HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence PWE 10/2/2013 li • •
MEMORANDUM City of Springfield
DATE: October 3, 2013
TO: Andy Limbird, Planner
FROM: Clayton McEachern, Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: PRE13-00026-OneLife Management/Hanson/Orton/Renken
The subject application involves tax lot 17-03-22-00-00400, 500, 600
Applicant's Questions:
1. Springfield Zoning Maps show the property with a MDR medium density residential zoning
classification. The Metro Plan shows the property with a LDR classification. Please confirm
what the zoning classification of the property will be once the properly is annexed.
To be answered by planning.
2. Will the development site be able to discharge stormwater runoff into the public drainage
easement abutting the south boundary of the subject property?
Our records do not show a drainage easement in this location. The detention pond located here is
the private property of Peace Health and this site cannot discharge any increase in runoff to the
pond without the permission of Peace Health. In addition to that this facility is temporary in
nature and planned to be developed at a future date.
There is a 60" line in Game Farm Road that is very deep and could drain the site but will require
excavation of Game Farm Rd and re-pouring of the concrete roadway. Some overflow could be
allowed into the gutter of Game Farm road to flow into the curb inlet located to the north of the
site. The site naturally drains to the northwest into a low area shared between several parcels.
As long as the post developed flows did not exceed the pre developed flows this same drainage
pattern could be maintained. In addition this area of town typically has very good infiltration
rates and some type of facility that took advantage of this could be utilized to manage onsite
increases in runoff.
3. The applicant is proposing to construct a residential care facility on MDR zoned property which
will be subject to the siting standards of SDC 4.7-155. Please confirm if the proposed
development will also be subject to the multiunit development standards outlined in SDC 3.2-
240.
To be answered by planning
nat.:, Received: /0/2/nil
Planner: AL
,
4. Please confirm the process for obtaining building permit approval for the proposed
development. Are we required to submit for, and receive, Site Review approval before we can
prepare construction documents? If required, can the site review approval process run
concurrently with the annexation application with the caveat that a building permit will not be
issued until the annexation process is completed?
These process can be done concurrently at the developers risk-in that if a change is needed on the
site plan to meet code requirements than that could change something in the
building/construction plans that require the process to start over, and the fees will be charged
again on the new submittal. No Public improvement permit process should be necessary
(although impossible to confirm without a site plan to review).
5. Are all public utilities adjacent to the subject property, available for use by the subject property
and are there any access restrictions onto Game Farm Rd. given the proximity of the property to
the intersection of Game Farm Rd. and MLK Jr. Blvd?
All utilities are adjacent to the site. The three lots have two different lateral locations that
provide sewer service. I have explained the storm drain situation in question#2. Access will
need to be taken off of Game Farm, as far as possible from the intersection with MLK Jr. Blvd
(further comments from Traffic).
It is recommended that the existing driveway easement along Game Farm Rd be vacated as part
of the development process to clean up the deeds on the property and not complicate any utility
construction. All overhead wire utilities will need to be undergrounded per the development
code to the site.
Before Demolition of the existing homes is completed, the fixtures and impervious areas should
be recorded and submitted as part of the development process to ensure the proper Development
Charges are credited to the site.
Lot consolidation may be desirable to satisfy building code requirements.
Date Received: o y i3
Planner: AL