The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04/18/2002 Work Session t\ . MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION OF THE SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD ON MONDAY, APRIL 8, 2002 The Springfield City Council met in Work Session at Springfield City Hall, Library Meeting Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, on Monday, April 8, 2002 at 6:00 p.m., with Mayor Leiken presiding. ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Leiken, and Councilors Fitch, Hatfield, Lundberg, Ralston and Simmons. Councilor Ballew was absent (excused). Also present were City Manager Mike Kelly, Assistant City Manager Gino Grimaldi, City Recorder Kim Krebs, and Members of staff. 1. Amendment to the Springfield Development Code Adding Two New Articles: Article 40 - Mixed Use Development Districts; Article 41- Nodal Development Overlay Zoning District. Planner Mark Metzger was present for the staff report. He said the purpose of this scheduled work session was to review and comment on the proposed addition of two new articles - Article 40 Mixed-Use Development and 41 Nodal Overlay District. Right now Springfield has in its current development plan, areas that call for mixed use and we don't have a tool to help mixed use develop. He said at issue is whether the proposed new articles effectively implement mixed use and nodal development in a manner that meets the future development needs of Springfield. . Mr. Metzger said Article 40 - Mixed-Use Zoning Districts, describes three different types of mixed-use; Mixed-Use Commercial (MUC), Mixed-Use Residential (MUR), and Mixed-Use Employment (MUE). These districts allow a mix of various uses to occur while maintaining a dominance of a particular use. The article lists those uses that are deemed compatible and adds . development and design standards that make mixed-use zoning districts more pedestrian-friendly. He said Article 41 - Nodal Development Overlay, is a response to TransPlan's land use policies that address the city's responsibility under state law to reduce the community's dependence on the auto for transportation. Under tbe conditions of approval for Eugene-Springfield's "alternative measures" for reducing VMT the state's Land Conservation and Development Commission, ordered the identification and development of "nodes". These "nodes" will become focal points for development in the future with the aim of directing a share of new housing and new jobs into these areas. He said nodes will be characterized by a minimum residential density of 12 units per acre, a restriction of auto-oriented uses, and design standards that are pedestrian- friendly and support a variety of transportation choices for consumers. Mr. Metzger said the proposed new articles bave been crafted with the input of various community interest groups, and have taken advantage of the experience of other communities who have preceded Springfield in the development of their own mixed-use zoning districts. He said these articles are a starting point and they will undoubtedly undergo some revisions in the months ahead. . Mr. Metzger said a public hearing on adoption of Article 40-and 41 was held before the Planning Commission on April 2nd. He highlighted the information that was shared in the public hearing portion. He said Phillip Farrington spoke on behalf of Peace Health, asking for flexibility in the code standards. He said a briefing of the testimony is presented in the council packet. He said David Carvo also spoke at the public hearing, and noted several recommendations. I f M[~utes of the Springfield City Council AprilS, 2002 - Work Session Page - 2 . Mayor Leiken asked if Mark Radabaugh was speaking on behalf ofDLCD or himself. Mr. Metzger said when the proposed code changes were submitted for their review, a lot of feedback was provided from DLCD and their official position. Mr. Metzger said if we adopt these articles, we will have new tools to use to implement nodal development, but by adopting these tools, we are not rezoning. Rezoning changes will have to be requested in the future. Councilor Ralston asked what density recommendation was Mr. Farrington recommending? Mr. Metzger said they would like to see .4 density, but he thinks that would not be feasible. He recommends .25, and highlighted the differences. Councilor Fitch asked if Article 10 would allow some discretion as changes in development occur, or do we need to revisit this each year and adjust the language to allow more flexibility. Mr. Metzger said he believes the language will allow for enough flexibility. He said he couldn't say for sure that they wouldn't need to come back before council if more changes are needed, but believes again this is a good start. . Councilor Simmons said the issue on minimum density does not preclude the higher density design in that process. If you have a site that is suitable to multiple floored buildings, you will see higher density building if it is economical and viable. He said the state position is definitely something that we need to be aware of, but doesn't think we are going to see these mixed use and nodes developed the way we have traditionally developed them. He asked Mr. Metzger if he had an estimate about how long it would take to develop a particular piece of property in the nodal concept. Mr. Metzger said that if staff and council feel this is a good idea, and if the community likes it, the plan amendment process could take 2-3 months. He said we have to allow 45 days for DLCD to comment before we can take action on this. Within a year a site plan could possibly be completed. Mr. Metzger said tbere are some grant funds that will assist staff in determining some identified parcels that would be the most viable node development sites. Councilor Fitch asked iftbere was going to be a public input process with developers to see if they have any recominendations as to what would be nodal potential development. Mr. Metzger said a significant portion ofthe nodal selection budget is going to be devoted to market analysis. That will assist the planners in getting an outside opinion of how to create preliminary designs for these developments. . Councilor Lundberg said this looks very good and commended staff for putting this complex report together. She wants to make sure we have some flexibility (Attachment B-9). Will this be precluded from how we want things to look. She said because the differences make a particular setting interesting, we want to make sure we don't have a cookie cutter look. It is important to have enough variation and compatibility. . . '. ... " Minutes of the Springfield City Council April 8, 2002 - Work Session Page -c 3 Mr. Metzger said compatibility would be important issue and that the design standards would allow for every type of architectural features. He said he and Roxie Cuellar from the Lane County Homebuilders Association sat down together and reviewed the proposed amendments. He highlighted the discussion he and Ms. Cuellar had, and said she encouraged flexibility for certain types of design, as well as making sure staff reviews our standards as trends in housing designs change. She too said flexibility would be needed for certain types of design Councilor Lundberg said there are a lot of people who have home based businesses, and the multi use language is important. She said the minimum and maximum parking in nodal development is important as well. She concluded by saying everyone will need to work together in putting these new standards into play. Mr. Metzger said it would be a cballenge and an educational battle to help and encourage the community to see that a higher density development could be an attractive addition to their neighborhood. Mayor Leiken said it is important to have this starting point, as we work through this with the developers from Peace Health. Councilor Hatfield said he was on the Planning Commission when these discussions first started. He said if we are able to apply a mixed use overlay over an existing residential area, it could influence the evolution for the existing property. For example, if an existing nonconforming use property sustains extensive fIre damage, are we going to allow folks to rebuild their house as it was or will it have to be built to the new standards? This is his only concern. Mr. Metzger said ifan overlay was put down, and a homeowner's house was damaged, we would like to allow them to rebuild as is, and not implement the new requirements. Existing homeowners are protected for their investment. Councilor Simmons encouraged staff to keep options open during this process. He said he is not so convinced that we can't have 21 sl century industry buildings together in high-density housing. He commended staff for an excellent job on this project. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6: 48 p~m. ~ Minutes Recorder - Kim Krebs ATTEST: Ul~\\.~ UOL\.~\0 .City Recorder