HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit Miscellaneous 1989-8-4
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
ADMiNiSTRATION
PLANNING I BUILDING
PUBLIC WORKS
Augus~E7f,OPT9i3~N WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT
Mr. and Mrs. Earl McElhaney
2797 Burlington
Springfield, OR 97478
i .. .. .::)
4r:fiE[[rr/~ . \
- AUG .?
l.-: 1 0 7989. -.
Utt~ r&.~
fnwirn """"t)'
Dear Mr. McElhaney,
Re: Partition of property located between North 28th Street and North 31st Street in
Springfield's Urban Growth Boundary (Jo. No. 89-06-109).
DECISION
The partition request for the above mentioned property has been granted PRELIMINARY
PLAN APPROVAL as of the date of this letter.
The applicant will have up to one year from the date of this letter to meet any
attached conditions or Development Code standards to obtain Final Map Approval. The
Final Map needs to be be submitted to the Development Services Department along with
legal descriptions of the new parcels and any other required legal documents. The
Director must certify that all conditions or Development Code standards li.sted under
Preliminary Plan Approval have been met prior to Final Map Approval and Development
Approval, i.e., before a building permit may be issued or property transferred.
Please refer to the attached "Findings of Fact" (See Attachment A).
FINAL HAP AND DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL
In order to obtain Final Map and Development Approval the following conditions or
standards need to be completed prior to August 4, 1990:
Primary Conditions
1. Two copies of: (a) The Final Map showing a 50 foot-wide double panhandle (this
panhandle must be part of Parcel 2 [25 feet] and Parcel 3 [25 feet]j the
drainagewaYj and the tree masses along the drainageway and other portions of the
property) and incorporating any conditions of the Preliminary Plan Approval. (b)
Two copies of the Future Development Plan showing the drainageway.
2. The legal descriptions of the new parcels.
3. A signed Statement of Vater Rights form (City).
4. A signed Dedication of right-of-way form for both N. 28th and N. 31st Streets
(Lane County).
5. A signed Improvement Agreement for both N. 28th and N. 31st Streets (City).
6. A signed joint use/access agreement for the 50 foot-wide double panhandle. This
document needs to be reviewed by the City Attorney.
';,
"'-
'>'.~' ,.ri ...'......1. ~..,
, .....,
,#"~ . ~ . .' ,.~.
Page 2 McE"lhaney Padition.,Letter
!I . ... "i.
,~r .' _": \,-\ .~. i "\) .: ~\,~~~.~'\
7. Sign!=!d iAn~,exa;t,~Qn,sAgreeme!! t forms (Ci ty) .
'" . ~t...",,~.. .~1~1'l .''''',\
8. A l.e,(te.;> signed 'by the, i Lane County Sani tarian stating that the' property is
capapl.,~""of" supportiI1:g a.t,'s~Ptic tank.
.~ ..." -\" ..' ,.... ,
9. A Slgneq' deed r~sti}ction for the existing drainageway stating that no
alteratipn,excavatlJ:>rl or-fill shall be allowed within the drainageway itself
which would imp.~de..the carrying capaci ty of the drainagewaYi no development shall
occur within 10 feet of the drainagewaYi and that the existing trees along the
drainageway shall not be cut without permission from the City. This document
needs to be reviewed by the City Attorney.
10. A Facilities Permit from Lane County for access to North 31st Street.
Secondary Conditions (do not have to be met until development occurs)
1. At the time of development of any parcel, the 50 foot-wide double panhandle
driveway shall be paved a minimum width of 18 feet for a distance of at least 60
feet from North 31st Street, the remainder of the driveway can be gravel.
2. The property address must be seen from the street.
3. Coordinate water connections with Rainbow Vater District.
Note:
Item 4 needs to be on,a Lane County form. A copy of this form needs to be
given to the City prior to approval by the Lane County Board of
Commissioners. Items 5, 6 and 9 require recordation at Lane County. The
applicant is responsible for paying the recording fees.
APPEAL
If you wish to appeal the decision of 'Partition Preliminary Plan Approval, you must
do so within 10 days of the date of this letter. Your appeal must be in accordance
Springfield Development Code, Article 15, APPEALS.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact me at your
convenience.
K:r/A:
Planner
cc: Larry Olson, Olson & Thompson
Mike Evans, Land Planning Consultants
John E. Barkle
Carl and Jo Anderson
Oscar and Delila Smith
Donna Carlile
Pat Dixon
Dorothy Scales
ATTACHMENT A
FINDINGS OF FACT
Background
This proposal would partition Tax Lot 800, Assessor's Map 17-02-19-30, into three
parcels. Parcell, would be approximately 1.4 acres; Parcel 2, would be
approximately 1.6 acres; Parcel 3, would be approximately 9.4 acres. Access for
Parcels 1, 2 and 3 would be through a 50 foot-wide double panhandle with a joint/use
access an9 maintenance agreement. Th~ panhandle would later be converted to public
right~of-way .upon subdivision of the remainder of the property after annexation to
the City of Springfield. The property is vacant. The property is zoned LOR Low
Density Residential; the Metro Plan designation is Low Density Residential. The
property is not in any refinement plan~
The proposal was submitted on June 23, 1989.
The proposal was accepted by staff on June ~O, 1989.
On June 30, 1989, adjacent owner/occupants were sent notice of this Type II
application.
On July 11, 1989, the Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed this request.
On July 13, 1989, the DRC held, a public meeting to discuss this proposal wi th the
applicants and adjacent noticed property owner/occupants.
S taft:
Gary Karp and Shari Higgins.
Public:
Carl and Jo Anderson, ,Oscar and Delila Smith, John Ba~kle Earl McElhaney,
Donna Carlile Pat Dixon and Mike Evans.
Issues: Protection of the drainageway, dedication of right-of-way for North 31st
,Street (concerns about, street widening), the Future Development Plan
(whether .it should be sent with the public notice*) and annexation to the
City (when), and the status of the 50 foot-wide double panhandle driveway
(whether it should'be dedicated as public right-of-way to Lane County).
The issues raised needed further study. A second public meeting was
suggested. *Staff will discuss this issue during the next review of
Departmental policies.~
'On Augus t
information
Lands.
3, 1989, the DRC held a second public meeting to review additional
submitted by the applicant, Lane County and the Oregon Division of State
Staff: Gary Karp and Shari Higgins.
Public: Mike Evans, Dorothy Scales, Christine McElhaney, Nicole McElhaney, Earl L.
McElh~ney and John Barkle; a letter sent by Mr. and Mrs. Carl Anderson was
read into the record.
McElhaney Partition Findings
Page 2
Issues:
1. Dedication of right-of-way on North 31st Street. Lane County received
a copy of this application and has requested the City to ask for an
additional 10 feet of public right-of-way so that this property can
,line up with properties to the north which have already dedicated the
proper amount of right-of-way. The only property that will be
dedicating right-of~way will be the McElhaney property. No other
properties ar~required to dedicate right-of-way at this time. This
portion of North 31st Street does not appear on the TransPlan (a
document which lists street improvement projects for the metropolitan
area). There is no street improvement project planned for the
immediate futur~.
2. The drainageway. Staff was concerned that the drainageway was a
potential wetland. John Marshall of the Division of State Lands was
asked to do an on-site evaluation of the drainageway. He stated that
the drainageway was not a wetland. However, staff agrees with the
neighbors that the drainageway must be protected. Therefore, a deed
restriction will be made a condition of approval of this application
stating that no alteration, excavation or fill shall be allowed within
the drainagewayitself which would impede the carrying capacity of the
drainageway; no development shall occur within 10 feet of the
drainageway; and that the existing trees along the drainageway shall
not be cut without permission from the City. This document needs to be
reviewed by the City Attorney.
3. The panhandle driveway. City staff originally asked that, the panhandle
driveway be dedicated to Lane County as public right~of-way. The
County did not want to accept responsibility for this right-of~way.
Therefore, a joint use/access agreement with language stating upon
further development of this property (after annexation) all parties
will agree to dedicate the panhandle to the City as public
right-of-way.
4. Annexation and septic approval. A number of years ago there was a
moratorium on septic approvals in north Springfield and the River Road
area. The north Springfield area was found to be able to support
septic tanks based upon the limited amount of development that is
permitted in the Urban Growth Area. Septic approval for this property
is required as a condition of approval for this application. Island
annexations are typically utilized when a health hazard exists.
Currently, there are no plans by the City to annex this area. If and
when sewers are extended to serve properties which are island
annexations, properties which are still in the County will not be
permitted to hook up to the sewer until they are annexed. The
properties would be assessed prior to hooking up to sewer.
.,.../
.
McElhaney Partition Findings
Page 3
Criteria of Approval
Section
approve,
criteria:
34.050 of
approve
the
with
Springfield Development Code states:
conditions or deny the request based
The Director shall
upon the following
(1) THE REQUEST AS ,CONDITIONED FULLY CONFORMS VITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS
'CODE AND THE KETROPLAN, ESPECIALLY REGARDING THE EFFICIENT USE OF URBAN
ANDURBANIZABLE LAND, THE EFFICIENT PROVISION OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND
SERVICES, AND CONSIDERATION OF NATURAL FEATURES IDENTIFIED IN ~~AO PLAN
INVENTORIES.
The zoning of the property and the Metro Plan designation are both Low
Density Residentiali thus the zoning is consistent with the Metro Plan
designation.
There are no identified Metro Plan inventoried natural features on this
property. However, the National Wetlands Inventory Map shows the
drainageway on the property. John Marshall of the Oregon Division of State
Lands was contacted concerning this issue. Mr. Marshall made a site visit
and tested the east end of the drainageway. Mr. Marshall's letter states:
" there are no wetlands in the area I visited on the McElhaney site".
The existing drainageway will be protected by a deed restriction stating
that no alteration, excavation or fill shall be allowed within the
drainageway itself, which would impede the carrying capacity of, the
drainagewaYi no development shall occur within 10 feet of the drainagewaYi
and that the existing trees along the drainageway shall not be cut without
permission from the City. This document needs to be reviewed by the City
Attorney.
This request will conform with the requirements of the Springfield
Development Code when all conditions necessary for Final Approval have been
met.
(2) THE FUTURE USE FOR uRBAN, PURPOSES OF THE REMAINDER OF THE PROPERTY UNDER
THE SAKE OVNERSHIP SHALL NOT BE IMPEDED.
Parcels 1, 2 or 3 cannot be further divided until they are annexed to the
City. The 50 foot-wide double' panhandle will allow for future division.
This panhandle will be required to have a joint use/access agreement and
wording to provide for the future dedication of right-of-way to the City.
A Future Development.Plan will be utilized in conjunction with any current
development of Parcels 1, 2 or 3 (one house is permitted on each parcel
until annexation and subdivision). This Plan will prevent the blocking of
proposed streets and will protect future lots.
The future use for urban purposes of the remaining parcel under the same
ownership will not be impeded.
'-."
McElhaney Partition Findings
Page 4
(3) THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES OR ACCESS TO THOSE PROPERTIES
SHALL NOT BE IMPEDED.
The partition has no affect on the development of or access to neighboring
properties.
Preliminary Plan Approval and Required Conditions
The Director has determined that the preliminary plan satisfies the requirements of
the Springfield Development Code and that conditions are necessary to satisfy the
requirements of this Code or the Metro Plan. Section 34.070 of the Springfield
Development Code states: All proposed partitions shall meet the public and private
improvement standards of 'Article 32, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE IMPROVEMENTS.
[X] ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF YAY AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS. VHENEVER AN EXISTING STREET OF
INADEQUATE VIDTH IS ABUTTING OR VITHIN A SITE REQUIRING DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL,
ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF YAY SHALL BE REQUIRED.
Dedication of right of way for North 31st Street: 30 feet to centerline. In
addition; dedication of right of way for North 28th Street: 25 feet to
centerline.
[X] SENATE BILL 142 REVROTE SECTIONS OF ORS 92.044 AND 92.120 TO REQUIRE SUBMISSION
OF A STATEMENT OF YATER RIGHTS PRIOR TO THE FILING OF ANY PLAN, PLAT OR REPLAT
OF A SUBDIVISION, NOT SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF ORS 92.110; AS YELL AS ANY
PARTITION. THIS BECAME EFFECTIVE ON JANUARY 1, 1988.
A statement of water rights form needs to be completed. A form is available
from the City.
[X] AN IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT SHALL BE REQUIRED ASA CONDITION OF DEVELOPMENT
APPROVAL IN ALL CASES VBERE UNIMPROVED STREET FRONTAGE EXISTS.
A City Improvement Agreement will be required for both North 28th and N. 31st
Streets.
THE ABOVE ATIACHED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL SHALL BE COMPLETED AT THE TIME THE FINAL
HAP IS SUBMITIED, PRIOR TO FINAL APPROVAL.
Note: The additional (delayed) conditions below do not have to be met at the time of
Final Approval. However, they have to be met prior to occupancy of any new dwelling
unit on Parcell, 2 or 3:
[XJ The panhandle driveway must be paved (minimum length 60 feet, minimum width, 18
feet).
,[XJ The property address must be seen from the street.
For Partitions within the City's Urban Growth Boundary, the following standards of
SDC 29.070(1) and (5) appl~:
.
.,..,--"'
McElhaney Partition Findings
Page 5
1. The minimum area for the partitioning of land must be 10 acres.
The subject property is approximately 12.4 acres. In this case the following
shall be met:
a. The efficient and full urban use of the property, or neighboring properties
shall not be limi tedby the parti ~ion.
The partition has no affect on the development of or access to neighboring
properties. The partition as approved will allow for the future division
of Parcels 1, 2 and 3 upon annexation to the City.
b. Proposed land uses and densities must conform with the Metro Plan and the
Springfield Development Code.
Only those land uses permitted in the UF-10 Overlay
permitted. Only one dwelling unit will be permitted upon
and 3) will be permitted. Upon annexation Parcels 1,
divided as shown in the Future Development Plan.
District will be
each parcel (1, 2
2 and 3 may be
The Metro Plan density for the Low Density Residential District is from 1
through 10 units per acre~ The proposed land uses and densities will
conform with the Metro Plan and the Springfield Development Code.
c. A Future Development Plan for urban development shall be requfred where the
property is redivisible into smaller parcels.
A Future Development Plan is required.
d. A majority of parcels located within 100 feet of the property to be
partitioned shall be smaller than 5 acres.
The following Tax Lots are within 100 feet of the subject property:
Assessor's Mapt 17-02-19-31; Tax Lot 00600*, 00701, 00703, 00704 and 00802.
Assessor's Mapt 17-02~19-32; Tax Lot 00500*, 00501, and 00601. Assessor's
Mapt 17-02-19-33 Tax Lot 00101, 00200, 00300, 00301, 00401, 00500 and
00501. Assessor's Mapt 17-02-19-41; Tax Lots 00126, 03001, 00318, 03026,
and 03027. There are 18 lots under and 2 lots over 5 acres; the majority
of the lots are under 5 acres.
Note: * These lots are over 5 acres.
2. Detached single family dwellings shall be si ted so as to allow for the future
division and/or more intensive use of the property.
Any 'dwelling unit proposed for Parcel 3 shall be sited so as not to prevent the
future division of Parcels 1, 2 and 3.
The DRC recommended, that the Director of the Planning and Development Department
grant Preliminary Plan Approval.
r-~... ~~
".".."i'''''''''.',..,....IiIJ~I.l! ~
-
---
.1. 33b'.l.S
80 lJ CC H.1$!ffy
',aLl ,or; ~
0\
(\ ... ':Q
I-..j \l ~t:l ~
LJ;j ~~, ~~,~,0017f'c?
. ~~ 13 "", ~~(
~ Q::~~~ It)~ l::j
"'~-I-: l:l ~
A ~~, ~
~ ~~
~ ~~..,~
.... ':[1 {?
C ,001 ~or; y '" .oo'oo~
IS(~ A
,,~~
~'<', ~\r),
-T'~ ~ _
H1f~~
ljil ~
~~~~ ~-
"".....\f\ le ~
~ ~~, ~
....
"
\' .
n,-~J '7
~ '.. "'~-
<( 6.., -"", U
_ >- ~.~.; :.'J
Cl /. III ~" .;. ", ',...
II' .... Vl1..j
0'; l) :> ~ -' (' i ~:
IL' ",- n' \~ ' ",],')
~~ ~~~::.;' ~~..:; :'.: :.:) I.'(:~
;:: IJ I (/) ~' ,,~ >; ~,:
"">,'- O~)IU
~ 0 C") ..,~:;
n~ (-:-,~' ~
0.. ,1:-- ~ -'
-' ~
I r
'-.---- -
I
)
~ ' '
II
~~ ~ :
~Q:
~(J
~ -...1<.; )..-
4,j"{ ~h.
<ll '->~ 'b
\0 C\Js
Q: <ll
~ ~ Cl:::\)
>- Ct)G
h:: < ~~
i=:: ~f..-~
I-.. (tl --...I
V) cj~'
~ I-.. ~ .~
~ ~~~
V)~
~k-.J~~
<<00:::"
,'K ~~
C ,00 'O~'/7 'J ~ l5V)~
H.Lb'ONI
...- 1--
I,
! I
Ii
17 02 19 3
T. L. 800
" j I H'\...'oijj,i.._I,.......j~I'I"loti.,;Ji,.,"'IJ,.~.m,..;,.~I.II..~I~I'111..~ll.~ao:.l"IIl:.I'I. ~I.. ~Ui..JI"..'I"liJlli,_ .1.jll~.I'I.llil .11 .'0''''1,1'; .1. 11.1,. I ,,'III,l.,
,.W~" ~i~I~l.j:il..MII.l." ,I.', 'I .1I...I.lL....,ILj .. ;i.l1~1..1.' , ,..lilj,jl ,..~ .. ~ ,1iiW1..l'lll,I.'''''I',' ."Io"hJ", , 1~1.11 i., l'I"I;";li.I"'" .\ L",.. ."_"
~ ~ ,.....,,,."",......,,,,.j.l,....,",... .." ',1001'..........,....."._....,.,.,,.....,..,..._..,....,..""., ".,. ",h'. ."",,,,, ."',.:""..,,........ .......,',.1,_,....... ';~..."'"
~"...,.....,...... .",........,
'~~SON & THOMPSON, INC. SCALE: ," = 200'
CONSULTING ENGINEE2S & SU2l1EY02S DATE: JUN, 12.1989
207 Q STREET D2AWN: LARRY OLSON
SPRINGfiELD, OREGON 97477 ~OB NO: 1089
""",....' '~I_~_,___ TELEPHONE: 503/726-5104
IIw:"'~I..,JII' I -=--.=- ---.
. ,.' . . ..1.
~ , ~ "
"-
<;
_.~=;'~:~-=~~':':';;;;.~~~:E;~~~=~=,~;:~.--
"
I.
["
,r
.Il
,.-- -" '''''''''''''lI'J{'?\';'iI;e( II '
"---
'1 ~~J7
I -'of "'\ ()
, ~ >\ \) '" ':;
~ ,,'. uJ ' ~' ~<: :;0
rY.. 0> ....1.... .
u~ --'" tY. ~;:~"OI...L....
t- <I), ::l ( ) ,,; ., J 'I)
U) If) , . ,,_ '"' U -l)
- lU Vl 1 C\~ >~ - :. .
t' LL '0 ,> IU
~ 8 €t~ "'~~
~'1: /5
...J ~
, \ ~
6
~
~Q:
", (J
:S::'
>-.'
~'f--..
C\j~
I Q: C)
>--.' ,\j
Vi
<,~~
:2" f..... '<:
:--J i 0) --J
lJJl..... '
.C:l
(j' (j ---I
~ ltJ llJ
"V)~
ct ~
()I...--J~<
< <:JQ:..........
......../'<-.. ~I~~
~ ~ViV)
'S:
()
h:
~
ct
~
z
<(
~
D-
z
o
(f)
>
o
OJ
~
(f).
W
Ct
~
:t
,
i.
n
::1
Ii!
::
,L
"
~
l
I
I
i'
17 02 19 3 T,L,800
:=~~~::~~~;~~~~~~~~=~~t=~~~f;~;~:~:lt~::.
C,ONSULTJNG ENGJNEE~S '& SURVEYORS DATE: JUN,12,1989
207 Q S11REE'r I D&AWN: LARRY OLSON
Srf\lNGflEl1D OREGON:J7477 ' ' JOB NO: 1089
, I ,
~ u ~.1'1~1'L~. .... ... '.' ..""".. ..:.~ ~~ ~ 1I.0. ~ ~~ ....5 ~ 3:..:.:6.::~ ~,~ .. ........ .~~.., ... .. JFI'r~~"~
i~'---'~I""" "J'i'!X.rT~""'''''l=i1'''L=i=,",=,=~'I1:-:''<===m~"",",,=="~'V'''"1''C;:~''~[''C';''=''l."l'""'r;','''~r.,~,rrrM= l
.J.33HiS IS/~7
80 Ve';l-\ HJ. gg.~. 1>
I ~ .' ~
o ,0 9i
~~,t \Ii
<OS ...
- , I-
'-'1..(;.. Y1,'
~~",:~ ~,OO'V.f'Z' H.1J70S
~~, (" Ob I <"Ll ~
oLl '0' Q
, ' ~ 9.i 0'3 ) "f,
g~' OL7ji' '!!<: I'~P'B~'- ~
~. '.0,0 ~~
S 0, .~, ~ -:....
- ~'1~' ^"',
c~ .00': ., ~ I >"' I. ,OC /::'
:~~ ~:.oi O~o1. ::
--- - "0, X
':. oq 0"') / ,OL! ~"
_.~ c. - o! ~/.
.2 "4 '1 ,~ ~
-.-
o
<:(:)
---
\II o<i3 I <Ff/ ,~
~-- --- o/'Y' '<?,-
~".p ~.-
'" <1 'J~' ,..., Sol
~ ' ,~
~'J-,Qil ___ I-
~
~
o
U) ,,'
l-
V) ___
~ 00\'
'<J~~' ~
, 5lt-\
,0
Q-
b I .. ~ ,
~ I ""'I
'n--j
. $
CI V\
l- ~
.01-\ I .so\ ')
I H.LlION
. .' ~. -
\f
,01: \
c 00 V!;p
I
I
. .
-I
"