Northwest to do a study. She and Bruce Newhouse looked at the study,
~nd the golf course plan was done without considering the Alton
Baker Park Plan. She discussed the various conflicts and
inconsistencies. She said there will be a golf course meeting
addressing some of these issues on January 19 at 3:30 pm. in Room
616 of Planning and Building. Chairperson Atkinson asked to be
invited to this meeting.
SPRINGFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
January 4, 1989 - 7:30 p.m.
Regular Session - Page 6
lV
8. BUSINESS FROM THE PLANNING AND BUILDING DIRECTOR
A. Commissioner Shaver suggested that a memo go to Councilor George
~ojcik, ~~e ?'~~~in9 Cc~~iS~~01 liaison fro~ City Council, invit~ng
him to t~2 next Planning Co~missi0n meeting.
B . Co mm i s s i G n e r 1-'1 a i new a sap poi n t e d to bet h e Co mm i s s ion r e pre s en tat i ve
on the Community Block Grant Advisory Committee. .
C. Chairperson Atkinson thanked the Commission for electing him Chair
for the year. He asked the Commission if they were interested in
assisting the Council on a broader range of issues. He said he had ~~
two goals in mind: 1.) working on ways t,.~~.lncrease family wage rfV./
jobs, and 2.) decreasing ~ro~erty taxes through annexatiorv:"""'-
At kin son s aid hew 0 U 1 d set a r.: e e tin g w; t h May 0 r I~ 0 r r i set t e s 00 n t 0 ~
discuss these two goals. ~
D. It was decided a memo should be sent to the City Council asking them
to stay on schedule with reviewing the Awbrey-Meadowview and
industrial plan amendments.
E. Commissioner Siegle volunteered to work as the Planning Com~ission
represent~t~ve in recruiting prospective businesses to the area.
9. ADJOURNMENT
. "
The meeting was adjourned at 10:25 p.m.
:
" ...
SPRINGFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
January 4, 1989 - 7:30 p.m.
Regular Session - Page 7
73
ATTACHMENT 4
SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPHENT CODE TEXT AMENDHENT REQUEST
STAFF R.E?ORT
APPLICANT
City of Springfield - Jo. No. 88-11-192.
REQUEST
Staff has initiat~d this request as part of the Second Annual Update of the
Springfield Develc:?ment Code. Staff is proposing to amend portions of ARTICLE 2
DEFINITIONS; ARTICLE 3 DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL AND L.4J'JD USE DECISION PROCEDURES; ARTICLE
4, INTERPRETATION; ARTICLE 16 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS; ARTICLE 18 COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS;
ARTICLE 19 BKMU BOOTH-KELLY MIXED USE DISTRICT; ARTICLE 20 LMI, HI AND SHI DISTRICTS;
ARTICLE 21 SPECIAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT; ARTICLE 25 VG VILLAMETTE GREENVAY
OVERLAY DISTRICT; ARTICLE 29 UF-10 URBANIZABLE FRINGE OVERLAY DISTRICT; ARTICLE 31
SITE PLAN REVIEV STANDARDS; ARTICLE 32 PUBLIC AND PRIVATE IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS;
ARTICLE 35 SUBDIVISION STANDARDS; AHTICLE 37 SIGN STP.NDAP.DS; AND APPENDIX 1
DEVELOPMENT CODE F~;S.
DISCUSSION
Vhen the Springfield Development Code vas adopted in May of 1986, there ~as an
agreement that the Code ~ould be revie~edand~pdated o~ an annual basis. The draft
for your review is the second annual update.': ."
Many of the proposed changes are housekeeping in nature or address changei required
by recent court cases or state agency regulations.
The key issues are:
1. -' FORMAL INTERPRETATIONS ARE PROPOSED TO GO FROM TYPE I REVIEV TO TYPE II REVIEV.
The interpretation of zoning ordinance provisions has been viewed by local
governments as ~n administrative function. Most ordinances provide for an
interpret~tion by the Planning Director. The person making a request is the only
person given notice and an opportunity to appeal the interpretation. This
traditional practice has been brought into question by the recent Land Use Board
of Appeals decision, Kunkel v. Vashington County (LUBA decision, 1988). The
formal interpretation process has been changed from a Type I process to a Type II
process so that abutting property ovners can be notified and the City can be in
compliance ~ith the Kunkel decision.
2. DAY CARE. These reV1Slons reflect the changes made to ORS during the last
legislative seSSlon concerning Day Care Homes and Day Care Group Homes. These
fa~ilities are to be treated as single family homes. The Planning Commission is
proposing that Day Care Centers be revieved under Discretionary Use standards on
local and collector streets in the Lov Density Residential District.
r.';GE 1
SDC ;.P.EI~D~ENT STAFF REPORT
7r
3. SITE PLAN REVIEV MINIMUM DEVELOPMENT STANDARrS.. Staff has drafted language that
reflects the Chamber of Commerce's proposal. Any language revision made during
the public hearing process ~ill be ad~Ed pric~ :0 City Cou~cil :Evie~.
4. SIDEVALKS IN SUBDIVISIONS. The installation of side~alks has been added here
because of the City Council's recent decision to have sidev~lks installed during
subdivision street construction.
5. TEMPORARY AND PORTABLE SIGNS. Temporary signs are proposed to be limited to 2
months rather than 6 months. In addition, replacement of the same temporary sign
cannot occur for 6 months. Portable sand~:ch board and reader board signs,
although they are not alloved, are being added tD the prohibited signs list.
6. SIGN DISTRICT ADDITION. A neYl "1-5 Oriented Shopping Center" sign sub-district
has been proposed. The League of Vomen Voters have expressed their opposition to
this proposed amen~ment (See Attachment A).
CRITERIA OF APPROVAL
SDC Section 8.030 states: "In reaching a decision on these actions, the Planning
Commission and the City Council shall adopt findings ~hich demonstrate conformance to
the folloving":
1 . THE KETRO PLAN;
Ref. - Amendment to Section 16.100(11): Allpw.i.ng professional ':offices" along Ma,in
Street in residentially designated areas. The intent is to improve the
appearance of Main Street, a major city entrance, and provide relatively low cost
office expansion opportunities. The Metro Plan's Residential Land Use
Designation states: "This category is expressed in gross acre density ranges.
Using gross acres, approximately 30 percent of the area is available for
auxiliary uses, such as streets, elementary and junior high schools, neighborhood
parks, other public facilities, neighborhood commercial services, and churches
not actually shown on the diagram. Such auxiliary uses shall be allow~d within
residential' designations if compatible \lith refinement plans, zoning ordinances,
and other local controls for allo\led uses in xesidential neighborhoods." (Ref. P.
II-E-2). The Springfield Development Code regulates "auxiliary uses" in
residential districts. Prof~ssional offices are considered auxiliary uses.
There are no other. Metro Plan Issues Ylhich apply.
PAGE 2
SDC AMENDMENT STAFF REPORT
\~
: ! ~I
2. APPLICABLE STATE STATUTES.
Ref. Arnend7~~ts to Sections 16.070(7), 16.100(4), 18.110(3) and 29.050(2):
During the last legislative session, there ~as an amerydment to ORS to treat Day
Care Homes and Day Care Group Homes as a single family residence. Day Care Homes
and Group Homes viII be outright permitted uses in residential and commercial
. districts vithout requiring Site Plan Reviev approval.
Ref. .Amendment to Section 35.090(1)(m) and (2)(f): (l)(m) - This Subsection
vas found to be i.ii'violation of ORS 92 and has been amended accordingly. (2)(f)
ORS vas a~ended to require a statement of vater rights as part of Final Plat
recording procedures.
There are no other applicable State Statutes vhich apply.
3. APPLICABLE STATE-VIDE PLANNING GOALS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RULES.
Oregon Administrative Rules pertaining to Day Care Homes and Day Care Group Homes
are being revised based on ORS amendments mentioned above. However, these
amendments do ~ct a~ply to Day Care Centers.
There are no a~Flicable State-vide Planning Goals or Administrative Rules which
apply.
There no other applicable Metro Plan Issues, State Statute..s, State-wide Planning
Goals or Administrative Rules applicable to this requestt this request is in
conformance vith the above.
PAGE 3
SDC AMENDMENT STAFF REPORT
77