The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutApplication APPLICANT 5/26/2006 . City of Springfield Development Services Department 225 FIfth Street Spnngfield, OR 97477 Phone (541) 726-3759 Fax' (541) 726-3689 Pre-Application Report SPRINGFIELD Prospective Applicant Name SC Springfield, LLC Address 5440 Louie Lane, SUite 1 02 ~ Reno, Nevada 89511 ~ Property Owner Name SC Springfield, LLC Address 5440 Louie Lane, Suite 1 02 ~ Reno, Nevada 89511 0 ill Phone, 775-853-4714 ill @] Phone 775-853-4714 ~ Property Address na ~ Assessor's Map No. 17 -02-30-00 and 17-03-25-11 E2l Tax Lot No, 1800 and 2300 Size of Property 4,368,691 Square Feet or 100.3 Acres Existing Use of Property Vacant, underutilized agricultural field, one small industrial building Descnption of Proposal Residential/Commercial/Office Mixed-Use Development See attached for additional information. Date May 12, 2006 Applicant Signature For Office Use Only: Journal Number. -ZON 'Z.()D6- 00030 ReceIVed By: j){L(J.e_ <t(. Assessor's Map No I?-Od, ~3o -ot> Tax Lot No ~t;.~ t 7-0325 /1 ii:l{~ Date Accepted as Complete Date Rec ~ived: " " MAY 26 2006 1 Original Submittal. 225 Fifth Street Springfield, Oregon 97477 541-726-3759 Phone Ci~' of Springfield Official Receipt n Jopment Services Department -0' Public Works Department RECEIPT #: 3200600000000000280 Date: OS/26/2006 2:41 :52PM PaId By SC SPRINFIELD LLC Item Total: Check Number AuthorizatIOn Received By Batch Number Number How ReceIved Amount Due 3,333 00 $3,333.00 Job/Journal Number DescriptIOn ZON2006-00030 CTY Pre-ApplIcatIOn Report Payments: Type of Payment Check Amount PaId DR 1057 In Person Payment Total: $3,333 00 $3,333,00 Date Received: MAY 262006 Original Submittal cRecemlJ Page I of I 5/26/2006 ". SATRE ASSOCIATES, PoCo Planners, Landscape Architects and Environmental Specialists 132 East Broadway, SUIte 536, Eugene, Oregon 97401 (541) 465-4721 0 Fax (541) 465-4722 0 1-800-662-7094 iIII!III III SATRE "tSs'Q~~~~7~ ' ,~, ",~ ~. --. ~,; tL.., > -..::f:i:w <,.i.~h /~_ ~ ~_~v v" ' <~~V~ www satrepc com TRANSMITT AL M~~~:<'> /'^ / :::>/"~;;~~"/-vJ~~;: /.N ,'.U lli'J';r;,;""" :;:--:-~X'ST_~S?*?ft~ TO: CIty of Spnngfield Planmng DIvision 225 Fifth Street Spnngfield, Oregon 97477 A TTN: Gary Karp DATE: PROJECT: May 26, 2006 The VIllages at Marcola Meadows CLIENT PROJ #: SATRE PROJ #: 0609 '.:2"" Yf;:;'1);:':.&i~ _, ," ",. AJ WI!;;;~,_i.:::i: ":,'~;~_~,:" "'~:'.&i~'7' ':,iTIY~\~'YfTYf%ilKfr'7;: ';;;" "'jP, -/~ DISPOSITION: For Your Approval For Your InformatIon Q TRANSMITTED: HerewIth n For Reply Separate Cover Other 2::::>f;'0,,,]~ >~~:;;;';,':N /m> / Pk V/P %~ ~, v,:~~,,'%t;j;;,t../""::;"~;; A~:O';:"'//hW~//-:::X: v k.&.,%,;;;\:~;l_-lJJ.dii.;m"'.;=~ ~1- #..if;:'~___;:,"'~~ !'-......~~~ /9fffig~~,", TRANSMITTED: # CopIes Item Dated No Pages (In additIOn to this cover page) 15 Pre-Application Report Apphcation Package May 26, 2006 ffR.,,'S':~r~~{{{f, jJi/"'d''''/:''>W~;~:;'4<<>AL~v-<2:~V~~''''~%P€Zl' tTm:-7"':d:>~~~:~ ~V=--$~::<< NW_;N~'>~"::~W=4<<>><m: :y~i'~'^>~~'\4J~< '~Jb REMARKS: Gary, enclosed please find our Pre-ApplicatIOn Report apphcatIOn submIttal for The VIllages at Marcola Meadows, includmg the apphcatIOn form, apphcatIOn fee, written statement, and associated exhIbIts, attachments and plans. A detailed table of contents itemizes the submitted matenals As the applIcant's representatIve, please do not heSItate to contact me should you require addItIOnal informatIOn for the Pre-Application process. On behalf of the apphcant, we look forward to heanng from you Let us know when the Pre-ApphcatIOn meetmg is scheduled Date Received, MAY 262006 Owner t~ Consultant ~ ',"_*,""< >><">l:,&fu;<>>/:~~"7",,,~~ , ~~Origihal ~uDmlnal' ,'w~, ~: J??%'*jP*~P~ \#;$~ // ~NY.-~ '~y~m~;~<'~J~;~';, vLHllJJLL:l~;t"v~r:"?:: COPIES TO: Agency File Other M. Satre, AICP, ASLA, CSI , \ EXHIBIT J MDR CC Nodal Development Overlay Zone (INDO) (Article 16- Cluster Development (Article 18- MUC MUE MUR Where the INDO zone conflicts with the base LMI Residential Zoning Commercial Zoning zone the more restrictive District) District) controls. Permitted Uses SDC 16.020 SPC 16.100(3)(d) SDC 18.020 SPC 40,020 SDC 40.020 SPC 40.020 Article 41 (SDC) Article 20 Single-family, multi- Allowed in all Per Table Per Table Per Table Per Table Based on MU 'parent' Per Table family, etc. residential zones zone as per Table SDC 41.020(1); many auto- oriented are prohibited per SDC 41.020(2) . II Site Develonment Standards SDC 16.010(2) SOC 16,IOOO)(e) .. Per Article 16il SDC 41.040( I)(a) Density 10-20 dua Shall not exceed the - MFD: per SDC 16,110 - Per SDC 16.100 as LDR=6 DUA No Code Provisions (developable; i.e., maximum allowed in Cluster: per SDC applied to MDRlHDR MDR/MUR=12 DUA minus ROW, public underlying zone 16.100(3) (10-20 DUA) HDR=25 DUA space, and at request (10-20 DUA) any inventoried natural resource) Lot/Parcel Size (min.) SDC 16.030 SDC 16.100(3)(e) SDC 18.030 Same as SDC 18.030 Same as SDC 20.030 Same as SDC 16.030 SDC 20.030( I) East-West streets 4,500 sf minimum No minimum - 6,000 sf minimum 6,000 sf minimum 10,000 sf minimum 4,500 sf Per base zone 10,000 sf minimum (all density limits lots) North-South streets 5,000 sf minimum No minimum - 6,000 sf minimum 6,000 sf minimum 10,000 sf minimum 5,000 sf Per base zone density limits Cul-de-Sac Bulbs 6,000 sf minimum No minimum - 6,000 sf minimum 6,000 sf minimum 10,000 sf minimum 6,000 sf Per base zone density limits Duplex (comers) 6,000 sf minimum No minimum - 6,000 sf minimum 6,000 sf minimum 10,000 sf minimum 6,000 sf Per base zone density limits Panhandle 4,500 sf minimum No minimum - 6,000 sf minimum 6,000 sf minimum 10,000 sf minimum 4,500 sf Per base zone density limits Same as SDC I! 8.030 Same as SDC 20.030 Same as SDC 16.030 Lot/Parcel Frontage SDC 16.030 SDC 16.100(3)(e) SDC 18.030 (front on (front on (front on SDC 20.030(1) Arterial/Collector) Arterial/Col lector) Arterial/Collector) East - West streets 45 feet Possible reduction - 50 feet 50 feet 75 ft 45 feet Per base zone 75 feet (all streets) density limits North-South streets 60 feet Possible reduction - 50 feet 50 feet 75 ft 60 feet Per base zone density limits Cul-de-Sac Bulbs 35 feet Possible reduction - 50 feet 50 feet 75 ft 35 feet Per base zone density limits Duplex (comers) 45/60 feet (based on Possible reduction - 50 feet 50 feet 75 ft 45/60 feet (based on Per base zone street) density limits street) 20 ft (single), 26 ft Panhandle (multi) Possible reduction - 40 feet (possible) 40 feet (possible) 40 feet (possible) 20 ft (single), Per base zone [13 ft per lot: density limits 26 ft (multiple) 4 lots/8 du max.] Page 1 of6 "0 Q) > '(j) o Q) 0:: Q) ~ CO o c.o c;:) c;:) C"oI '\0 C"oI ~ ~ m ~ E .c :::J en m c '5> '~ o -~ Lot/Parcel Coveral!e SDC 16,040 SDC l6.100(3)(e)(4) SDC 4Q.040(l) SDC40,040(2) SDC 40.04Q(3) . SDC 20.040 ~ . Limited by other Limited by other Limited by other standards standards ( I- 45% (net standards (parking/landscaping, (parking/landscaping, Same as Standards of Limited by other sections 45% (parking/landscaping, ;~ development) etc.); primarily Articles etc.); primarily Articles SDC 16.040; i.e" 45% of the Code etc.); primarily Articles 31 & 32; generally NO 31 & 32; generally NO 31 & 32 maximum maximum SDC 16.100(3) SDC 20.050 (e) and (f) SDC 18.050 SDC 40,050( I) - Same Setbacks SDC 16.050 Perimeter of Arch.extenstions may as SDC 18.050 with SDC 40.050(2) - SDC 40.050(3) - Same SDC 41.040(2) development shall protrude a max. of 2 ft. noted exceptions below Same as 20.050 as SDC 16.050 meet the MDR standards Front, Street Side, Rear I 0 feet Ibid.; except front Building-lOft No minimum setback for Building= lOft 10 feet CommerciaVlndustrial no Building = 10 feet yard within 25 feet of Parking, driveway, front, street side and Parking, driveway, minimum setback - Parking, driveway, outdoor est. residence shall be outdoor storage=5 ft through lot rear lot lines outdoor storage=5 ft max=20ft; storage = 5 feet within 5 ft. of the residential=max. 25 ft existing setback (max. setback (when on 2 streets, setback 25 ft) only one street is applied the maximum setback) Interior 5 feet Ibid. Building= 10ft Same as SDC 18.050 Building=10 ft 5 feet Building = 10 feet Parking, driveway, Parking, driveway, Parking, driveway, outdoor outdoor storage=5 ft outdoor storage=5 ft storage = 5 feet Attached o feet 10ft between clusters - - - o feet dwellings Garages/Carports 18 feet Ibid, - - - 18 feet Alley o feet Ibid. - - - o feet Solar Setback Standard SDC 16.050(5) Solar 'protection' - - - SDC 16.050(5) required for abutting LDR properties to the north Height Standards SDC 16,060 SDC 16.100(3)(e)(2) SDC 18,060 SDC 40.060(1) SDC40,060(2) SPC 40.060(3) SDC 20.060 No building Height Stds Max Height is 35 ft, No increase in max, Max Height is No limit; Max, Height is 60 ft Max. Height is 45 ft Max. Height is 35 ft Except the industrial or Per solar standards height permitted; shade pt height applies (proposal that exceed are Exception when abutting Exception When district abuts a LDR or ofSDC 16.050, when next to est. LDR when res, to north; there eligible for discretionary LDR, MDR, MUR abutting a LDR, MDR MDR District. In this case whichever is less (25 under 21 ft in height is a height restriction approval if the meet the height limitation of SDC district height building height is restricted min. when setback the buildings shall within the 50 ft buffer criteria of SDC 21.080(1)(a) and (b) and limitations of SDC by SDC 20.060(1)(a)-(b) from northern line 'step-down' to be next to MDR (E, W, S) 10.030(1)-(3)); (2) shall apply 16.060(1)(a) and (b) half the length of the within 5 ft ofthe max. height equal to Exception when abutting and (2) shall apply lot) shorter building height MDRlLDR as applicable a LDRlMDR district when within 25 ft of height limited by the est. residence 18,060(1 )-(3) Page 2 of6 CD c:=>> ~ L.O ~ ~ :E ro ::: 'e .0 ;j (f) ro c 'i;) .t: o . . Per table SDC SDC 16.070(5)(b) U Off-Str~~t Parkinl! 16,070 Per Tab]e SDC 18.070 SDC 41,040(3) SDC 20.070 Q) > I space per 50 sf (see SDG> Location - - Generally I per 300 sf Surface parking for Surface parking for Surface parking for Parking, driving, 20.070(\)-(7) ~ SFA 2 for each dwelling Ibid. of gross floor area, commercial area per industrial area are per residential area per SDC maneuvering areas shall 0=: Condominiums 1.5 per dwelling unit Ibid. SDC 18.070 SDC 20.070 16.070; may reduce if not be located between the Q) SFD 2 for each dwelling Ibid. A 20% reduction may be A 20% reduction may be along transit route, etc. main building(s) arid a +oJ m Duplexes 2 for each dwelling Ibid. allowed by director wlo allowed by director wlo A 20% reduction may be street; parking is at rear of 0 Mobile/Manf. Home 2 for each dwelling Ibid. a variance based on the a variance based on the allowed by director wlo a building or when 40% of Multi-familv 1.5 for each dwelling Ibid, results of a parking results of a parking variance based on the frontage is building on generation study generation study results of a parking either or both sides of the QuadslQuints 0.75 for each Ibid. maximum may not max, may not exceed generation study building (these standards dwelling exceed 120% of the 120% of the allowed max. may not exceed do not apply in LOR) allowed 120% of the allowed Fence Standards SDC 16.090 Ibid. SDC 18. ]00 SDC 40.080(1) SDC 40,080(2) SDC 40.080(3) SDC 20.090 Outside Front yard 6 feet (SFD/MFD) Ibid. 6 feet (outside YCA) Same as SDC 20.090 4 ft (3 ft if opaque) 8 feet Within front yard (SFD) Ibid. - 3 feet (MFD) wlin YCA 2.5 feet Ibid. 2.5 feet Same as SDC 18.100 2.5 feet Same as SDC 16.090 8 feet (See SDC Public Utility Facilities Exception no hazardous Exception no hazardous (outside front vard/VCA) 8 feet (abutting) Ibid. 8 feet fencing is allowed 8 feet fencing is allowed 20.090( I )-(2) Commercial/Industrial 10 feet (abutting Ibid. Per SDC 16.090(5) Per SDC 16,090(5) (outside front yard/VCA) residential) Discretionary Per SDC 16.090(2) Ibid. At top of 6 ft fence; max At top of 6 ft fence; max Uses/Hazardous fences height is 8 ft height is 8 ft Outside storage screening - - Fence shall be opaque Fence shall be opaque Special Use StandlJrds PerSDCI6.100 Ibid. SPC18.110 SDC 40.090(1) SDC 40.090(2) SDC 40.090(3) SDC 20.100 Res. Fac, 15+ At least 50% of structure people; foster homes Same as SDC' 16.1 00 as to be used for storage & Group Care Facilities more than 5 children; Ibid. - Same as SDC 18.110 Same as SDC 20.100 they apply to MDR and 50% or less may be used shelter homes SDC HDR for retail and office floor 16,100(7) space (SDC 20.100(\ )-(5) Cluster Development See next column (per - - SDC 16.100(3)) Desil!n Standards None. Per SDC 16.100(3)(g) None, SPC 40,100 SDC 40.100 SDC 40.100 SDC 41.050(0 Building Orientation To the extent possible all new buildings will be oriented towards both external and - internal streets in a manner that frames and defines streets and pedestrian areas; building in MU areas shall not be separated from fronting streets; parking shall be located behind the building, internal to development on the site (on existing developed sites outparcel buildings shall be used between a large parking lot and the street to help define the streetscape and to lessen the visual impact of the parking lot from the street.) Door - Opens to fronting - Doors shall be visible from the street and oriented towards it; at least one per street Opens to fronting street street frontage Walkway - 3 ft wide to fronting - Walkways shall provide direct and convenient access from the sidewalk to the 3 ft wide to frntg. street street building Garage (facing - 40% of width of - 40% of width of house street) house facade facade Garage Setback Same as front yard 4 ft. back from house - 4 ft. back from house fa9ade (0 feet if the fa9ade (0 feet if the house Page 3 of6 c.o c::;) c::;) C"oI (ij '" ..... ..... C"oI 'E ~ .0 ~ :E en (ij c '0 .~ 0 house has a 50 sf plus has a 50 sfplus porch . , porch encroaching encroaching into the "0 into the setback setback ~ Building setback - - Buildings shaIl not be setback from streets or plazas; exceptions: building design - .::. - incorporates public seating, plazas, or other usable public space as per SDC ~ 40.100(7); necessary to preserve existing healthy mature trees; necessary to accommodate ADA rules Windows/doors - 15% min, area when Ground floor windows required for all civic and commercial uses - 50% of each 15% min. area when ~ facing a public street! - street length is to be windowed (25% of waIl area),exemQ!: elevations adjacent to facing a public street! sidewalk aIlevs or vehicular access ways used primarily for service or delivery acess sidewalk Vertical Face - - - Along vertical face offsets shall occur every 50 ft: 4ft recess; extenstions; roof - offsets Design Variety - Building Materials, - Shall include architectural elements designed to break up vast expanses of single Per SDC 41.050(1)(d): architectural features, element building elevations including but not limited to offsets, windows, entry roof pitch & design (min. 4 architectural details treatments, wood siding, brick, stucco, textured concrete block, etc.; vary the to 12); Eaves (Min. 18" treatment in buildings in order to differentiate ground floor from upper floor overhang); Building Materials; Trim (Min. 2.25"); Increased Windows (min. 20%); Architectural features; Arch't details Weather - - - Buildings shaIl provide min. 6 ft weather protected area along the portion of the protection building abutting sidewalks or plazas (awnings, canopies, etc.) Open Space - 20% (including - wetlands, steep slopes, natural waterways or wooded areas; also areas for community activities (such as playgrounds, picnic areas, gardens or sports features) Note: setbacks and buffer areas do not count. HOA required. Exception: MFD use SDC 16,110 Landscaping Required setbacks. Min. 50% of open Per Articles 31.140 and 31.160 and (a) street trees per SDC 32.050; screening of space parking areas. etc. per SDC 31,160 and (1) no receptacles within front setback abutting residential zones (2) utility equipment shall be placed or screened to reduce visual impact (3) plants reach 50% coverage within 2 years, 100% within 4 years; irrigation to support landscaping; drought tolerant plants encouraged; (SDC 31.050(1 )~and SDC 31.140(4)); parking lots screened per SDC 31.160 Internal - - Circulation shaIl provide cross access to abutting development (exception due to circulation toPOg. ) Block Perimeter Maximum - 1,400 feet Neighborhood - - Near SFD (roof from, lighting w/o glare (SDC 31.160(3)); requires site obscuring Within 5 ft of est. front Compatibility fence and landscaping, shade trees 30 ft on center, mechanical equipment screened yard setbacks (not over 25 as per SDC 40.100(4)(b) and noise reduced to 50db at LDR line ft); transition height; massing scale; roof shapes Pedestrian - - Per table listed under 40.100(7)(a) amenities Conditions of - Director may require - approval additional landscaping in perimeter areas adjacent to exist. development Page 4 of6 \ ~ ~ to C"I ~ :E \ ~ 'E .c :J (/) a; ~ .0 'C; o SDeciJic .DevelOD!Jlent Standards - - - SDC 40. UO(I) SDC 4QJ ]0(2) SDC 40.1 10(3) Development (a) Preservation of (a) Preservation of (a) preservation of ' , - - - "'0 standards Commercial land industrial land supply: residential land supply: Q) > supply: 100% ofMU 60% of the gross floor minimum of 80% of gross '0) building footprints can area on the development floor area is reserved for 0 be built for commercial site must be industrial; multi-unit residential; (b) Q) use (60% of the total businesses and minimum density is 20 dua tx: ground floor area on the professional offices and for areas with only j!! development site must personal services as residential development; to be commercial) (b) specified wi/in SDC minimum density for areas 0 maximum footprint for a 40.020(4) shalI not have with mixed uses is 12 dua single commercial ground floor area of - each phase of the building is 50,000 sf (c) more than 5,000 sf; indo development shalI meet minimum FAR of 0.40 Uses shalI be built prior this standard; maximum (gross floor area of alI to or concurrent wi other density is not regulated buildings and structures uses (building height limitations on the building lot (b) minimum FAR of shalI regulate density); (c) divided by the total lot 0.25 required (c) on-site non res. is limited to 5,000 area) design stds of SDC sfper use (and 20% of 21.120 apply except that entire development gross outdoor storage is floor area) (c) AlI alIowed (but they must development complies wi be screened) minimum SDCI6.110 landscaped area is 25% maximum impermeable surface is 75% Multi-Unit Design Standards Applies to 3+ SDC 41.050(2) - MU attached units residential design guidelines are determined bySDC 16,110 (MFstds.) and SDC 40,110(3) (MU- Res, Stds.) Building orientation Front colIector and Ibid. - arterials that have on-street parking along 50% of frontage per standards of SDC 16.11O(4)(a) Building form 16.11O(4)(b) Ibid. - Transition! compatibility wlin 75ft or res. Plan designation shalI be - setback within 5 ft of est. setback; 25-ft buffer and LDR property lines (includes no vehicular circulation, site obscuring landscaping, one-story/21 ft max.), etc.); structures within 50 ft shalI not have a continuous horizontal distance exceeding 120 ft; buildings abutting LDR shalI not exceed in height their distance from the LDR boundary (for a distance of 50 ft Storage Trash receptacles Ibid. Screening required required PerSDC 18.IOO(I)(c) Open Space Min. 15% (inclusive of required yards, - common and private open-space); exempt - mfd within mu buildings; mfd exceeding 30 dua shall have a min. of 10% open-space; below 30 dua shalI comply with SDC 16.11 O( e )(2) Page 5 of6 CD ~ ~ C"ooI ~ c....a ~ ::E (ij ::: 'E ..a :J en (ij c: '0, 't: o - , EXHIBIT I MARCOLA MEADOWS LAND USE APPROVALS - APPLICATION PROCESS SUMMARY ThIS IS a summary of the land use applIcation process antIcIpated for the development of Marcola Meadows. It mcludes an outline of steps for each land use permit that WIll be reqUired and a tllnelme of the entue process. This summary IS mcluded m the Pre- ApplIcatIOn Packet to facIlItate cooperation among the participants and m recogmtIOn of the ambitiously time-compressed process the applicant is requesting of the CIty and other revIewmg agencIes The land use permits antIcIpa~ed for the development of Marcola Meadows are as follows. 1 Pre-ApplIcation Report 2 MetropolItan Plan Amendment 3 Zone Change 4. Master Plan Approval 5 TentatIve SubdivIsIOn 6 Varmnce 7 D WP Overlay 8. Tentative SIte Plan ReVIew 9. Fmal Site Plan ReVIew 10 Final SubdIvIsIOn 11 Remainmg Land Use ApplIcatIOns and Approvals Date Received: MAY 2 6 2006 Original Submittal MARCOLA MEADOWS LAND USE APPROVALS - APPLICATION PROCESS NOTES As of May 1,2006 1. PRE-APPLICATION REPORT Process: A Pre-Application Report is a required pre-cursor for Master Plan Application and is a highly recommended pre-cursor to a Metro Plan Amendment. It is an initial technical review of the proposed project before official submittal of a land use application. The applicant has the opportunity to discuss the entire project with City Staff and receives a written report from Staff as to issues, advice, recommendations, etc, It typically aids in the development and submittal of more readily approvable applications, resulting in a saving oftime and cost. Application packet includes an applicatIOn, narrative description ofthe project and characteristics of the use, plans and attachments. The more specific the application content, the more detaIled the staff research and response Meetings are facilitated by city staff and a written record of the meeting conversation is produced. The process is eenerallv as follows: Day # 1 7-21 30-45 Activity Submit Application Package. Staff reviews the applicatIOn, prepares material for discussion, Pre-Application Meetmg occurs, Report generated and delivered. Timeline: Meetings are scheduled in advance (30-45 days from submittal) and are typically limited to 1.5 hours, but can be longer for large or complex projects. (Compressed 21 Days, Target 30 Days, Standard 45 Days,) If appealed: This is not a land use decision so can't be appealed. ~: ,., Date Received: ; MAY 2 6 2006 . , <. Original Submittai MARCOLA MEADOWS LAND USE APPROVALS - APPLICATION PROCESS NOTES As of May 1,2006 2. METROPOLITAN PLAN AMENDMENT Process: Metro Plan Amendments are a Type IV process, Once the application is deemed complete (the completeness process is 30 days) the state statute timeline starts, The process is eenerallv as follows: Dav# 1 5-7 15-30 30-45 37-53 45-60 45-90 60-105 60-135 65-140 Activity Application deemed complete. Notice sent to DLCD, application distributed to DRC, Public Notice of pending land use decision and upcoming hearing is distributed (300 ft). DRC meets and discusses project. Staff Report, with recommendation (approval, approval wIth conditions or denial), is forwarded to Plannmg Commission and Applicant, and made available for public review. Planning Commission Public Hearing and close of record (unless time extension is granted), Planning Commission forwards a recommendation (approval, approval with conditions or denial) to the City CouncIl. City Council Public Hearing and close of record (unless time extension granted). City Council renders decision (approval, approval with conditions, denial). The decision is in effect unless an emergency clause was not included in the adopting ordinance, in which case the decision is in effect 30 days after the decision. Notice of the DecisIOn is mailed. Timeline: Statutory maximum time limit for a Type IV land use decision is 180 days from Completeness. City of Springfield target for processing a Type IV application is 120 days (Compressed 90 Days, Target 120 Days, Standard 180 Days). If appealed: Type IV decisions are final at the local level. Appeal would be to State Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA), Intent to Appeal must be filed within 21 days of Notice (Compressed 111 Days, Target 141 Days, St~ndard 20 1 Days). Date n ~':eived: 1 .:~i MAY 2 j 2006 Origina: 2ul:;llittal --., MARCOLA MEADOWS LAND USE APPROVALS - APPLICATION PROCESS NOTES As of May 1,2006 3. ZONE CHANGE Process: Zone Changes are a Type III process unless filed concurrent with a Plan Amendment. If filed concurrently, Zone Changes are elevated to a Type IV process. Once the application is deemed complete (the completeness process is 30 days) the state statute timeline starts. The process is e:enerallv as follows: Dav# 1 5-7 15-30 30-45 37-53 45-60 45-90 60-105 60-13 5 65-140 Activity Application deemed complete. Application distributed to DRC. Public Notice of pending land use decIsion and upcoming hearing is distributed (300 ft). DRC meets and discusses project. Staff Report, wIth recommendatIOn (approval, approval with conditions or denial), is forwarded to Planning Commission and Applicant, and made available for public review. Planning Commission PublIc Hearing and close of record (unless time extension is granted), Planning Commission forwards a recommendation (approval, approval with conditions or denial) to the City Council. City Council Public Heanng and close of record (unless time extension granted). City Council renders deCISIOn (approval, approval with conditions, denial), The decision is in effect unless an emergency clause was not included in the adoptmg ordinance, in which case the decision is in effect 30 days after the decision. Notice of the Decision is mailed. Timeline: Statutory maximum time lImit for a Type IV land use decision is 180 days from Completeness. City of Springfield target for processmg a Type IV application is 120 days (Compressed 90 Days, Target 120 Days, Standard 180 Days). If appealed: Type IV decisions are final at the local level. Appeal would be to State Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA), Intent to Appeal must be filed within 21 days of Notice (Compressed 111 Days, Target 141 Days, Standard 201 Days). ~ ~ t' I Date Received: MAY 26 2006 Original Submittal MARCOLA MEADOWS LAND USE APPROVALS - APPLICATION PROCESS NOTES As of May 1,2006 4. MASTER PLAN APPROVAL Process: Master Plan Approval is a Type III process. Once the application is deemed complete (the completeness process is 30 days) the state statute timeline starts, The process is eeneraIlv as follows: Dav # ActivItv 1 Application deemed complete. 5-7 Application is distributed to DRC. 15-30 Public Notice of pending land use deCIsion and upcoming hearing is distnbuted (300 ft). DRC meets and discusses project. Staff Report, with recommendation (approval, approval with conditions or denial), is forwarded to Planning Commission and Applicant, and made available for public review. Planning Commission Public Hearing and close of record (unless time extension is granted). Planning Commission issues Decision (approval, approval with conditions or denial). Notice of the Decision is mailed; is in effect unless appealed, Time limit for local appeals. Unless appealed, Decision is final. 30-45 37-53 45-60 45-90 48-93 60-105 61-106 Timeline: Statutory maximum time limit for a Type III land use decision, including local appeals, is 120 days from Completeness. Whereas the general process identifies 106 days, the City has a target of 90 days. The 106 day process reserves 14 days for the local appeal process, tough to do (see below). The 90 day target allows 30 days. In practice the 90 day process is often what occurs. Given the complexity ofthe Marcola Meadows application, without expedited processing or other assistance, expect a 90 day process (Compressed 60 Days, Target 90 Days, Standard 120 Days). If appealed: Appeal of a Planning Commission Decision is to the City Council. If such occurs, the process is generallv as follows: Day # 90-106 91-107 100-112 , 117-119 117-119 120 Activitv Appeal filed with City Council. Public Notice of appeal hearing is distributed (300 ft). Staff Report, with recommendation regarding the appeal (approval or denial), is forwarded to City Council, Applicant, Appellant, others on the Record, and made available for review, City Council PublIc Hearing and close of record (unless time extension is granted). City Council issues Decision (affirming, modifying, or reversing). Notice ofthe Decision is mailed. , ',., City Council Appeal decision is final at the local level. Subsequent appeal would be to State Land Use Board of AppeatJ ~ept~us\. e filed within 21 days of Notice (Max Day 141). a MAY ~ ; e:tJ06 Original b;",;r l:~',;;";...-, MARCOLA MEADOWS LAND USE APPROVALS - APPLICATION PROCESS NOTES As of May 1, 2006 5. TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION Process: Tentative Subdivision (Land Division) is a Type II process, Once the application is deemed complete (the completeness process is 30 days) the state statute time line starts, The process is eenerallv as follows: Day # 1 5-7 15-30 30-45 37-53 45-60 48-63 60-75 61-76 Activity Application deemed complete. Application dIstributed to DRC. Public Notice of pending land use decision IS distnbuted (300 ft). DRC meets and dIscusses project. Staff Report, with recommendation (approval, approval with condItions or denial), is forwarded to Development Director. Development Director DeCIsion and Staff Report is issued to Applicant, made avaIlable for public review. Notice of the Decision is mailed; is in effect unless appealed. Time limit for local appeals. Unless appealed, Decision is final. , Timeline: Statutory maximum time limit for a Type II land use decision, including local appeals, is 120 days from Completeness. Whereas the general process identifies 76 days, the City has a target of60 days. The 76 day limit reserves 44 days for the local appeal process (see below). The 60 day target allows a comfortable 60 days, In practice the 75 days is often what occurs. Given the complexity of the Marcola Meadows application, without expedited processing or other assistance, expect a 75 to 90 day process (Compressed 45 Days, Target 60 Days, Standard 120 Days). If appealed: Appeal of a Development Director Decision inside the city limits is to the Planning Commission, If such occurs, the process is generally as follows: Day # 75 80-90 103 110 11 0-117 120 Activity Appeal filed with Planning Commission, Public Notice of appeal hearing is distributed (300 ft). Staff Report, with recommendation regarding the appeal (approval or denial), is forwarded to Planning Commission, Applicant, Appellant, others on the Record, and made available for review. Pla~ing Commission Public Hearing and close of record (unless time extension is granted). Planning Commission issues Decision (affirming, modifYing, or reversing original Decision), Notice of the Decision is mailed. Planning Commission Appeal decision is final at the local level. Subsequent appeal would be to State Land Use Board of Appeals. Intent t~~almust jJe 'I '; filed within 21 days of Notice (Max Day 141), Kecelved: MAY 2 6 2006 Original Submittai --------- -i:i ~ '- m C,i en u: <D 'If....... fa o ....~~ ------- MARCOLA MEADOWS LAND USE APPROVALS - APPLICATION PROCESS NOTES As of May 1,2006 6. VARIANCE Process: Variance is a Type III process. Once the application is deemed complete (the completeness process is 30 days) the state statute timeline starts, The process is 2enerallv as follows: Day # Activity 1 Application deemed complete. 5-7 Application is distributed to DRC. 15-30 Public Notice of pending land use decision and upcoming hearing is distributed (300 ft) DRC meets and discusses project. Staff Report, with recommendation (approval, approval with conditions or denial), IS forwarded to Planning Commission and Applicant, and made available for public review. Planning Commission Public Hearing and close of record (unless time extension is granted), Planning Commission issues Decision (approval, approval with conditIOns or denial). Notice ofthe Decision is mailed; is m effect unless appealed, Time limit for local appeals, Unless appealed, Decision is fmal. Timeline: If appealed: ~ ?e ~::, ~ ~ ~ J J9 ..... 'E .Q :::J CI) ~ :g> o 30-45 37-53 45-60 45-90 48-93 60-105 61-106 Statutory maximum time limit for a Type III land use decision, including local appeals, is 120 days from Completeness, Whereas the general process identifies 106 days, the City has a target of 90 days. The 106 day process reserves 14 days for the local appeal process, tough to do (see below). The 90 day target allows 30 days, In practice the 90 day process is often what occurs. Given the complexity of the Marcola Meadows application, without expedited processing or other assistance, expect a 90 day process (Compressed 60 Days, Target 90 Days, Standard 120 Days), Appeal of a Planning Commission Decision is to the City Council. If such occurs, the process is generally as follows: Day # 90-106 91-107 100-112 Activity Appeal filed with City Council. Public Notice of appeal hearing is distributed (300 ft), Staff Report, with recommendation regarding the appeal (approval or denial), is forwarded to qty Council, Applicant, Appellant, others on the Record, and made available for review. City Council Public Hearing and close of record (unless time extension is granted), City Council issues Decision (affirming, modifying, or reversing), Notice ofthe Decision is mailed. 117-119 117-119 120 City Council Appeal decision is final at the local level. Subsequent appeal would be to State Land Use Board of Appeals, Intent to Appeal must be filed within 21 days of Notice (Max Day 141). MARCOLA MEADOWS LAND USE APPROVALS - APPLICATION PROCESS NOTES As of May 1, 2006 7. DWP OVERLAY Process: DWP Overlay (Drinking Water Protection Overlay Zone) is a Type I process, Once the application is deemed complete (the completeness process is 30 days) the state statute timeline starts. The process is 2enerallv as follows: Dav# 1 30 37-45 38-48 52-60 53-61 Activity Application deemed complete. Staff Report, with recommendation (approval, approval with conditions or denial), is forwarded to Development Director. Development Director Decision and Staff Report is issued to Applicant, made available for public review. Notice of the Decision is mailed; is in effect unless appealed. Time limit for local appeals. Unless appealed, Decision is final. Timeline: Statutory maximum time limit for a Type I land use decision, includmg local appeals, is 120 days from Completeness. Whereas the general process identifies 61 days, the City has a target of 45 days. The 61 day limit reserves 59 days for the local appeal process (see below). The 45 day target allows a comfortable 75 days. In practice the city often meets Its 45 day target for Type I decisions. Given the complexity ofthe Marcola Meadows application, expect a 45 to 60 day process (Compressed 45 Days, Target 45-60 Days, Standard 120 Days). If appealed: Appeal of a Development Director Decision of a DWP is to the Hearings Official. If such occurs, the process is generally as follows: Dav# 60 65-75 I 88-95 95-102 110-117 120 Activity Appeal filed with Hearings Official. Public Notice of appeal hearing IS distributed (300 ft). Staff Report, with recommendation regarding the appeal (approval or denial), is forwarded to Hearings Official, Applicant, Appellant, others on the Record, and made available for review. I Hearings Official PublIc Hearing and close of record (unless time extension is granted). Hearings Official issues Decision (affirming, modifying, or reversing original Decision). Notice of the Decision is mailed. Hearings Official Appeal decision is final at the local level. Subsequent appeal would be to State Land Use Board of Appeals. Intent to Appeal must be filed within 21 days of Notice (Max Day 141) Date Received: MAY 2 6 2006 Original Submittal r- . . " CD > '$ o CD ex G) ..... f\ L~ MARCOLA MEADOWS LAND USE APPROVALS - APPLICATION PROCESS NOTES As of May 1, 2006 8. TENTATIVE SITE PLAN REVIEW Process: Tentative Site Plan Review is a Type II process. Once the application is deemed complete (the completeness process is 30 days) the state statute timeline starts. The process is 2enerallv as follows: Day # 1 5-7 15-30 30-45 37-53 Activity Application deemed complete. Application distributed to DRC. Public Notice of pending land use decision is distributed (300 ft). DRC meets and discusses project. Staff Report, with recommendation (approval, approval with conditions or denial), is forwarded to Development Director. Development Director Decision and Staff Report is issued to Applicant, made available for public review. Notice of the Decision is mailed; is in effect unless appealed. Time limit for local appeals, Unless appealed, Decision is final. 45-60 48-63 60-75 61-76 Timeline: Statutory maximum time limit for a Type II land use decision, including local appeals, is 120 days from Completeness, Whereas the general process identifies 76 days, the City has a target of 60 days. The 76 day limit reserves 44 days for the local appeal process (see below). The 60 day target allows a comfortable 60 days. In practice the 75 days is often what occurs. Given the compleXIty of the Marcola Meadows application, without expedIted processing or other assistance, expect a 75 to 90 day process (Compressed 45 Days, Target 60 Days, Standard 120 Days). If appealed. Appeal of a Development Director Decision inSIde the city limits is to the Planning Commission, If such occurs, the process is generally as follows: Day # 75 80-90 103 Activity Appeal filed with Planning Commission. Public Notice of appeal hearing is distributed (300 ft), Staff Report, with recommendation regarding the appeal (approval or denial), is forwarded to Planning , Commission, Applicant, Appellant, others on the Record, and made available for review. Planning Commission Public Hearing and close of record (unless time extension is granted), Planning Commission issues Decision (affirming, modifying, or reversing original Decision). Notice of the Decision is mailed. (.0 c:;:) l::) C".! 'f.) C"'-.I ~ :1E 110 m - "!: E ..0 ::s en m c 'f:>> (5 Planning Commission Appeal decision IS final at the local level. Subsequent appeal would be to State Land Use Board of Appeals. Intent to Appeal must be filed within 21 days of Notice (Max Day 141), 11 0-11 7 120 MARCOLA MEADOWS LAND USE APPROVALS - APPLICATION PROCESS NOTES As of May 1,2006 9. FINAL SITE PLAN REVIEW Process: Final Site Plan Review is a Type I process, Once the application is deemed complete (the completeness process is 30 days) the state statute time line starts. The process IS eenerallv as follows: Dav# 1 30 37-45 38-48 52-60 53-61 Activity Application deemed complete, Staff Report, with recommendation (approval, approval with condItions or denial), is forwarded to Development Director. Development Director Decision and Staff Report is issued to Applicant, made available for public review. Notice of the Decision is mailed; is in effect unless appealed. Time limit for local appeals. Unless appealed, Decision is final. Timeline: Statutory maXImum time limit for a Type I land use decision, including local appeals, is 120 days from Completeness, Whereas the general process identifies 61 days, the City has a target of 45 days, The 61 day limit reserves 59 days for the local appeal process (see below). The 45 day target allows a comfortable 75 days. In practice the city often meets its 45 day target for Type I decisions. Given the complexity ofthe Marcola Meadows application, expect a 45 to 60 day process (Compressed 45 Days, Target 45-60 Days, Standard 120 Days). If appealed: Appeal of a Development Director Decision of a DWP IS'to the Hearings Official. If such occurs, the process is generally as follows: Dav# 60 65-75 88-95 95-102 110-117 120 Activity Appeal filed with Hearings Official. Public Notice of appeal hearing is distributed (300 ft). Staff Report, with recommendation regarding the appeal (approval or denial), is forwarded to Hearings Official, Applicant, Appellant, others on the Record, and made available for review, Hearings Official Public Hearing and close of record (unless time extension is granted), Hearmgs Official issues Decision (affirming, modifYing, or reversing original Decision). Notice ofthe Decision is mailed, Hearings Official Appeal decision is final at the local level. Subsequent appeal would be to State Land Use Board of Appeals. Intent to Appeal must be filed within 21 days of Not ice (Max Day 141), Date Received: MAY? 6 2006 O. . ," ,- ,',',' rlglli..... .....\;.J"~,L..j._ ____-__._ MARCOLA MEADOWS LAND USE APPROVALS - APPLICATION PROCESS NOTES As of May 1, 2006 10. FINAL SUBDIVISION Process: Final Subdivision (Land Division Plat) is a Type I process. Once the application is deemed complete (the completeness process is 30 days) the state statute timeline starts. The process is eenerallv as follows: Day # 1 30 37-45 38-48 52-60 53-61 Activity Application deemed complete. Staff Report, with recommendation (approval, approval with conditions or denial), is forwarded to Development Director. Development Director Decision and Staff Report is issued to Applicant, made available for public review. Notice ofthe Decision is mailed; is in effect unless appealed, Time limit for local appeals. Unless appealed, Decision is final. TImeline: Statutory maximum time limit for a Type I land use decision, including local appeals, is 120 days from Completeness. Whereas the general process Identifies 61 days, the City has a target of 45 days, The 61 day limit reserves 59 days for the local appeal process (see below), The 45 day target allows a comfortable 75 days. In practice the city often meets its 45 day target for Type I decisions, Given the complexity of the Marcola Meadows application, expect a 45 to 60 day process (Compressed 45 Days, Target 45-60 Days, Standard 120 Days), If appealed: Appeal of a Development Director Decision of a DWP is to the Hearings Official. If such occurs, the process is generally as follows: Day # 60 65-75 88-95 95-102 110-117 120 Activity Appeal filed with Hearings Official. Public Notice of appeal hearing is distributed (300 ft). Staff Report, with recommendation regarding the appeal (approval or denial), is forwarded to Hearings Official, Applicant, Appellant, others on the Record, and made aVailable for review. Hearings Official Public Hearing and close of record (unless time extension is granted). Heanngs Official issues Decision (affirming, modifying, or reversing original Decision), Notice of the Decision is mailed, Hearings Official Appeal decision is final at the local level. Subsequent appeal would be to State Land Use Board of Appeals. Intent to Appeal must be filed within 21 days of Notice (Max Day 141). oate Rece\\led.. \4\~ ~ 1 Q 1~\)~ , \ subfn\tta\----- or\g\\"\a MARCOLA MEADOWS LAND USE APPROVALS - APPLICATION PROCESS NOTES As of May 1,2006 11. REMAINING LAND USE APPLICATIONS AND APPROVALS Following completion of the above land use application processes 1 through 10, prior to individual lot or parcel building permit issuance, there remains a few final land use permits to procure. These include: A. Vacations and Dedications - Vacating existing right-of-way and/or easements and dedicating new right-of-way, easements or other lands for public and/or utility use. Generally completed within 30 days. Process concurrently with Final Subdivision. B. Public Improvements - generating public improvement plans (streets and utilities) and processing them through the city review and approval process. This would be through a Privately Engineered Public Improvement (PEP I) process. One should expect 2 to 4 city review cycles. This will lIkely take 90 to 120 days, Process before or concurrent with Final Subdivision, Hold off on filing Final Subdivision Plat until PEPI approvaL C. Land and Drainage Alteration Pennit (LDAP) - Springfield's version of an erosion control permit. 60 to 75 days, Process concurrently with the second half ofthe PEPI process. D. Wetland Fill Permit (JPA) - Will need DSL and COE approval of wetland fill and mitigation prior to approval of Master Plan. 120 to 180 days. Submit as soon as possible. Date Received: MAY 2 6 2006 f)l"i~;r"l! Sul,mittal ,. " ./ ~ SATRE ASSOCIATES, p,c. Planners, Landscape Architects and Environmental Specialists 132 east Broadway, Suite 536, Eugene, Oregon 97401 (541) 465-4721 · Fax (541) 465-4722 · 1-800-662-7094 www satrepc com TEAM o I R L S C U NOTES ] , Typical Processing Timelines: Type II: Completeness Review. 30 Days, Processing and Decision - 45 Days (Compressed 45 Days, Target 60 Days, Max 120 Days) Type III: Completeness Review - 30 Days, Processing and Hearing - 60 Days, Decision - 15 Days (Compressed 60 days, Target 90 Days, Max 120 Days) Type IV: Completeness Review - 30 Days, Processing and PC Hearing - 60 Days, CC Hearing - 60 Days, Decision - 30 Days (Compressed 90 Days. Target 120 Days, Max 180 Days) 2, Max calendar time for local appeals is 120 days from submittal of complete application, 3, Notes = . = See Technical Analysis Checklist .. = See Application Contents Checklist iiII SATRE ASSOCIATES Property Owner Client Client Representative Legal Counsel Assigned Spfld Planner Civil Engineer Surveyor SC Springfield, LLC SC Springfield, LLC The Martin Company Law Office of Bill Kloos, PC Gary Karp K & 0 Engineering, !nc, K & 0 Engineering, Inc, A Architect TBG Architects & Planners / Inc. Waterbury Shugar Architecture LLC Satre Associates, P,C, Satre Associates, P,C, Applied Technology / Satre Associates Access Engineering LLC P Planner o Landscape Architect W Wetland Specialist T Transportation Engineer G Geotechnical Engineer MARCOLA MEADOWS LAND USE APPROVALS. APPLlCA nON CALENDAR ICALENDAR #3 - COMPRESSED TlMELINE Days are ca endar davs As of Mav 26, 2006 APPLICATION ~ PARTICIPATION CALENDAR Lead I Assist March 2006 6 I 13 1 20 I 27 I I I r16) #: Utility, Stonn. Wet. Geotech Reports June 5 1121191 26 July 3 I to I 17 1 24 I 31 April 3 I 10 117 I 24 I I I I I I May I 1 8 1 15 1 22 1 29 August September 7 I 14 1 21 I 28 4 1 II 1 18 1 25 Task October 2 1 9 I 16 1 23 1 30 November 6 1 13 1 20 I 27 December 4 III 118 I 25 April 2 1 9 1161 23 Team .. January 2007 I I 8 I 15 I 22 1 29 . February 5 112 1191 26 March 5 1 12 1 19 1 26 May 30 1 7 114 1 21 1 28 Activity Project Pre..~aration Authorization to Proceed Regulatory Analysis (LU Plan and Code) Technical Analysis. Master Plan and Illustrations P I I TIA Analysis Master Plan Diagram I IDraftTIA I I P I Complete TIA I I I I I Team .. Utility, Stonn, Wet, Geotech Analysis j 1 - Pre-Application t .01 Generate and Submit Initial Application (NA) 1.02 City Completeness Review (NA) I 1.03 Generate and Submit Complete Application I I Submit _ ~ __ 1.04 Cii 2.01 Ge~ I 2.02 City Completeness Review City Reviewl -,- 2.03 Generate and Submit Complete Application Re.Submit 1.04 City Processing and Decision I Processing 3,01 Generate and Submit Initial Application ..," . Generate I I I' I I Submit ' { . ,':. 3.02 City Completenoss Review City Reviewl 3.03 Generate and Submit Complete Application Re.Submit 304 City P .01 Gener .02 City Completeness Review =H=H= =H+ .03 Generate and Submit Complete Application .04 City Processing and Decision 5 - Tentative Subdivision (T\'oe III I I I Submit City Reviewl Re.Submit ______L..__ I Processing I Decision. 45 Daysl I 60'Oa7.~1- I I I Max 120 Days I Submit City Reviewl Re-Submit --------- I Processing I Decision - 45 Days I 60'Oa7.l-l- I I I Max 120 Daysl i I Submit I City Reviewl Re.Submit .- ---r--- -rl-l~ ~2~~ys I Processing I Decision - 4S Days I 60 Days; t I I I 2 ~ I I I l_LJ _~-'_J_ J_J_1_L DeCiSion.compres~ I 1_...._ _~-'_J_ _1_J_1_L I Tj 1 J_1_L I Max 120 Days Decision - Compressed 90 Days 3 I j City Reviewl I I Re.Submit Processing Decision - Compressed 60 0 ys Target 90 Days 4 5.01 Generate and Submit Initial Application 5.02 City Completeness Review 5.03 Generate and Submit Complete Application 5.04 City Processing and Decision 6. Variance lTyne " or III) 6.01 Generate and Submit Initial Application .02 City Completeness Review 6.03 Generate and Submit Complete Application 6.04 City Processing and Decision 7. DWP Overlav ITme II 7.01 Generate and Submit Initial Application 7.02 City Completeness Review 7.03 Generate and Submit Complete Application 7.04 City Processing and Decision 8 - Tt"ntalive Site Plan Re\'iew - \Vith Master Plan AOp':roval 8.0 I Generate and Submit Initial Application 8.02 City Completeness Review 8.03 Generate and Submit Complete Application s1WProCeSSing and Decision 1 9.01 Generate and Submit Initial Application 9.02 City Completeness Review 9.03 Generate and Submit Complete Application 9.04 City Processiml. and Decision Generate I I I Generate I Generate 1 reguired 0 a p'er.lol p'er.p.8rcel basis onlv (Ty'p':e II) ~~i Ions Generate I I. I I I I I I I Submit I =H+ =H+ City Reviewl Re.Submit __ ~'Oa7.C-~.;r.-I-i"~ 12~~ysl m .... ....-... _!...... ,JCI\~ . W V I-. I: ')1 I , , '.. ,'" <::, 'bmit., . .... ~'.""""'t_y EXHIBIT H ... 8_m DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PORT\..AND DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS POST OFFICE BOX 2946 PORT\.AND. OREGON 97208-2946 January 29. 2004 Anel1lOo1 OF Operations Division Regulatory Branch Corps No.: 2001-00466 Mr. Paul V. Vaughn Hershner, Hunter. Andrews. Neill & Smith, U1' 180 East 111h Avenue p.o. Box 1475 Eugene, Oregon 97440 Dear Mr. Vaughn: We have reviewed the Adnnmstratlve Appeal Decision dated June 11.2003 fOT the Pierce Trust property in Springfield, Oregon as remanded to the U.S. Army Corps of EngineeJS (Corps). Portland DlstnCt by Charles R. Krahenbuhl, acting appeals officer, of the Corps' Northwestern Division office. You submitted the request for appeal on January 9,2003 on behalf of your client, the Ralph H. Pierce Trust (the Pierce Trost). The appeal IS associated with a Junsdicuonal detennmation made on property located at Section 30. Township 17 South and Range 2 West, near Springfield, Lane County Oregon. Duong an April 10, 2003 site visit to the Pierce Trost property, water was observed flowing from Irving Slough to the Pierce Ditch and continuing west, finally dischargmg into the Willamette River at Alton Baker Park This was confirmed by the consulting firm personnel that have been asststing in the Pierce Trost review. In addition, a review of Corps aerial photographs indicates water drains as noted above. The Corps field verified portions of that connection on December 10, 2003 and the City of Springfield acknowledged the tributary connections. The drainage across the Pierce Trost property eventually drains to the Wlllamette RIver. a navigable water, and the Pierce Trust drainage is conSidered to be a tributary consistent With Section 3283(8)(5) of our regulations (33 CPR 320 - 330). As noted In our letter of November 14, 2002, SectIon 328.3(a)(7) further clarifies that wetlands adjacent to these waters hSled above are also waters of the Umted States. Pennits under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act are reqUired for the placement of dredged or fin material into these "waters", Due to the prevIOus appeal, this approved JuosdlctlonaJ detemunatlOn IS now valid for a penod of 5 years from the date of this letter or unless new information warrants reviSIOn of the delineatton before the eJ\.plral1on date. The 5-year tIme frame identified in our letter of November 14, 2002 is void. r~~,3 ~~C':!V~rf~ 1,( .,. ~ t'~! ~ I ~ ~ J I I 0 , 11"> I f. ~ t~.J,JJ Original Submittal t - -2- If you have any questions about this action, please contact me at the letterhead address or telephone (503) 808-4370, Thank you for your interest in our regulatory program. Smcerely, Enclosures Copy Furnished: Mr Allan Pierce Environmental Protection Agency (portland, Vallette) Oregon DivIsion of State Lands (Morlan) Corps of Engineers - Eugene (Monical) Date Received: MAY 2 6 2006 Original Submittal . CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE CITY RECORDER COMMUNICATIONS COMMUNITY RELATIONS October 21, 2004 225 FIFTH STREET SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 (541) 726-3700 FAX (541) 726-2363 Norm LeCompte Hershner Hunter P . 0 . Box 14 7 5 Eugene, OR 97440 RE: Channel Maintenance in pierce Property Ditch Your File No. 4422-20104 Dear Mr, LeComp~e: In confirmation of your telephone conversation on Tuesday, October 19, 2004 wlth Joe Leahy, City Attorney, please be informed that in consideration for permission by Trustees of the Ralph and Elizabeth pierce Trusts for the City of Springfield, Department of Public Works , Maintenance Division, to perform channel maintenance which was authorized by the US Army Corps of Engineers in a letter to the City of Springfield dated March 2, 2004, the City of Springfield agrees to the following conditions: 1. The City of Springfield (City) will comply with all of the terms and conditions of the Corp's authorization, includlng, without limitation, the project's specific conditions, the regional conditions, the general conditions and the Oregon DEQ conditions. 2, The City and its employees, agents and contractors assume all risks arising out of their entry and activities on the Pierce property, and the Trustees will have no liability to any of them for any condition that may exist. 3, To the extent set forth under the Oregon statutes regarding Tort Actions Against Public Bodies, ORS 30,260 et seq" the City will indemnify and hold harmless the Trustees from any claims, losses, liabilities or expenses arising in any manner out of the City's channel maintenance activities, including, without limitation, any entry or activities on the Pierce property by the City or its employees, agents or contractors. I represent and warrant in executing this letter on behalf of the City of Springfield that I am duly authorized to do so. "'- Date Received: Michael A. Kelly City Manager, City d MAY 2 6 2006 Original Submittal EXHIBIT G MARCOLA MEADOWS BIBLIOGRAPHY OF LAND USE PLANNING DOCUMENTS The following documents were used in preparing this request for a Pre-Application Report regarding a Master Plan with associated Metro Plan Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment. If the reviewing City Planner knows of other relevant plans, maps, inventories studies, or policy documents, the applicant requests a list of those items Springfield Development Code, Adopted May 1086, Revised July 18, 2005 Eugene-Spnngfield Metropohtan Area General Plan (Metro Plan), Adopted April 21, 2004 TransPlan The Eugene-Springfield Transportatzon System Plan, Amended July 2002 Springfield Bicycle Plan, Adopted June 15, 1998 Springfield "Conceptual Road Network" map, Updated July 25, 2005 Springfield Natural Resource Study Report, October 2005 Sprmgfield Rlparian Channel Assessment Report, 2002 Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Plan (Wlllamalane), Adopted March 2004 Eugene-Sprmgfield Metropohtan Area Public Facllities and Services Plan, Adopted December 2001 City of Springfield Stormwater Management Plan, Review Draft, January 2004 Multl-Hazard Mitigation Plan for the Eugene/Sprmgfield Metropolitan Area, November 8, 2004 Sprmgfield Commercial Lands Study, February 2000 Metropolitan Industrial Lands Policy Report, July 1993 Eugene-Sprmgfield Metropohtan Area Residentzal Lands and Housing Study Draft Supply and Demand Techmcal Analysis, February 1999 Date Received: MAY 26 2006 Original Submittal EXHIBIT F ~ l"'!:;l Information ~~. .TO Build On Engineering.. Consulting. Testing May 10, 2006 Mr. Bob Martin The Martin Company Post Office Box 1482 Albany, OR 97321 Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation and Engineering Services Report Proposed Development of 14 69 Acres of Land NE ~ Section 25, Township 17 South, Range 3 West Springfield, Lane County, Oregon PSI Report No. 722-65027-01 Dear Mr. MartIn: Professional Service Industries, Inc. (PSI) is pleased to submit our Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation and Engineering Services Report for the above referenced site. The purpose of these services was to classify the subsurface soils in accordance with ASTM method 02487, Standard Practice for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes for the proposed construction and development of 14,69 acres of land. The development is based on the Lowes Tract parcel map for Springfield LLC labeled Exhibit "A" and UB" and a sIte plan by K & D Engineering Project 5-89-A dated 6/28/2005. Our services were performed in general accordance with our Agreement which was signed by Mr. Jeff Belle of SC Springfield, LLC a Deleware Corporation on May 4, 2006. On May 9, 2006 we conducted eleven (14) exploratory test pits placed randomly throughout the property to verify subsurface conditions (see attached Test Pit Location Map). At the time of investigation, the site was relatively level and at or near adjacent street grades with an eXisting drainage ditch north of the site, Based on those test pits, the soil profile under the proposed building lots generally consisted of: Test Pits (TP-1, TP-2, TP-3, TP-4, TP-5, TP-6, TP-7, TP-8, and TP-9) (see attached test pit location map). 18 to 26 inches of relatively dark organic silt with gravel topsoil. At about 2 feet to 5 feet wet brown silt with a trace of gravel was encountered. We received refulsal at approxImately 5 feet of gravel well graded dense material into terminated depths us to 8 feet. Test Pit (TP-12, TP-13 and TP-14) (see attached test pit location map): Approximately 2 to 3 feet of topsoil, dark brown, soft With a slight gravel fill material was encountered. Underlying the topsoil was what appeared to be silt, no gravel. We encountered the dense sandy gravel at 4 feet through our terminated depth of 10 feet. Date Received: MAY 2 6 2006 Original Submittal ProfeSSional Service Industnes, Inc. .1040A Shelle)' 5t . Sprmgfleld, OR 97477. Phone 541/74~-9649. Fax 541/746-7163 '~ l-~ ;1 Information t:!.~. .To Build On Engineering. Consulting. Testing Upon completion, the test pits were loosely backfilled with the excavated soils. Please note that above soil descriptions are based on visual descriptions. More detailed classifications in accordance with ASTM 02487 will be available after laboratory work has been completed. Based on the information we obtained during our field investigation, the materials encountered appear to be consistent throughout. While we have not completed the laboratory work at the time of thiS letter, our field analysis Indicates that the matenal should be sUitable for building. Please note that the limits are not known at thiS time and will need to be verified by further laboratory analysis and detailed structural Information. A more detailed report of our site investigation and recommendations will be provided In our final report which will be submItted by May 26,2006. If we can provide additional assistance, or observation and testing services during construction, please do not hesitate to contact Jennifer T ran at (541) 746-9649, Respectfully Submitted, Professional Service Industries, Inc. r? - -- Jennifer p, Tran, EfT EngIneering Associate Charles Lane, PE Senior Geotechnical Engineer JPT: jpt Date Received: MAY 2 6 2006 Original Submittal Professional Service Industnes, Ino, .1 D40A Shell~ St . Sprmgfleld, OR 97477. Phone 541/746.9649 . Fax 541/746-7163 EXtt/8/ T 1]3// .. 'S; LOWES TRACT FOR SPRINGF1ELD LLC- N W'0E S we-A TIOP IN TI1~ 'Hf. 1/4- ~t.. 25, r, 11 -;::../ R, '3 hi., hJ.l1" t.1T'( Of ?f'I<IN~flE.t..I?, [.,A}l!::. c-otJHTT", Ol<~ON nA'( L 200b '?J' \)1>. /~ ~~ '\ C?> ~'v~~\J ,,~ /fG / I J <\. \\J ~ V .. LO=l'{;O,02. I r:..\ fa Ro:J5DO.OO ~.J" ~/q i '.. .-' -----, f;fg ,I. . .. --." :,11' . ~l -Jill! I L"'ZQ.l=l7' ...--+- : R"'8.00.DO' wi I a~ I 91?l : C\I,tr: I. 0'" ~ 016 : 1~ . OIN i '", J ~ ; ~ 1.=:(;;7.'IS J : ,~ "ff-4 t<') 1(-400.00'1'-- J ~ '0 , . b"l ' lri ! I "\ b 1"(5" f v \\D ;0 ~=:~:=:::.:::'~:::-_'=::'::-~~_::___ '.. ;;5+-: .:::-__.t?~~=..~-------- .._____ _.;-I,!.~ ___w------- --------.-..------------------.-.- L~7.C15;--:.r_ "f- u.~.__.. '--iXiS-TiNG""ZO' wlof""i.ANITA Y\--'~'--'-- -'3-----..--.-.-----...--------- R=400 00' : 1, SEWER EA5EMF,NT I ,9 ~ . , 'bv, 0 ~ I f') ~~ I 0 ~A o!' ~ ~ FUTURE: 35' WIDE ~,\,,?" \ Q ~ 9:r-.: PUBLIC- R-O-W ~ b ON)"<l;: DtDI CATION 0 'dJ I b:O :11" 15' % oil') I \I'll 1 , I ! : rV- , fUTURE 70' WID!;; i N8 058'00"[ 2G;3,'19; PUBLIC R-O-W '- i \ DEDICATION ~'}. L.-.42..07' I i ~"'1B4 00' . , , , SCALE: 1" '" 200' tr -'~ \\ L..B3,07' b I' f\! i\ R"'500.00' (lfl<-\'l\o\..e.. 5 e.'f5B'OO~ W 510.00' ~ ~ \'\ .A"O ,,\1... ~\ ~ ~ \ ~ ,I' \ \ u \ cA' lrlYl ~' ",q,,..\U\ D, o... -5Db... - - EXISTI Co ORA'N1E" DITCh :., . '. --: '.-cv -YG:~ '/ \~ . ~ . I~/ \qJl ~"',1t -'\~.(~ )\~O c.\':"'" , '611 ",.1 'tot/)' -t> 1- L ~ S TR.ACT (14 q, ACR(5) ,....."'- "0 or- .- ~ I M ~ Date Received: \ L",~.~8' ~"'~:lG.oD' ""\1" \ . '"' P.O.B, N8'1'S8'OO"E '4"35.17' _ ~ Sf GORNER~ ~ P ARCrL :3 '" ..... MAY 26 2006 5B9"57'Z~!tV( 141 C\21' (SBCJ"5T30"W l.o1J9,2.2.') t1ARC8LA ROAD Original submittal , ,I PROFf.:$!:)IO~\JAL AND F .mVt.=-YOFl ........ ...."'n;:;:~ , l"r:l' ~ I f;GPl",l J 1.Y f! I :?,()D?' Jrrt~ 'It (:;(~l'A i,(5f1f.J1'll$ ~ ~l""'_t"'" [~?1f'::.:-f::=L7J?~1~t:.J " K K AI D ENGIN:!EmNG, 1D~. 1. D 276 N,\'>, IllokotY St".~" l' 0 Eo" 7~6 (~(, AIMny. O....R." nT.l&L /D<l) ~2~-MD~ O!l-BQ-A 058'io-bfll LoweS-IZ]-o~ 1 of 1 '-." -~ EXHIBIT E , . May 25, 2006 RIck Satre Satre AssOcIates, P C 132 East Broadway, SUIte 536 Eugene, OR 97401 RE Marcola Meadows Traffic Impact Study Status Report ThIS document IS meant to provIde you wIth a status report on the Traffic Impact Study requITed for the Marcola Meadows development At thIS tIme we have not receIved a specIfic scope of work for the study from eIther OnOT RegIOn 2 or the CIty of Spnngfield However, as we dIscussed at the scopmg meetmg wIth ODOT and the CIty on May 9t\ I have prepared prelImmary tnp generatIOn and dIstnbutIOn mformatIOn for three development scenarIOS' a worst-case development under the eXIstmg zonmg, a worst-case development under the proposed metro plan deSIgnatIOns, and the proposed master plan development Also mcluded m thIS document IS an outlme ofthe scope and methodology that WIll be used m the Traffic Impact Study Smce the precIse study area has not yet been defmed, no current traffic volume data collectIon has been undertaken However, traffic volumes from 2003 at the the Mohawk Blvd and Marcola Road mtersectIOn mdIcate that the addItIOn of development traffic may double the eXIstmg traffic levels on cntIcal movements at that mtersectIOn ThIS IS the most lIkely mtersectIOn that WIll reqUIre ImtIgatIOn - and that mItIgatIOn would be reqUIred for the worst-case development under eXIstmg zonmg as well I WIll keep you updated on progress WIth the study We antICIpate receIVmg a scope of work wIthm the next week Yours very truly, MIchael WeIshar, P E Access Engmeenng LLC Date Received: MAY 2 6 2006 Original submittal Marcola Meadows Traffic Impact Study Status Report Page 2 Trip Generation Tnp generatlOn for three land use scenanos are provIded a worst-case land use scenano for the eXlstlllg zomng, a land use scenano based on the proposed metro plan desIgnatIons, and a land use scenano based on the proposed Master Plan The Marcola Meadows SIte contallls three eXIstIng zonlllg dIstncts There are approxImately 40 acres of MDR (medlUm densIty reSidentIal) wIth a maXImum densIty of 20 umts per acre, 8 acres of CC (commumty commerCIal), and approXimately 50 acres of CI (campus llldustnal) FIgure 2X shows the apprOXImate configuratlOn of zones on the SIte For the eXlstlllg zomng a worst-case land use was chosen for each ofthe three zonlllg categones on the SIte For the MDR zone, an 800 dwelllllg umt (40 acres X 20 umts/acre) PUD (ITE Code 270) was chosen For the CC zone, a ShOpplllg center (ITE Code 820) was selected The SIze of a ShOpplllg center that wlll fit on 8 acres was determllled to be approXImately 100,000 square feet based on coverage hll1lts, reqmred parklllg and loadlllg areas For the CI zone, a 50 acre busllless park (ITE Code 770) was selected The descnptlOn of the CI zone specIfically mentlOns busllless parks as the preferred land use for the zone Table 1 on the followlllg page shows the tnp generatlOn for these land uses under the eXlstlllg zonlllg The proposed metro plan deSIgnatIOns for the SIte lllclude retallllllg the medIUm denSIty reSIdential and the commumty commerCial desIgnatlOns, though shghtly smaller III area The remallllllg area IS proposed to be deSIgnated as ll1lxed use The land uses for the reSIdentIal and commerCial areas are the same as those chosen for the eXlstlllg zonlllg scenano except that the SIze of the Shopplllg center was reduced proportIOnately to ItS area and some of the medIUm denSIty reSIdentIal wlll splll over llltO the mIxed use area The mIxed use area IS composed of a Illixture of office, commerCial, llldustnal, and reSIdentIal uses FIgure 2Lshows the approx1Illate configuratIon of plan deSIgnatIOns and the land uses chosen for the SIte Table 2 on the followlllg page shows the tnp generatIOn for these land uses under the proposed metro plan deSignatIOns The proposed zonlllg or master plan land use scenano provIdes a more detaIled breakdown of the ll1lxed use deSIgnatIOn llltO Spnngfield's ll1lxed use zomng dIstncts The master plan calls for MUE (mIxed-use employment), MUC (ll1lxed-use commerCIal), and MUR (mIxed-use reSIdentIal) zones ThIS scenano hsts the current master plan land uses for each zomng dlstnct The MDR zone w1l1 conSIst of up to 225 smgle-famIly lots CITE Code 210) WIth 535 apartment umts CITE Code' 220) combmlllg to meet the mmamum 20 umts/acre denSIty In the MUE zone, the master plan calls for a Home Improvement Store (ITE Code 862) along WIth undefined retaIl bUlldmgs (ITE Code 820) and a ll1lX of medIcal-dental (ITE Code 720) and general office (ITE Code 710) bUlldlllgS The MUC zone conSIsts of a speCIalty retall (ITE Code 814) area along a "town center" street, WIth undefined retall bmldmgs (ITE Code 820) along the Marcola Road and 28th Street frontages Th MUR zone lllcludes up to 100 townhouses (ITE Code 230), a contmulllg care retIrement commumty (ITE Code 255), a medIcal-dental office (ITE Code 720), and a day care center (ITE Code 565) FIgure 2Z shows the conceptual master plan for the SIte Table 3 on the followmg page shows the tnp generatIOn for the master plan land uses based on bUlldlllg SIzes shown on the master plan Date Received: MAY 2 S 2006 O ~.......i)' ~l -I l.",.., \.~~,-l fI~.~'"" ......H.."...ll. ,___ Date Received: MAY 2 6 2006 Marcola Meadows Traffic Impact Study Status Report Original Sl.lbffftffai3 Table 1: Gross Trips - Existing Zoning Ex Land Use (ITE Code) SIze Unrt ADT PM Peak Hour Zonmg Rate Trips Rate Trips MDR Planned Unit Development (270) 8000 Dwelling Units 752 6018 067 537 CC Shopping Center (820) 1000 1000 SF GFA 6791 6791 626 626 CI Business Park (770) 500 Acres 152 82 7641 1682 841 Total 20450 2004 Table 2: Gross Trips - Proposed Plan Designations Plan Land Use (ITE Code) Size Unrt ADT PM Peak Hour Desig Rate Trips Rate Trips MDR Planned Unit Development (270) 8000 Dwelling Units 752 6018 067 537 CC Shopping Center (820) 770 1000 SF GFA 5263 4053 489 376 MU Shopping Center (820), Home Impr 540 Acres 14604 1436 Store (862), Gen Office (710), Day Care (565), Retirement Comm (255) Total 24675 2349 Table 3: Gross Trips - Proposed Master Plan (proposed Zoning) Prop Land Use (ITE Code) Size Unit ADT PM Peak Hour Zonmg Rate Trips Rate Trips MDR Single Family Residential (210) 2250 Dwelling Units 974 2193 099 222 Apartments (220) 5350 Dwelling Units 629 3366 058 312 CC Shopping Center (820) 64.3 1000 SF GFA 5735 3687 531 342 MUE Home Improvement Store (862) 1670 1000 SF GFA 2980 4977 245 409 Shopping Center (820) 405 1000 SF GFA 5735 2323 531 215 General Office (710) 300 1000 SF GFA 17 60 528 375 112 Medical-Dental Office (720) 690 1000 SF GFA 4361 3009 320 221 MUC Shopping Center (820) 573 1000 SF GFA 5735 3286 531 304 Specialty Retail (814) 450 1000 SF GFA 4432 1994 288 129 MUR Townhouses (230) 1000 Dwelling Units 642 642 060 60 Cont Care Retirement Center (255) 2000 Occupied Beds 281 562 029 58 Day Care Center (565) 100 1000 SF GFA 7926 793 13 18 ~32 Medical-Dental Office (720) 100 1000 SF GFA 4361 436 320 32 Total 27795 2549 Marcola Meadows Traffic Impact Study Status Report Page 4 Internal and Pass-by Trips The proposed multI-use development contams resIdentIal, retall, and office components As such there IS a hIgh potentIal for tnp mteractlOn between the uses m the overall development The Tnp GeneratlOn manual, used for the above tables, provIdes tnp rates for uses on freestandmg sItes Therefore, a sum of these mdIvIdual tnps wIll overstate the actual number oftnps made to the development from off-sIte by the number oftnps made on-sIte among the resIdentIal, retall, and office components These on-sIte tnps are called mternal tnps The ITE Tnp GeneratlOn Handbook provIdes some data and an analysIs procedure to determme the percentage of mternally captured tnps m a multI-use development Usmg that procedure and prelllmnary tnp generatlOn for the eXlstmg and proposed zomng scenanos, mternal tnp percentage were found for the reSIdentIal, retaIl, and office land uses for each of the three scenanos The worksheets are attached Some land uses are treated separately m the proposed plan desIgnatIOn and proposed master plan scenanos and were not mcluded m the worksheets The day care center was assumed to attract customers mamly from thIS development As a result, 50% of the tnps were assumed to be mternal for that land use The retIrement commumty generates relatIvely few tnps, so mternal tnps were not speCIfied fOl that use Smce thIS development proposes a commerCIal center onented toward Marcola Road, many ofthe tnps to and from the retallland uses can be claSSIfied as pass-by tnps These tnps are made by motonsts who are already on the street system and stop at the SIte whIle on the way to another destmatlOn These are not conSIdered new tnps to the study area but do result m mcreased tnps at the SIte access 10catlOns Pass-by tnps are made by dnvers on streets adjacent to the SIte The percentages of pass-by tnps for many retaIl uses are tabulated m the ITE's Tnp GeneratIOn Handbook The fitted curve equatIOn for shoppmg centers was used to detemune the pass-by percentages for both the shoppmg center and specIalty retallland uses m each scenano The pass-by rate for the home Improvement store, 25%, was taken from prevIOus studIes of home Improvement stores m the metro area No pass-by tnps are expected for the reSIdentIal r office land uses Tables 4, 5, and 6 on the followmg page apply the mternal and pass-by tnp rates to the gross tnp generatlOn totals calculated above to detenmne the external tnps generated by each of the three scenanos Date Received: MAY 2 6 2006 Original Submittal Marcola Meadows Traffic Impact Study Status Report Page 5 Table 4: Net External Trips - PM Peak Hour - Existing Zoning Ex land Use (lTE Code) Gross Internal Trips Pass-by Trips- Net External Trips Zonmg Trips % # % # # Enter EXIt MDR Planned Unit Development (270) 537 19% 102 0% 0 435 283 152 CC Shopping Center (820) 626 13% 81 39% 212 332 159 173 CI Business Park (770) 841 6% 50 0% 0 791 158 632 Total 2004 233 212 1558 600 957 Table 5: Net External Trips - PM Peak Hour - Proposed Plan Designations Plan land Use (ITE Code) Gross Internal Trips Pass-by Trips Net External Trips Deslg Trips % # % # # Enter EXit MDR Planned Unit Development (270) 537 31% 166 0% 0 371 241 130 CC Shopping Center (820) 376 12% 45 31% 103 228 110 119 MU Shopping Center (820) 636 12% 76 31% 173 387 185 201 Home Impr Store (862) 409 12% 49 25% 90 270 127 143 Gen Office (710) 201 20% 40 0% 0 161 27 133 Retirement Comm (255) 58 0% 0 0% 0 58 28 30 Dav Care (565) 132 50% 66 0% 0 66 31 35 Total 2349 442 366 1541 749 791 Table 6: Net External Trips - PM Peak Hour - Proposed Master Plan (Zoning) Plan land Use (ITE Code) Gross Internal Trips Pass-by Trips Net External Trips Deslg. Trips % # % # # Enter Exit MDR Single Family Residential (210) 222 30% 67 0% 0 156 98 58 Apartments (220) 312 30% 94 0% 0 218 142 76 CC Shopping Center (820) 342 13% 44 31% 92 206 99 107 MUE Home Improvement Store (862) 409 13% 53 25% 89 267 125 141 Shopping Center (820) 215 13% 28 31% 58 129 62 67 General Office (710) 112 17% 19 0% 0 93 16 77 Medical-Dental Office (720) 221 17% 38 0% 0 183 49 134 MUC Shopping Center (820) 304 13% 40 31% 82 182 87 95 SpeCialty Retail (814) 129 13% 17 31% 35 78 34 44 MUR Townhouses (230) 60 30% 18 0% 0 42 28 14 Cont Care Retirement Ctr (255) 58 0% 0 0% 0 58 28 30 Day Care Center (565) 132 50% 66 0% 0 66 31 35 Medical-Dental Office (720) 32 17% 5 0% 0 27 7 20 Total 2549 488 356 170s.. 7r ~....d. Il: """ ed: M~:f 2 ~ 2006 ~ ,.., ,J~,,"'r~ '..,~ (Jr~fji~t.:4 ~~ 1 I .....-.. ----.- Marcola Meadows Traffic Impact Study Status Report Page 6 Site Trip Distribution The dlstnbutlOn of external trIpS for each scenano was done m two parts Tnps to and from the retaIl and office land uses under the proposed scenanos and the retaIl and busmess park uses under the eXlstmg zonmg predommantly have a household as a destmatlOn dunng the PM peak hour Tnp dlstnbutlOns from these commercIal land uses were based on Spnngfield and East Eugene household census data provIded by LCOG and from the tnp dIstnbutlOns from prevIous commerClal uses proposed for the sIte Tnps from the resIdentIal land uses can have a dIfferent dIstnbutlOn pattern than the commercial land use tnps ResIdentIal tnps wIll be mostly employment based tnps m the PM peak hour that would tend to have ongms that encompass the entIre metro area whIle the commercial tnps would tend to draw from the Spnngfield half of the metro area As a result two dlstnbutlOn patterns have been IdentIfied fOl traffic generated by the sIte FIgure 4 shows the expected dlstnbutlOn of traffic from both the resIdential and commercial areas of the development Applymg these tnp dlstnbutlOn patterns to the external tnps generated by each of the three scenanos results m the study area tnp aSSIgnments shown m FIgure 4X (ExIstmg Zorung), FIgure 4L (Proposed Plan DesIgnatlOns), and FIgure 4Z (Proposed Master Plan) Scope of Work and Methodology At thIS tIme a specIfic scope of work IS bemg determmed by ODOT and the CIty of Spnngfield The figures presented here show a study area that Includes key mtersectIOns surroundIng the sIte along WIth the mtersectIons leadmg to the nearest freeway ramps ODOT and the CIty may add to or delete IntersectlOns for thIS study area A figure showmg ,the approved study area and eXIstIng lane configuratlOns at each study area IntersectIon wIll be provIded Followmg IS a bnef outlme of the methodology of the Traffic Impact Study Once the study area IS defined, a 3-hour traffic count for allmtersectIOns and approaches wIll be made dunng the afternoon peak, WIth 15-mmute breakdowns All traffic volumes WIll be seasonally adjusted to represent 30th HIghest Hour V olumes per ODOT gUIdelmes Capacity Analysis: CapacIty analYSIS of sIgnalIzed mtersectIOns, unslgnahzed mtersectIOns, and lOad way segments WIll follow the estabhshed methodologIes of the current HIghway CapacIty Manual (HCM2000) FOl slgnahzed mtersectlOns, the ovelall IntersectlOn volume to capacIty ratIo (V/C) wIll be leported For unslgnahzed mtersectIOns, the hIghest approach VIC WIll be leported, along WIth an mdlcatlOn of ItS correspondmg movement Plannmg level moblhty results (V IC) at the state hIghway mtersectlOns wIll be compared agall1st HIghway Moblhty StandaIds (Pohcy IF) and the Maxl1llum VIC RatIOS proVIded m Table 6 of the 1999 Oregon HIghway Plan (OHP), August 2005 Amendments At CIty mtersectlOns, the Level of Sel VIce (LOS) based on average delay wIll be compared to the standards proVIded m the most recent Eugene-Spnngfield Transplan I Date Received: MAY 2 6, 2006 Original submittal Marcola Meadows Traffic Impact Study Status Report Page 7 Queue Length Analysis: The mtersectlOn operatlOn analysIs wIll meIude the effects of queumg and blockmg Average queue lengths and 95th Percentile queue lengths wIll be reported for all study area mtelsectIons The 95th Percentile queumg shall be used for deSIgn purposes, and wIll be reported to the next nearest 25 foot Increment Right & Left Turn Lane Criteria: Proposed nght or left turn lanes at unslgnahzed mtersectlOns and pnvate approach roads WIll meet mstallatIon cntena contamed m the current ODOT HIghway DeSIgn Manual (HDM) Traffic Signal Installations & Modifications: AnalYSIS and recommendatlOns related to new and/or modIfIed traffIC SIgnals Will follow ODOT's Traffic SIgnal Pohcy and Gmdehnes, and all subsequent reVlSlOns New SIgnal proposals for Day of Opemng wIll show the followmg . A clear mdlcatIon of need for a traffic SIgnal, . An assessment of the abIhty of eXlstmg, planned, and proposed pubhc roads to accommodated development traffic at another locatlOn . DocumentatlOn of traffic volumes and sIgnal warrant satisfaction, Any recommendatlOns for traffic SIgnals to be mstalled as part of future IllitIgatlOn must meet prehmmary SIgnal warrants (MUTCD Warrant #1, Case A & B) Report Contents: EXlstmg CondItlOns Identify current year SIte condItions at the proposed development locatlOn ThIS meIudes, but IS not hmlted to the followmg . A descnptlOn of the SIte location, zomng, eXIsting use(s), and proposed use(s) of subject property . A descnptlOn of surroundmg land uses . A graphIC IdentIfymg eXlstmg lane configuratlOns and traffic control deVIces at the study area mtersectlOns . A graphIC showmg eXlstmg 30HV traffic, reported as PM (4-6 pm) Peak hour volumes and also as average dally traffIc (ADT) . An analysIs of eXlstmg mtersectIon operatlOns, reported m telIDS of both V/C and LOS . An analysIs of at least 3-years worth of crash data, mcludmg mformatIOn on all SPIS SItes wlthm or adjacent to the study area Traffic Volumes & OperatlOns - Year of Openmg, WIth & WIthout Proposed Development An analysIs wIll be made of all study area mtersectlOns m the Year of Openmg, for both background traffic and total traffic condItions Total traffic condItions are conSIdered background traffic volumes plus SIte genewted tnps Tills analysIs should prOVide the followmg . A graphIC showmg Year of Openmg background traffic and total traffic volumes . A graphIC or table showmg V/C and LOS analysIs results for both background traffIC and total traffic volumes . A graphIC or table IteIllizmg storage length reqmrements for all approaches, rounded to the next nemest 25 foot mcrement Traffic Volumes & OpewtlOns - Future Year, WIth & WIthout Proposed Development An analysIs shall be made of all study area mtersectlOns for a future year hOrIZon, fOI:[!)f1~~ed: MAY 2 6 2006 Orl;<:n'1! S'.~bmitt~1 ,.) Marcola Meadows Traffic Impact Study Status Report Page 8 traffic and total traffic condItions ThIs analysis should provIde the followmg . A graphIc showmg Honzon Year background traffic and total traffic volumes . A graphIc or table showmg VIC and LOS analysIs results for both background traffic and total traffic volumes . A graphic or table Itermzmg storage length reqmrements for all approaches, rounded to the next nearest 25 foot mcrement Planned transportatlOn system Improvements antiCIpated wlthm the Honzon Year shall be mcorporated mto the Future Year analysis ConclusIOns and RecommendatlOns Summanze eXlstmg and future condItions and dISCUSS the proposed development's Impacts IdentIfy any operational or safety defiCIencIes and recommend mltIgatlOn along wIth the effectiveness of the mltIgatlOn Summanze how the proposed development complIes wIth all opelatlOnal and safety standards m the applIcable approval cntena r' Date Received: MAY 2 6 2006 Original Submittal x " c '" EXISTING ZONING & LAND USE (XXX)-ITE Land Use Code ~---- --~-~...- ~- - .- - ~---~~..,~~ ~'~I :::....;~ ~ ._ ..,,--"1 C-', ~ "7- \ ~~ ~ _\_~.. ::.:#,:-:.. ~,// "..... J --:_,..~ ~(c ~"'-......... "'-""!Y ... //"" .' ,'.- - , " // /' ~...-~ --~ l I ',\ ; . />' \ , _~ 1"'''''- -, 1 , ( I ''',' - j _ ---r"\ / ;-'", Ij> ---s-_.... I ~J II I ') 1 / ~- , I I II t '< ~__~__<jl~",,1 _..."').____ ".: - --=n-l -I' ~,,~" '''f'' --, 'i I! l .....- -- , . I _ ~ ~... 1 ~ --I 'i - , . I : \ - :.-/-\. (,,,, --~-: 1'...1 It <._-;--- I~: I ,Iu! ~~~- T Il 1 - I j---- ~ ! ;,///..~ -. --~'--'/(, - ,~.,.."" -> ~ - I'" "'- ~ \ i: ..r ~~-(9a) ~:5" l 0 SHOPPING () ~ l m CENTER ~ en i 3: CD (820) {I) So ::!< j: 100000 SF GFA 01 ..... I ;0, ' ;::) 3 I ~.-- m I ~ ~- " 0")---- n. - . h__ - :::J ID -' ~- V_(\) .- . (l) - ~ _. (l) c;:::) < ~ en (I) ~ a. MDR - MedIum Density Residential CI - Campus Industrial CC - Community Commercial -~ -,.. ~ t 1 _ -:. 0:::::-'-:-:- :;;;.:.' .::::-:::_:':-:='-==-1: II: ..-.""~.......-..-:;'J:'..,..--~ II ___~.___'--:;t;'Il ~ 1<1 ~,::;... y:..:;.~- '\I ~ ; e .::::..---- 1 _ __--~,::::;:::';--;~~~ 1 ;;~.~--;~~-;~~--"._:-:::.:~ !MOO - (40a) ':\ · JI I~l ! ''\. - ~-~- l 1 =-~ ~:-=-_-:~, __ , l' !~- ~,LJ,- ........ ~ 'I t . '! I I ,_..:L- -.-- rl - .,-~- .- , I ' I __.__l.. -1 lr~-'-'~~- ~ /, I Yo' I ,( J '1/ / -- -" ~~ ' I /~;::<K ! I /~~;>v~\'- : i ~v~-:;:i;;~4~/ "'-:-:- -! I :::;--' /<:;,,- ;;--./< 'I ' ;:..><../ ~-:;.~~::-" ~ ~'*'/(~*'/ : : v/"',~/"'\ \~ -, -",," """",' - --------1 i ' / 4/' ~, --- - ----- - -'- / ,f~ '. -7------ -, '/~fl I f/~' ;' I ~ff ~ ,I I ~ 1\ / _-----/ 1\ .... ~ I 't--. -- ~--- --- . ~ _ ~~ ~--~------=Mr:~~~~~- --- =-;:1- PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (270) 40a x 20 D.U.la = 800 D.U. I- I ! ~u - (50a) BUSINESS PARK (770) r ~ "'" (') o til ~ D:J & ~ ::;t t\) ;:: ...... (') ~:r. ~ cO" (') t:: ........, C/)(1) ~I\) ~~ x ~ C' PROPOSED METRO PLAN DESIGNA liONS (XXXHTE Land Use Code _'-- -~11 ---- - -- _.- "I _ ~ ,,"rr~:<:;::;:~;"-=-- -:- :.-:':-- ---- :: i; ---~-~ ; 'I _"--,:;..::::~O, ~;; ..-- -- -' -:;::;.." -""""'" I I __- _ _ '_', ;,-; c,.; -:.~__ -.' ,/' ,.-.-- IlWlDlml - (38a) III - .- .I~'I . =-,:: -r---.'f ~:---.r.c--: PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (270) I?l ; \ \ _- 'J _ i }. - 800 D,U 11':-=: " ~- ~~ ~_.._:~ - -- - :.. {, - -- ----- (-- ;-t::l-.. ,,~ ""'- -.... \( - _~_____-------- ----'"- ~ /::~. .:,':. ~~ Y) --I .......... \' \ ___-------- t I! //;-/~, \ " :._-' I -- _,I If-=-- ..' { l~. ,..-- 7"'--1 j ~ ~--- I I t ~"\ - t' __ 1 f __------------- - - \.;' I r- __----.-------- i fl---- f~'" I "}v .,.,_- u_'_ ~ ~~'W ;;,;;L~ / ~:o~~::""nt Community (255) [it -~l~ ~ ~- - :-- /, ~ - ! Day Care (565) } J! I ~/"- ,^,,_, I 10,000 SF !/: i L___""""': r .-- -. -- --. - -- --- '-1/ ;/] ~--~--_~~_~___ ~',-" ~- r - - --- . -- - -. - g i ~ ~--:..." ~,1\ i I ~ r. ,,/' ~;"'...,.;>\,~, '.... I ~ c;..oo,' // ';;::~ ~ ~~~/;/ ".. - ~ h/-".Y.//;:"';"";::;' ~~ , I h..../ ~ :'?, ~":"/"d~ ;:q:/\ ~ f";"~ I I y~/4'\\'- ----- -------: . u// ... F/ ," -. ..--- .Joj...~.:E ~ ~~-~~~ - - - - _1 ,Ill' ~--,- -----1 r// / Jf If /1 ,_/ .J ~ ~ L --------- i ~... "'.".. - ---~---~.- - ~-~- -L"i- - ---- - --<<--...-- MDR - Medium Density Residential MU - Mixed Use CC - Community CommercIal ~ :to. :r g~ ~(J) O>fr ~~ ~m ::i_ Ql ~ S. CQ I , ~ - - ....:,:-;1'" '- ~ ~_ !,~...'\ ~ ......h " '''- , '" lAAlIUI- (54a) Home Improvement (862) 167,000 SF L __~ ' I I I I 0 3!: a SHOPPING ~ (I) CENTER Gen, Office (710) N :;0 (820) 109,000 SF oj, ~ ,77,000 SF GFA ;= ~-:.=~-=~-~---- .--- :--~:_=--__~_'-_"~~:u_ .__ en CD a. (C~ - (7a) --I Shopping Center (820) 130,600 SF ~ ..., (") C Sir ~ n'l ~ ~ ~ n'l ...... ~ (")' ~ ~!1 n'l CQ' Q.~ CJ)(I) ~ ~~ >< ~ PROPOSED MASTER PLAN/ZONING (ITE CODE) MDR - Mediu m Density Residential MUE - Mixed Use Employment MUG - Mixed Use Commercia)' MUR - Mixed Use Residential: CC - Community Commercial: 225 Single-Family Res, (210); 535 Apartments (220) 30K SF Gen. Office (710); 69K Medical Office (720); 135K SF Home Improvement (862), 40.5K SF Shopping Center (820) 57K SF Shoppmg Center (820); 45K SF Specialty Retail (814) 2000ce. Bed. (255); 10K SF Day Care (565); 10K Medical Office (720); 100 Townhouses (230) 64 3K SF Shopping Center (820) ~ ).0 Q :::!. Q(C ~ :5 CD ~ gwg> ~O' ;::, 3 (I) -' (I) :::: :! Q) ::f - lQ 3: ~ i'o,') en r-..> c:::> c:::> en ~ t\:J ~ -. (') 3":t1 -g ca. ~~ CI)<D ~ ~~ ~ ""\ (') o Sir ~ t\:J % ~ C/) Figure 4 Marcola Meadows Traffic Impact Study Trip Distribution ~z 1'- x i\ "t- " "- t 'l--i -+i-' T ''y - "', i '1- 4- ,t :1 ! + (J) CI) a. 0.. 'C 'C l- I- -.. 0 ~~ 0 '0 :.:; '- C ID II) E "0 i .---' (1) E I , II) 0 0:: 0 i- f ~ ~ ~ .t z <H-iI-t + t- ~ -.. 'fj ~~ "-" te Receive JttlM; .. N Figure 4X Marcola Meadows Traffic Impact Study Trip Di$tn"bution Existing PA and Zoning (:) (2) J~ (11)3.# (J5)8~ 104 0 (H) (5) 5 3 tot @V , , (16) 1:..15(40) 28 ....,5(81) .69(322) f 127 (121) [40] [70] (332)(87) ...... 9(304.) 99 5 [37] _I 0(111) .. [-37] (48)(211 (11l) H, 32 "'-59(83) J ~ ~ +-7(28) (#).4" {69)3...... .3 25 (16)2""\- (6)(19) , . lr -"';:---t'".. 1_... ;''''k, ~: ~i~-t_~ 4 28\11 @Pierce (131)18+ ..... [65] (>44)0-.. [ -65}-- ......8(16) 1 19 jmohawk@MarcolojQ 2 Marcola@Site 3 Maroola@28" (40)5 (2~2)30",,\- 56 (96) 8 Marcola@42od (201 )(121) -46 23 .. ~ LEGEND xx Residential Trips (XX) Commercial Trips [xx] Pass-by Trips (2~2) 30 ~ {M)28...# t 28 (32) 12.7 (IV) 6 Mohawk@WB Ramps 9 42od@WB Ramps (121) 23 ~ (79)85 J- Date Received: (161) (Sl) 15 15 J ~ 42 (048) MAY 2 6 2006 t 28 64) 7 Mohawk@EB Romps 10 Original SUbmlttaL_Z;-2- 42"'t@EB Ramps uts Access Engimn1ring XJl\fIC . N Figure 4L Marco/s Meadows Traffic Impact Study Trip Distribution Proposed Land Use (e) (3) 5 0 Jt- (8)3..4- (21)IO~ 17 () (16) (+) 5 31 @'\jL (48) "'-6(63) 13 +16(63) -r6't{2M) r 107 (216) [35] [122- (103)(52) "'t.,12(14) 88 7 [15] .1 279) ~ (-28] [35] (205) J 4 2&'0 @Pierce +13(14) 1 19h/Mohawk@Morcolo/Q 2 Marcola@Site 2a Morcola@Site 3 (19)S Marcolo@28'lo (126)o4a~ 81 (96) (189) (95) .j.Q 2.4 J ~ 8 t.4arcola@42nd1 LEGEND xx Residential Trips (XX) Commercial Trips (XX] Pass-by Trips (126) 48 ~ (48)54..#"' t 27 (.fa) 107 (216) 6 t.4ohowk@WB Ramps 9 42""@WB Ramps (95) ~ (1#)67...1' Date Received: (63) (63) 32 16 J -f. .w (12) MAY 2 6 2006 t 27 48) 7 Mohawk@EB Ramps 0" I S b . 10 nglna u mlttal 42""@E8 Ramps bi-~ Access Engineering 1UlWG . N Figure 4Z Marcola Meadows Traffic Impact Study Trip Distribution Proposed Zoning (7) (3) 6 0 J.J. (10)4J'" (24)11~ 19 0 (17) (5) 5 31 @\J'A. (51) ~9tJ2) 15 .....1802) -r72{324) (51)30...... r 118 (230) [34][119 (117) (59) "t.. 13(17) 98 8 [15] .1 0(351) .. [-27] ~~]) ~(25X46] (117)(54-)(124 (~ 0 13 56 't..93(88) J [~~]) J .J .. .....10(29) (83)0.4- (41)6 2 21 (18)1~ (13X38) 4 28"'@Pierce (249)163j [107] (83)0-.. [-107]-- +15(15) 1 19"'/Mohawk@Marcola/a 2 Morcola@Site 2a Marcola@Site 3 (22)9..... Morcola@28" (1,")!i4-~ 89 102) (216)(108) 45 Xl J .J. 8 Morcola042" LEGEND xx Residential Trips (Xx) Commercial Trips (Xl(] Pass-by Trips (144) S4 ~ {51)59.4- t 30 (51) 118 (230) 6 Mohowk@WB Romps 9 42.c1@WB Romps (108) V ~ (l53)U"';# (72) (72) 38 18 J ~ +4- (77) MAY 2 6 2006 t 30 51) Date Received: 7 Mohawk@EB Ramps 10 Original submittal~ 4~@E8 Ramps ~ Access Engineering XJ:lMl ITE Code 27.0 Size 800 D,U. Ex EXIts Total Internal External I Enter 349 106 243 1 Exit 188 61 127 Ex, Entr Total 537 167 370 % 100% 31% 69% o -, 6' :;- ~ en c 0- 3 ;:::;: m Analyst CMW Date OS/22/06 MULTI-USE DEVELOPMENT TRIP GENERATION AND INTERNAL CAPTURE SUMMARY Development Marcola Meadows Time penod PM Peak Hour Proposed Land Use land Use A Retail ITE Code 820 Size 1 00 K SF Ex EXits Total Internal External I Enter 678 75 603 I EXit 743 100 643 Ex Entr Total 1421 174 1247 % 100% 12% 88% Demand Demand Demand Demand % # % # % # % # vi 12%l 89\ 9%1 61J^ vi 3%\ 221 2%1 141^ Balanced Balanced Balanced Balanced # # # # v I 891 611 ^ v I 111 141 ^ Demand % # vi 31 % I 1081 Demand Demand % # % # 53%1 iDOl" vi 31%1 111 Oemand Balanced Demand % # # % # 10%1 351 <<< 171 <<< 10%1 171<< 0%1 01 >>> 01 >>> 0%1 01>> Demand % # 23% I 381 ^ Land Use C Office Land Use B Residential ITE Code 710 Size 109 K SF Total Internal External Ex EXits Enter 34 11 23 l EXit 167 30 137 I Total 201 41 160 Ex Entr % 100% 20% 80% << I >> I ~ ~ a, ~ ~ o m ...... CD ::u (1) o (1) <. CD 0.. Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Total Enter 603 243 23 870 EXIt 643 127 137 907 Total 1247 370 160 1777 Internal Caoture Smgle-Use Tnp Gerl Est 1421 537 201 2159 18%1 Land Use B 0 .., tB. :J 0 ~ D) C/) 3: ...... c: !< CD CT ;0 3 ~ ;::;: en CD .- ~ ~ ~ C) <' c:;:) en CD 0. Analyst CMW Date OS/22/06 MULTI-USE DEVELOPMENT TRIP GENERA nON AND INTERNAL CAPTURE SUMMARY Land Use A Retail ITE Code 814+820+862 Size 316 K SF Ex EXits Total Internal External r Enter 663 73 590 r Exit 737 111 626 Ex Entr Total 1400 183 1217 % 100% 13% 87% Development Marcola Meadows TIme penod PM Peak Hour Proposed Zoning Demand Demand Demand Demand % # % # % # 0/0 # vi 12%] 881 9%1 601^ vi 3%1 221 2%1 131^ Balanced Balanced Balanced Balanced # # # # v I 88J 601 ^ v I 221 131 ^ Demand % # vi 31%1 1191 Demand Demand % # % # 53%1 1121^ vI 31%/ 271 Demand Balanced Demand % # # % # 10%1 381 <<< 281 <<< 10%1 281<< 0%1 01 >>> 01 >>> 00/01 01 >> ITE Code 210+220+230 SIze 860 D U. Ex EXits Total Internal External I Enter 383 116 267 I EXI1 211 60 151 Ex Entr Total 594 176 418 % 100% 30% 70% ReSidential << I >> I Demand % # 23%1 641^ Land Use C OffIce ITE Code +710+720 Size 109 K SF Total Internal External Ex EXits Enter 87 22 65 I EXit 278 41 237 I Total 365 63 302 Ex Entr % 100% 17% 83% Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Total Enter 590 267 65 922 EXit 626 151 237 1015 Total 1217 418 302 1936 Internal Capture Smgle-Use Tnp Gen Est 1400 594 365 2359 18%1 Analyst CMW Date OS/22/06 MUL TI.USE DEVELOPMENT TRIP GENERATION AND INTERNAL CAPTURE SUMMARY Development Marcola Meadows Time penod PM Peak Hour EXisting PA & Z ITE Code 820 SIze 100 K SF Ex EXits Total Internal External I Enter 300 33 267 I EXit 326 49 277 Ex Entr Total 626 82 544 % 100% 130/0 87% Land Use A Retail Demand Demand Demand Demand % # % # % # % # vI 12'%1 39\ 9%1 271^ vi 3% r---wl 2%1 61^ Balanced Balanced Balanced Balanced # # # # v I 391 271 ^ v I 101 61 ^ ITE Code 270 Size 800 D,U. Ex EXits Total Internal External I Enter 349 74 275 I EXit 188 27 161 Ex Entr Total 537 101 436 % 100% 19% 81% Residential Demand Demand % # % # 53%1 1001^ vi 31%1 521 Demand Balanced Demand % # # % # << I 10%1 351 <<< 351 <<< 10%1 67[<< >> I 01 >>> 01 >>> 0%1 01>> Demand %; # 23%1 1551^ Demand % # v I 31 % I 1 081 Land Use B land Use C Office ITE Code 770 Size 50 acres Total Internal External Ex EXits Enter 168 10 158 -I EXit 673 41 632 ul TDtal 841 51 790 Ex Entr % 100% 6% 94% 0 .., cO' 5' 0 a?. en :s:: m r+ C ~, (l) 0- 3 ro..) ;0 ;::;: (I) .- en In 0 '" (I) <::::) <" <::::) en (I) a. Land Use A Land Use B Land Use C Total Enter 267 275 158 700 EXIt 277 161 632 1070 Total 544 436 790 1770 Internal Capture Single-Use Tnp Gen Est 626 537 841 2004 12%1 'VELLHEAD PROTECTION AREAS Contaminant Source Inventory Springfield Oregon " ~ . - . i . '\, ~~., ,~ ~ ' .~~. --~, , "I ! 'I J J .), . ,-, ~ ~_ d ".!~, ~ .;J...)r, iJ~;~~ . jl ,:.~ <," I\. .I I ,4,11 '.' -,,".,.---.,. _/-'" 7 '~~ ',/!),~ .:' (' I. '-"} .till ,,~,.' ,"'" .- 3,~ =:-J ~~ .---- .~\~) " !1 ; "_ i ~ I\" ., ': ""' . ..J '~;, ,\~~h;~..!I.!....._...~.'.r..r-. ...-.1n..~".._.."..!:-e \,\1 ~~ .1 ,v i,. ;'" )t.:r " .l ...... ~ R,~u,~'l!I~~~':'{' "lP'.')' :~"\j~~r ~ .~ Jt,;, , :'~, r" . ~~",:'}L'sc~~~tj~~~" ~ ~ ~-" , ~""'~ . ~ I \ '. c- .\~ ~-~~; .'~~. ,. 'a,... -#" ~ ~ .~ ~~~_ / J r 1= Jl"r'~, ~1 ,II:\. ,"if; ~. ~. .... q,? . ".!::,," 111, '~. . "I t>.; IL ~1 :-=~... f\ J0- . "e' ~'ifI'~!l."r' I ',-- ~ 'j ..h ~"' It;;/! '" . ' " f ~ ~.. ~~~W1TT- ><lio-~~::'"1;,L~= z~' ::~~...K~ ~""'''";" " "Y'" , . ". ..- It,. H I ~I~jl~'~ ~~c:T:.. L -~~_.'" . !!II ~ i.i . QE ~~\~'~'.i~f ~- ." -""',. "I.n'..'~:, ~..K~I' .,.-- . -- ~ _ ~~ru.'.ro.. 11--- r I .-I I~A;.'(1,~:, c,...t&. f'ttn \ 1'1 ~ " QST ~ I'" -. . I. j ';"'" ,?', ~,J[ <.J.. 1'1 . .i . '!AlA . ~""" -, ''''. ,I "EYEIlKAEUSEI.I I'lAnl il /liE> TI "'-.0./1 \l.. ~4U-.11~1":~>-: '-. I . .'. ' ,,' ~~b I';l J'" _\"":1.~' :~. H=".-:l. ~"\;c_r-:.' .~fl',., -'\.-1-'\0 \". ,~X~.,j~, f'-r <.l.\ ''"'", ::;I1=- _ j{TT~h~T.~ ::~J:- '. ~~""',t-. "~.' <. ~.~~~iJ.n'~/?;" l, ~ "~-.,."",, I_~'. - .~' . ~ "v , L. .,' '" ., .., .... ,:"'" JA', I . . ~ ~.. '" J:iF~ . ....:. ."""= ":'\.' ._~1> K~" kif, ~ ,rir.... " . .......' ~'. . · 1t:'1:l J;~~" . "",;.'" 'f .p~,' ~tI>oDSC>l f:w,-~~~;:. -=1 ... \ ~l;--H ."~~, ~ :-!iz:'! :. ' ',:' ./, v, . , "lit l: Ic-"'i,"" .,:";;? ~...",,~~;.. q . Tt " ':.it. ,.' h . l'~ I , _ . -- . ..' . Fil"'C(' ',. .. '" c-t-- ""'cU- d '. . '''" ';- ,~ " . '0 ".'1\ ,. f~.:.4J .' ' ~. CO! ""fu-4-=V'.. ~" m ,,' c: .1" L fi :>~~ ; 'Ii; '~ .'~....... I---...~ 0 ~' ti,1 )-\1 .~ ' ... ~ ',-!->;-<-- '>\~', .... ,. 'u J IN' f; , ~"M; "1""" ..~~ ~ I L ( J ' ;f ~ _ J ~ I.j -. c.=-;;'" ~ ~ - ~~: '~t\,. '" J ~. : ';-'..,ri; ',.,~. '"" "4i' ~. , ,', r.:~; 'f!li~'iA:' 2-.{,'fi';:.~' . '._~~ - .i-- ',:~', ;-~'.J , ' ': fflf.<' " !\of'.. {,I m ~~~ L , " ~" :, ~~". ': :"Frs,! -; Ii";" "I--- O~ -L fi>-.. M.I.llir/,'Fr!, Lt !7 !,fi -K-' U 0-1~;: ;'f.:,,~L,;. '~"I /:JIo..; -'"-. :~~,:/1l~~ !, ,:l~~~ - ~tTr:.';;~l ~~<<f I 'l:'..!.J JCl_~r'(~" ',T'-W<;~..tJ,"';::r , G8Hi" 'f' /-. ~iI ~ ,t, '<'1. , ~''''J. <- ~"""u.' f2:j~~ o"j t J~-"~' ,9 t!l ... 'IT- \~, j .,. ._\ ~..l ~~~~,J ~",".~l .tt" .:, ~,;=-" "~" J.... .IJ~. ~::I;."' I "'~' ~....,_-r.~il. I~: :-;, ":~' ~,,;::...L-l.1 ',....r-? t< = 'V l. . ~,=, ", . . ' _ m _ , '- ~, . r.n ' , . , f ,~,~. ~,. """', '. , ' "'-~ '.Jr"l: ~--. CI..w--, " ~ -!I'rU;--l ' " ,~ IT:L.J . ~~~~...~ <" f;. q,- 1 i, ( .r.c -' w.1 ~. ,~~"rj!f1f-.-J ~ Ti ......' ~..~. L~~-J~ ~o!'. e- 1" "'"j H, ,i~ . ~~~~ 3> -) c- \" .J . .~,\ ~ .. ~J'l ~. "~----'~ ~ ' '" - - - -"~ ~j'~ r - ~~, ~ !~~. I:;~;" r' - - , '':' ~\... . ~ ':l ~.. _ I " . ,', ~ ,; ,., , . L ~... -, 'M ~-= ':" ~ ,~ of/!~, . ,.. ~. ~ ",~" ! I "~, ../ j).,: " 'J'",-' :::!.. ~ " . ;:%', -. .... ' .I .l!- I '4 ~ "---- ~.. ""'''~~J (.' ~ ,: >".', ' ' ." "'i~"", >):1 ..k1li ~ i' < . ~ ~ ~ t ' ,J ~~ ..; \,' ~ J ~ \ ~ f"t\r J-i , ' ~ 1,- ~f~"~ t " (; ", f1 . , , 1 r. I' .K'. ,,0 " , ~ , ~ ~- ~ , <;C' .~ ... -- .~ ~ . l.._ ~ ~'" . ~$' H" ~f " i~t!.\ .\,' rl":~~": ;, "~,l!-":'\''''~r FJ , ,. ,"':.z~ ~!ik , . ."~" ' f ~'- ";, J.i e' 1':. "jt~J;.' .,.! \ ! 4 .: iv ,; ~ \ .IlIt. 1~...1.'..... , ...~ . ~ ~ .i..( ,-. ~r ~ 'r----- -<: ~ ~-- ( ~~; ~-, ~~~~ .I \. -r! \ . , .~ -~ ':; " I, ;~ ^\, ,I ~~ ~_ 0' R'I, ~;'n '\1 .1, r--:..J'; H- '''';;';' .-r ' -< ) ~ .) r- (f' I _ rJ '\ ~f I -~ h., .' ~~ t UJoIrTAl'JOI'li OF u.ulun ~~:~~~~==~~_-:_-- :.?~-e.::_~-:~....___o:n-'___.,_ ~ -' ..- . r .. . ~" " . --- -- ., fr. --~ -- , r? ., p ... EXHIBIT D r~ ~ .;- '-~.~ ~ .1 "\. (~,.,.~~. ",r / ~ >. -- "'- I \ - ~"\ LEGEND o Eskdac Wdk CONT AMIJIOAl',. SOURCES ".........- II ........ ""'- II..... D ~~\\.aw:~ .. ~a-q.Siws .. ~5MnpT"'ac:..,. .b. ~s.-pTds + l..o::ob.c~Slcna;cTanb + I~""",,--- ~Fxik... . TftK~ . Sa!idVi_fa.:u.a OJ~~takri&I.l~ TIlliE OF TRAVEL -IY_T_oCT...-eI -~"'_T_lIf'l""" _S..._T_Ill'T...... IOY_T_IIfTlPd _3tY_T__rTln'IlI - z..-oC~~"roT) BOUNDARIES -_s~"'k1Cil)'linitJ _ ~CII)'u.- _ UrN.ar-1ha.-.ilry D.' ,..... ,'. ~ .... / ~ ';;:,_8 - "t \. CD h'raCiaI W~Ik W:'oIING !oiiWili c-iol lJPJi if ......... u ,... J..-t lcudenlill IlIillil .,..." "- Date f .f~eceived: 'i'1 _ ::!P ~ ZOCClant-' 1m 1D.:!n7.XXCanfta.ld ~ 5.'IO~7..ocG:ombi.<d ~ Il$'IO':!fllZOCC--"" MPf ~ 6 2006 ,I .1 ., Original SL b, ~ittal :N + ~,1tItU i" ,rii..~~ x" ~'. ~f'-j -::;:;...jI '1 '~1li1 .c, F' ...., ".. = EUGENE ...'~ "";.~ \. )~~~ ~ ~ ""~ ~ -,.....- - .......;:; ~ ..... "" ..... ~:"Il "'r'" ,,\ $;", .; ".' . ''; l~ ~r ! 8 -~ ,J:.' [!- j ,r 1;' .. '. ~~li .'/; 'f C. ~ ~," ~\. / -- 'tf1 ;~ \1 ~7.1'~ ~.',:. .l '1:'\.."" ~ F" 11~ll.l' r:- ~ tt, '- ~s- -" ,A ~, ~ . ",:'C!' ,,f.. ~ .... Local and National Wetlands Inventory Springfield, Oregon d ... ~ "" " , (~~~ ~. ~ l / ,) ~ A r .jl ':!l' I .4. j y--J 9"'" , ! ..:)~_. \\ - · ,rf: & '. 1 t .;}, y /,' 'I' _'A~~... ~f"\~I~ ... ;; (~., t' '" ~ fI ,'. ,/ j. ,-"/ ;". J -,. ., .J. .. ~I-,' l I c:v .. ".I ...... .- " <;. ~j- 'F r "'"f , 't. ..... ''\ ... ~~ -.. ~-'-.. ',l ~r')i ~ ~ -.~ !.1 \ ~ 4 J " ~ --~ ,-.~ " ( I ."/ ... ,--- -..- ,t~~ ~l J.">7 ;:;.,. '# ~ ;> '~~~:;.,; (~-G-<'.~...7 ~:;;.. - ;: ~ I ~... ;~\..,.~ It. I ~.:",=,-",~ ~-. I -- . l 'k-- ~I ". "' -....,.. J.,,~'~c . ~ '" f ~ 'rl"" - - t'l' , -- v: iJ.~~' I ' J'.....~ - '" -'. - "!'!\. I ~, . ~ -' __. .," ~ 1;'" ~_1l';'""!n,~'j::,-!'-l~ iI~~~ w~ lJ~-::- .~ _ r""'-:- , f f' ._r"-,.~-':.;r,,;J, -'of' ~;;ji;; ,;I ,- .~......v ~ ~,~ __ ---1 -" j-_ '~ -;:;":,,:.rlL .T~.:"""~- '"" - . ,- .. ,n~ -.;" ~F < ... - r----7~" ~/' .. ..... (~~~7;t!:'~..., '~'" ""'~~" 1-.,...': ......- ,~,,-"';:"""':'"-.~,~~_}. ~J" }" ~ t.'"~<~ .~. '~."J~.7~~~"'- ~ 1I I,-"-,...~ 1Y"-" ......cc"...... ~ '"\... '.'" =: ~ .... .,; "i:..\~~.~ !~. ~.~ ~ "";' ,'f'", i'>'f f ~1- ~._' e':j. ",~,1 .~ ,;. ... 'I ':f --'......~....# "': =, _~'P?I,;.., ~ ~";J. ...- . 1 J~' \, ." ~./ r; .. ~:;:~'::.:::~.'.. ~::~,~~ . '-:::?I," ~.'"'' '"\:;;=.~.-Ni..:f"'SC;'-'4i ~!1;'. '~""';JO?;h ~.nof.j;~~i~~.t~1'%-;:t' "':"-1" .. ,', ~ fl."'_ ~~. .'~ _'(':;;. ~"'r .'-.., , '<:.'f:\" J" tj.-I .~.~::F '.~ ,. r ~ ~-pJr-.. -." . - . ['. ii" ,." " _ ~ .J ~" J .'~ ~; fA~;;J. .d,jl "'-'" " '~" I''"(''ll 'II:"'" ,:c' '.~ -:::::). -.' ~ IY~"'" I -' ..Il. F ,,,,U ffl~ r. :P" ,r; r, f- ~~. l' JT.;.. , ~ __-..I. ~ jI"_.., ~ t"'~~,:,-:! ,...~1 1':;"'=Il""~~ - ,-"..' ...~.~,.,Ji.:... ::!--. ~........~ ~ " ~ l ;!l.. ~ .:-:: ~ ,:=; ~j[\- - -.,. ~~ ';';~ J~T yp "5;;' I j;..'"..~:"~,,I;. gjF.f-;: ~~~.- ~~,. _ _ ~ , 0.1 ~~ 1:1-. ~"'~"~1"'~:\ ..:..;-;-..,..'~~/_..:..'" .!,..~, -I.'~Y' ,~'m ,..~~-~.'~~,;:# a..r', _,;---', ~~ ---;'_ ,TU i,"'- ~ ,I 111\ ./jJ' ...;- -'f".Jih~~ ~~~, ~;-!;~,.. ~..~O:-....rf_:.~'''' ,__ _ ....J , ~~~It"~ ~ ,..]_' '~--" 1i ........' . ~ 'I fJJ ~ ~ " "~, , ",~rffi ~ .....;...\\,., " ,I . --..... r-, '- ;;~. ~ 'Ii . t" ",.:;;1' .' ,-" l' ~ ~,~;. "~,, S;:.... i"';;,",""'~ r ijf;: j, -.,. ~'~ ~""'~. ~-........... ,....f! ",..' -".._ ~!).I!ll ,~"f", ',_ -.cj r~' .::1i tI,:"" 1,,!'! ",;,,,,,.,,.,, '. """'c. ,~.;>, 1 :J~l'tl:! . . . .i:.\':-t~ ~ .. J::! tJ!:;' '-, ~~ ~~! ""~ · 1','~';;~1 'Ii! ii;.t~~1r. ,!::::~' ~,_ ~"N ~" f ~ A,;-. ___ - -=...-:.::. I_.~l- -1....:-"- ~ ~ ....J:. . --:-1 'I ~ r:l-;,.'f.!;#.'.... ..:B. .I.~._ . ~if:}IJ., ~ .~~.... ~ ~ .~ 11; ~Ft1I ~ ~ .~~- I - -\...' "~ ~ ." '- --.;. - :!0:;;. ;,.. ..I" ",," !mr.;' g '1 ~ ~";;F";;:;: r.';:;- ~ ; ill'~~' ~'. ~ J :r...... ~h'; ~ '" f',~ ",. '"' I;::' -" -;41 '"':. , ~.:r ~-"...~ - ...- 1-""" ~-j J,jol"1 f '1~'r.;::.r-4, T ~~,,' . ,,,,.,.; _1""'1U III ," '~ii I .,lilo!;- I " ;v ~ . R I It". . '" . l;!'-~ ~-i':Y~-_ - - "":...('.1::< ~R;:. /J g- ;:] ~.. ~.j1:::&.:.l' _-........ __I _ ...;--- 1':-;.:- ........ - t. . ~ '9~~ _----f11/19 -- .~ . ""D:.1I:J rr':- .._1r' rr_.~...:~........!:_:i'1l-....~ ~-IO:':~r. ...~..." 1~!+' ~_. ~.,"';ti _...._ ~ lZ '0 " "j~~ ~. ,..c;::~-- ':':: t" f'" -.. ~~,-.. _!P\!~ ~ ....;,~~'J;~~~O-~._~; --1crir~'<r~i,"Tr,;-;.r:.~~~~~.J~I?~7~~_lo.===~4 _l-J..' ~ri;-;..u.~~F ,.-..:~dif3~jj~fffeo tfd.l~.,~~....~ ~~--e [ ". - """"';;;,-~"'-- '-:TC 'I - 4 ~rJ; -,x~ .,.0;;:, ~ "'""!L-' I ~-I.f' ~"""T,:,> - ~~':i"~ __~" ,. "",:z.,__~ ~__.-._~ \. I~ -.. - .. ~ ~: ~-r r - - ......,!';, O!~. b" ..:.:a 'A'-' ...~ - -'":~... n., r" Ij..j-'''r'~~~l\-~ ';_ ~ ~ ,-- ~~, -.... - . 1 Jl j~~ - J 1('i:: Cf'~' ~ .." ~ ~ !(;-J ~I..._.... 't. '.~'.I ~~... _ I . ~ . '"?- ...'. ..~, '.. i..;J;:_,-:::_ _' ~ '~~ '" ',,;~ ~Iol':.- b ,li .!<J · I"-~~;: A:' ,I JJ!]f1Jir.;1.\"<o;:!i'i~biTq,: -?~ ~iI".l "l. ~ ',,::-..,.,. .,~ ~.., .< V-I, \.'!~lp '';< .'" ~"", ~~, L"~~!h' ~ r~r- "'l, &,.. 0;;;..,."" ... :.. ' . 'r J'- I t'.~ d ",-IIJ! ~f.Pi.,"I':. ~ >j,~;r1l. .::;: ..;~~~.I.. I ~ ~ ~~&. .. I .. .. - , / ~." iI...1J. .. ~ , lb,;., \u. ':' s 'ti< .. .. ,.oJ ~ ,~"t '10> 'l. ~~ &i!I' ~ ., ~ ~ ~ ~~Y'='i ,.l!dI:~ III .. ..~ ~ "\ '-'; .... ~ -9 ,;..r-f>. ...l.. J-J I . ~- l 'T -_ """,,~. ......;-1 ~1!:!J"" ;:;;: '" "",.=.-.. ".'" . ~.., '>; "'f..,;:o;. ..~ J, ~-: ....- "~ ,-'~ - - ':<l_ ~ '~1 ':-:';', ~~-~~~"''''''~''.'f..--''''''' i ~"".~.. (I T-l~.. '. Ip,.-. ~-~ ..." _ -- '.' ;, j- L-.o;~ '-- __". ~ :'" +- J - , '. j \\ ,..,~...I; f ';"1': it~ ~ ,).. ' ?" -.;. f '~.' '.I~\ r.,r.;,..{_....._ . ~f?ru:~~r ~".:~.:; ..~,l:~=~~ ~~"'..:" --'.- ,; ...~. .'- "'''''''\''_.'. /' " .-'-~_ ~. -,.~. ""'J .. l~ ~ii _. " ,.. t- -1L r .~ ,~ ;.. -,,'-" '8 I , .. .=-~ ;:: 1\ ~ = ""t':::.." .t:' .. :-. -d-- - -', ~..,.. ............. II ... ,-,,~}. ~:..... - '. G~ \!l ~I--~ ........, II. \,' ' \ f-,\ ~~.. 1 ~ , .; '", () ~ .. . ~, " ' -,#-' r'~i~ (.,:i-' - _"r- rl .I _\~ ' . 4 _~~ D ~ ~r' =- I.. ~ ~. . j " ! -', '" ~ , HI t \ '- "1 C'~ ~, ~~' '~. ~~~ ~ ~tr~:' ~~~-r ~, ~""<'.~'; \ ). ,~" , I, ~ ;'"Ii $:;.. 7- , It, } - ~. ... ( ,:I' .,.", -...l = ~ I:::' .~t' ;. . 7' - . ~~" --... "~.... --~ ~, "'?,.. ~ , ( -'-...... ~, .-r" (l I '" ~ {i - r""'- .... ,II .......... "', ~ r; 1-. i. ;j ~ ~,;:;.;..('~ ;C'-i'".?o ~ " ~< - .. ..A, ""', ~ ~1:i 1 ~ I, . ~~ 4 J} ~ 'f 'l" "'V. J 1 - ,., ~ -.--,....1 f ................-.n =..-:~-=.-====------ ::.~~~~...:-.~~-==-~ ...~~ ---..-.........~------.~-- ---.-.--,.....- =-~-:::===----~~---......- .-...--~------'-~~--....~-.- ... , ~ ~r-:: , , . ~. ,..;J , I -".. , ( . .J ~. ) "".l. .-,,. r- .~~:f..,.J.. , ,..' j J ",5-:...-- ..~v.'.. ~~.. ~ .;,::;;;: '.... -"i- ~ ,. :: ~ \,;. \. ~ ~ I' " ..J--l ""i ,'\ ;. _.J. fl:"'>,' ..r ..1.., ,.. .- ~ F!:.., ..., .. ..~i ..;'.!~' 1 ~ l " - ...(- f , . 0, 'I , k, . ) I :,.~f ,> , , ,It . # ,. _ LcaI WIIIanda ~ NoIIIon8l W-.. Inwmaoy - SprlngIWd CIty LImIls UrbM GrowttI Boundary o 0", r ",/ EXHIBIT C of I ~( " &1":- /-I\~ .( ~.:.. ... . ". . \ I"~, I Milo Received: ~262006 Original Submittal A B HIVATlO", .UI'INCf MAI'S rrr",NCr llIV.rt~ iliA.. l1In NGVDI DISCI.PIIOH 0' U.", SD'.O, ... CHIN HILL ,..,..... .,1.' .It ',7 I.., ..... .,...... I. ,.. ....1.. ..4. ,I ".0' ,.1. H.. It I tl. II.. 1"2 ~!!: ~':~:~ I:: :::: ~:~::.: ::H :~.:::: I..... 2 3 4 5 6 -:\. c 113"00"00" .'"05']1" 13 76 ZONE X 50 ~1l~Sf"~f.1 "'" ",,0 CORPORATE LIMITS H"'O]"45" [2]"00-00" o E F G ., Q7"'54'Ol" 44~']1" 66 18 ZONE X 51 LANE COUN1Y em' OF SPRINGFIElD- -n ZONE X B CITY OF SPRINGF1ELD 415592 ~~~ 1IIffi<COIU'OMTlDAlIZAlI ~ <7, 59 '4"0]'45" 121~'O7"' LEGEND EXHIBIT B Bm W~~OOf~~D ....J::w INUNDATED ~fA '-__.-...-__ --.....-.......... -...,.,...,.J......._ ~_..~ '_....."".1.........,._ -.......~-....... ~_...~............... I.bo"""""'"....1IIIII-1M......, _Iooooi____ ==-. ...-- c-..l""'_-'''"-d_ .."""'.._....,~---. c-..__-,~_ .-..;-....---.. fLOOOW"V AREAS IN ZONE IlL OTHER flOOD MEAS tONI-X -.~IbJd:_oIlll1-t- ___..~oI..._ 1.._<10...._...._ 1__"""--,,...,...,.., --~....... t& n,'jl>!:!,d o OTHER ....REAS ZON.X _............>>......__ ........ ~""""'.....~- UNDEVElOPED CO\ST Ai. IIARRlERS ~ 0 ~ -- ,~ - -- ~_........._....,......_.......IOS_ --- ~ -- --- ""'- a...--..Olwldng~_ -- z-.&. _.......... 0.-.., "'- 0100_ CodtIl __ _ E_ =.-...._- a.. Ro<Id a...._ I,rc E_.._s........_ ....E~n...... --.. --........~~~ - Utllr_ _ z-.. s..104Iop.........1ot~_o....... E_IW.......,"'-'l -- -~_..."""'" -O"""oIllilXI~21l - . -513-- @---@ (El9871 RM7X 'l7007'3Q"'.Jl"22"JO" NOTES TI\Io...."Ior...iI~1IIe_""""'I_,.,_; ......-~!clwoIttIll_~".IIoodItIf.~t...... .....~ -... ...-......-- .-.....- SQecIII"""", _ 100_1_ --...,.........-,._... _""__.........Vf..._..._~... =...."'"'=..prIOo..._oI__... __. 1Oo_..5IoodIl__~_1_z-...'A.E.._ ~.AH.NJ._",V!:"'Vl-lI3O. ~c:=~---....""--'" ~'" "'" t-..s_--..-.. ___ "-PaIo...._......_'lIw~....__ ...........__.....,r.-.--"'....._ ~~""-"'. ~-..~__...........__,o_"._ _ ... __0...1__ -..rr_. "'-11_0l<I'l ~___""""'...._...a.alfOvD._-. ....._"'- -- _.....,_-....I~ ....................IIlr...__..._..._ -,....~ ~._._---"'...._"'.._.""- oIloo.lI:t_____--,.._"._,_. ....--..,,--....""........"'...- TI\Io_....,.-..-..___"'~...... ~s-u..._..ov.___ __ - "'" ~ __......--...... 0\ !illIGtI'l1O\-6R. F.-........-,.__IIIooorI_.__n--.._ __iUl..""__S.....,.~ F",............_""'*__....___..",~ .......,.. MAP I'IEPOSlTOff1 l'Iel...tD~u.tlngOtlMIIIl'"<M. fFf€CTlVE CAli: O~ COVNTYWlDE FLOOO INSUAANCE RATE MAP: -.- EFfECTIVE OATBSI or RE\ItSfON'S1 TO tHIS PANEl:: ...........flOODt/Sl..lI\lHCEl\A,re_EFffCl'JY(D.t.l"E_ .............---...."""'.......".".... ---...........--- T._'Ik>ooI~io-._...__", .........___".....IeoolQ.all2O. . ~ROKlMA.1t SCALE IN FEET '" , '" NATIONAL flDOO INSURANCE PROGRAM AREAS lSEE M.oJ> II~DD! ~DI'I PANELS NOT ",""TEOI Date Received: 1 j , ~~~ I /. MAY 2 6 2006 Original Submittal MAP NUMBER 41039CI153 F EFFECTIVE OATE: JUNE 2,1999 1 '. -- LEGAL DESCRIPllON - PER llTLE REPORT PARCEL 1 . (SEE SHEET 3) BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT-OF WAY LINE OF MARCOLA ROAD SAID POINT BEING NORTH B9~57 30 EAST 261160 FEET AND NORTH 00 0200 lIVEST 45 00 FEET FROM THE SDUTH\^JEST CORNER OF THE FELIX SCOTT Jr 0 L C No 51 IN TOVVNSHIP 17 SOUTH RANGE 31/\1EST OF THE VVlLLAMETTE MERIDIAN THENCE ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT -OF WAY LINE OF MARCOLA ROADSOUTHB9"5730 Vv'EST 1419 22 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PARCEll OF LAND PARTITION PLAT No 94-P0491 THENCE LEAVING THE NORTH RIGHT OFWAY LINE OF MARCOLA ROAD AND RUNNING ALONG THE EAST BOUNDARYOF SAID PARCEL 1 AND THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION THEREOF NORTH 00 0200 VlJEST 516 00 FEETTO A POINT ON THE SOUTH BOUNDARYOF NICOLE PARK AS PLATTED AND RECORDED IN FILE 74 SLIDES 30 33 OF THE LANE COUNTY OREGON PLAT RECORDS THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF SAID NICOLE PARK NORTH 89 5730 EAST 99 62 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NICOLE PARK THENCE ALONG THE EAST BOUNDARY OF SAID NICOLE PARK NORTH 00002 OO~ WEST 259 82 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTCORNEROF SAID NICOLE PARK THENCE ALONG THE NORTH BOUNDARY OF SAID NICOLE PARK SOUTH 89G5800 WEST 6 20 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOCH LOMOND TERRACE FIRST ADDITION AS PLAnED AND RECORDED IN BOOK 46 PAGE 20 OF THE LANE COUNlY OREGON PLAT RECORDS THENCE ALONG THE EAST BOUNDARY OF SAID LOCH LOMOND TERRACE FIRST ADDITION NORTH 00.0200 WEST 112 88 FEETTOTHE SOUTHV\ESTCORNEROF AUSTIN PARK SOUTH AS PLATTED AND RECORDED IN FILE 74 SLIDES 132 134 OF THE LANE COUNTY PLAT RECORDS THENCE ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF SAID AUSTIN PARK SOUTH NORTH 8905800 EAST 26000 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID AUSTIN PARK SOUTH THENCE ALONG THE EAST BOUNDARY OF SAID AUSTIN PARK SOUTH NORTH 00G02 00 WEST 909 69 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID AUSTIN PARK SOUTH SAID POINT BEING ON THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF THAT CERTAIN TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED IN A DEED RECORDED JULY 31, 1941 IN BOOK 359 PAGE 285 OF LANE COUNTY OREGON DEED RECORDS THENCEALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF SAID LAST DESCRIBED TRACT NORTH 7904154 EAST 1083 15 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF THE LAST DESCRIBED TRACT AND THE EAST LINE OF THAT CERTAN TRACT OF lAND CONVEYED TO R H PIERCE AND ELIZABETH C PIERCE AND RECORDED IN BOOK 238 PAGE 464 OF THE LANE COUNTY OREGON DEED RECORDS THENCE ALONG THE EASTLlNE OF SAID LAST DESCRBED TRACT SOUTH 00 0200 EAST 1991 28 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING ALL IN LANE COUNTY OREGON PARCEL 2 - (SEE SHEET 2) BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE CENTER OF COUNlY ROAD No 753 THAT IS 3470 24 FEET SOUTH AND 1319 9 FEET EAST OF THE NORTHINE.ST CORNER OF THE FELIX SCOTT DONATION LAND CLAIM No 82, IN TOVIINSHIP 17 SOUTH RANGE 2 \/VEST OF THE WLLAMETTE MERIDIAN AND BEING 866 FEET SOUTH OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF TRACT OF LAND CONVEYED BY THE TRAVELERS INSURANCECOMPANY TO R o KERCHER BY DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 189 PAGE 268 LANE COUNTY OREGON DEED RECORDS THENCE WEST 1310 FEET TOA POINT 15 LINKS EAST OF THE IJI.EST LINE OFTHE FELIX SCOTTDONATON LAND ClAIM No 82 NOTIFICATION No 3255 IN TOVvNSHIP 17 SOUTH RANGE 2 WEST OFTHE W1LLAMETTE MERIDIAN AND RUNNING THENCE SOUTH PARALLEL INITH AND 15 LINKS DISTANT FROM SAID WEST LINE OF SAID DONATION LAND CLAIM A DISTANCE OF 230476 FEET TO A POINT 15 LINKS EAST OFTHE SOUTHI/'vEST CORNER OF SAID DONATION LAND CLAIM THENCE EAST FOLLOVIIING ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF COUNTY ROAD No 278 A DISTANCE OF 1310 FEET TO A POINT IN THE CENTER OF SAID COUNTY ROAD No 278 DUE SOUTH OFTHE PLACE OF BEGINNING THENCE NORTH FOLLOVIIING THE CENTER LINE OF SAID COUNTY ROAD No 753 TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING ALL IN LANE COUNlY OREGON EXCEPT THE RIGHT-OF WAY OF THE EUGENE~WENDLlNG BRANCH OF THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD ALSO EXCEPT THAT PORTION DESCRIBED IN DEED TO THE CITY OF EUGENE RECORDED IN BOOK -359, PAGE 285 LANE COUNlY OREGON DEED RECORDS ALSO EXCEPT BEGINNING AT A POINT WHICH IS 158947 FEET SOUTH AND 1327 33 FEET EAST OF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 19 TOWNSHIP 17 SOUTH RANGE 2 WEST WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN LANE COUNTY OREGON SAID POINT ALSO BEING OPPOSITE AND 20 FEET EASTERLY FROM STATION 39+59 43 P 0 S T SAID STATION BEING IN THE CENTER LINE OF THE OLD ROUTEOF COUNTY ROAD No 142 5 (FORMERLY #753) THENCE SOUTH 0011 WEST 183 75 FEET TOTHE INTERSECTION Vv1TH THE NORTHERLY RAILROAD RIGHT OFJJVAY LINE THENCE SOUTH 84 45 \/\lEST 117 33 FEET, THENCE SOUTH 79030 \!vEST 4837 FEET TO THE INTERSECTION OF SAID RAILROAD RIGHT OF-WAY UNE WITH THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OFTHE RELOCATED SAID COUNTY ROAD No 7425 THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF A 316 48 FOOT RADIUS CURVE LEFT (THE CORD OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 39 0335 EAST 261 83 FEET) A DISTANCE OF 26994 FEETTO THE PLACE OF BEGINNING IN LANE COUNTY OREGON ALSO EXCEPT THAT PORTION DESCRIBED IN DEED TO LANE COUNTY RECORDED OCTOBER 19 1955 RECEPTION No 68852 LANE COUNTY OREGON DEED RECORDS ALSO EXCEPT THAT PORTION DESCRIBED IN DEED TO LANE COUNTY RECORDED JANUARY 20 1986 RECEPTION No 8602217, LANE COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS ALSO EXCEPT THAT PORTION DESCRIBED IN THAT DEED TO WILLAMALANE PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT RECORDED DECEMBER 4 1992 RECEPTiON No 9268749 AND CORRECTION DEED RECORDED FEBRUARY 9 1993 RECEPTION No 9308469 LANE COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS ALSO EXCEPT THAT PORTION DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A OFTHAT DEED TO THE CITY OF SPRINGRELD RECORDED SEPTEMBER 22 1993 RECEPTION No 9360016 lANE COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS ALSO EXCEPT MARCOLA ROAD INDUSTRIAL PARK AS PLATTED AND RECORDED IN FILE 75 SLIDES 897 898 AND 899 lANE COUNTY PLAT RECORDS LANE COUNTY OREGON NOTES THIS SURVEY HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR TITLE INSURANCE PURPOSES 1 THIS AL TASURVEY AND MAP ARE BASED UPON CASCADE TITLE COMPANY PRELIMINARY REPORT No 0244224 DATED AS OF FEBRUARY28 2005 2 THE BOUNDARY DATA AND TITLE IvtATTERS AS SHO\l\oN HEREON HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED FROM THE REFERENCED TITLE REPORT AND SURIIEYS OF RECORD 3 THIS SURVEY SHOINS EASEMENTS SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIED AS EXCEPTION IN THE ABOVE REFERENCED TITLE REPORT 4 THE FOLLOINING EASEMENTS MAY EFFECT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY BUT CANNOT BE LOCATED BY DESCRPT10N A) EXCEPTION#7 A DITCH EASEMENT TO THE BENEFIT OF BENHAM IRRIGATION COMPANY PER BOOK 119 PAGE 560 THE EASEMENT WDTH IS NOT DEFINED AND THE LOCATDN CANNOTBE LOCATED BY DESCRIPTION (PARCEL 1) B) EXCEPTION #8 AN ELECTRICAL AND TELEPHONE UTILITY EASEMENT TO THE BENEFIT OF THE CITY OF EUGENE PER BOOK 142 PAGE 450 THE EASEMENT WIDTH IS NOT DEFINED AND THE LOCATION CANNOT BE LOCATED BY DESCRIPTION (PARCEL 1) C) EXCEPTION #15 A DITCH EASEMENT TO THE BENEFIT OF BENHAM IRRIGATION COMPANY PER BOOK 121 PAGE 66 THE EASEMENT WIDTH IS NOT DEFINED AND THE LOCATON CANNOT BE LOCATED BY DESCRIPTION (PARCEL2) D) EXCEPTION #16 AND ELECTRICAL AND TELEPHONE UTILITY EASEMENT TOTHE BENEFIT OF THE CITY OF EUGENE PER BOOK 188 PAGE 452 THE EASEMENT WDTH IS NOTDEANEDANOTHE LOCATION CANNOT BE LOCATED BY DESCRIPTION (PARCEL2) THE FOLLOVv1NG COVENANTS CONDITIONS RESTRICTIONS AND EASEMENTS EFFECT A PORTION OF PARCEL 1 OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY A) EXCEPTION #11 COVENANTS CONDITIONS RESTRICTIONS AND EASEtvENTS PER REEL No 1563 RECEPTION No 891176 AND REEL No 1600 RECEPTION No 8949055 AND REEL No 1695 RECEPTION No 9121698 AND REEL No 2009 RECEPTION No 9477951 THE ABOVE STATED DOCUMENTS EFFECT A PORTION OF PARCEL 1 OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS SHOV\IN ON SHEET 2 OF THIS SURVEY THE EFFECTED AREA IS APPROXIMATELY THE SOUTH 516 FEET OFTHE \/VEST 100 FEET OF PARCEL 1 AS SHO\^JN ON SHEET 3 NO OTHER ANALYSIS OR STATEMENT RELATED TO OTHER SECTIONS OF THE ABOVE STATED DOCUtvENTSAREOFFERED OR INTENDED B) EXCEPTION#12 COVENANTS, CONDITIONS RESTRICTIONS AND EASEtvENTSPER REEL No 1695 RECEPTION No 9121696 AND REEL No 1883, RECEPTION No 9362649 AND REEL No 1886 RECEPTION No 9365168 THE ABOVE STATED DOCUMENTS EFFECT A PORTION OF PARCEL 1 OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS SHOV\IN ON SHEET2 OF THIS SURVEY THE EFFECTED AREA IS APPROXIMATELY THE SOUTH 516 FEET OF THE V\lEST 100 FEET OF PARCEL 1 AS SHOVlIN ON SHEET 2 NO OTHER ANALYSIS OR STATEMENT RELATED TO OTHER SECTIONS OF THE ABOVE STATED DOCUrvENTS ARE OFFERED OR INTENDEO DRAINAGE SWALE THE SURFACE OF THE NORTHERLY PORTION OF PARCEL 1 HAS A GRADUAL SLOPE TO A DRAINAGE SWALE AS SHOV\IN ON SHEET 3 THERE IS A DRAINAGE CULVERT UNDER THE EWE B CORRIDOR THAT PREVENTS ANY WATER FROM COLLECTING ON THE SITE Date 3/2212006 Time 900 Scale 1=100(PS} File dwg\2005\05-89\89 AL T A dwg (Bnan E) KD K &: D ENGINEERING, !ne no NlY HJLh"TV Stlf:.'i!t PC A..bllf'v JreAcr-9732 \5HI g,>e-2[C3 + SURVEYOR'S CERllFICA TE TO FlrstSank, a South Dakota bank THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THIS fv1AP AND THE SURVEY ON Vv1-lICH IT IS BASED V'vERE MADE IN ACCORDANCE VIIITH MINIMUM STANDARD DETAIL REQUIREMENTS FOR AL TNACSM LAND TITLE SURVEYS JOINTLY ESTABLISHED ANDADOPTEDBY ALTA ACSM AND NSPS IN 1999 AND DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY ITEMS OFTABLE A THEREOF PURSUANT TO THE ACCURACYSTANDARDSAS ADOPTED BY ALTA NSPS AND ACSM AND IN EFFECT ON THE DATE OF THIS CERTIFICATION UNDERSIGNED FURTHER CERTIFIES THAT THE SURVEY MEASUREMENTS 'NERE MADE IN ACCORDANCE IJI.1TH THE ~MINIMUM ANGLE DISTANCE AND CLOSURE REQUIRE:MENTS FOR SURVEY MEASUREMENTS V\1-lICH CONTROL lAND BOUNDARIES FOR ALTNACSM lAND TITLE SURVE'YS DATE SIGNATURE OR PLS 58561 REGISTRATION No ~ N WeE 5 EXHIBIT A AL TA / ASCJ'V\ LAND TITLE SURVEY FOR SPRINGFIELD LLC. LOCATED IN THE NE 1/4 SEe 25, T 17 S ,R 3 W , W M , CITY OF SPRINGFiElD, LANE COUNTY, OREGON JUNE 16, 2005 REVISED MARCH 7, 2006 REVISED MARCH 22, 2006 I ------11 ---~---------- - r I III ~ ;;'''''EE:= III II~ I~ · f ~~rc ,I =-"-1 -, j --- 'jo -- I 400 FT - --- -- ----;;;-;;~;;;;;;;--_/-_/---------------- o 100 200 ~- SCALE 1. = 200 -~-- ____;-q~::;::-__r_=_-::;:"-::.-- __ ----C- -- - I : I \ \ __ _I ~\--j ~~ ---=::: '<<, /....: ~---....,.---_...... \ '~ 'f/\ ". ---7-- I 'Ef~LJ ---r-~ --~~~ONOA",NU' l' i I ~,' I ~ ~j r /'-I~ [Ill .~ 1_ 11 ~<'~~~~--- PARCEL 1 SEE SHEET 3 :-~I "-,=\ ~1 \ IJI : -MARCULA HUALJ PARCEL 2 SEE SHEET 2 tf'lrHCr [-'P.I-(I\\fVAV -.-J J Date Received: ~~--- MAY 2 6 2006 Original Submlttai SHEET 1 OF 3 \1 ... E ~~ -^'''~,^.' N~S w o 100 200 FT r-___- SCALE 1~ = 100 ~I -I lElj ~ I- W w 0: I- (f) ~ i ! Er i i C -------'-"0. T d 31st STREET E , [ SOO~02'05"E 1115 25 EXCEPTION No 17 10 WIOE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD PUBLIC UTILITY AND SIDEWALK EASEMENT ALONG THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF 28th AND 31 5t STREETS PER RECEPTION No 9360016 _- THE EXISTING BURIEO RAW WATER MAIN LINE UTILITY POLES TRANSMISSION LINES AND ASPHAlT PEDESTRIAN PATH WAY LOCATED IN THE EWEB CORRIDOR DO NOT ENCROACH ONTO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY 60' WIOE E WE B CORRIOOR PER BOOK 359, PAGE 285 MATCH LINE ---- (SEE SHEET 3) K"D K & D ENGINEERING, Ine 276 N.,., HIcken Slpeet PO Box 7<.5 A bani Oregoo l'l7JCO:l ,54) f!23-2:J8:l Date 3f22t2006 Scale 1=100{PS) FIle dwg\2005\05 89\89 ALTAdwg (Bnan E) + UTILITY POLE IS ON PROPERTY LINE Time 900 MATCH LINE (SEE SHEET 3) ,,\. ., I' fo."-C 0< Q~9\ 9~-1' \J"\'\O ~,g,1 !-II' Csr ,1,10 ?<.I' I'fo."- c.~ ,,~~ 5S 75 OPEN STORM DITCH PARCEL 2 2,071,516 S F 47 56 ACRES o I \ I . . ( EAST LINE OF \_ PIERCE TRACT PER BOOK 238, PAGE 464 l=.=m- ~ _ UJ : UJ 0: (f) !-If>.C"-<2-5' ? "SICO ft <&l kJ ----4___________=__::::... ~ EXISTING 18" CONCRETE STORM ORAIN LINE POSSI8LE LOCATION OF EXCEPTION No 15 SEE NOTE 4-C ON SHEET 1 SOO~0200~E 1991 20' BASIS OF BEARINGS PER C S 31917 (SOO'02'00"E 1991 28) ) PARCEL 1 2,297,175 S F 5274 ACRES r ABANOONEO POLE --< \ , . . , , , , , , , , , ' , ' " 0 .' .' " EVIDENCE OF ENCROACHMENTS o o UTILITY POLE ANCHOR IS 3 35 SOUTH OF PROPERTY LINE THE EXISTING SANITARY SEWER PIPE MAY NOT BE COVERED BY AN EXISTING PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT NO EASEMENT IS DISCLOSED IN TITLE REPORT AL TA / ASCN\ LAND TITLE SURVEY FOR SPRINGFIELD LLC_ . LOCATED IN THE NE1/4SEC 25,T 17S,R 3W,WM, CITY OF SPRINGFIELD, LANE COUNTY, OREGON JUNE 16, 2005 REVISED MARCH 7, 2006 NOTE EASEMENTS SHO/v'N ARE LABELED AS EXCEPTION NUMBERS" AS REFERRED TO IN THE TITLE REPORT @ MONUMENT REFERENCE LIST, @ @ FD 5/8 IR wtYFl'a: STAfv\PED LS 1301 ft FLUSHW,GROUND FD 5/8 IR W@STAlv1PED OW BAKER PLS 1978 FLUSH W/GROUND FD 5/8~ IR W.@CSTAMPED "D W BAKER PlS 1978" FLUSH W/GROUND FD 5fS"IR W@STAMPED OW BAKER PLS 1978" FLUSH W/GROUND @ @ @ FD 5/B IR B@ 010 BELOW GROUND TIED SPIN HOLE :I: C) , ,I- 5 I '" '''' o I- '" 'z ,~ o I COV- "W-f>."'S,,,-lfo.\. I\,\Q~fo.?-1C' 1 ~I 0: <(I 0.. ~I 0..1 FD PKNIIASHER 0 STAMPED BAKER PLS 1978' FD PKlWASHER 0 STAMPED BAKER PLS 1978 5/8 1 R V@c -.28th AND PIERCE STAMPED BAKER PLS 1978 @ @) @ @) FO 5/S"IR W@STAtvPED o W BAKER PLS 1978" FLUSH WIG ROUND FD 5/8 IR W@STAMPED OW BAKER PLS 1978" FLUSH WIG ROUND FD S/S"IR WrVM STAMPED LS 1301 FLUSR'tV/GROUND FD PKl'WASHER -@tp C STAMPED "BAKER PLS 1978" FD PKM'ASHER .@t AND SHOOT STAMPED BAKER PLS 1978" FQ PKlWASHER @tPT STAMPED BAKER PLS 1978 FD PK/VVASHER @t AND V" STREET STAMPED BAKE1l PLS 1978 FD 5/e lR W@STA/v1PED OW BAKER PLS 1978" 0 20 BELOW GROUND P T FD 5/8 IR W..@)::STAtvFJED "0 W BAKER PLS 1978" FLUSH WIG ROUND @ FD 5/8 lR W@STAMPED OW BAKER PLS 1978 FLUSH W/GROUND @ @ @ @ @ @ @ SURVEY REFERENCES COV- "W-f>.~S,?-li>l- W~Q~fo."-lC' o CS 31917-PARTITION PlAT 94 P0491 o C S 33731 A RIGHT-OF-WAY SURVEY :I: ,C) I- '5 ," '" '0 I- '''' ,z , UJ I 1& 1'1 , , , EXISTING j~ \~ GAS LINE ./I~ \, STUB / I \ / II ~ \ EXCEPTION No 17 _/ I 1\ "~"- 1",1' ~', ~~~II~EU~\:J-r$~~6~~~~;,t~ jcn I ~ " EASEMENT ALONG THE [1_",: 0" ~ ~ ' WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE ______-.. OF 28th AND 31st STREETS PER ~ RECEPTION No 9360016 : I : ~'" , I 1 f8l.---..----~~ II ~ ~_ I I ~-.... I~I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 ~~~~~7;~: ~ SPRINGFIELO SANITARV 1 1 SEWER EASEMENT PER 1 1 RECEPTION No 50778 1 1 I 1 :~I : , I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I 1 i _l---OHP UTILITY POLE & CURB INLET @ ~ ~ ~ I i S21'0050"W J@r-0~rr~, 12220' J @ [S22~56'16'W ] SOO"02'23~E 12217' 5600' [ SOl'52 54"E ] 55 99' ~ ::i ~N 0 ~"'- U '" - 0: ~ ~ I <( '" ::;;: PO B PARCEL 1 . (I _ -....... ! '- EXISTING CONCRETE CULVERT \ L EAST LINE OF PARCEL 1 ALSO BEJNG WEST LINE OF PARCEL 2 . , , r 11,' GRAVEL /--- ~ / ---" -1J I~r GRAVEL , I / LOAOING EXISTING ~ I DOCK BUILOING ~ I NE CORNER B B POWERS DlC No 64 LEGEND () RECORD DATA PER LEGAL DECRYPTION AND C S 31917 EXCEPT AS N01ED RECORD DATA PER C S 33731 EXCEPT AS NOlEO CURVE REFEREN:E- SEE CURVE TABLE RECORO REFERi3'ICE SEE REFERENCE LIST UNDERGROUND POV\ER STORM ORAIN SANITARV SEWER CENTERLINE DOMESTIC WATER UNE GAS UNE FOUNO IRON ROD EDGE OF PAVEMENT PUBLIC UTlUTY EASEMENT FOUND 5/8' IRON ROD WfYPC MARKED BARKER PLS 636 SET BY C S 19801 OR C S 20040, UNLESS OTHERVv1SE NOTED CALCULATED BOUNDARY CORNER EXCEPT AS NOTED ENCROACHMENT REFERENCE see ENCROACHMENT LIST EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT EXISTING WATER CONTROL VALVE EXISTING UTILITY POLE EXISTING SO MANHOLE COVER EXISTING 5S MANHOLE COVER EXISTING TELEPHONE PEDESTAL EXISTING POIAER PEDESTAL EXISTING WATER METER EXISTING CURB INLET I) @ o UGP so ss o W G FO IR EP PUE o CD ., ---'""-It- €> G ill '" "; " - ~-'-~ EXJSTlNG UGHT POLE W EXISTING GAS VALVE ~ ~ EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE --' EXISTING CURB & GUTTER EXISTING CURB GUTTER AND SIDEWALK EXISTING FENCE -SD- EXISTING STORM DRAIN LINE -ss - EXISTING SANIT,ARY SEVl.ER LINE -OHP- EXISTING OVER HEAD POV\ER LINE CURVE TABLE 545'0429 W 4319 [546'52'54'W ] 4316' CURVE LENGTH RAOIUS CHORD DELTA 407 29 36500 S32 04 07 W 386 49 6J8S6 04" 1 [408431 1365001 IS34'Ol 54 W 387 451 164'06451 368 80 49000 S42D30 33 W 360 16 43~07 26' 2 [49000] [S44'30 46W 360 361 [43'09'001 (369021 6222 50500 S03"3334W6218 07"03 33M 3 [50500] [S05'2436W62161 107'03241 16220J SOO'02'38"E 4526' MATCH LINE ---- (SEE SHEET 3) ACCESS TO PUBLIC STREET ~~ Date Received: -~ .- 'i:l -, ~ -~ MAY 2 6 2006 Original Submittal SHEET 2 OF 3 :~ \, E - "",:Q)- N 4 s ~ w 60'WIOE EWE B CORRIDOR PER BOOK 359, PAGE 285 18 BURIED CONCRETE ORAIN PIPE --' Date 312212006 Time 900 Scale 1=100(PS) FIle dwg\200S\oS-B9\B9 AU A dwg (Bnan E) + ---L , , , , \ , , o 100 r-___- SCALE l' = 100' 200 FT , MATCH LINE (SEE SHEET 2) \ ~-~-- -- ___ THE EXISTING BURIED RAW WATER MAIN LINE, - UTILITY POLES TRANSMISSION LINES AND ASPHALT PEDESTRIAN PATH WAY LOCATED IN THE EWEB CORRIOOR DO NOT ENCROACH ONTO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY , , , , , , , , I I DRAINAGE 5WAlE (SEE NOTE 6 ON SHEET 1) ~ " " P\- ~~ \ ~ ~ Gj \ %~ '~~ \~~ \'Cn'Cn \~'Z " \ \ , , , , \ I \ \ , \ , -- L----- \ , --~I , , , , , , \ ----- r- -' \ PARCEL 2 2,071,516 S F 47 56 ACRES o BASIS OF BEARINGS PER C.S_ 31.1.1,h , '-\ EAST LINE OF \ PIERCE TRACT PER BOOK 238 PAGE 464 ) PARCEL 1 2,297,175 S F 52 74 ACRES c'f;.I.-'!J <;>f>.~ 0'< QAg\ gA-<;> <;>V" ~:~ ~,~,1 I ",I,IO~ ?~\l. G \ <;>1' ~ (NOO'02 OO'W 909 69') NOoo02'16W 909 63' 6 WOOD \ ,- 6' CYCLONE FENCE \ I FENCE --", I' '-Ci]---" :5 :. I I~ ;;: II~I 0, :2:, 0: ...J -~- SOO.02'QO-E 1991 20 ~__ NE CORNER \ B B POWERS PO B PARCEL 1 0 L C No 64 ~ R ~,Oll r--- 0:. OHP , . ~[:i- ,;-;:;,:v~~/~ I: ,~~ ACCESS TO >- I _ _ _/ ~::t~......~ 1 1 PUBLIC STREET r rrJ ,.-GRAVEL - I " ,I' I' LOADING EXISTING ~ '\ i - OOCK I I' BUILDING I . ,- / II \ / l.../ ,I I _ II ' 1r~ II II --jr II JI ~11 Il~ II~ I~ 115:! ll~ I I: II '1: Ii I' EAST UNE OF PARCEL 1 ALSO BaNG \'vEST UNE OF PARCEL 2 \ MATCH LINE " " :1: , I I I I I I I I I I I I lUll lUll I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I lUll lUll i I I I~"I ]:-; EXCEPTION No 9 / I : ~~:~~~~~ ~:NIT~/ I I SEWER EASEMENT PER I I RECEPTION No 50778 I II I I , I I~l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - EXCEPTION No 10 I VARIABLE WIDTH I SPRINGFIELO SCHOOL I OISTRICT No 19 SANITARY I I SEWER EASEMENT PER REEL 1001 'TRUST PROPERTY NOTE 1564 RECEPTION No 8911838100 I THAT THE EASTERLY 14260 IS ! ,NOW A PART OF THE ; ; MARCOLA PROPERTY i~~~~~~~~~6cAL EAST BOUNOARV OF -- I I -I ACCESS EASEMENT PER PARCEL 2 OF PARTIl10N I I , RECEPTION No 9429767 PLAT No 94-P0491 I f \ / ~I I"" / NOO'0223W51588 3 ~ I __ _ " j" (NOO'0200"W 516 00') I ~ OPEN STORM OITCH " '-1 (SOO'0200"E 1991 28') .. " -- I '-- EXISTING CONCRETE / CULVERT ABANDONED POLE --< (SEE SHEET 2) + I : , , I 15 I 15 'I'" , '" '0 , It; I I ffi I ':S , I , ' , , I ,(8 POSSIBLE LOCATION OF EXCEPTION No 7 SEE NOTE 4.A ON SHEET 1 , , , , , , 'J: I I~ I I is , '" '" ,,0 f- , ,Ul 'm .- 6' WIDE CONCRETE SIDEWALK I '15 I ENDS AT PROPERTY LINE I I I ~ ::\:' i I @ I' r@J ~ T I , I ,r I I; / 11,.-_-..;/ 1-1 Y " I" " 1- --120 PYBLlC I II"{IGHI-OF-WAY 17 \ 15 ~~ , " , ( S890S800W I 620' S890S8'00.W \ 620' / @2" ~ ,,: '2l1 NOO'0200"W I I L.:..J. 11288' . I 3 n NOOG02'00"W h! ~ 11288' Vi , " 11 , \ /"-. // -"17'0' , --j \ , 'I \ \ \ I \ \ -.I \ /~ \ \--- ---- 'r- ,,----- ... \ \. i '- \. ' \ \ '",- I " " ""- I "'-, ~ "- ......~~ -- ------- ,- 1- 1; " [;: ~ ~ N EXCEPTION No 12 SEE NOTE 5-B ON SHEET 1 EXCEPTION No 11 SEE NOTE 5-A ON SHEET 1 16 I I I -----J. \0\1 I.: 'J -~ -'~,~!~I, 11--- 13 2= 12 r--- ~ - CLINIC" PROPERTY EXCEPTION No 14 POB ~ ~ ~ ~ N N l' l' g gj ;.... F-- ~ '" en en '" '" ~Ul SO SOO'02 38'E 4500' ACCESS TO PUBLIC STREET '" '" ~ I I I i SW CORNER ~ FELIX SCOTT : JR 0 L C NO 51 AL T A / ASCJ"v\ LAND TITLE SURVEY FOR SPRINGFIELD LLC. LOCATED IN THE NE 1/4 SEC 25, T 17 S ,R 3 W , W M , CITY OF SPRINGFIELD, LANE COUNTY, OREGON JUNE 16, 2005 REVISED MARCH 7, 2006 REVISED MARCH 22, 2006 EVIDENCE OF ENCROACHMENTS Ci] A PORTION OF FENCE 11629 IN LENGTH ENCROACHES ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS MUCH AS 0 84 ALONG THE EAST LINE OF AUSTIN PARK SOUTH SUBDIVISION BETWEEN LOTS 8 AND 9 o A PORTION OF FENCE 7 08 IN LENGTH ENCROACHES ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS MUCH AS 048 ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF t AUSTIN PARK SOUTH SUBDIVISION NEAR THE SOUTHV\EST CORNER OF LOT 15 [2] o o A PORTION OF FENCE 1 55 IN LENGTH ENCROACHES AND IS ON THE SOUTHERLY PROPERTY LINE NEAR THE SOUTH EAST CORNER NICOLE PARK EXISTING 14" PVC STORM DRAIN PIPE THAT DRAINS TO EXISTING DITCH THERE IS AN EXISTING ASPHALT PAAKJNG LOT SHARED DRfVEwo.y AND LANDSCAPNG LOCATED ON A PORTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY THE PARKING LOT IS USED BY THE 1f11LLAMETTE VALLEY CANCER CENTER o THE EXISTING SANITARY SEWER PIPE MAY NOT BE COVERED BY AN EXISTING PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT NO EASEMENT IS DISCLOSED IN TITLE REPORT SURVEY REFERENCES o cs 31917-PARTlTIONPLAT94.P0491 o C S 33731-A RIGHT-OF-WAY SURVEY @ AUSTIN PARK SOUTW SUBDIVISION FILE 74 SLIDE 132 @ .NICOLE PARK SUBDIVISION. FILE 74 SLIDE 31 LEGEND. () RECORD DATA PER LEGAL FOUND 5/8" IRON ROD WNPC DESCRIPTION AND C S 31917 MARKED 'BARKER PLS 636 EX(.EPT AS NOlED SET BY C S 19801 OR C S IJ RECORD DATA PER C 5 33731 20040 UNLESS OTHERVv1SE NOTED EXCEPT AS NOlED @ CURVE REFEREN8E- 0 CALCULATED BOUNDARY CORNER SEE CURVE TABLE EXCEPT AS NOTED 0 RECORD REFERENCE Q EXISTING ARE HYDRANT SEE REFERENCE LIST EXISTING WATER CONTROL VALVE Ci] ENCROACHMENT REFERENCE --'J:- EXISTING UTILITY POLE SEE ENCROACHMENTU5T @ EXISTING 50 MANHOLE COVER UGP UNDERGROUND POV'vER @ EXISTING 5S MANHOLE COVER SO STORM DRAIN SS SANITARY SElJI.ER EJ EXISTING TELEPHONE PECESTAL 0 CENTERLINE '" EXISTING PO\.o\€R PEDESTAL FO FOUNO ...~ EXISTING WATER METER IR IRON ROO " EXISTING CURB INLET EP EDGE OF PAVEMENT ~~ PUE PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT EXISTING UGHT POLE EXISTING CURB GUTTER -.' EXISTING GAS VALVE AND SIOEWALK 0 EXISTING FENCE EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE -SO- EXISTING STORM DRAIN LINE -SS- EXISTING SANITARY SEIM'OR LINE -OHP- EXISTING OVER HEAD PO\I\ER LINE MONUMENT REFERENCE UST @ FD 5/8 IR BOO 040 BELOW GROUND TIED SPIN HOLE @ SE CORf\ER PARCEL 1 OF PARTITION PLAT No 94-00491 FD PKNlASHER I@JNC STAMPED"LS1301" ~ @ FO PK!WASHER II@NC STAMPED "LS 1301" HELD @ FD 5/8 r R w.@t STAMPED LS 1301" FLUSH W/GROUND @ FD 5/8 I R W@STAMPED D W BAKER PLS , 978" FLUSH W/GROUND FD 518 I R IN@NcRETEATFENCE CORNER WNPC CAP IS ILLEGIBLE @ @ FO 5/8 I R Rs@<ENCE CORNER 13 WEST OF TRUE CORNER WIYPC STAMPED LS 1301' FLUSH W/GROUNO 1 78 (E) OF FENCE €V FD 5/8" I R wfiik STAMPED LS 1301 0 80 B~OWGROUND 1 0 EAST OF FENCE o FO 5/8 IR W.<YRcSTAMPED Date Rec~I'ved.. LS 1301" FLUSHvV/GROUND Y 1 10 EAST OF FENCE @ FD 518" I R V\@c STAMPED LS 1301 FLUSH W/GROUNO @ FO 5/8 I R NWP BENT TIED SPIN HOLE 020 BELC;vVGROUNO MAY 2 6 2006 FD 5/8" I R NWP, BENT TIED SPIN HOLE 010 BELCnNGROUND 050 EAST OFFENCE Ori inal Submittal FO 5/8 I R w.<YRc STAMPE~ LS 1301 030 B"a.OWGROUND @ FO 5/8" I R ~ STAMPEO I.S 1301 FLUSH WIGROUNO FD 5/8" I R w@J; ST AWED "LS 1301" FLUSH W/GROUNO e @ @ K-:D K & D ENGINEERING, Ine 2~b N II' H\('>"orv "'treel P (' Box 'Ur;, ~lbn....'1 Ol'eij:lln 971~1 5,.11928 :2:iel SHEET 3 OF 3 "'ll;::,'i;;;~"","",_ ~.. ~ ::E! CD ~ ~ iJ JI I I 'I ~ ') '~I rh :1 ;1J " (Jl -l . :l , , 'f; I' if 'I 'I " N 17TH ~ ST _ ,- - ~. , ~ ~" ... . .--' . . . . . . "0 \ . '., GREENBRIAR ST __._ . 11' '._ ~ . . . :' : i.' I. :'.' Ii 2t< .....p- N 17TH ST ~ ~." i------------------ . , . . . . --------------~---- ST ~ "0 :r z m !4:J q I I o }> Z -l m ;1J CD C ~ (Jl -l ~ N21Sr ~ ,. .. 1 J-- . r :s ~ ;\ o -z. -l ~~' m r ~l Z ~ ;2~- N21ST ST ;1J ,_ :r o o o o ..m Z o ;1J o Z' - - - - - - - - - - . - - -I . ,..~~~~I..~_.. . . . . . . . . . . . -------------. . U . ~ . . ~, :t r~' , . 'e , , . , " , ~ ..,.N 17TH.ST ,. It · , 1 _:__.._N 17TH_ST ol1383-ltvo ~ I ~ m~ 34TH ST .s'v~ 1t1' Or ---I , :5 ~ LOCUST ;;: o z, ;-i ~ '"' N 2BTH ST I 0' :> ;1J ;1J j;, Gl m 1 I. . 'tl' -o'Ot\."'> , -;0"6 I ~tl' i=..._ "'l Cu.... "'" '" i5 I '" "f 33RD ST 35TH ST_ ,~5TH , JI I \... Leaend ~ <? . I'A~ ,... -- r _N.f7TH PL ll'< J N lBTH ST I, I ~ .ff :>' < ~ ,. ...J -----. J I, ! " I' -i.......I 'I !I-:'---' '" N.19TH ST ~--. Sol _"'II! .... '""r..;, - , , I I ;'''' , , . , ~ ~ .. .i. ~,' _, ,.1.s.HlOZ N - ."t , ... .... , J , , z . ,,1 I I ~ . -- . " . ;1J ;0 rr .~ ...- 0' . :r 0 , .t (Jl ;;: J r ~, ~I , 1 . , I 0 - 1 ~ '",""" , . ,--I 0 '--' , ....;, ~ , ~; ~ 0 0 .ilL ... ':t m ~ I ~ ~ '. , "- r 0 '0 , ;XI 0 , . 0 I ~ ._~...._-~-.._--~_._---- 0 , 0 J ;1J ... - _:iic"",,:, ;XI () , 0 , !; , ,I " 1 ;1J q 0 , \. . ~ )l '" X)()( )( ~ X x x x x X I X \ x )( x X x x xx x 'X x " ......... )( )()( ~ ),,~ .3,~x x~,x X ~ )( .,1>-' )()(-)' )-. )( ~0< )( )( )( Xii, 0<' x m><X )( ~ x ~~ ~ I( )!c, ~,<;y<y~ ~ )( >- ~)<.x.>j'Y .Ill J<. , 'Y , '~; N 31ST S . . --:' J.. ~~.. ,~ 20TH I ~ f)~ X' rY -<> I " " " , . " I CORRAL DR T , , -.-------_.1 . . . . . . i . . . . . .- " I. :1 :1 " " I ~ · I -",,,.1. -~- ",,-...- . , . ; , . , . , , . " , , , , I.,"" i- . I c, (Jl -l ~' (Jl -l r-. I '1 < (Jl -l I' 0';1.1,,<;' ~. .1."" ,'~ , , . , , . ., , , . , , -<. , 0 \ ~, , 0 , y , ~. \11', , ,., , , - 32ND ST )- ... - .. ,- ~ .... .., ljljIo-'" ., ! r \ I 11 ,. ... .. "'if1. . I ~ ,. . I Plan District Boundaries ~ Mixed Use Areas _ Commercial Low Density Residential _ Major Retail Centers _ Medium Density Residential _ Heavy Industrial _ Light Medium Industrial ~ Campus Industrial _ Parks and Open Space Miscellaneous Boundaries i-----: Springfield :-----.! City Limits Existing Parcels l_~ D Subject Site )> =1 )> () I s: m z -i CJ1 )> Job# Date: Drawn: Checked: Revised: 0609 5/26/06 MH RS . The Villages at Marcola Meadows Current Metro Plan Diagram MAY 2 fu 200600 600 ~ Original Submittal Scale: 1" = 600' Feet 1,200 I ~ - SATRE ASSOCIATES '--i , , , '--, , i--..' . , . . , "ll · .. .j; . . . : I . 1-- h: : .! ...... - -. . . , , , ls.Hlol N . _._ - " j 'I k' : I! I ~1. : ~Ij . __," o ,;0, r ,~l 0 l' I ~., ':.-1. ~r \. : fi . < z .I' ~ 'II P - .;p~.N 21ST ST ~ '. ~l- ,., \ "~ ~-?>O d 5? I r""!' - 1" .., ,',.." " 0 0 :;; " '..' I ..- m ~ ~ 8' ~ . r 0 ~ 0\ r. "ll 0 Z ,i! I 'it,rn I :1:1 m ; rii ., M _ - .::. "': ,ell ~ ~... l _ ..I _ _ iii 15, 0 ~I" . ! r ~ 0 - _CORRAL DR en';O ~J O' I ' " IS , I ----- ""i -1< 0' )> z --._________ -n IJ 1 I ,[ .2 <1 ~ · ~ --.--~--~------------------.. JJ~~ ..t,r. - ;: I 0, . I ~~' . 1;2.\>1;.._..,-., "ll lIl:p'-"" .... __~ -'- ?J\ J I -r- r"illl ..... f'" ". · t' < ~LOCUST_ _ s: ' o z -II ~ N 17TH f" I '.:." J I I __ST....." r .....,.. · 1 ' S? ;0 ;0 ;; G'l m " 1 'Pi' w'. . I .. I ,I ~.: I II. ~N lTfi; 'ST .J II I - '. : I # 3<of< 1 ,'\~., '<Itl' 90 :::li (j) ~ ~ ~ , !". 01 ~, o N lBTH ST I I - GREENBRIAR Sf .... ~--.. . j I . , , (I)' -Ii \ _.l ~.- r -....,..... _ L - .._ .N19T:l:i ST .. , i" f I . /1'" t'.', ~"" ,t f.:' hY, , ~,:/.' ~Iil;:_~ l !j ml . , 'I I R :~ I:. 18 " IS;: I 'f! ;0 j in ,rt ,r. 'I :~ il .1, rI !~ il '1 "I 'I 1'4 I C' enl -I d P I, I ft en rt .. , o~tr;, r -..t ......... J1p , ., l /' I}: 11 ~ ...,.. ,/ Legend Plan District Boundaries ~ Mixed Use Areas Low Density Residential _ Medium Density Residential Commercial - ~ ~ - - - - Major Retail Centers Heavy Industrial I :. _. N'17JH ST..., : : I I I ~ I' ~ ~-::, --;:. _N 1.7TH PL I ' 1 I N 17TH ST, J i------------------ . , -} , M .ff ~ ~ ~ "l < ~-..._---_._------- '" " J ~~T "" - - F". ...... ''''~ ~ '1' ""~'r" ~ ~ : !.II ~... I I I I! I I ~ ,.------------- , , , .,. 0 , :P , ! t' -< , ~ I r N21S~ l!\ I N 2BTH ST . , . '...... - ~ .. - , r-~ ",p- I l .. I I , . I , t I .\ I ~ I t ,I I I I , -V I . I.. I ( I II .. I , ~ ~ , . I ... '1 ' '"""~ i ., .., L , , I , I ,. I . I 1 I -~ ~ . ~- I , _ ..i. ""~ iIISo.- ._<.', " ~ .... I ~ N 20TH o:l1383i;.,0 VV_i Co - . '" Z o C/,) "f I .\ r .... .;>j,i; ..,-----------' , ~ . . . , . . . . , . " , ~ II 't I II I, 1'1. ,"".:_.. , , , , , , , I --I , "'32ND Sf M , - ".- '"F ~ , " " r i I ::: en -I ... "1'r-.."" d ~ m I ~BD SJ ~ , , , , , , , "' ., I , " , -, , , Ice<. \ ~. , 0 .. I ')7 " ~ , '" , , , ~ , ~ ~ 34TH ST .s'u~ '1t1- C~ _,35TH~ST ~-t. ~ q , ,. ~ r r r_.. . ,. . Light Medium Industrial Campus Industrial Parks and Open Space Date Received: Ml~Y 2 6 20 ---' 35TH l ~ ---,, . ~ ! I i , \J Miscellaneous Boundaries ------, , I , . .------ Springfield City Limits Existing Parcels Subject Site CJ D ~ )> () I ~ m z -i CJ1 OJ Job# 0609 The Villages at Marcola Meadows OriginC:ij GiJb'O'ittalsuu oUU ~ Date: 5/26/06 1,200 Drawn: MH ~ I - Checked: RS Proposed Metro Plan Diagram Revised: - Scale: 1 n = 600' Feet SATRE ASSOCIATES B-. ~ () m :r. III p d () I I ;0 0 ___,___.._._.__. 0 ,I : ;., ------- 'lIl..."I! 0;'" ~ \VI J! r · it ~-"l ~, ..r" ..~., "..-=..... :z aD i l ~ N 17TH .. : I I . r- 'ST:, --:;,,- -~ee n . ~ . - .1 ;0 . ~, . m, · i Ii: . I',,~' GREENBRIAR~T i-f: I . ..' . . 'e' ~ . .\ . ~~tl' ~~<o tl'0 '<l . I -' 1<j . z "" w ;0 o en -f . . . '. , , ,. .,----,,'; , . . . I. . I . . "'. . . . , r ..I · _, .1.$ f{.I.OZN,... "r" " i I · - I ~ I "_ _N 19TH ST~ I . . 1 I ~ l ." ;0, :i!" I ~, r- O~ s: -~. o ~. - ..,... i ~ ~ ~ ,--I ,_.1 ,il ... ~,. - ! 's: )> ;0 n o ): 'j ;0 o ;0 en -f x x X I . x :>< :1 )t x )t x i 'I J ;~ 'II i, .' )( X )( ~~ _ xX ~~ - ~"" )t x x x x x x x x x X ",,>- ~ \ m ~ ;0 i '< II(X - .. o~ ,.)( .;:> ~ -$' ~, 1 I I t l N 31ST ST c (f) -f o~1,,'" ~ ~ '<0"'.1."" .,. --; I I . . " " " \\ ( " " , , " , , , r \ or'"' , , , , I r . ,.N.mAST _ ~ w N 17TH ST -I r i.~..-.---------_.- . . . '. ~ . ~ ~------------------ 0' ::\~ o . p .... ~., - N 17TH PL __ ~ I I I '" ~ ff~ if ~ 11 ST " ; ~... 1Il -l ~ - ""~ mN 21ST ST. ;0 _ :r o o o ~t Z o ;0 o z en .... .....,..-- L..,. ~~ ~ j-i N 20TH .$'1t ~, ~ ~1 )> < o )> " :r z m en -f m r- III ~I .~ ~.."U,~ r ...'__~ ""', I;, ~ ( {l'~"';;'l .".,. 1 ' ~ : I p~.......... . ~C:> ..... $. fg LOCUST s: o Z -f ~ ',', '1 t ; g 0, en -l - l ~ - CORRAL DR _ 1- . . . . . N21S,. ~ n )> Z -l m ;0 III C ;0 -< en -f ST -- )( x J< )( J< )( J\ X X X x X X X x X X X. X ~~x X X x' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o . . . . . :. " . . .' . . . ~ N 28TH ,.. "'!;~<l. "!"" -. lJ,',," _ _ 01136'3-lIVOllt ",,'" z o CI} ~ lIlI!Iil (' ... ....-~-.;.... - , . ' . . . . . . . . , . , , '.-- ~ m I ..,._ . 33RD ST _ ~ 34TH ST .s'(;~ -<q,1< . C,,>o 35TH Sr.~ . < (f) -f ~ (f) -f i . .. 35TH 'j \. Leqend _ High Density Residential _ Medium Density Residential Zoning District Boundaries _ Community Commercial IIIIIII1 Major Retail Commercial _ Mixed Use Commercial _ Nieghborhood Commercial Low Density Residential _ Mixed Use Residential - Light Medium Industrial ------1 , . I . ,.----- ~ Campus Industrial I I . - - Heavy Industrial - Public Land & Open Space CJ Date Received: I ... -,>>< I ~ ....32ND ST - , , , , , . , . . . . , , . . . , a-- ~ ~ ~ ~. , z " It' , , -, , Miscellaneous Boundaries Springfield City Limits Existing Parcels Subject Site )> -I -I )> () I s: m z -I 0) )> ,. i I .... . r ,..... ~... ilIl'~.~- iF' .', 'I' i ! ~ /" '!'<. .~ I '~"":'" - - \ ., Job# Date: Drawn: Checked: Revised: 0609 5/26/06 MH RS The Villages at Marcola Meadows Current ZoninQ.. Original su~itt;j')n ~OQ '~ Scale: 1" = 600' Feet 1,200 I .... - SATRE ASSOCIATES .. .J L ~-'f-l .0............. ::l! r ~.. iID i \ i ..... 1 ~ j-~ ,s;~~.",:*...""""", ;~~'" ,-- I f f 1 . f__. I }? f # ~I --- \?;<a'f\ ~ f · 0~"" ~ : .q~ '" m . I I I' ! 1 : I I ' ._ -(2 . ~REE~,BR~ ~T . . : . '.- - : :~ -.---. - ,- -. f . . '. . f .;~ f . . . z . . ~ · ~f 01. . ~ (J) . :i! -II : ~1 . I . . H ,__, : ~- .' .f. . ~.f . ,..~ I I ~_ST";,,! N 17TH N,17TH ST~ . N 17TH~ST~ I ""'- N 17TH ST_,~ =. .. . . .~ . I .: N.1rrH;PL" II J I j" .A", .~ ~-~---------------- . j I I - ...- f '- .1 . f i f -----------------.- 01 ::I o I _.J I I I "It . U>' -I , I ~ ,. ! J ; I , _NJ9J!;I ST~ _ .. j I '1. , .. oJ _ l,,__ ~ ~ ~..~ -- ~.. ~ "" M'" , '".l.SHlOl N :.-; I I . : f I'" .... . ~--- . . ::,....-::.- 1. - -, ~ ". r N 20TH ~ ~ST I ~ ()~~ , ~,.. '" ~O ~r"" gr o o m z 0, :>J o Z (/) 5. ;: .01 Z jOl _ ~o{.. -'''7 , o )> "'0, J: Z m (/) -II . I .... , N21ST ST ~ . I o ::I, o ~ S ('I :t- ,0 "';xl .. ~ t ,. L . , .,J ... ~ rn OJ, ~ _~ L.... g ,_'>> _CO~L DR. ~.! ' -.----- :1 " I ------~--------. .r: "'- -'~l ~ ~... ~;:;cP -..: ,;,;,,;- 'I I' .'- jl :>J (J) .. ,rj ! I :ti 'f ,,!21S,. ~ ~ z rri · ;0 CD C ~ (J) , -I N 28TH 'I f il p ,111 ' ~~ "'01). ~\ ~ ;0 ~ '< '''''1~1 '" ~ \ . . . . . . . . f . . . . . . f f . f . f f . f f . . I ~ - . -. / '" N31ST ST ~ ... r . r "'" _ ~' _ -~ - ~ "'. . f . . f . . . f f _ ~32NP':SJ1 - -. '.... ~ . '. . " .' ; I c (J) -I ., ; , I I I '0"''1-<;' -)..~.... f, (J) -I~ ,I :E' (J) -i >H.~".., P r'" rI" I . , . ,; I , o 113fJ3./.N0 ~ .. I , t I ~ ~ m ,,~ . . . . . ., ~ 0", "I \ . , . , . , ri .v . . , , , , , 1" II. , I "-- - " . "-~."'J - I l 1 I -'I . i I . . , p ~ 1 34TH..ST I'" , -<. ~ o "P ~ {II \. I . , ,. " " ,\ " " , , , , '\ I \.,r , , , , f / ". . L .s'v~ ~I\t (;',. I . q l- i' I I ~ ... 'JI:> Ii J .1 ,. .. "'\ r~ I ~..,.... A ., s 1 o ~l ~ m ,~ CD. 0, ~j ;;!, -.-;2 < i LOCUST;~ o Z -I, ~ ; II ST ~.. ..,. ~-, ""<u Z o OJ '( 33RD sr _ ., .35TH _ST~ "I 6 f 35THw, I , I " LeQend Miscellaneous Zoning District Boundaries Boundaries . High Density Residential . Community Commercial . Light Medium Industrial ---.-., Springfield . I I . City Limits .------ . Medium Density Residential 11111111 Major Retail Commercial ~ Campus Industrial CJ Existing -- Parcels Low Density Residential . Mixed Use Commercial . Heavy Industrial D Subject . . . Public ~1R>Be~;%~e Site Mixed Use Residential Nieghborhood Commercial )> -; -; )> () I :s;: m z -; (J) lD Job# 0609 The Villages at Marcola Meadows (}.jir.al Submittal III!Ii Date: 5/26/06 0 300 600 1,200 Drawn: MH ~ I - Checked: RS Proposed ZoninQ. Revised: - Scale: 1" = 600' Feet SATRE ASSlX'IAllS . ~... \ ATTACHMENT 4.A .. ........ , ATTACHMENT 4 B "/. ATTACHMENT 3.A . . "C Q) co > c:::>> '(i) ~ -(5 0 CoD .... Q) ;!: 0:: C'oI E ~ .0 Q) ::s - :E (/) (ti m 0 c 0) "C 0 r '" " ~" ,; "..' . I.) \ . ; J " I 11' The Villages at Marcola Meadows Retail Street Section Pre-Application Report - 26 May 2006 I1I!lIIii rAIl SATRE ASSOCIATES ATTACHMENT 3.8 ,- ,r ...::r1f'#" ~ .w- If l' i'".r , .~-- - , ... ~-. "',(" ""1r 'Jr'.f ... "/If' . [ t " " . -. . .f ;.. . of .~ :;;.." i;,:' ~ /~/~ :0"4. j. ' -'. '.I~"/:;,?},../)l? .'p"r,.I.~ ~~j'~'~:-p...~~~.. ~.' _:i:',' ~ p'~~ . :r - ~ Jf '. T,i. , '" ~ '" .. ~ L.-+." '-".. 'ill, .~ ...4. _,:\ ~;" · pi 'J'J ",I. "I .~ . /'.", WI'- I ,~ ""'~ is I ,,~. . I F L ... O'I'\..,~ ~ ~(i;.. .... ~~/... J' .'. 'if;:r. .. . V' , ~. 'C66fr; ~"'/',j ~f'(~{"'['''''' i ~ " . ~~ ..1 4t ~ ~~ Iii .I ~ ~ . (..I'~ .. rtt ... \',~ Ii.. ' 1 -"irii1l -' rv ". ~(;I, ~ ~ ~i _ ~. ~ .,. r' .~. .. !?~ ,;i";';foiI. ,f} ').;'1\ ~... . \.."'CY... '.' .,.Y ~.ID.. II ~ ,,"f ~ ( , ." 1"'.0; .... -' "'V~ ~<r ~. ;..', ... ~.')- ,. .. ~ 'I" ,1 r.. II' ~ ...~ '.J.: ,...r~' 1.1' tI " . .','I'~' . ~.. r !... Ii\,"r.. · .. " '4'-T" ']l,~ ''''S.. , .. -" . r" ,'1 ""1ol<C:'""" .' "'/"'~" ,.. ~ J . 4 ." .'!jI';:., , ".'. ~.~ 1--- .....~..t . ,I. ,," ., , . ~ r ':.. ,-'" 'r I ,..", ~' ,," r,; ;....-... - ". 41rv..::::!t~~l{,r,. 'f,sJ C' ~'. .. j I ~ J' I .; l,;'~'" ,,,' ---- " I"'ifaa'~' - .;. -t. If' 'i':" " ~ t.""~' 'O' ,L ~.r~1' .~. '. ',. r' .J. 'l!Jt'" ......,"~.,.~? ,'.'? ,"'>::-':'-- . .". ,..~ 'f" , J ',__ .t! . . .i..-.: . ~ '. r; A " . i ~ '. " A.T' -?;: " .., .' i" . .....-..1' ,i. t ~ .... r: t. ~..' . " ,.. - .."..l" ~ oJ .. - -t .1 .... r- r '"' ~ . "'" ',1 I ~ ".t i- ;.1 ~'fr:,..I '1.....,~~"~,' ,.':~{.;r,~ .v;~~~/~~~, }, 'J:.11, ". . *~~" .. f1't' 1."";' . . ;.~. - ,Ln.;.Lt.:_ r<}I['" r l~~:ft.' j\ ~ J. _, ...,~: ,.,?r~~" ;@ ~",J~'J.I.>:;t "" i,... "',: 11,8 ..I'.}. . ..,.:...- ~;.r~~ ~ w.: :._ .t..~ 'jJ'r1tJ, "',Jr. ' .'.' t.' ; '~'. ' . -" 0 ..~ ~'r-' ,1 "I.."'. ~ 7/r.('~~ " ~. / '1' p~ ,-," ".r I,):..' i: ,," ~., _" '-", ~ -M1J ~:t~ I, ... " ',< ffi__ ,. . ' (1 '.. !of. .}II .. .. . ~~... I "0. \ '. ,.r ! }' (J ~ . ~ Mir,... ---..::" ~...! . j ~ .1" . _ r... ~ '~'. P.:l. ,n-~ , 5i' '.--r..~~~~<<d~~ :;::;;:.I r:;:,-' . _"" ... :!: '-- -....:..r I , ...:....,,,., l1.., .,.-. ,!l".ll'. - . J_" _~.,....::~",'~ J, ~f' J ....-.:!'..... "~~ ~ ~~ .... .... . f(} .. . . I'JU """c "'--- ~ ~, )~ ;.'., :, ~'" "'1'/' 'f"h4'l'..'" ... _ .. ,A.~ ',"'.~ b--~""~~_,' '''~~d,,~...l 'I;'~: ". :~~~_~~~:I 11:r't............':;.~._1;.~. ~ ~h:'...J"ii,:m.!.7r-~~~... ~.'~. t'NJ!, . . . U-'l', "'I~~ . .T.J:~J · .~. ". ...." :I';J'H. '_u... ~ ,.;;;f];,"~J ! '') 1 i!'.~ :!!!I"...fl'-\ ~ .,~. . ;~s~~..~8~-..~~i_~I~ .. I ~, ~ ()L~ ~: tJ~ " - .~, I,A (i. I .... ~. * '!l' n..' . :l. l 1 i " - ; 'r L . ~- t,. .,'.'...". ..' :. !.'l ..... 1 ~t ~. ~'- "fr'.... ;,tj.1iW I -.~~.. ,.., "j ...~ ~ ",...~.. '. ~.iI. J ~ ~ 't!"" - :..~~ ~-: r "~" · tl ! · ~. :. ..I . ' .. ".. . I . ~' ~" . lo'!. -.. "p . -- ~'~~..~1Il:!"..,.,_ ''''.. L ,J ,I I, , .......... "II t..;. .... _ .f" l. II.. ...b....T~.. . I. , '. ." 1 '..,,;/1-: ".dIL"I.,,- '.. .. ~ 1""'.; r . , .'~ .. ~~.: ~~.."";.~r~~~~~~'" I, .~?:- ~ ",r~~:.. ~...~~-.r"..:~ I" ,.." ~ . - ""1' ..' i~?""I', ":...{. - ~ "V' "-"!",;'~fitt.i'! :;:'1 "-.', ~ ~ """- _ . .. ~ .. .... .. .. ~ s!:.:,;.l'. . ,,~ ..0:....::.... '-, - ;I' ," <:; ? ,;1. ::" ti/......;,:, .~'!: i ~ '.' "'.. 4loQ11f ;.,.. -- ~... 'Il~::=J:"- _*'" . 1_..1 ; r ~." .. J . ...... .... ."...., ',r - tA:;t'~'~,4 ~.. ..~-"l!.:. \00 ......--' " .' ....., - . i>r..If' lIII.a-.. .-~ . ... ...~ 7':,11":-.. -...t .~ . p' ... ~ .It ..~~jij,..,~' 'I """'l. .. -I ..~~ c .->!...~"""~" - - ~- ..' ~ , ~ r"".t J ~. ",.1 .y.~~_ .. :"l""'!I'#.... If . _!:k" Ql I / .:'11"1."'. _..;10.. .."~ 1') C"1 ..1:....""',:;. 'o' .. . - .n.. .. ..~, ., ~~- ~. . ---~._..., ~-~~ . tn TRANSIT ST A TlON AT NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER;.-- . "!':<-. I' ml, ~~:~' ~. . "-""t- ~".' '..r ~ " ----- :.... I ~.. ~.. "..;i -< '!~t ",~ -=-,. ."" .:Iii ,J -,,;, .. ...." if... ,It "... ~ --t; .. ~. . . ''! 4 "' ~,.....;"~ " .~ II ow ,r .. : ,". ,.,....a.L .,... ~ 1"~ :Ii 111 ... "', ,_,. _ .. ~, :-"'. ... ',. l- i . 4 . ""'" Wf'. .. f . . '1";>- .~ ill . . ~ - I I . . . .. . . ;"' _'- .-1 ... .... ., ~..,. ,.~. ,'. '~ ~. '" _.~ . , ,f. " ~.~ ',' ..,~~.~ ~~.a.~;llm"'l" ' -' r · . tI> _...._...,.. "- >Ii-'" -" ,p. ., The Villages at Marcola Meadows Transit Station Perspective Pre-Application Report - 26 May 2006 ~ii:"--:~": . . "'C ~ ~ 'Q) ~ o CD m"r-.t ~ Q) ~ ..... 2: ctJ Cl .~~ ..... ti C li :.J (') '(ij c CD .t: o IIJJ!IIi ~ SATRE ASSOCIATFS ATTACHMENT 3.C ",. ..,. ',. I '. ;/' 'a."" f;;Jr.~ J", ~_A'.,. ii' -,... **'... if' .I: ..-.r - P":- . ~~ )l.t~.t ,r.t -.'':1 .. ~ _'~. i1".ii, "(,J- ,t ." . '" ...~..... ,.....',.. '.'" ..':....,J ~_ - j ,.;,~~J ......, ...,....,.. ti f .. ~- . . Pf;Jl....7~".-, ."" .- ~I"~.f' . .* . /,,;,;, ''':. ,ii I I !;.. , . I .. " ~-~ _ ~ _ "~t.~,~..~.: ~r," ~..., "'C Q) CD > <::) 'Q) ~ ro 0 CD .oJ Q) - 0:: C"oI 'E ~ .a Q) :::J ...... ::IE (J) CO C5 C c: '6> .;:: . 0 . . '" ~ to:~;'" I~ ,.," I..; "" '" J' ",po rl i. . ..,,, I.. ," "1 ","~ .,t ". l~EIGHBORHOOD CENTER - ELEV A TIO~ The Villages at Marcola Meadows Retail Center Elevation Pre-Application Report - 26 May 2006 III!IJIi .. SATRE ASSOCIATES ATTACHMENT 3.0 ~ ~ . '" The Villages at Marcola Meadows Stormwater Feature Pre-Application Report - 26 May 2006 "'ff:~'''''; ". ,-'7i'" -0 Q) > "Q) o Q) 0:: Q) +-" as Q co c;:) c;:) C'i u:::t C'i ~ ~ Cii ~ E .0 ::J en (ij c "5 .C o .~,-~..:.~'...t~ I1IIJJ!lfJi .. SATRE ASSOCIATF5 r - f / The Villages at Marcola Meadows Index to Site Panoramas and Photos ATTACHMENT 1.A Pre-Application Report - 26 May 2006 . . -c (1) > 'Q) o (1) 0:: (1) ~ co C ~~., (.D c::) ~ c.c C"oI ~ ::E ~ ._. ...... .~ 15 ::3 v"J co c '0 'C o IIIiIJi -- SATRE ASSOCIATFS ATTACHMENT 1,8 ~---....- 1. View north from ditch 2. View south/southwest from northeast corner The Villages at Marcola Meadows Site Panoramas - #1 Pre-Application Report - 26 May 2006 iIilJIIi .. SATRE ASSOCIATFS ~I ~ ~I ~ >- .0 :J (J) (ij c: .6> .;:: o , ATTACHMENT 1.C 3. View east from west property line, north of ditch ro .... ~ E .a ::J en ro c: .0, .C o 4. View west from 28th Street, north of ditch The Villages at Marcola Meadows Site Panoramas - #2 Pre-Application Report - 26 May 2006 ~ rAIl SATRE ASSOCIATES ATTACHMENT 1.0 ..,---. .....~ ,.~~' ~._. .' ..g <I) . :> . .~ ~ ~;'''''1~ '=.".._'~' ,', '"~ ::!Ji;;~- <G ~, (ij .- .- "E .0 ::J (/') "to c "5> ';:: o ';':")' 5. View east into park from end of residential cul-de-sac ~. 6. View west along north edge, south of residential area The Villages at Marcola Meadows Site Panoramas - #3 Pre-Application Report - 26 May 2006 iIJJIIj .. SATRE ASSOCIATFS .'" ATTACHMENT 1.E 1= '-''''_1['_. 7. Ditch through center of site 9. East end of ditch at 28th Street 8. Possible wetland areas The Villages at Marcola Meadows Site Photos Pre-Application Report - 26 May 2006 III!tIi ,.. SATRE ASSOCIAlli ./' ATTACHMENT 1.F eYe, 1 ~. .... ~ l~ > I.~ ,0::: Q) ... .. 't..JtJ ~-;:: ~ ~ ,., tD c;:) c;:) '" cs::> C"Y ~ ~ ro ..... ~ E .0 :;) (j) (ij c C) ".:; o 12. Northwest Residential 10. West Commercial -. ~. ~ 13. West Residential Connection 11. East Residential The Villages at Marcola Meadows Surrounding Context Pre-Application Report - 26 May 2006 iIIIIi .. SATRE ASSOCIATF5 r ATTACHMENT 2.A ~..~- ~- ..... . . "'C Q) > .(6 o Q) 0:: Q) Bridgeport Village ro Tigard, Oregon 0 Developer: Opus Northwest c.D c::;) c::;) '" c.o C"-' ~ :e: m -- ..... .e J:J :] (/) (ij c Om "t: o 5th Avenue Eugene, Oregon 5th Avenue Eugene, Oregon The Villages at Marcola Meadows Precedents: Main Street Retail Pre-Application Report - 26 May 2006 iIIIIIi .. SATRE ASSOCIATES r . :0 '.' ~ '.. ~; a L ..' lli ~ ~". ~ III .P ~ ~ ~~ - Valley River Village Eugene, Oregon Seaside Architect: DPZ From The New Urbanism By Peter Katz The Villages at Marcola Meadows Precedents: Streetscapes and Pedestrian Connections ATTACHMENT 2.8 r--- . . -c ~ CD c::::t "(i) c::::t C"'o.l (ij 0 u;) ..... (I) - 0:: ~ 'E ~ .a (I) :J ..... ~ (/) co m C c 'a, 'C L... 0 Bridgeport Village Tigard, Oregon Pre-Application Report - 26 May 2006 IIJJIBi III SATRE ASSOCIATES r ATTACHMENT 2.C Delta Oaks Eugene, Oregon .Gateway Medical Center Springfield, Oregon ......... .. ----- Pavilion Eugene, Oregon Willamette Valley Cancer Center Eugene, Oregon The Villages at Marcola Meadows Precedents: Office IIIIIi II'AI SATRE ASSOCIATES Pre-Application Report - 26 May 2006 m .... .... E .0 ::J en a; r::: c;, '0:: o r ATTACHMENT 2.0 Wal-Mart Springfield, Oregon ~ "0 CD > 'CD o CD 0:: .>- .m < aJ ~ C (0 C::) C::) "" co .- ~ E .0 ::J (J) (ij c: .OJ .C o c.o '" -...~~ Home Depot Eugene, Oregon Wal-Mart Springfield, Oregon Home Depot Eugene, Oregon The Villages at Marcola Meadows Precedents: General Retail Pre-Application Report - 26 May 2006 iIIIlIJi .. . SATRE ASSOCIATES ,~' Project: Sheldon Village, Eugene, Oregon Architect: Bergsund Delaney Architecture and Planning Client: Lane County Housing and Community Services Agency The Villages at Marcola Meadows Precedents: Residential I L ATTACHMENT 2,E !'I"'- .~~ . . "'C Q) c:D > c;:) "CD ~ <<i 0 (S;) - CI) ..... 0:: c--.t "E ~ .a (I) :J ..... :E \n m co 0 c '[;) .t: 0 Pre-Application Report - 26 May 2006 iIJJIrIi -- SATRE ASSOCIATF5 ATTACHMENT 2.F V-'''~~:.1ft'i:( :i!.ii'W .. Amazon Pool, Eugene, Oregon Landscape Architecture Magazine, 2002 Project: Water Pollution Control Laboratory, Portland, Oregon Architect: Miller Hull Source: Miller Hall Architects of the Pacific Beaverton Clean Water Services The Villages at Marcola' Meadows Precedents: Stormwater Pre-Application Report - 26 May 2006 IIilJlIIi .. SATRE ASSOCIATFS to ~ t:::2I C"'-II I Cii -, ...... "g ..a~ :::J, ,^., V,I.. co. ~ >-~ <: ~ cui '6:. 'in. i::: ,""",-:,', 0 ~r I .. .- ... --.. -a~_-= t~:11 ATTACHMENT 2.G I ~~~ - ... .,. Pervious Pavements .... -~ :~ .... . ,-I.o......,~ -, - ..../~" ....." "'- ;...... ., ,,~_, J "''-..._ -.,- , (/'''~ "-'"'Ji,--",,' "- ~... ,,/' ~j .... / .., "" ~''"''~ .,.., -.., ........ -~... ":-. - -.... --- ... ....... -. -<.... .." ........, ,-'~' .... ~ '-, '!o, __, Illioi_ ~_-~ - '" ..... ...,... ~ ....... /' ....... ...../ '~" " .,~, .... '-. . ,i'.......:, :~'~ ........ ","", " "', Stamped and Stained Pavement " ... .. The Villages at Marcola Meadows Precedents: Paving ""'~".t ~ ~ ... ....-... ... ~.. ~ .., ~ ~ ... .... ..... ....- ,..... -I . , \ -c (I) tD > C) C) 'CD t'J -(ij 0 (g +J ..... (I) C'.t 'E 0:: ~ .0 (I) :J ..... :E en m 10 0 c 'm 'C .. ~.~._":'..(:;;....~-. 0 ::" 2"" -..0: .. -'~~-- ~- '*,,, .... ""1l6I ~.ii!' -- Pre-Application Report - 26 May 2006 ... rail SATRE ASSOCIATES Project: The Pavilion Architect: TBG Architects and Planners, Inc. Client: Alan Evans, Evans, Elder & Brown 1lII.-.....~ 'ill' Project: Oakway Center Architect: TBG Architects and Planners, Inc. Client: McKay Investment Company The Villages at Marcola Meadows Precedents: Details #1 ]~ I .-J- ....... ATTACHMENT 2,H e CD <::) C) t'-l Q) (,Q 0= e"'-t ~ .._-~ . (ij .... :!: E .Q :.:J (f) (ij c '0, '0:: o , L. A " t_~. '":~"",-.. ;;."'~''''~ Project: Delta Oaks Shopping Center Developer: Vik Construction Company Pre-Application Report - 26 May 2006 ~ .. SATRE ASSOCIATF5 f I . ~.... \t:; \} L.~.. Project: 5th Street Market Business: Marche Project: Oakway Center The Villages at Marcola Meadows Precedents: Details ATTACHMENTS 2.1 U) ~ ~ C"oI <U (J:) ... ~ ("'o,t E ~ .a ::l :E (/) (ij c: C) "-=: 0 j~ ~~ Project: Oakway Center Project: Oakway Center Pre-Application Report - 26 May 2006 IIilJ!t1j .. SATRE ASSOCIATES ~ " :. \" . , ' l' , ~ SATRE ASSOCIATES Satre Associates, P.C. 132 East Broadway SUite 536 Eugene, Oregon 97401 Phone 5414654721 Fax 5414654722 1 800 662 7094 www satrepc com ....."i ,.4 ,J May 26, 2006 CIty of Spnngfield Development Services department Plannmg DIVIsIOn 225 FIfth Street Spnngfield, Oregon 97477 Attn. Gary Karp Re The VIllages at Marcola Meadows Pre-ApplIcatIOn Report ApplIcation Dear Gary, Enclosed please find Pre-ApplIcatIOn Report applIcatIOn materials for the proposed development, The VIllages at Marcola Meadows Included are the applIcatIOn, wntten statement and assocIated exhIbIts, attachments and plans. The Wntten Statement contams general project mformatIOn, a summary of the land use request, mformatIOn about the SIte, eXIstmg condItIons and proposed use, as well as an outlme expressmg our understandmg of the project's requIred land use approval process, applIcable plans and ordmances The VIllages at Marcola Meadows IS an excitmg proposal, offenng an entIcmg mIX of reSIdentIal envIronments, commercial and specIalty retail shoppmg opportunitIes, eatmg and dInmg establIshments, and medIcal and profeSSIOnal offices centered around a Pacific Northwest theme threaded WIth meandenng waterways, natIve plant commumtIes and continuous open space ' As the ApplIcant's deSIgnated contact, Satre ASSOCIates IS aVailable to answer questIOns or proVIde supplemental mformatIOn as needed to faCIlItate the reVIew process Thank you m advance for your conSIderatIOn of the applIcatIOn We look forward to workmg with you on the project Date Received: MAY 2 6 2006 chard M Satre, AICP, ASLA, CSI President Satre ASSOCIates, P.C Onginal Submittal Planners, Landscape ArchItects and Environmental Spectalists liliiii - SATRE '\ ""'l K r \ If '" THE~LLAGESATMARCOLA~ADOWS PRE-APPLICATION REPORT APPLICATION Lane County Assessor's Map 17-02-30-00, Lot 1800 and Map 17-03-25-11, Lot 2300 Date Received: MAY 2 6 2006 SC Springfield, LLC 5440 Louie Lane, Suite 102 Reno, Nevada 89511 Original Submittal. May 26, 2006 MCKENZIE-WILLAMETTE MEDICAL CENTER PRE-APPLICA TION REPORT APPLICATION T ABLE OF CONTENTS Cover Letter Table of Contents ApplIcation Written Statement ExhibIts (Bound Herem) A Alta Survey .... ..... .. ... ... . ........ .... ... . B FIRM Map .,. ... . ....,. ........ .. .......,. .. .....,.. C. Local and NatIOnal Wetlands Inventory Map .... .. ......,. D Wellhead Protection Areas Map . . . . . ... E Traffic Impact Study Status Report .. . '" ... . ... . .. . F. Prelimmary Geotechnical Report . ., ... .. ... .. .. .. .. .... .. G BIbliography of Land Use Planmng Documents . . ....... H. Wetland-Related Correspondence.. ........ I Land Use Approval Summary. .............. J. Development Code Outline.... . Attachments (11 x 17, Bound Separately) 1. Site Photos ......... ... .. ... ........ . ....... 2 Precedents.. .. . ..... ... . .... . 3. Illustrations.... .. .... . '" .. .. .. .. . . .. ... .. .... 4. Aerial Perspectives ....... . ......... .... ..... . 5. Existing and Proposed Metro Plan DesignatIOns . . .. . . , . 6. Existmg and Proposed Zoning . ,. ............ Plans (30 x 42, Bound Separately) 1 Cover Sheet 2 Air Photo 3. TopographIC Survey 4. CIty of Spnngfield GIS Data 5 PrelIminary Master Plan 6. Conceptual Storm Drainage, Open Space and Circulation 7. V Illages, Land Use and Area TabulatIOn No. of Pages 1 1 3 15 '" -' 1 1 1 18 3 1 3 13 6 6 9 4 2 2 2 One Sheet Each Date Received: MAY 2 6 2006 Original Submittal -' ,Y' ~~- SATRE ASSOCIATES, P .C. Planners, Landscape Architects and Environmental Specialists 132 East Broadway, SUIte 536, Eugene, Oregon 97401 (541) 465-4721 . Fax (541) 465-4722 . 1-800-662-7094 www satrepc com - ... III SATRE ASSOCIATES May 26, 2006 ./ THE VILLAGES AT MARCOLA MEADOWS PRE-APPLICATION REPORT WRITTEN STATEMENT I. GENERAL INFORMATION Sublect SIte The subject SIte consIsts of two propertIes identIfied as Tax Lot 1800 of Lane County Assessor's Map 17-02-30-00 and Tax Lot 2300 of Lane County Assessor's Map 17-03-25-11 The area so defined will be referred to in thIS application as the subject site The site IS wIthin the Spnngfield City LImits . Size Approximately 100 3 acres (see Alta Survey, ExhibIt A, and TopographIc Survey, Plan Sheet 3). Owner/Applicant The SC Spnngfield, LLC IS the property owner and applIcant (see applIcation form) ApplIcatIOn Team Owner/Applicant: SC Spnngfield, LLC 5440 Lome Lane, Suite 102 Reno, Nevada 89511 Attn Jeff Belle (775) 853-4714 * (775) 853-4718 Project Developer: The Martin Company PO Box 1482 Albany, Oregon 97321 Attn. Bon Martm (541)917-0071 * Fax (541) 917-0769 * bob@tmcdevcom Date Received: MAY 2 6 2006 Original Submittal Planner/Landscape Architect: Satre Associates, P.C. Planners, Landscape Architects and Environmental Specialists 132 East Broadway, SUIte 536 Eugene, Oregon 97401 Attn. RIchard M Satre, ASLA, AICP (541) 465-4721 * Fax (541) 465-4722 * r satre@satrepc com " Architect: Waterbury Shugar ArchItecture LLC 225 West 5th Avenue Eugene, Oregon 97401 Attn. RIchard Shugar, AlA (541) 342.5777 * Fax (541) 343-6128 * RIchard@ws-archItecture.com Civil Engineer/Surveyor: K & D EngIneenng, Inc PO Box 725 Albany, Oregon 97321 Attn Dan Watson, PE (541) 928-2583 * Fax (541) 967-3458 * dkwatson@callatg.com ) Transportation Engineer: Access EngIneering, LLC 134 East 13th Avenue, Suite 2 Eugene, Oregon 97401 Attn' Mike WeIshar, PE (541) 485-3215 * Fax (541) 485-3253 * mikew@accesseng com -.....J II. LAND USE REQUEST ThIs request for a Pre-ApplIcatIOn Report IS submItted as a prerequisIte to a proposed Master Plan ApplIcatIOn (SDC 37.020(2)) and as a voluntary prerequisite to a Type IV Metro Plan Amendment (SDC 7 020(1)) Master Plan Approval and Zone Changes are Type III process per SDC 3.090, and MetropolItan Plan Amendments are a Type IV process per SDC 3 100 The applIcant wIll request that the applications 'be processed concurrently as allowed per SDC 37.010(3), and as such, all applIcations shall be subject to the Type IV process per SDC sectIOns 12.020(1)(b) and 37020(1) ThIs project narratIve shall provIde baSIC InfOrmatIOn regardIng the Master Plan, Type II Metro Plan Amendment and Zone Change applIcatIOns. The applIcant has proposed a compressed tImetable for the processing of the land use permIts reqUIred for the development An ApplIcation Process Summary accompanies thIS request It includes notes on proceSSIng steps and an overall tImetable reflectIng the accelerated schedule, d' Date Receive . MAY 26 2006 The Villages at Marcola Meadows - Pre-ApplIcatIOn Report - Wntten Statement May 26, 2006 Page 2 of 15 Original Submittal r III. THE SITE AND EXISTING CONDITIONS A. Location and Context LocatIOn . The subject sIte is located approxImately one-quarter mIle north of Highway 126 at the northwestern mtersectIOn of Marcola Road and North 28th Street Lots Affected by the Proposed Master Plan. Metro Plan Amendments and Zone Changes. The subject sIte consists of two propertIes Identified as Tax Lot 1800 of Lane County Assessor's Map 17-02-30-00 and Tax Lot 2300 of Lane County Assessor's Map 17-03.25.11 Tax Lot 2300 was platted m 1994 as Parcel 3 ofland partItion plat 94- P0491 A property line adjustment was recorded with Lane County m 1997 affecting the common boundary between parcels 2 and 3 of land partItIOn plat 94-P0491 m so doing completing the current configuratIOn of the subject sIte (City of Spnngfield file# 97-02-029). Plan DesignatIOn The Metro Plan Diagram applIes multiple plan designatIOns to the subject site' Commercial, Campus Industnal and MedIUm DensIty ResIdential. A current Metro Plan Diagram for the ( subject sIte IS attached as Attachment 5 A See FIgure 1 (below). Figure 1: EXlstmg and Proposed Metro Plan DesignatIOn Acres EXIsting Proposed 39 3 30 1 00 00 00 175 110 70 00 186 00 140 50 0 0 0 00 131 1 00 3 100 3 Plan Designation Medium Density Residential Low Density Residential Mixed Use Residential CommerCial Mixed Use CommerCial Light Medium Industrial Campus Industrial Right-of-Way Total Zomng DIstncts The OffiCIal Zonmg Map apphes multIple Zoning DIstncts to the subject sIte' Commercial, Campus Industrial and MedIUm Density ReSIdentIal. A current Zoning District map for the subject sIte IS attached as Attachment 6 A. See Figure 2 (below). Figure 2: Existmg and Proposed Zomng Distncts Acres EXIsting Proposed 33 1 30 1 05 00 00 175 115 70 00 186 00 140 55 2 0 0 00 131 100 3 100 3 Zoning District Medium DenSity ReSIdentIal Low DenSity ReSidential Mixed Use ReSidential Community CommerCial Mixed Use CommerCial Light Medium Industrial Campus Industrial Right-of-Way \ Date Received: MAY 2 6 2006 Total ~nal SubfnlttaL_ The Villages at Marcola Meadows - Pre-ApplIcatIOn Report - Wntten Statement May 26, 2006 Page 3 of 15 B. Site Description and Existing Conditions Sublect SIte i The subject sIte: has previously been used for a vanety of agncultural and industnal uses Currently the sIte' is vacant, except for a vacant machme shop building located near the southeast r corner of the sIte: The subject site IS entIrely wlthm the Spnngfield UGB and City LImIts. The site abuts resIdentIal development to the east (across 31st Street), west, south (across Marcola Road), commercIal development to tre southwest; mdustrial development to the southeast (across North 28th Street and Marcola Road), and parks and open space to the north (across the EWEB corridor path) r A storm water dramage ditch bisects the subject sIte runnmg from east to west (see TopographIc Survey, Plan She:et 3) The site IS located outside of both the 100-year flood and SOO-year flood areas (see FIrm Map, ExhibIt B). , IV. PROPOSED USE The Villages at: Marcola Meadows IS a proposed mIxed-use development compnsed of resIdentIal, offic~ and retml villages Referencmg the dramatic wooded backdrop of the Coburg and Marcola hIlls to the north, and the large plane of valley floor meadow on SIte, Marcola Meadows has been conceived to blend m with thIS overall setting while creatmg a bndge and supportive transItion in the scale and mtenslty of larger commercIal uses to the south wIth qUIte resIdentIal neigh~orhoods to the north. Withm Marcola; Meadows a SUIte of eleven Villages will exit Five residentIal VIllages compnsed of smgle famIly homes, apartment homes, semor apartment homes, townhomes and an assisted livmg facilIty WIth senior cottages wIll occupy the northern extent of the SIte, buffering eXlstmg resIdential developments to the northwest, north, and northeast Two office VIllages, conslstmg of medical and professIOnal offihes, wIll occupy the next area Four retml VIllages, general I retml, neIghborhood retml, main street retml, and commercial, wIll face 28th Street and Marcola Road Each of the VillAges is enVISIOned to be umque, yet part of the whole The overall Meadows theme wIll appear throughout, WIth the use of meandenng waterways, natIve plans and generous open space WIthin each VIllage, Pacific Northwest deSIgn aesthetic wIll prevail, supported with the generous use ,of stone, wood and steel. I i Marcola MeadoJs will not only be a great place to call home, but an excltmg place to shop; WIth I specIalty retml shops and umque dmmg venues Stores wIll have welcommg front doors, large wmdows and hIgh ceIlmgs, all WIth natIve materials and muted colors It will be easy to get around, and to do so on foot All streets WIll have WIde sidewalks, any of them setback from vehIcle traffic The entIre community wIll be connected WIth all-weather multI-use off street pathways. It will be convement, and safe, to wall from one Village to the next Date Received: The Villages at Marcola Meadows ~ Pre-ApplicatIOn Report - Wntten Statement May 26, 2006 Original submittal .' It wlll be a great place to be outdoors, wlth meadow-flavored open spaces, native plant commumtles, lightmg, bridges, seatmg, and overlooks to support walkmg and relaxing. It wlll be a healthy place; wlth ample use of oxygen-generating trees to cleanse the au, catch the wmd and cool the temperature It wlll be an envlronmental place, utlhzmg a network of bioswales, shallow seasonal ponds, and a meandenng drainageway to capture and cleanse storm water In all, The V lllages at Marcola Meadows wlll not only be a great addltlOn to the commumty but a Wlse use of land and smart approach to deslgn. v. APPLICABLE CRITERIA The following three sections enumerate the cntena that will be used for review of the antlclpated Master Plan, Metro Plan Amendment and Zone Change. The purpose is to ldentlfy relevant standards and policies the apphcatlOns must address. Each section quotes or refers to the appropnate cntena and, in some cases, offers prehmmary responses to those cntena. A. Master Plan Criteria From the Springfield Master Plan apphcatlOn "A complete application consists of. (3)A wntten explanatlOn of the proposal whlch addresses the apphcable Spnngfield Development Code cntena of approval. These cntena are hsted below" SDC 37.040 CRITERIA A Master Plan may be approved If the Planmng Commlsslon finds that the proposal conforms wlth all of the followzng approval cntena In the event of a confllct wlth approval cntena zn thls SubsectlOn) the more specific requlrements shall apply (1) The zonzng of the property shall be conslstent wlfh the Metro Plan dlagram and/or applzcable Refinement Plan dzagram) Plan Dlstnct map) and Conceptual Development Plan, (2) The request as condlflOned shall conform to applzcable Spnngfield Development Code requzrements, Metro Plan polzcles, Refinement Plan) Plan Dlstnct, and Conceptual Development, Plan polzcles ' (3) Proposed on-slfe and ojf-slfe publzc and pnvate lmprovements shall be sufficlent to accommodate the proposed phased development and any capaclty requzrements of publzc facllztles plans) and prOVlSlons shall be made to assure constructlOn of ojf-slfe lmprovements zn conjUnctlOn wlfh a schedule of the phaszng (4) The request tshall provlde adequate guzdance for the deslgn and coordznatlOn of future phases) (5) Physlcal features) zncludzng but not lzmlted to) slgnificant clusters of trees and shrubs, watercourses shown on the Water Qualzty Llmlfed Watercourse (WQLW) Map and thelr npanan areas, wetlands, open spaces) and areas of hlstonc and/or archaeologlcal slgnificance as may be specified zn Artlcle 30 ofthls Code or ORS 97740-760, 358905-955 and 390235-240 shall be protected as specified zn thls Code or zn state or Federal law) and (6) Local publzc facllztles plans and local street plans shall not be adverselJ!.. lmpacted by. the proposed development Date Received: MA 'fale65 ~OG The Villages at Marcola Meadows ~ Pre-ApplicatIOn Report - Wntten Statement May 26, 2006 Original Submittal SDC 37.040(1), The zonzng of the property shall be consistent With the Metro Plan dzagram and/or applzcable Refinement Plan dzagram, Plan District map, and Conceptual Development Plan, Metro Plan Diagram The Metro Plan Amendment applicatiOn will be concurrent with a proposed Zone Change and proposed Master Plan Application There are three areas of the property, each with a different designatiOn on the adopted Metro Plan "Land Use Diagram" These designatiOns are Medmm Density ReSidential, Commercial, and Campus Industnal. The Metro Plan Diagram Amendment will propose to change the area designated Campus Industrial to Light Medmm Industnal, Commercial, and Medmm Density ReSidential with a Mixed Use Overlay designation on the Commercial and Medium Density ReSidential areas (See Attachment 5). The Zone Change proposes to change the area currently zoned Campus Industnal to areas zoned Light Medmm Industnal, Mixed Use Commercial, and Mixed Use Residential (See Attachment 6) If these concurrent amendments to the Zoning Map and the Metro Plan diagram are approved, the zomng will be conSistent with and implement the Metro Plan "Land Use Diagram." Refinement Plan diagram There is no applicable Refinement Plan for the subject Site Conceptual Development Plan: A Conceptual Development Plan (98-02-47) for the subject Site was approved by the Spnngfield Plannmg CommiSSiOn on September 1, 1998 The plan was proposed pursuant to SDC ~21 030 which reqmred approval of a Conceptual Development Plan pnor to development of land zoned Campus Industnal With approval of thiS Master Plan and the concurrent Zonmg Map Amendment, CDP 98-02-47 Will no longer be m effect SDC 37.040(2), The request as conditIOned shall conform to applzcable Springfield Development Code reqUirements, Metro Plan polzcies, Refinement Plan, Plan District, and Conceptual Development Plan polzcies Spnngfield Development Code The followmg Spnngfield Development Code (SDC) Articles are relevant to the proposed Master Plan applicatiOn. The Master Plan application, when submitted, will mclude explanatiOns of and references to the Site plan other application matenals addressmg each of these SDC sectiOns Together, the applicatiOn matenals will demonstrate conformance With the Spnngfield Development Code Article 3 Development Approval and Land Use DeciSiOn Procedures Article 7. Metro Plan Amendments Date Received: Article 12. DfficIaI Zomng Map Amendments Article 16 Residential Zoning Districts MAY 2 6 2006 Article 17' DWP Dnnkmg Water ProtectiOn Overlay Distnct Article 20 LMI, HI and SHI Industrial Zoning Distncts Original Submittal Article 31' Mimmum Development Standards and Site Plan ReView Standards Article 32 Public and Private Improvements Article 35: SubdiVision Standards The Villages at Marcola Meadows - Pre-ApplicatIOn Report - WrItten Statement May 26, 2006 Page 6 of 15 ArtIcle 37 Master Plans ArtIcle 38 Tree Fellmg Standards ArtIcle 40. Spnngfield MIxed-Use Zonmg Dlstncts SDC 37.040(3), Proposed on-szte and oifslte publzc and przvate lmprovements shall be sufficzent to accommodate the proposed phased development and any capaclty requlrements of publzc facllztles plans, and prOV1SlOns shall be made to assure constructlOn of oifslte lmprovements zn conjUnctlOn wzth a schedule of the phaszng The Master Plan applIcatIOn, when submItted, wIll mclude references to a Traffic Impact AnalysIs and MItIgatIOns, a Phasing Schedule - plan, table and narrative, and an outlme of the antIcIpated SubdivIsIOn Improvements Agreement and Fmancial Guaranty (as part of subdivision process) It will mclude the concurrent Zonmg Map Amendment response to SDC 12.030(c), "The property lS presently provlded wlth adequate publzc facllztles, serVlces and transportatlOn networks to support the use, or these facllztles, serVlces and transportatlOn networks are planned to be provlded concurrently wzth the dev~lopment of the property " The Master Plan applIcatIOn, when submItted, wIll also refer to the site plan and assocIated drawmgs showmg eXlstmg and proposed streets, utIlities, samtary sewer, natural and pIped storm dramage system, water service, bIke -and pedestnan ways and transIt facility locatIOns Any reqmred dedIcatIOns and or grantmg of nghts of way, easements, parks, and open spaces wIll also be dIscussed SDC 37.040(4), The request shall provlde adequate gUldance for the deslgn and coordznatlOn of future phases, \ The Master Plan applIcatIOn will refer to design gmdelmes that wIll be attached to the applIcatIOn It will also outlIne CondItIOns Covenants and Restnctions, Property Owners AssociatIOn Bylaws, and establIshment of an Architectural Review Board to be as part of the subdivIsIOn proces~ SDC 37.040(5), Physlcal features, zncludzng but not lzmlted to, slgnificant clusters of trees and shrubs, watercourses shown on the Water Qualzty Llmzted Watercourse (wQLJ1!) Map and thelr rzparzan areas, wetlands, open spaces, and areas of hlStOrzC and/or archaeologlcal slgnificance as may be specified zn Artlcle 30 ofthls Code or ORS 97740-760, 358905-955 and 390235-240 shall be protected as specified zn thlS Code or zn state or Federal law, The Master Plan applIcation wIll refer to other applIcatIOn matenals that wIll mclude · Wetland DelIneatIOn and letter of concurrence from the Oregon Department of State Lands · Natural Features Assessment - showmg protectIOn of sIgmficant natural features (If not covered In Goal 5 mventory) mcludmg rare plants and natIve plant commumties, habItat for rare ammals, prominent topographIc features, wetlands, stream corndors, npanan areas, and areas IdentIfied m the Metro Plan or other CIty adopted natural resource Inventory · Tree Preservation Report and Plan prepared by an arbonst - Identifymg and evaluatmg all trees on property 8" or more m dIameter at breast heIght and mdicatmg removal or means of preservation of sIgnificant trees ; · Landscape Plan addressing open space, buffers, and other required landscap[)i:ifesReceived: The VIllages at Marcola Meadows - Pre-ApphcatlOo Report - Wntteo Statement May 26, 2006 (- Original submittal SDC 37.040(6), Local publzc facllztles plans and local street plans shall not be adversely lmpacted by the proposed development The Master Plan applicatIOn, when submItted, WIll refer to the above response to SDC 37 040(3) B. Metro Plan Amendment Criteria From the Spnngfield Metropolitan Plan Amendment application. "A Complete Application Consists of 2 A statement containmg Fmdmgs of Fact addressmg the Criteria of Approval found m Springfield Development Code (SDC) 7070(3) In order for the Planning CommIssIOn and the CIty CouncIl to consIder an amendment of a plan text and/or diagram, there must ,be Fmdmgs of Fact submItted by the applicant The Fmdmgs of Fact must show reason for the request consIstent WIth the Cnteria of Approval (shown below). If msufficIent or unclear mformatIOn IS submItted by the applicant, the request may be denied or delayed" SDC 7.070(3) - Criteria for Approval of Plan Amendment. The followmg cntena shall be applzed by the Czty Counczl m approvmg or denymg a Metro Plan amendment applzcatlOn (a) The amendment must be conslstent wlth the relevant statewlde planmng goals adopted by the Land ConservatlOn and Development CommlsslOn, and . (b) AdoptlOn of the amendment must not make the Metro Plan mternally mconslstent SDC 7 070(3)(a), The amendment must be conslstent wlth the relevant statewlde planmng goals adopted by the Land ConservatlOn and Development CommlsslOn, Goal 1 - Citizen Involvement To develop a cztlzen mvolvement program that znsures the opportu~lty for cztlzens to be znvolved zn all phases of the plannzng process Goal 2 - Land Use Planning: To establzsh a land use planmng process and polzcy framework as a basls for all declslOn and actlOns related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual base for such declSlons and actlOns Goal 3 - Agricultural Land: To preserve and mamtam agnculturallands Prelimmary Response: ThIS goal applies to lands that are deSIgnated Agricultural ThIS amendment is for property located within the CIty limIts of Spnngfield and does not affect land deSIgnated for agncultural use Therefore, Goal 3 is not applicable or relevant to the amendment. Goal 4 - Forest Land: To conserve forest lands by mazntaznzng the forest land base and to protect the state's forest economy by makzng posslble economlcally ejjiczent forest practlces that assure the contznuous growzng and harvestzng of forest tree speCles as the leadzng use on forest land conslstent wzth sound management of SOlI, mr, water, and fish and wzldlife resources and to provlde for recreatlOnal opportunztles and agnculture Date Received: Prelimmarv Response: MAY 2 6 2006 ThIS amendment is for property located wIthm the CIty limits of Spnngfield and does not affect land designated for forest use Therefore, Goal 4 IS not applicable or relevaQ:tr~I1i~ ~tlnt.____ The Villages at Marcola Meadows - Pre-ApplicatIon Report - Wntten Statement May 26, 2006 Page 8 of 15 Goal 5 - Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Area, and Natural Resources: To conserve open space and protect natural and scemc resources The Sprzngfield Natural Resource Study Report, October 2005, hsts the dramage dItch that traverses the sIte from west to east in the "Local Wetland Inventory." It IS Identlfied as "Wetland M32" and does not meet OFW AM sIgmficance cntena AdditIOnally, according to the same report, the Oregon Department of State Lands and the Army Corp of Engmeers have claImed that thIs IS not a JunsdIctIOnal wetland The subject sIte is not located within the Washburn HIstonc Landmark DIstnct (SDC 30030(1)) or hsted on the HIstonc Landmark Inventory (SDC 30 030(2)) Goal 6 - Air, Water and Land Resources Quality: To mazntazn and Improve the qualzty of the azr, water and land resources of the state Goal 7 -'Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards: To protect life and property from natural dIsasters and hazards Prehmmary Response' Goal 7 addresses natural hazards and requires that local governments inventory risks for floods, landshdes, earthquakes and related hazards, and wIldfires among others and implement appropnate safeguards when plannmg for development m areas of natural hazards The MultI- hazard MItIgatIOn Plan for the Eugene/Sprzngfield Metropolztan Area (Metro Hazard Plan) was adopted m 2004, this plan is non-regulatory but provIdes an mventory of known hazards The Metro Hazard Plan does not identify any known hazards wIthm the area of the subject sIte, Furthermore, the subject area IS outsIde of the 100 year and 500 year flood plams (ExhIbit - FIRM 41039C1127F) There are no adopted or non-adopted maps that IdentIfy the subject sIte to be WIthin a known hazard area Future development on thIs sIte wIll mclude a full analYSIS of hazard nsk and mItlgate the nsk through appropnate constructIOn As such, thIs amendment is m compliance With Goal 7 Goal 8 - Recreation Needs: To satISfY the recreatIonal needs of the cItIzens of the state and VISItors and, where approprzate, to provIde for the SItzng of neces~ary recreatIOnal faczlItIes zncludzng destznatzon resorts Parks and RecreatIon ComprehenSIve Plan (WIllamalane), Adopted March 2004 Goal 9 - Economic Development: To provIde adequate opportumtIes throughout the state for a varzety oj econom'Ic actIvItzes vItal to the health, welfare, and prosperzty of Oregon's CItIzens :' Date Received: Sprzngfield Commerczal Lands Study, February 2000 MetropolItan Industrzal Lands Polzcy Report, July 1993 MAY 2 6 2006 Goal 10 - Housing: To provIde for the houszng needs of cItIzens of the state Original Submittal Eugene-Sprzngfield Metropolztan Area ResIdentzal Lands and Houszng Study Draft Supply and Demand Techmcal AnalYSIS, February 1999 The VIllages at Marcola Meadows - Pre-ApplicatIOn Report - Wntten Statement May 26, 2006 Page 9 of 15 Goal 11 - Public Facilities and Services: To plan and develop a tImely, orderly and efficzent arrangement of publzc facllztles and servIces as a framework for urban and rural development PrelImmary Response' All of the parcels subject to this applIcatIOn are currently wIthm the Urban Growth Boundary and are annexed mto the CIty of Spnngfield The annexation was made III compliance with an acknowledged comprehenSIve plan and Implementmg ordinances, and establIshed the aVailabIlIty of urban facIlities and serVIces A detailed analYSIS of the aVailabilIty ofthose serVIces follows Waste Water SolId Waste Management Potable Water SerVIce FIre and Emergency MedIcal SerVIces Police Protection Electnc SerVIce Natural Gas Communication FacIlItIes PublIc Schools Improved Streets/ TransportatIOn Storm Water Control References Eugene-SprIngfield Metropolztan Area Publzc Facllztles and ServIces Plan, December 2001 CIty of SprIngfield Stormwater Management Plan, Review Draft, January 2004 Goal 12 - Transportation: To provIde and encourage a safe, convenzent and economIc transportatIOn system Prelimmary Response Goal 12 is implemented through the "TransportatIOn Plannmg Rule," OAR DIVIsIOn 12, 660. 012-0000 et seq, (TPR). The Eugene-Sprzngfield Metropolztan Area TransportatIOn Plan (TransPlan) proVIdes the regional policy framework through WhICh the TPR IS enacted at the local level TransPlan was acknowledged for complIance wIth Goal 12 m 2001 Plan amendments and land use regulation amendments are regulated under OAR 660-012-0060 If an amendment sIgmficantlYI affects a transportatIOn faCIlIty, a local government must provide a form of mItIgatIOn 660-012-0060(1) states. "A plan or land use regulatIon amendment sIgnificantly affects a transportatIOn facllzty if zt would (a) Change the functIOnal classificatIon of an eXlstzng or planned transportatIon facllzty (exclUSIve of correctIOn of map errors zn an adopted plan), Date Received: (b) Change standards Implementzng afunctIOnal classificatIOn system, or j MAY 26 2006 The VIllages at Marcola Meadows - Pre-ApplIcatIOn Report - Wntten Statement May 26, 2006 Origin~1 submittal Page 10 of 15 (c) As measured at the end of the planmngperlOd Identified m the adopted transportatlOn system plan (A) Allow land uses or levels of development that would result m types or levels of travel or access that are mconslstent wzth the fimctlOnal classificatlOn of an eXIstmg or planned transportatlOn facIlzty, (B) Reduce the performance of an eXIstmg or planned transportatlOn facIlzty below the mImmum acceptable performance standard Identified m the TSP or comprehensIve plan, or (C) Worsen the performance of an eXIstmg or planned transportatlOn facIlzty that IS otherwIse projected to perform below the mImmum acceptable performance l standard Identified m the TSP or comprehensIve plan " Goal]3 -'Energy Conservation: To conserve energy Land and uses developed on the land shall be managed and controlled so as to maXImIze the conservatlOn of all forms of energy, , based upon sound economIC prmcIples Goal]4 - Urbanization: To provIde for an orderly and efficIent transztlOn from rural to urban land use _I PrelImmary Response. All of the parcels subject to this applIcatlOn are currently wIthm the Urban Growth Boundary and are annexed mto the CIty of Springfield The annexatlOn was made in complIance WIth an acknowledged comprehensIve plan and Implementmg ordmances, and establIshed the aVailabIlIty of urban faCIlItIes and services. ,Therefore the amendment IS consistent with StatewIde Planning Goal 14. Goal]5 - Willamette River Greenway: To protect, conserve, enhance and mamtam the natural, scemc, hIstorzcal, agrzcultural, economIC and recreatlOnal qualztIes of lands along the WIllamette RIver as the WIllamette RIver Greenway PrelIminary Response: The subject SIte IS not wIthm the Willamette RIver Greenway Therefore, thIS goal IS not relevant and the amendment wIll not affect complIance WIth Goal 15. -../ Goal 16 through 19: (Estuarzne Resources, Coastal Shorelands, Beaches and Dunes, and Ocean Resources) PrelImmary Response: There are no coastal, ocean, estuanne, or beach and dune resources related to the property or mvolved m the amendment. Therefore, these goals ,are not relevant and the amendment will not affect complIance WIth Goals 16 through 19 SDC 7.070(3)(b) AdO'ptlOn of the amendment must not make the Metro Plan mternally mconslstent Date Received: The VIllages at Marcola Meadows - Pre-ApplicatIOn Report - Wntten Statement May 26, 2006 MAY 2 6 2006 Page 11 of 15 Original Submittal The Master Plan apphcatIOn, when submitted, will address the followmg Metro Plan Pohcles Residential Land Use and Housing Elements Policy #A.2 ResIdentzally desIgnated land wIthin the UGB should be rezoned consIstent wzth the Metro Plan and applzcable plans and polzcles Residential Land Use and Housing Elements Policy #A.17 ProvIde opportUnitIes for a full range of chOIce In housing type, densIty, sIze, cost, and 10catlOn Economic Element Policy #B.l Demonstrate a posztlve Interest In eXIting and new Industrzes, especzally those provIding above average wage and salary levels, ad Increased varzety of job opportUnitIes, a rzse In the standards of lzv,Ing, and utIlzzatIon of our eXIsting comparatIve advantage In the level of educatlOn and skIll of the resIdentzallabor force Economic Element Policy #B.6 Increase the amount of undeveloped land zoned for lzght Industrzal and commerczal uses correlating the effectIve supply In terms of sUltabIlzty and avaIlabllzty wzth the prOjectlOns of demand Economic Element Policy #B.7 Encourage Industrzal pa~k development, including areas for warehousing and dIstrzbutIve Industrzes and research and development actIvItIes f Economic Element Policy #B.9 Encourage the expanSlOn of eXIsting and the 10catlOn of new manufacturzng actIvztIes, whIch are characterzzed by low levels of pollutlOn and effiCIent energy use r Economic Element Policy #B.12 DIscourage future Metro Plan amendments that would change development-ready Industrzal lands (sItes defined as short-term In the metropolztan Industrzal Lands Speczal Study, 1991) to non-Industrzal desIgnatlOns Economic Element Policy #B.16 UtIlzze processes and local controls, WhICh encourage retentlOn of large parcels or consolzdatlOn of small parcels of Industrzally or commerczally zoned land to facIlztate theIr use or reuse In a comprehensIve rather than pIecemeal fashlOn Economic Element Policy #B.21 Reserve several areas wzthIn the UGB for large-scale, campus-type, lzght manufacturing uses (See Metro Plan Dzagramfor 10catlOns so desIgnated) Economic Element Policy #B.23 ProvIde jor lzmIted mIXing of office, commerczal, and Industrzal uses under procedures WhICh clearly define the condltlOn under WhICh such uses shall be permItted and WhICh (a) preserve the sUltabIlzty of the affected areas for theIr przmary uses, (b) assure compatlbllzty, and (c) consIder the potentzal for Increased traffic congestlOn Date Received: The Villages at Marcola Meadows - Pre-ApplicatIOn Report - Wnrten Statement May 26, 2006 5 1'" ", "r~ 'I r"lhi"'iHtal '\... I ...J' "'....1 ~<<;'''''' ,"-T \ ~.. Economic Element Policy #B.24 Continue to evaluate other sztes in and around Springfield and Eugene for potentzal lzght- ) medzum industrzal and speczallzght industrzal uses, as well as potentzal reszdentzal uses Transportation Element Policy, Transportation System Improvements: Pedestrian #F.26 Provzde for a pedestrzan envzronment that zs well integrated wzth adjacent land uses and zs deszgned to enhance the safety, comfort, and convenzence of walking Public Facilities and Service Element Policy #G.l Extend the mznzmum level and full range of key urban faczlztzes and servzces in an orderly and efficient manner consistent with the growth management polzcles in Chapter II-C, relevant polzcles in thzs chapter, and other Metro Plan polzczes Public Facilities and Service Element Policy #G.2 Use the planned faczlztzes maps of the Publzc Faczlztzes and Servzces Plan to guzde the general locatIOn of water, wastewater, stormwater, und electrzcal prOjects in the metropolztan area Use local faczlzty master plans, refinement plans, and ordinances as the guzde for detazled plannzng and project zmplementatIOn C. Zoning Map Amendment Criteria From the Spnngfield Zone/Overlay DIstrict Change applIcation "A Complete ApplIcation ConsIsts of. 3 Before the Planning CommIssion can approve a Zone/Overlay DIstnct Change Request, there must be mformatIOn submItted by the applIcant whIch adequately supports the request If InsufficIent or unclear data IS submItted by the applIcant, there IS a good change that the request wIll be denied or delayed It is recommended that you hIre a professIOnal planner or land use attorney to prepare your findmgs " SDC 12.030 Criteria: (3) Zoning Map amendment crzterza of appro'val (a) Conszstency wzth applzcable Metro Plan polzczes and the Metro Plan dzagram, (b) Conszstency wzth applzcable Refinement Plans, Plan Dlstrzct Maps, Conceptual Development Plans and functIOnal plans, and (c) The property zs presently provzded wzth adequate publzc faczlztzes, servzces and transportatIOn networks to support the use, or these faczlztzes, servzces and transportatIOn networks are planned to be provzded concurrently wzth the development of the property (d) Legzslatzve Zonzng Map amendments that znvolve a Metro Plan Dzagram amendment shall 1 Meet the approval crzterza specified in Artzcle 7 of thzs code, and 2 Comply wzth Oregon Adminzstratzve Rule (OAR) 660-012-0060, where applzcable SDC 12.030(a), Conszstency wzth applzcable Metro Plan polzczes and the Metro Plan dzagram, Metro Plan PoliCIes: ThIs applicatIOn IS concurrent WIth a proposed Metro Plan Diagram Amendment As such, It IS reqUIred by SDC 12.030( d)l to address the Metro Plan DIagram Amendment cntena under SDC Article 7 WIth regard to conSIstency WIth Metro Plan polIcies, please refer to the response Date Received: The VIllages at Marcola Meadows - Pre-ApplIcatIOn Report - Wntten Statement May 26, 2006 Page 13 of 15 MAY 2 6 2006 c . . ; ~.,"IL {j" below addressmg the reqUIrements of SDC 12.030(d)1, specIfically those respondmg to SDC 7 .070(3)(b). Metro Plan Diagram ThIS applicatIOn IS concurrent WIth a proposed Metro Plan Diagram Amendment. There are three areas of the property, each wIth a dIfferent desIgnatIOn on the adopted Metro Plan "Land Use Diagram" These desIgnatIOns are MedIUm DensIty ResIdential, CommercIal, and Campus Industnal The Metro Plan DIagram Amendment proposes to change the area desIgnated Campus Industnal to LIght MedIUm Industnal, CommercIal, and MedIUm Density ResIdential WIth a MIxed Uses Overlay deSIgnatIOn on the CommercIal and MedIUm DensIty ReSIdentIal areas (See ExhIbit) If this concurrent amendment to the Metro Plan dIagram is approved, the proposed Zomng Map Amendment wIll be consistent WIth and Implement the Metro Plan "Land Use DIagram " SDC 12.030(b), Conslstency wlth applzcable Refinement Plans, Plan Dlstnct Maps, Conceptual Development Plans andfunctlOnal plans, Refinement Plan diagram There IS no applIcable Refinement Plan for the subject sIte: Plan DIstnct map: There is no applIcable Plan Distnct map for the subject sIte Conceptual Development Plan' A Conceptual Development Plan (98-02-47) for the subject sIte was approved by the Spnngfield Plannmg CommIssion on September 1 S\ 1998 The plan was proposed pursuant to SDC 921 030 whIch reqUIred approval of a Conceptual Development Plan pnor to development of land zoned Campus Industrial WIth approval of thIS Zomng Map Amendment and the concurrent Master Plan, CDP 98-02-47 wIll no longer be m effect SDC 12.030(c), The property lS presently provlded wzth adequate publzc facllztles, serVlces and transportatlOn networks to support the use, or these facllztles, serVlces and transportatlOn networks are planned to be provlded concurrently wlth the development of the property The final verSIOn of thIS document will mclude references to a Traffic Impact AnalYSIS and MItIgatIOns, and to adequacy of eXIstmg and planned faCIlItIes and serVIces provIded by the followmg faCIlIty plans TransPlan The Eugene-Sprmgfield TransportatlOn System Plan, Amended July 2002 Spnngfield Blcycle Plan, Adopted June 15, 1998 Spnngfield "Conceptual Road Network" map, Updated July 25, 2005 Eugene-Sprmgfield Metropolztan Area Publzc Facllztles and Servlces Plan, December 2001 Czty of Sprmgfield Stormwater Management Plan, ReVIew Draft, January 2004 Parks and RecreatlOn Comprehenslve Plan (Wlllamalane), Adopted March 2004 SDC 12.030(d), Leglslatlve Zonmg Map amendments that mvolve a Metro Plan Dzagram amendment shall 1 Meet the approval cntena specified Tn Artlcle 7 of thlS code, and 2 Comply wlth Oregon AdmTnlstratlve Rule (OAR) 660-012-0060, where applztf:!N;.fe Received: The VIllages at Marcola Meadows - Pre-ApplIcatIOn Report - Wntten Statement May 26, 2006 MA~115 ~dd6 (' , '~~ ):..n~iit)i-..., SDC 12.020(1)(b) "Quasi-judlczal Zomng Map amendments mvolve the applzcatlOn of eXlstmg polzcy to a specific factual settmg, generally affectmg a smgle or lzmzted group of prf?perlles and mayor may not mclude a Metro Plan dlagram amendment Quasl- judlczal Zonmg Map amendments shall be revlewed usmg Type III procedure, unless a Metro Plan dzagram amendment lS reqUlred In this case, the Qitasl-judlczal Zomng Map amendment shall be razsed to a Type IV reVlew " The Zomng Map Amendment is concurrent with a Metro Plan Diagram Amendment Therefore, It WIll be a legIslatIve actIOn revIewed through a Type IV process j SDC 12 030(d) 1, SDC ArtIcle 7 Critena In the final verSIOn of thIS document, text from the concurrent Metro Plan Amendment cntena responses wIll be mserted here SDC 12 030(d) 2, OAR 660-012-0060 Please refer to Metro Plan Amendment Goal 12 response withm matenals mserted above VI. CONCLUSION The Villages at Marcola Meadows IS an excItmg proposal, offering an enticmg mIX of reSIdentIal envIronments, commercial and specialty retml shopping opportumties, eatmg and dmmg establishments, and medIcal and profeSSIOnal offices designed to address the dmly needs of nearby reSIdents as well as the greater North Spnngfield neIghborhood The VIllages wIll be centered around a Pacific Northwest theme, generous m the use of contemporary, yet timeless natural matenals and hIgh qualIty SIte furmshmgs and pedestnan amemtIes. The VIllages, while each umque, WIll be held together WIth meandering waterways, natIve plant communitIes and continuous open space The VIllages at Marcola Meadows wIll be lIke no other place to lIve, work or shop m the Springfield Commumty. If you have any questIOns about the above applicatIOn, please do not hesitate to call Rick Satre, AICP, ASLA, at Satre AssocIates, P C (465-4721) Date Received: I ( , I MAY 2 6 2006 \ :~ :\ Original Submittal The Villages at Marcola Meadows - Pre-ApplicatIOn Report - Wntten Statement May 26, 2006 Page 15 of 15 ~ FOR ASSES~~~ENT AND - ...... ONLY ~ SEC. TAXA TI Qf]trv F SPRINGFIELD 17-0 -30-00 TL 1800 l-\1..\1o~ ~ '~~ 30 T.175. F LANE COUt SCALE 1- - 4Q( ~I . 'b ~ r r ~I It) ~I ('If ~ 0 I ~ ...... -- -w- a.. i ~ !{ w w !~ (I) ~ ~ "c 1700) 1800 47.85 AC. NORTH t c '" 25 ,AAQR -t 3q~ DU: uHf to' (po ~ _ I 6/-'0 ~__--_____ !-- SECTJa\I LINE " ~.1,,,'.z9.J!. II~ SITE/ ~- .... I ~ ~- / -1J1i{:5tf~ ,-:dbo~ ~?.. .. ~ \;. .. "- " 'k _""r _.e.. z:t1' ~~~ -'(~1 CD 0.4 19 15.7: I ~ .~ TAXATION ONLY NE 1/4 NE 1/4 5lC L~ I. I I~ r; 4VV VV IVI LANE COUNT', SCALE 1" ~ 100' NORTH + CITY OF SPRINGFIELD SEE MAP 1 7 ~ ~ 1/-u3-25-1 R/\N ~~ ~ 2300 52 69 AC PARCEL 3 1fJ,~, $8958'.1 10'3.0' 21 2100 SITE '05.D' 20 " 2000 g ~ 800 "" 8 19 9 1050 1900 b 900 ~ . ~ SB958"\I ID~O 18 10 1050 1000 ~~ !3r9.<7 0\)5:) ~\ ~~ ((5j~~ Date Received, MAY 2 6 2006 1'4. ;.; Il\\l' <) f{<?~ 1- I\j Onglnal SubmlttaL____ > 8 " , :;j;r:.;~t:~~~;:.:'t:;,;:~}', ~ L~:;:. ~:,' :~: ,;::',' . ;;:z. cnJ:E-j 't\1\.:F'I P.. 0 { ~&0 @J) \O)~ &0~"0 ----------~-~----- - SEE MAP 17 03 25 ~ 0 :R 975130 IJ 4299 >i Q' ~:q P,. ~Iin 1