Date: Jurisdiction: Local file no.: DLCD file no.: 01/13/2015 City of Medford DCA-14-083 009-14 The Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) received the attached notice of adopted amendment to a comprehensive plan or land use regulation on 12/30/2014. A copy of the adopted amendment is available for review at the DLCD office in Salem and the local government office. Notice of the proposed amendment was submitted to DLCD 51 days prior to the first evidentiary hearing. Appeal Procedures Eligibility to appeal this amendment is governed by ORS 197.612, ORS 197.620, and ORS 197.830. Under ORS 197.830(9), a notice of intent to appeal a land use decision to LUBA must be filed no later than 21 days after the date the decision sought to be reviewed became final. If you have questions about the date the decision became final, please contact the jurisdiction that adopted the amendment. A notice of intent to appeal must be served upon the local government and others who received written notice of the final decision from the local government. The notice of intent to appeal must be served and filed in the form and manner prescribed by LUBA, (OAR chapter 661, division 10). If the amendment is not appealed, it will be deemed acknowledged as set forth in ORS 197.625(1)(a). Please call LUBA at 503-373-1265, if you have questions about appeal procedures. If you have questions about this notice, please contact DLCD’s Plan Amendment Specialist at 503- 934-0017 or plan.amendments@state.or.us DLCD Contact NOTICE OF ADOPTED CHANGE TO A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR LAND USE REGULATION http://www.oregon.gov/LCD/Pages/forms.aspx -1- Form updated November 1, 2013 DLCD FORM 2 NOTICE OF ADOPTED CHANGE FOR DLCD USE TO A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR File No.: LAND USE REGULATION Received: 12/30/2014 Local governments are required to send notice of an adopted change to a comprehensive plan or land use regulation no more than 20 days after the adoption. (See OAR 660-018-0040). The rules require that the notice include a completed copy of this form. This notice form is not for submittal of a completed periodic review task or a plan amendment reviewed in the manner of periodic review. Use Form 4 for an adopted urban growth boundary including over 50 acres by a city with a population greater than 2,500 within the UGB or an urban growth boundary amendment over 100 acres adopted by a metropolitan service district. Use Form 5 for an adopted urban reserve designation, or amendment to add over 50 acres, by a city with a population greater than 2,500 within the UGB. Use Form 6 with submittal of an adopted periodic review task. Jurisdiction: City of Medford Local file no.: DCA-14-083 Date of adoption: 12/18/14 Date sent: 12/30/14 Was Notice of a Proposed Change (Form 1) submitted to DLCD? Yes: Date (use the date of last revision if a revised Form 1was submitted): 08/28/14 No Is the adopted change different from what was described in the Notice of Proposed Change? Yes No If yes, describe how the adoption differs from the proposal: No Local contact (name and title): Aaron Harris, Planner II Phone: 541.774.2380 E-mail: aaron.harris@cityofmedford.org Street address: 200 S. Ivy City: Medford Zip: 97501 PLEASE COMPLETE ALL OF THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS THAT APPLY For a change to comprehensive plan text: Identify the sections of the plan that were added or amended and which statewide planning goals those sections implement, if any: For a change to a comprehensive plan map: Identify the former and new map designations and the area affected: Change from to acres. A goal exception was required for this change. Change from to acres. A goal exception was required for this change. Change from to acres. A goal exception was required for this change. Change from to acres. A goal exception was required for this change. Location of affected property (T, R, Sec., TL and address): The subject property is entirely within an urban growth boundary The subject property is partially within an urban growth boundary http://www.oregon.gov/LCD/Pages/forms.aspx -2- Form updated November 1, 2013 If the comprehensive plan map change is a UGB amendment including less than 50 acres and/or by a city with a population less than 2,500 in the urban area, indicate the number of acres of the former rural plan designation, by type, included in the boundary. Exclusive Farm Use – Acres: Non-resource – Acres: Forest – Acres: Marginal Lands – Acres: Rural Residential – Acres: Natural Resource/Coastal/Open Space – Acres: Rural Commercial or Industrial – Acres: Other: – Acres: If the comprehensive plan map change is an urban reserve amendment including less than 50 acres, or establishment or amendment of an urban reserve by a city with a population less than 2,500 in the urban area, indicate the number of acres, by plan designation, included in the boundary. Exclusive Farm Use – Acres: Non-resource – Acres: Forest – Acres: Marginal Lands – Acres: Rural Residential – Acres: Natural Resource/Coastal/Open Space – Acres: Rural Commercial or Industrial – Acres: Other: – Acres: For a change to the text of an ordinance or code: Identify the sections of the ordinance or code that were added or amended by title and number: 10.370-10.385 (Southeast Overlay District) For a change to a zoning map: Identify the former and new base zone designations and the area affected: Change from to Acres: Change from to Acres: Change from to Acres: Change from to Acres: Identify additions to or removal from an overlay zone designation and the area affected: Overlay zone designation: Acres added: Acres removed: Location of affected property (T, R, Sec., TL and address): List affected state or federal agencies, local governments and special districts: Identify supplemental information that is included because it may be useful to inform DLCD or members of the public of the effect of the actual change that has been submitted with this Notice of Adopted Change, if any. If the submittal, including supplementary materials, exceeds 100 pages, include a summary of the amendment briefly describing its purpose and requirements. Ordinance 2014-160 with revised code sections and staff report with findings are included. “Working with the Community to Shape a Vibrant and Exceptional City” Lausmann Annex • 200 South Ivy Street • Medford OR 97501 Phone 541-774-2380 • Fax 541-618-1708 www.ci.medford.or.us CITY OF MEDFORD PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT – LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT Date: December 2, 2014 To: Mayor and City Council for 12-18-2014 hearing From: Aaron Harris, Planner II Reviewer: John Adam, Senior Planner Subject: Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan for the Southeast Overlay District—City of Medford, Applicant File no.: DCA-14-083 BACKGROUND Proposal: To initiate an amendment and make a recommendation to revise Municipal Code Sections 10.370–10.385 (Southeast Overlay District), to adopt the Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan, and to complete general housekeeping items within these sections. Pursuant to Section 10.374(5), the Master Plan will be incorporated by reference as part of the Municipal Code for the regulation of development in Area 7A in the Southeast Overlay District. History: In 1993, following the inclusion of the Southeast Area within the Medford urban growth boundary, the City undertook the first special planning study (Southeast Medford Land Use and Transportation Study, 1993) to compare the future traffic impacts that would result from development of the area in a manner based on neo- traditional rather than contemporary development schemes. Based on the study, the City chose to pursue a neo-traditional development pattern characterized by mixed-use zoning and an interconnected street system to distribute peak period traffic to all streets, not just collectors and arterials. 1995–1998 A subsequent study (Southeast Medford Circulation & Development Plan Project Report, August 1995) guided the preparation of amendments to the Medford Comprehensive Plan and Municipal Code for the Southeast Area. The Southeast Plan was originally incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan as part of the General Land Use Plan Element in 1998. 2004 The Southeast Plan was further refined by Ordinance no. 2004-258 on December 16, 2004, following the adoption of the Medford Transportation System Plan (TSP) in Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan, Southeast Overlay District DCA-14-083 Staff Report December 2, 2014 Page 2 of 24 November 2003. The TSP designated the Southeast Village Center as a Transportation Oriented District (TOD) and directed the City to complete and adopt plans and standards for the designated TOD areas. The 2004 revisions to the Southeast Plan incorporated additional TOD design guidelines and standards, refined the sub-area boundaries and designations, and incorporated the Southeast Plan within the Neighborhood Element of the Comprehensive Plan rather than the General Land Use Plan Element. The refine- ments also established a Commercial Center and a Commercial Center Core Area within the Village Center to establish a concentric town center with a “main street” along Barnett Road that would not be subject to the City’s LOS mobility standard for automobile traffic. This was enabled by incorporation of the Southeast Medford Plan Area Neighborhood Circulation Plan and Transportation Policies and Guidelines into the Southeast Plan. 2008 The City, through Ordinance nos. 2008-246 and 2008-247, adopted text amend- ments to the Southeast Plan within the Neighborhood Element of the Comprehensive Plan and to the S-E Overlay District of the Municipal Code which corrected inconsisten- cies in the mapping for SE Plan Sub-Areas (12) and (7A) and also refined the district development standards pertaining to garages for attached housing and to building height limitations. Other minor housekeeping corrections were also adopted. 2010 In September 2010, various property owners within the Commercial Center Core Area (7A) submitted a Master Plan, accompanied by design guidelines, and amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Municipal Code. The City Council asked the Southeast Plan Implementation Advisory Committee (Southeast Committee) to review said proposal and give a recommendation to the City Council. 2012 On June 7, 2012, the property owners who submitted the Master Plan requested initiation of the Comprehensive Plan and Code amendments that would allow adoption of the proposed Master Plan from the City Council. The City Council voted to initiate the process with the stipulation that work not begin until after the Southeast Committee made a recommendation. The Southeast Committee noted that “although the adoption of the recommended Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code Amendments would technically allow the adoption of the proposed Master Plan, the Committee expressed disappointment in the proposed Master Plan itself. They indicated that they would prefer that the Plan be (1) more pedestrian-friendly; (2) more greenway-oriented; and (3) more specific about the architectural design (particularly for Main Street).” The Southeast Committee recommendations were reviewed by the City Council during a joint study session on November 1, 2012. The primary changes the Committee recommended for the Southeast Commercial Core Area (7A) were: Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan, Southeast Overlay District DCA-14-083 Staff Report December 2, 2014 Page 3 of 24 1. Changing the “Main Street” from Barnett Road to Stanford Avenue; 2. Modifying the alignment of Barnett Road; 3. Allowing a roundabout at Stanford and Barnett for a bus turn-around; 4. Requiring two-story buildings along Stanford Avenue; 5. Allowing three drive-throughs in exchange for not allowing gas stations in the Commercial Center Core Area; 6. The elimination of a maximum square footage limitation for the Commercial Center Core Area; 7. Removing the Goddard property from the Master Plan Area (7A); 8. Adopting a Master Plan as a separate document, not as part of the Code or Comprehensive Plan; 9. Requiring a PUD for modifications to the Master Plan; and 10. Requiring a Traffic Impact Analysis prior to adoption of the Master Plan. The City Council, at the conclusion of the study session, directed staff to proceed with the proposed Comprehensive Plan and Code amendments as recommended by the property owners and Southeast Committee. The City Council further directed staff to proceed with adoption of the Master Plan with a requirement that a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) be completed to demonstrate that a roundabout intersection as proposed in the Master Plan will operate properly at that location. 2013 On March 7, 2013, the City Council adopted Ordinance no. 2013-41 approving major amendments to the Neighborhood Element and Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan and also adopted Ordinance no. 2013-42 approving amendments to the Section 10.372, 10.373, 10.374, 10.377, 10.378 and 10.384 of the Medford Municipal Code pertaining to the Commercial Center Core Area (7A) of the S-E Overlay District. The amendments to the Comprehensive Plan included the following substantive text changes: 1. Realignment of Barnett Road, moving the curve approximately 400 feet to the east; 2. Moving the “main street” emphasis from Barnett Road to Stanford Avenue; 3. Removal of the square footage cap of 150,000 square feet for retail and commercial uses; 4. Removal of the Goddard property (37-1W-27 tax lot 1602, 765 North Phoenix Road) from the Commercial Center Core Area (7A) Boundary; 5. Removal of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) requirement for the Master Plan; and 6. Modification of Policy 3-A and removal of Implementation Strategy 3-A(1) pertaining to level of service exemption for zone changes with the effect that the exemption shall apply to Stanford Avenue and the alternatively designed section of Barnett Road east of Stanford Avenue within the Southeast Com- mercial Center. Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan, Southeast Overlay District DCA-14-083 Staff Report December 2, 2014 Page 4 of 24 The amendments to the Comprehensive Plan also resulted in the revision of the following maps: 1. S-E Plan Map (Figure 1 of the S-E Plan, Neighborhood Element); 2. S-E Village Center Map (Figure 2 of the S-E Plan, Neighborhood Element) 3. S-E Area Neighborhood Circulation Plan Map (Figure 1 of the S-E Medford Area Neighborhood Circulation Plan and Transportation Policies and Guide- lines, Neighborhood Element); and 4. Medford Street Functional Classification Map (Figure 1-2 of Transportation System Plan Element). The substantive amendments to the Municipal Code included the following changes: 1. Revision to Figure 10.372 (Southeast Village Center) to match changes to the corresponding map at Figure 2 of the S-E Plan, Neighborhood Element in the Comprehensive Plan; 2. Revision to Figure 10.373 (Southeast Plan Map Sub Areas) to match changes to the corresponding map at Figure 1 of the S-E Plan, Neighborhood Element in the Comprehensive Plan; 3. Revisions to Code Section 10.374(4) regarding the minimum required ele- ments to be included in the Master Plan. The revisions reflected the changes to the Comprehensive Plan regarding street standards for the arterial seg- ments of Barnett and “Main Street”‘ treatments for Stanford Avenue, a new requirement that neo-traditional design elements be incorporated into the development, a requirement that all buildings along Stanford Avenue be two-story or have such an appearance, and that the Master Plan include a requirement for development permit applications within Area 7A to include photometric data and illumination plans consistent with Code Section 10.764; 4. Code Section 10.374(5) was added to require that the Master Plan be incor- porated by reference as part of the Medford Municipal Code for the S-E Overlay District. The provision also specifies that development within Area 7A be approved by the Site Plan and Architectural Commission if found to be consistent with the adopted Master Plan, or to otherwise obtain approval of a PUD from the Planning Commission for proposed development that is not consistent with the adopted Master Plan. Section 10.374(5) further estab- lishes parameters for minor revisions that would be found consistent with the adopted Master Plan to provide some flexibility in final design; 5. Code Section 10.378, “Special Standards for Commercial Center (7A and 7B), S-E”, was revised to clarify standards for outdoor eating and sidewalk cafes, to allow for drive-through service at three sites in Area 7A with specified limi- tations, to disallow fueling stations that had previously been allowed by CUP, to establish that the maximum amount of off-street motor vehicle parking Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan, Southeast Overlay District DCA-14-083 Staff Report December 2, 2014 Page 5 of 24 spaces within the Commercial Center Core Area (7A) shall not exceed the minimum standard normally applicable for the subject use, and to require that the amount of bicycle parking provided within the Commercial Center Core Area (7A) be two times the amount required by Section 10.478, “Bicycle Parking Standards”; 6. Section 10.984 was revised to specify the location for Major and Minor Greenway designations on the Southeast Circulation Plan Map, to allow open space for stormwater quality and detention facilities as required by Section 10.486 and 10.729 to be provided in Greenways rather than on-site, to clarify timing of Greenway improvements adjacent to development, and to require that a landscape restoration plan be prepared for review and approval by the City to demonstrate equivalent or better amount of stream corridor shading will result upon maturity of replacement vegetation elements. Also in 2013, a Traffic Impact Analysis was completed by JRH Transportation Engineering which analyzed traffic operations for the proposed roundabout intersection of Stanford Avenue with East Barnett Road. The report also provided a comparative analysis of alternative intersection operations without a roundabout (i.e., a two-way stop, a four- way stop, and a signalized traffic control). The Medford Public Works Department, after reviewing the analysis, confirmed by interoffice memorandum to Medford Development Services that report shows that a roundabout will accommodate traffic with less delay than either a two-way stop, four-way stop, or a traffic signal. Public Works stated in its memo that it supports the proposed installation of a single lane roundabout to provide access to the town center and adjoining properties. In conclusion, Public Works also stated that its recommendation was made without conditions and pursuant to the recommendations in the subject traffic impact report most recently revised December 3, 2013. 2014 On November 13, 2014, the SE Master Plan and associated housekeeping items were presented before the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission determined that the proposal met all applicable criteria, but failed to meet the expectations of the Neighborhood Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission made two separate motions. A motion was passed 5-0 to recommend approval of the SE Master Plan’s associated housekeeping items. A second motion was passed 4-1 to recommend denial of the SE Master Plan. AREA CHARACTERISTICS The subject land affected by this amendment is located within the S-E Commercial Center Core Area (7A) and currently zoned SFR-00 (Single-Family Residential, one dwelling unit per parcel) and MFR-20 (Multiple-Family Residential, 20 units per acre), with a General Land Use Plan (GLUP) map designation of CM (Commercial). Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan, Southeast Overlay District DCA-14-083 Staff Report December 2, 2014 Page 6 of 24 Table 1. Adjacent Land Designations and Uses GLUP Zoning Uses North SC SFR-00 Single Family Residence South UH, UM SFR-00, MFR-15 and -20 City of Medford Fire Station East SC, UM SFR-00, MFR-20 Single Family Residence West CM, SC, UR SFR-4, C-S/P, C-C Michael Park Subdivision (SFR); Joseph Office Park; Larson Creek Shopping Center AUTHORITY The Planning Commission is authorized to recommend, and the City Council to approve, amendments to the Municipal Code under Sections 10.102, 10.110, 10.111, and 10.122. An amendment must be initiated by the Planning Commission or the City Council per Section 10.181. APPROVAL CRITERIA COMPLIANCE The criteria for this amendment are the typical criteria found in the Medford Municipal Code, Section 10.184. “Class ‘A’ Amendment Criteria,” and, in this particular case, criteria in Section 10.374(4). The general code amendment criteria will be addressed in “Part 1” and particular criteria will be addressed in “Part 2” following. Part 1 Findings and Conclusions relating to general code amendment criteria in Municipal Code Section 10.184(2) 10.184(2) Class ‘A’ Amendment Criteria—Land Development Code Amendment. The Planning Commission shall base its recommendation, and the City Council its decision, on the following criteria: Criterion 10.184(2)(a). Explanation of the public benefit of the amendment. Findings and Conclusions: A Master Plan for the Commercial Center Core Area of the Village Center is required to implement the Southeast Plan (Neighborhood Element, Medford Comprehensive Plan). The Master Plan will assure creation of a pedestrian- friendly retail “main street” with commercial buildings on both sides of Stanford Avenue and will establish special design and development standards for streetscapes, building Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan, Southeast Overlay District DCA-14-083 Staff Report December 2, 2014 Page 7 of 24 orientation, architectural form, signage, lighting, landscaping, plazas, transit station, and other physical elements in promotion of a transit-oriented neighborhood. The Master Plan has also been coordinated with the Rogue Valley Transit District to locate a transit station and needed public street infrastructure including a roundabout intersection that will serve to extend transit service to the area much sooner than would be likely without the Master Plan. Normally, RVTD would not extend service until the street grid for the larger neighborhood area is built out in the future. The Master Plan also includes a requirement that a transportation demand management program be included as part of future development plans within the Core Area. The TDM program provides developers with a variety of options under a “cafeteria”-type approach to make improvements on or off site to promote multi-modal transportation opportunities, and also will require on-going programs in support of alternative travel mode use. Adoption of the Master Plan will also enable rezoning of and development of the Core Area to proceed in implementation of the underlying General Land Use Plan. Much of the critical urban infrastructure needed to serve the remaining Southeast Plan Neighborhood to the east must run through the Commercial Center Core Area which may not be rezoned for development until a Master Plan has been adopted by the City. In effect, adoption of the Master Plan for the Core Area is also needed to enable lands beyond—some of which have already been re-zoned—to be made available for needed housing and employment opportunities. Accordingly, staff concludes that the proposed Code amendment will provide public benefit. The proposed changes to the Code aim to clarify and rectify existing code. The purpose is to align code with practice, to fix small errors, to maximize opportunities for creative development, and to reflect adopted riparian corridor regulations. The proposed changes will improve administration of the Development Code through increased clarity. The public will have an easier time interpreting the regulations and staff can provide answers clearly and more quickly. Criterion 10.184(2)(b). The justification for the amendment with respect to the following factors: Criterion 10.184(2)(b)(1). Conformity with applicable Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines. Findings and Conclusions: The proposed code amendment to adopt a Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan for the Village Center of the Southeast Plan Area is a requirement of the existing adopted Code at Sections 10.373(3) and 10.374(4 & 5), which in turn implement Southeast Plan Policy 1-B (Implementation 1-B(3)) in the Neighborhoods Element of the adopted Medford Comprehensive Plan. These compre- hensive plan and implementing ordinance provisions have already been acknowledged by the state as being in conformance with the Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines. Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan, Southeast Overlay District DCA-14-083 Staff Report December 2, 2014 Page 8 of 24 Therefore, staff concludes that a Master Plan that conforms to the adopted require- ments for the same as set forth at Code Section 10.374(4) is also in conformance with the Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines. The proposed amendments concern the functioning of the Development Code rather than applying new policies. They do not, for the greater part, rise to the level of enacting the Goals. Where an amendment has some relationship with a Goal, it supports the Goal in some modest way. Criterion 10.184(2)(b)(2). Conformity with goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan considered relevant to the decision. Findings and Conclusions: Medford Municipal Code Section 10.374(4), which establishes the minimum required elements to be provided in the Master Plan within the S-E Overlay District, was adopted to implement and assure conformity with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan for the Southeast Plan Area. The proposed Master Plan conforms to the Southeast Plan Goals and Policies as follows: Goal 1: To assure that development in the SE Area occurs in a manner that reduces reliance on automobile travel within the area and promotes multi-modal travel, including pedestrian, bicycle and transit. Policy 1-A: The City of Medford shall assure that circulation and development design in the SE Area emphasizes connectivity and promotes multi-modal transportation viability. Implementation 1-A (1): Do not allow private streets to prevent vehicular or pedes- trian connectivity or public access to greenways, parks, schools, or other activity centers. Finding: Access to the greenway within the Core Area will be by way of Michael Park Drive which is to be a public street to the south and generally parallel to the green- way. The Master Plan includes a dedicated sector (Michael Park Creekside) with specific standards to ensure public connectivity and access to the greenway is pre- served. Access to the north side of the creek through the Master Plan (7A) area is provided by crossings at North Phoenix Road and Stanford Avenue. Public street access is also provided to the East Plaza in the Stanford Avenue Sector and to the Transit Station Plaza which are the other activity centers in the Master Plan area. All public streets as provided in the Master Plan are located in accordance with the locations shown in the adopted Southeast Area Neighborhood Circulation Plan Map of the Comprehensive Plan. Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan, Southeast Overlay District DCA-14-083 Staff Report December 2, 2014 Page 9 of 24 Implementation 1-A (2): Discourage gated or dead-end developments because they prevent connectivity and neighborhood formation. Require adjacent developments to integrate with one another. Finding: There are no gated or dead-end developments indicated on the proposed Master Plan. The Master Plan includes six specific sectors that are designed to work together as an integrated whole to create a transition from the existing suburban pattern west of North Phoenix Road to a traditional “main street” of retail commer- cial shops and eateries along Stanford Avenue and from there into the planned neo- traditional form of the larger Village Center. The buildings and plaza along the east side of Stanford Avenue will have shared access and parking with the adjoining development in Area 7B, and the North Phoenix & Barnett (South) Sector to the west of the fire station is designed with cross-access connectivity to the adjoining property in Area 12 to the south. The Michael Park Creekside Sector will integrate Area 7A with the portion of Area 7B to the north of the creek. Lands to the west are outside the Southeast Plan Area, which is bordered by North Phoenix Road on the west side. Implementation 1-A (3): Assure that development design and street improvements on North Phoenix Road promote non-vehicular access across this major arterial at intersections. Finding: North Phoenix Road is designated as a major arterial and a freight route, and is regionally significant in its function as a local arterial route alternative to Interstate 5. The Master Plan provides for greater landscaped setbacks for develop- ment within the Sectors located adjacent to North Phoenix, and requires that the City’s standard major arterial cross section street treatments be utilized to buffer pedestrian from higher-velocity traffic. See Site Design requirements for North Phoenix Road frontage – Chapters 3 and 4. Pedestrian crosswalks that now exist at the signalized intersection of Barnett Road and North Phoenix Road will be pre- served. An additional cross-walk is indicated for the future intersection of Michael Park Drive with North Phoenix Road. A final design will be coordinated with the Public Works Department for final review and approval by the City at the time Michael Park Drive is offered for dedication and construction. Implementation 1-A (4): Discourage development site design along collector and arterial streets from creating a walled effect near the sidewalk. Finding: Area 7A includes two arterial streets (North Phoenix Road and Barnett Road) and no collector streets. The Master Plan is a form based code keyed to the plan map separated by sectors with a primary objective to establish transitional streetscapes from west to east – that is, from the regional arterial to a traditional “main street”. The Master Plan map provides for greater separation in between Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan, Southeast Overlay District DCA-14-083 Staff Report December 2, 2014 Page 10 of 24 buildings and between buildings and the street along North Phoenix Road where traffic is heaviest. The greater separation along that corridor also serves to preserve view of Roxy Ann for those many people who travel north along that street every day. Along Barnett, structural setbacks to the street are reduced to zero as the major arterial segment transitions to a minor arterial street 250 feet east of North Phoenix Road. The spacing between buildings decreases as this transition continues eastward. The Master Plan also establishes Common Design Standards (Chapter 2) that apply in all sectors. Common Design Standard (CDS) 9(c)(ii) requires that pedes- trian access be provided between buildings along street frontages at spacing not to exceed 300 feet in order to connect parking areas with retail streets. These pass- through walkways are to be integrated with other outdoor activity areas such as plazas, patios, or entry courts rather than as secluded narrow corridors. Extra-wide sidewalks and street furnishings are also required, along with architectural façade treatments that require a richness of depth and detail (CDS 1 and 2). Blank walls only visible from adjacent streets and public areas must also be avoided (CDS 4). In these ways, the Master Plan discourages site design along collector and arterial streets from creating a walled effect near the sidewalk. Implementation 1-A (5): Encourage the Rogue Valley Transportation District (RVTD) to serve the SE Area with transit service as soon as feasible. Finding: This implementation strategy was a critical objective in the development of the Master Plan. The Southeast Village, within which the Commercial Center Core Area (7A) is located, is designated as Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) district. The core of this district is the subject Master Plan area. However, transit service currently is not available to the area. The nearest service line terminates at the Rogue Regional Medical Center one mile to the west (Black Oak Drive and Barnett Road). Until the Southeast Neighborhood plan area is more fully developed with a grid of public streets, the transit district indicated that it would not be likely to extend the route beyond North Phoenix Road although demand in the near future may warrant an extension of service to that point. However, the transit district agreed that it would be willing to extend service to a transit station in the Master Plan area if able to maneuver its vehicles to the return route without need to leave the public right-of-way. The transit district does not allow routing of its vehicles through private property for risk-control reasons. The roundabout intersection at Stanford Avenue and Barnett was then proposed as a means to make it feasible for RVTD to cross provide service within the actual SE Village Center TOD east of North Phoenix Road sooner than it would otherwise be possible when additional streets are dedicated and built in the future. The right-of-way for Barnett Road already exists and will be widened as development within Area 7A occurs along Barnett. The transit station will be located on the north side of Barnett Road just west of the roundabout to provide the first stop on the return trip for that service line. A Trans- portation Demand Management (TDM) Program was also created in coordination Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan, Southeast Overlay District DCA-14-083 Staff Report December 2, 2014 Page 11 of 24 with the property owners at the request of RVTD to provide further incentive for the district to extend service as soon as feasible. The Master Plan also include a specific transit station sector and design standards to provide a plaza and other transit amenities such as bicycle storage so as to create a hub between a wide variety of travel modes. Finding: Policy 1-A applies to the entire SE Area, including the Commercial Center Core Area (7A). Conclusion – Policy 1-A: Based on the findings above demonstrating conformance with the Policy 1-A implementation strategies, staff concludes that the Master Plan will assure circulation and development design that emphasizes connectivity and promotes multi-modal transportation viability in a manner consistent with Policy 1-A. Policy 1-B: The City of Medford shall assure that the Village Center is developed as a pedestrian-oriented, mixed-use, higher-density central core (Transit-Oriented District) for the SE Area. Implementation 1-B (1): Require special design for development within the Village Center, affecting such elements as building location and orientation, lighting, sign- age, parking, outdoor storage and display, greenway/wetlands treatment, etc. Finding: The Master Plan includes common and sector-specific special design stand- ards affecting the above elements. The Commercial Center Core Area (7A) is also subject to other special standards applicable within the S-E Overlay District as estab- lished in the Medford Municipal Code which have been adopted in accordance with this Implementation 1-B (1). Implementation 1-B (2): Limit the commercial zoning districts and permitted uses within the commercial portion of the Village Center to assure pedestrian-oriented development. Finding: The adopted Southeast Plan includes a history of the development of that neighborhood plan. It is explained there that the Commercial GLUP designation and commercial zoning districts amended following adoption of a Phase 2 plan to limit the size of businesses in the Community Commercial (C-C) zoning district to 50,000 square feet, and to create a new Regional Commercial (C-R) zoning district. This action was needed to allow the use of C-C zoning in the SE Area without permitting large regional retail uses. The C-C zoning district will be applied to the Commercial Center Core Area (7A) when rezoning is allowed after the Master Plan is adopted. The Master Plan also includes additional and more specific limitations and special design standards to assure pedestrian-oriented development. Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan, Southeast Overlay District DCA-14-083 Staff Report December 2, 2014 Page 12 of 24 Implementation 1-B (3): Require master planning of the entire Commercial Center Core Area of the Village Center prior to development approval. Finding: This requirement was included in the adopted regulations for S-E Overlay District, and the Master Plan is a result of this requirement. Implementation 1-B (4): Promote the location of public and quasi-public uses within the Village Center, such as a fire station, day care center, community center, church, park, public plaza, etc. Finding: A fire station currently sits within the Village Center, adjacent and south- southeast of the Commercial Center Core Area (7A). The Master Plan includes the Michael Park Creekside Sector which promotes park and open space use along the greenway and the Master Plan includes the East Plaza with public restrooms in the Stanford Avenue Sector and a transit plaza in the East Barnett Transit Station Sector. The existing fraternal lodge within the North Phoenix and Barnett (South) Sector also functions as a community center. A small portion of that building will be adapted for interim use by a credit union which will continue to offer the remainder of the building for community meetings and activities. The Master Plan also specifies the location of commercial plazas and courts and retail streetscapes with wide sidewalks and furnishings to establish a sense of place at the street level. These features, combined with the roundabout intersection, will effect a plaza form around the intersection of Stanford and Barnett. The property owners to the south of the inter- section, located in Area 13 (MFR-15) outside the Core Area but within the Village Center, also plan to mirror this treatment. A mixed-use plan for that property to the south, which includes retail commercial along the roundabout, was considered in the Roundabout Analysis (Master Plan Appendix B) and is attached as Appendix F to that report. Conclusion – Policy 1-B: Based on the findings herein above demonstrating conform- ance with the Policy 1-B implementation strategies, staff concludes that the Master Plan will meet Policy 1-B to assure that the Village Center is developed as a pedestrian- oriented, mixed use, higher density central core (Transit-Oriented District) for the SE Area. Policy 1-C: The City of Medford shall support the location of small neighborhood commercial sites in the SE Area outside the Village Center. Finding: This policy does not apply to Area 7A. Conclusion – Goal 1: Based on the findings and conclusion above that the Goal 1 policies are met by the Master Plan, staff concludes that the Master Plan comports with the goal to assure that development in the SE Area occurs in a manner that reduces reliance on Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan, Southeast Overlay District DCA-14-083 Staff Report December 2, 2014 Page 13 of 24 automobile travel within the area and promotes multi-modal travel, including pedestri- an, bicycle and transit. Goal 2: To assure that development in the SE Area occurs in a manner that preserves its abundant natural features and resources. Policy 2-A: The City of Medford shall strive to provide a system of interconnected open spaces in the SE Area utilizing drainageways and stream corridors open to public view and access. Implementation 2-A (1): Accentuate drainageways and stream corridors by locating street rights-of-way collinear and adjacent to them in order to open them for public view and access. Such placement should be outside the Greenway, should not disturb the riparian area, and should be in conjunction with enhancement and/or restoration. Creekview Drive in particular should be so located in relation to the Middle Fork of Larson Creek. Finding: The Master Plan provides for Michael Park Drive, a public street, to be located collinear and adjacent to the greenway in a manner consistent with Imple- mentation 2-A (1). The pattern will thereby be set to extend easterly as the green- way continues through the remainder of the SE Plan Area and ultimately to Chrissy Park and Prescott Park. Code Section 10.384 (Greenway – Special Design and Devel- opment Standards, S-E) and the Michael Park Sector specific standards further provide for protection and enhancement of the riparian area. The area along the Medford Irrigation Canal is also reserved as accessible open space. There are no other drainageways or stream corridors within Area 7A. Conclusion – Policy 2-A: Based on the finding herein above demonstrating conformance with the Policy 2-A implementation strategy, staff concludes that the Master Plan will meet Policy 2-A to assure that development in the SE Area occurs in a manner that preserves its abundant natural features and resources. Policy 2-B: The City of Medford shall strive to protect natural features and resources in the SE Area, including restoration when necessary. Implementation 2-B (1): Encourage clustered development to avoid alteration of important natural features. Finding: The Master Plan sets aside the natural features as a specific sector (Michael Park Creekside). The sector includes provisions to considerable flexibility in design of the buildable pads outside the greenway boundary in order to protect the natural features. Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan, Southeast Overlay District DCA-14-083 Staff Report December 2, 2014 Page 14 of 24 Implementation 2-B (2): Apply best management practices for private and public development activities that affect streams, drainageways, and wetlands, including reducing impervious surfaces so that runoff is slowed and filtered. Finding: The Master Plan include a special street design for Michael Park Drive requiring a bio-swale edge treatment on the north (creek) side, and provides for a subarea stormwater detention and treatment facility to be accommodated in ac- cordance with the City of Medford Stormwater Management Plan. As described in the plan, the water quality facility would “be a buffered low flow channel and the detention would be dedicated upland area where flows from the one-year storm would back up. The slope allows the backing and the upland area could serve as open space. This facility would work hand in hand with site specific water quality control measures and low impact development designs. …” The described facility will be integrated with the trail, recreational, and open space components of the green- way in an attractive manner. Implementation 2-B (3): Require hillside development to meet stringent standards limiting grading and vegetation disturbance, and minimizing visual intrusion. Finding: The City of Medford, in accordance with this requirement, has adopted hillside development regulations (Code Sections 10.929–10.933). The Master Plan does not change or relieve development within the Master Plan area from hillside development requirements. The land within Area 7A is, however, moderately sloped in general. There is a hill situated to the southeast in Areas 13 and 14. The toe of slope extends partially into Area 7A where the existing Barnett Road right-of-way is located. The planned re-alignment of Barnett Road to the east of Area 7A will follow the slope contour at the foot of the hill. Implementation 2-B (4): Require tree preservation plans indicating existing trees of more than six inches in diameter, in conjunction with development applications. Finding: The only existing trees in Area 7A are located adjacent to the creek within the greenway boundary. Code Section 10.384 will continue to apply special green- way design and development standards. Subsection (D) of that section, which ap- plies specifically to land within the Commercial Center (7A and 7B), requires a land- scape restoration plan be approved by the City prior to commencing any alteration of vegetation within the greenway area. Conclusion – Policy 2-B: Based on the finding above demonstrating conformance with the Policy 2-B implementation strategies, staff concludes that the Master Plan will meet Policy 2-B to protect natural features and resources in the SE Area, including restoration when necessary. Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan, Southeast Overlay District DCA-14-083 Staff Report December 2, 2014 Page 15 of 24 Policy 2-C: The City of Medford shall pursue the continuing evaluation of the SE Area’s natural resources to determine which should be protected by permanent use re- strictions or public ownership, and which can be included in environmentally sensitive development. Finding and Conclusion – Policy 2-B: The City of Medford City Council, in the course of the master planning project, commissioned a survey of the natural area along the creek and resolved to acquire the greenway area and some adjacent lands within Area 7A and some land within Area 7B. The Master Plan establishes the Michael Park Creekside Sector that is specific to reserving the natural area as open space and park use. Accordingly, staff concludes that the Master Plan complies with Policy 2-C. Conclusion – Goal 2: Based on the findings and conclusion above that the Goal 2 policies are met by the Master Plan, staff concludes that the Master Plan comports with the goal to assure that development in the SE Area occurs in a manner that preserves its abundant natural features and resources. Goal 3: To provide for the implementation of the Southeast Plan. Policy 3-A: The City of Medford shall use zone change procedures as the timing mechanism to control development within the SE Area, based upon the availability and adequacy of public facilities and services, as required by the Medford Comprehensive Plan and Medford Municipal Code. However, future zone changes in the City will be exempt from meeting the minimum transportation LOS standard for Stanford Avenue and the alternatively designed section of Barnett Road east of Stanford Avenue located within the Southeast Commercial Center because Barnett Road within the Commercial Center is desired to have a high level of slow moving traffic. Finding and Conclusion – Policy 1-A: This policy is implicated at the time zone changes are considered, but is not directly applicable to adoption of the Master Plan. However, it should be noted that the policy was enacted so that the “main street” development pattern that is required by the Southeast Plan and the Master Plan will not inhibit the ability of property owners to obtain zone change approvals within the City should congestion through the Commercial Center (7A and 7B) result. The policy furthers the implementation of a TOD district by expressly accepting that a high level of slow-moving traffic supports a retail district. Policy 3-B: Where a street functions as the boundary separating two land use designa- tions or categories in the SE Area, changes to the street location resulting from planning actions shall shift the designations or categories accordingly. Encourage similar land use types to be located facing one another across streets with changes in land use types occurring at the backs of lots where possible. Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan, Southeast Overlay District DCA-14-083 Staff Report December 2, 2014 Page 16 of 24 Finding and Conclusion – Policy 3-B: East Barnett Road is currently the boundary between Area 7A and Area 13 (Rowhouse – MFR-15). A planned re-alignment of the roadway will occur east of the roundabout, which will place a small corner of the Core Area to the south of the re-aligned right-of-way. However, the Southeast Plan explains that the realigned portion of Barnett Road is intended to provide for commercial uses facing on both sides of an alternatively designed minor arterial cross section for that segment east of Stanford Avenue. Due to the location of existing water mains in the existing right-of-way which connect to the nearby reservoir to the southeast which serves this part of the City, a utility easement will be retained over this alignment so as not to disturb those facilities. Accordingly, staff concludes that the boundary separating Area 7A from Area 13 does not shift with the re-alignment of Barnett. By retaining the existing boundaries after the realignment, the policy will be achieved as the result will be similar land use types facing one another across the street with change in land use types occurring at the back of the lots located on the south side of Barnett east of Stanford – which will be generally beyond and east of Area 7A. Policy 3-C: The City of Medford shall pursue the future adoption of regulations and design criteria that promote transportation-oriented design in the SE Area pursuant to the recommendations of the Rogue Valley Regional Transportation Plan, the Medford Transportation System Plan, and other plans as adopted. Finding and Conclusion – Policy 3-C: The Master Plan is a regulatory code to be adopted in conformance with this policy to promote transportation-oriented design in the SE Area. Staff also notes that the likely intended word in the goal is “transit” instead of “transportation.” The current proposal cannot make that change that since the Comprehensive Plan is not being amended. Policy 3-D: The City of Medford shall assure that notice is provided to the Medford and Phoenix-Talent School Districts that land designated for future schools and/or parks in the SE Area may be acquired by the City or school district for such purposes. The City shall notify the applicable school district of pending development permit applications on such land. The City shall not withhold the approval of zoning or development permit applications solely on the basis that a school district or the City has not acquired title to the property. Nothing in this policy prohibits the location of a school or park from changing. Finding and Conclusion – Policy 3-D: No school site has been designated in the SE Plan for Area 7A, which is located in the Medford School District. The school district is included in the agency notification for Class A authorizations. Policy 3-E: The City of Medford shall seek to expend parks systems development charges (SDCs) collected within the SE Area on park-related improvements within the same SE Area. Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan, Southeast Overlay District DCA-14-083 Staff Report December 2, 2014 Page 17 of 24 Finding and Conclusion – Policy 3-E: This policy is not directly implicated for adoption of the Master Plan. The City has adopted separate and generally applicable Systems Development Charge regulations consistent with this policy and State regulations for the same. Conclusion – Goal 2: Based on the findings and conclusion above that the Goal 2 policies are met by the Master Plan, staff concludes that the Master Plan comports with the goal to provide for the implementation of the Southeast Plan. The associated housekeeping amendments cannot be easily linked to policies in the Comprehensive Plan. As previously noted, housekeeping changes are meant to make the Code clearer and easier to use in terms of general policy only. The Comprehensive Plan tends to name goals with more specific solutions. Criterion 10.184(2)(b)(3). Comments from applicable referral agencies regarding applicable statutes or regulations. Findings and Conclusions: City of Medford Parks and Recreation Department submitted project comments on October 27, 2014 and are attached as Exhibit D. Parks comments reference Master Plan Chapters 1, 6, and 8, the Master Plan chapters applicable to the development and maintenance of Michael Park Creekside. City of Medford Public Works Department submitted project comments on October 29, 2014 (Exhibit E). Public Works comments for Master Plan Chapter 1 recommend that access points onto North Phoenix Road and East Barnett Road be removed from the Master Plan map with future approval to be justified by a traffic impact analysis. In response, staff added language to the caption for the map on page 1.2 to stipulate that access points along North Phoenix Road and East Barnett Road shall not be approved until justified by a traffic impact analysis. Public Works comments for Master Plan, Chapter 2, sub-section 1, point out that “encroachment permit” is not the correct term. In response, staff changed the phrase on page 2.2 from ‘encroachment permit’ to ‘revocable permit.’ Public Works comments for Master Plan, Chapter 2, sub-section 12, state that language in the Master Plan should stipulate that intensification of landscaping at intersection corners and at driveway entrances shall conform to the clear view triangle as specified in MLDC 10.735. In response, staff modified Master Plan language on page 2.6 to state that landscaping shall conform to MLDC 10.375 in addition to 10.377(6) and 10.780. Staff has determined that all additional Public Works comments are informational for future development. Additional modifications to Master Plan language is unnecessary. Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan, Southeast Overlay District DCA-14-083 Staff Report December 2, 2014 Page 18 of 24 Staff concludes that the Plan has been modified to adequately address the issues raised by responding agencies. Criterion 10.184(2)(b)(4). Public comments. Findings and Conclusions: Comment from Rogue Credit Union expressing support for the project was received on October 24, 2014 and is attached as Exhibit F. Criterion 10.184(2)(b)(5). Applicable governmental agreements. Findings and Conclusions: No government agreements were found to be directly implicated by adoption of the Master Plan or by revisions to the Municipal Code. The City of Medford and Jackson County have mutually adopted an urban growth boundary agreement that recognizes land within the urban growth boundary is to be made available to meet the city’s urban land needs. The Master Plan is to be adopted in furtherance of the adopted urbanization policies. CONCLUSION: the foregoing finding and conclusions demonstrate that the Master Plan comports with the required criteria for a Class “A” Land Development Code Amend- ment. Part 2 Findings and Conclusions relating to Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan requirements in Municipal Code Section 10.374 Section 10.374 (4) Commercial Center Core Area (7A) Master Plan The Southeast Village Commercial Center Core Area (7A) Master Plan, adopted by the City Council, shall govern design and development within the area designated (7A) “Commercial Center Core Area” on the Southeast Plan Map (See Figure 10.372). All zone changes, PUDs, other land use actions, and permits within the Commercial Center Core Area (7A) shall conform to the Master Plan. The Master Plan, at a minimum, shall contain the following elements: Criterion 10.374 (4) a. Provision for retail commercial uses on both sides of Stanford Avenue. Finding: The Master Plan provides for retail commercial uses on both sides of Stanford Avenue which is governed by the Stanford Avenue Sector provisions in Chapter 7 of the plan and in satisfaction of this requirement. Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan, Southeast Overlay District DCA-14-083 Staff Report December 2, 2014 Page 19 of 24 Criterion 10.374 (4) b. Pedestrian and bicycle circulation plan. Finding: The Master Plan includes a pedestrian and bicycle circulation plan at Appendix A. The Common Design Standards included at Chapter 2 also include specifications for pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Criterion 10.374 (4) c. Barnett Road shall be developed to Major Arterial street standards from North Phoenix Road east 250 feet. From 250 feet east of the intersec- tion of North Phoenix Road and Barnett Road, to the easterly boundary of the Commer- cial Center Core Area (7A), Barnett Road shall be developed to Minor Arterial street standards. Finding: The Master Plan includes these requirements for Barnett Road as specified for the site design standards for the adjacent Sectors in Chapters 3, 4, 5, and 7 of the Master Plan. Criterion 10.374 (4) d. Special street design standards for the main street, Stanford Avenue, that include on-street parking, sidewalks of at least twelve (12) feet in width on both sides of Stanford Avenue, street trees, and no planter strips. Finding: The Stanford Avenue Sector specific standards for site design at Chapter 7 in the Master Plan include special street design standards that comply with this require- ment. Criterion 10.374 (4) e. Required architectural design standards and unique architectural themes for each sector of development. All applicants shall incorporate neo-traditional design elements into the development. Finding: The Master Plan includes Common Design Standards at Chapter 2 that include neo-traditional architectural design standards applicable throughout the district. Specific sector standards are also established in Chapters 3 through 8 covering each Sector within Area 7A. Criterion 10.374 (4) f. Required “pedestrian friendly” design through the use of: (1) Building facades set nearer the sidewalk. Finding: The Master Plan provides for a transition from the context of the heavily travelled North Phoenix Road (major arterial and freight route) to a “main street” pedestrian friendly design where retail buildings are to be sited adjacent to wide sidewalks and plazas. Building setbacks to the adjacent street decrease along Barnett Road from west to east as it transitions from a major to a minor arterial and then to the roundabout intersection with Stanford Avenue, the designated “main street”. Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan, Southeast Overlay District DCA-14-083 Staff Report December 2, 2014 Page 20 of 24 (2) De-emphasis of automobile access and storage; avoiding an uninterrupted expanse of asphalt; and provision of large shade trees on the interior and perimeter of parking lots. Finding: The Master Plan arrays buildings along the street edges with common parking area provided to the rear and thereby screened from the public streets, which the Master Plan emphasizes to create as a “main street” retail district. Trees are shown on the plan on the interior and perimeter of parking lots, and the same are required to be large shade trees pursuant to the Common Design Standards (Ch. 2, 12(c)). An interior pedestrian walkway from East Barnett Road to the Market-Grocery buildings functions to separate the common interior parking and to provide safe and attractive pedestrian access in accordance with the Master Plan standards (Ch. 2, CSD 9). (3) Interesting and varied landscape designs including hardscapes. Finding: The Master Plan is a form-based regulatory code under which development of buildings and sites within Area 7A will be subject to Site Plan and Architectural or Planning Commission review and approval. Development plans must comply with the Common Design Standards and the Sector Specific Standards included in the Master Plan as well as the remaining applicable code requirements for development in the S-E Overlay District and the City as a whole. The Master Plan includes detailed architectural and landscape standards throughout to assure that interested and varied landscapes will be provided including hardscapes. (4) Common streetlights that are architecturally appropriate. Finding: Chapter 2 of the Master Plan requires that pedestrian scale lighting be provided along public streets and along off-street walkways and sidewalks (CDS 9d). The standards require the use of the S-E Area Street Light Standards for public street lighting. Bollard and pedestrian scale pole fixtures including banner or planter brackets are specified for off-street parking areas. (5) Street furniture, such as benches, lights, raised flowerpots, drinking fountains, and public art. Finding: Each Sector include specific site design standards for these elements. (Ch. 3, 1(ii); Ch. 4, 1(b)(vi); Ch. 5, 1(a)(ii, vii), and 1(b); Ch. 6, 1(a)(iv) and 1(c); Ch. 7, 1(a)(vi), 1(c), and 1(e); and Ch. 8, 1(b). The Common Design Standards in Chapter 2 applicable to the entire area also require projects design intersection corners and commercial entry drives as area focal points for landscaping, and to include planter pots, window boxes and/or other smaller scale elements along sidewalks and near storefronts to provide visual interest to the streetscapes and interior walkways (CDS 12). Plazas and adjoining sidewalks are to include seating, pedestrian scale lighting and similar pedestrian Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan, Southeast Overlay District DCA-14-083 Staff Report December 2, 2014 Page 21 of 24 improvements, and low walls or planters and landscaping to separate the plazas from adjoining parking lots and maneuvering areas (CDS 12). (6) Weather protection for pedestrians. Finding: The Common Design Standards in Chapter 2 of the Master Plan requires weather protection for pedestrians along adjacent sidewalks to storefronts and includes standards for awnings, canopies, arcades, or other shelter (CDS 1(c)). (7) Design that discourages use of fencing. Finding: The Master Plan specifies fencing with vegetative screening as an option for screening of trash and service areas (Ch. 2, 5(c)) and potentially as may be required by the Medford Irrigation District for safety and control along the irrigation canal (Ch. 4, 1(a)(vi)). Otherwise, the Master Plan provides for a cohesive integrated project that discourages the use of fencing. (8) At least three (3) operating building entrances per block and at least one (1) per building on streets where on-street parking is permitted. Finding: Primary building entrances continue to be subject to the standards of Section 10.377(3) which requires all buildings within the Southeast Village Center (including Area 7A) to have a primary building entrance face an adjacent street or placed at an angle of up to 45 degrees from an adjacent street. Buildings at intersections need to provide a primary entrance along each adjacent street or orient a primary entrance to both streets. The Master Plan provides at least three buildings along each block. Consequently, Section 10.377(3) will operate in combination with the Master Plan to ensure that there will be at least three operating entrances per block. On-street parking will not be permitted along North Phoenix Road, East Barnett Road, or Michael Park Drive within the Master Plan Area (7A). Again, Section 10.377(3) will operate to require building to include primary entrances oriented to adjacent streets, plazas, and transit stations. The Sector Specific Standards reflect this requirement (Ch. 3, 2(c); Ch. 4, 1(d); Ch. 5, 2(e); Ch. 6, 2(a & b); Ch. 7, 1(a)(ii), 1(c), and 2(d) (9) All buildings along Stanford Avenue shall be two-story buildings, or have the appearance of a two-story building. Finding: The Master Plan contains this requirement at Chapter 2, Section 2 (Building Design). Criterion 10.374 (4) g. Lighting plan that avoids lighting adjacent properties and the night sky. The master plan shall require that applicants for development within Area 7A include photometric data and an illumination plan consistent with Section 10.764 at the Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan, Southeast Overlay District DCA-14-083 Staff Report December 2, 2014 Page 22 of 24 time development permit applications are submitted to the City for review and approval. Finding: The Master Plan includes no exemption to the generally applicable standards of Code Section 10.764. Accordingly, the Master Plan continues to require photometric data and an illumination plan at the time development permit applications are submitted to the City for review and approval. The Master Plan also specifies that low bollard lighting fixtures are to be used along smaller paths and as landscape accents and that hooded pedestrian-scale lighting fixtures are to be used within off-street parking areas. City standard street lighting for the S-E Overlay District is to be utilized along the public streets. Criterion 10.374 (4) h. Master signage plan that encourages monument signs, discour- ages retail signage that lists tenants, and discourages rooftop lights. Finding: The Master Plan includes signage standards in Chapter 9 that includes authorization and specifications for monument signs (Section 8), disallows roof- mounted signs (Section 1(g)), and limits multiple tenant signage to three tenants (Sections 8(f) and 9(d)). Criterion 10.374 (4) i. Covered bicycle parking areas. Finding: The Master Plan Common Design Standards in Chapter 2 require bicycle parking to be provided in accordance with Sections 10.747 through 10.751 except that the amount of bicycle parking provided shall be two-times the amount required by Section 10.748 “Bicycle Parking Standards” (Master Plan Ch. 2, 16(a)). Common Design Standard 16(b) also specifies that the eleven separate bicycle parking facilities shown on the Bicycle and Pedestrian Circulation Plan (Appendix A) must be provided. In turn, Section 10.747 requires that at least 50% of the bicycle parking spaces shall be covered where 10 or more bicycle spaces area required. Section 10.748 requires that the minimum number of parking spaces to be provided for bicycles is to be equivalent to 10% of the number of spaces provided for automobiles. Accordingly, the Master Plan requires that the minimum number of bicycle parking spaces shall be equivalent to 20% of the number of spaces provided for commercial development in the Core Area. Covered parking areas will necessarily be required to meet these standards as development of the Master Plan area proceeds. The Master Plan also includes incentives to provide additional sheltered bicycle parking over minimums and other bicycle amenities by awarding points for that as an option in the Transportation Demand Management Program at Common Design Standard 16. Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan, Southeast Overlay District DCA-14-083 Staff Report December 2, 2014 Page 23 of 24 Criterion 10.374 (4) j. Public restrooms. Finding: Public restrooms are required by the Master Plan to be provided as an amenity in the East Plaza within the Stanford Avenue Sector (Ch. 7, 1(c)(iv)). Public restrooms would also likely be provided as park amenities along the greenway when park design planning is finalized as discussed in Chapter 8 of the Master Plan. Criterion 10.374 (4) k. Usable exterior spaces and outdoor gathering and eating areas open to the public. Finding: The Master Plan includes Sector-specific standards to assure that the East Plaza and the East Barnett Transit Station Plaza will be usable outdoor gather and eating areas open to the public in addition to the extensive public open space reserved in the Michael Park Creekside Sector. The plan also includes provisions throughout to promote outdoor dining areas to be provided along and within extra-wide sidewalks and retail plazas, patios, and courtyards. A large plaza is also required for Buildings 7 and 8 in the Market/Grocery Sector. Criterion 10.374 (4) l. Shopping cart storage incorporated into building design to screen stored carts. Finding: This is required in the Master Plan (Ch. 6, 2(c)). Criterion 10.374 (4) m. Separated truck delivery and circulation from customer circulation. Finding: Separated truck delivery and circulation is specified on the Master Plan for Building 3 (to be a pharmacy) and Building 7 (Market-Grocery). The bus bays to be provided along the East Barnett Transit Station will also be dedicated for interim use as loading zones until transit service is extended to the area (Chapter 5). SUMMARY The proposed Code amendment can be found to be consistent with the overall Goals and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan by continuing the City’s efforts to promote neo- traditional neighborhood design and TOD principles while protecting the physical features and qualities that are unique to the Southeast Plan in an effective and efficient manner. The amendment also can be found to be consistent with the requirements of Section 10.374(4) because all of the required elements for Commercial Center Core Area (7A) Master Plan are included in the plan. Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan, Southeast Overlay District DCA-14-083 Staff Report December 2, 2014 Page 24 of 24 RECOMMENDED ACTION Based on the findings of this staff report that all approval criteria are met or are not applicable, staff recommends approval of the Core Area Master Plan and an associated set of clarifying code amendments. At their meeting of November 13, 2014, the Planning Commission voted to forward a recommendation for denial of the Core Area Master Plan based on its finding that the Plan fails to meet the expectations of the Neighborhood Element. The Planning Commission recommends approval of the associated set of clarifying code amendments, however. EXHIBITS A. Southeast Village Commercial Center Core Area Master Plan (Note: Appendices B through H of the Master Plan comprise a 98-page TIA addressing the East Barnett Road roundabout and are available for review at the City of Medford Planning Department) B. Proposed Code Amendment, Sections 10.370–10.385 C. Minutes from October 27, 2014 Planning Commission Study Session D. City of Medford Parks and Recreation Department Comments E. City of Medford Public Works Department Comments F. Rogue Credit Union Letter of Support CITY COUNCIL AGENDA: December 18, 2014