Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016 12 20 AIS for Skyway Towers Monopole Cellular TowerAGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: 12/20/2016 Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Staff Contact/Dept.: Andy Limbird, DPW Staff Phone No: 541-726-3784 Estimated Time: 30 Minutes S P R I N G F I E L D PLANNING COMMISSION Council Goals: Maintain and Improve Infrastructure and Facilities ITEM TITLE: HIGH VISIBILITY CELLULAR TOWER APPLICATION—SKYWAY TOWERS LLC ON BEHALF OF T-MOBILE WIRELESS, CASES TYP316-00003 AND TYP216-00050 ACTION REQUESTED: Conduct a public hearing and approve, approve with amendments, or deny a proposal by Skyway Towers to construct a 150-foot tall monopole cellular tower on an existing, vacant industrial property at 2037 Laura Street. ISSUE STATEMENT: The applicant has submitted Discretionary Use and Site Plan Review applications for a new wireless telecommunication tower facility within an existing equipment storage yard at 2037 Laura Street. The proposed cellular tower is a standard monopole design with top-mounted antenna array, which is classified as a “High Visibility” wireless telecommunication facility requiring Planning Commission approval. Section 4.3-145.F of the Springfield Development Code (SDC) provides Discretionary Use standards for approving the cellular tower placement. Upon referral the City Council declined to conduct the hearing on this proposal. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Staff Report and Recommendation for Discretionary Use 2. Staff Report and Recommended Conditions of Approval for Site Plan Review 3. Skyway Towers Application and Exhibits 4. Written Comments from Suzanne Fenner 5. PC Final Order - Discretionary Use Request TYP316-00003 6. PC Final Order - Site Plan Review Application TYP216-00050 DISCUSSION: The proposed monopole tower facility is located at the northeast corner of an industrial property that abuts the western edge of Pioneer Parkway West north of the intersection with Q Street. The subject property is vacant and has been used for storage of construction equipment and machinery. The subject site is zoned mixed use Light-Medium Industrial/Community Commercial (LMI/CC) in accordance with the Springfield Zoning Map and the adopted Gateway Refinement Plan diagram. Properties in the immediate vicinity are zoned for mixed use commercial, industrial, and residential. The subject property and abutting properties are industrial in nature and staff has applied the provisions of the LMI district to the site. High Visibility cellular tower facilities are allowable in the Light Medium Industrial district subject to Discretionary Use approval. The proposed cellular tower is just west of the southbound travel lanes of Pioneer Parkway West and adjacent to the EWEB waterline that runs across north Springfield. There are existing residential dwellings in the vicinity of the subject site on the east side of Pioneer Parkway and to the west on Scotts Glen Drive. The nearest residentially-zoned property is about 190 feet east of the proposed tower site. Skyway Towers, on behalf of T-Mobile Wireless, has provided evidence of a substantial capacity and coverage gap in the mid-Springfield area (Attachment 3), particularly with modern data streaming demands. According to the applicant’s submittal, two of the T-Mobile cellular facilities currently providing coverage for this area of Springfield (a tower located near Gateway Mall and a tower on Quarry Hill) are exceeding capacity. Therefore, the proposed cellular tower facility would allow the wireless provider to improve service capacity in the area. Staff has prepared a staff report and recommendation based on the review criteria found in SDC Section 4.3-145.F and SDC Section 5.9-120 (Attachment 1). The findings presented by staff provide a substantive basis for conditionally approving a high visibility wireless telecommunication facility at the subject property. Staff has also prepared a staff report with recommended conditions of approval for the Site Plan Review application, which is based on the review criteria found in SDC Section 5.17-125 (Attachment 2). Staff received one written comment in response to the mailed notice of the Public Hearing for Discretionary Use and Site Plan Review applications. However, staff advises that the response was not related to the criteria of approval and therefore has not been included herein. Staff Report and Findings Springfield Planning Commission Discretionary Use Request (T-Mobile Wireless) Hearing Date: December 20, 2016 Case Number: TYP316-00003 Applicant: Justin Jones, Skyway Towers LLC on behalf of T-Mobile Wireless Site: 2037 Laura Street (Map 17-03-27-10, Tax Lot 2200) Request The application was submitted on October 28, 2016 and the public hearing on the matter of the Discretionary Use request is scheduled for December 20, 2016. The City conducted a Development Review Committee meeting on the Discretionary Use request on December 6, 2016. Site Information/Background The industrial property that is the subject of the Discretionary Use request is located at 2037 Laura Street and is used for storage of construction vehicles and machinery (Photos 1 & 2). The physical location of the proposed cellular tower is in the extreme northeast corner near the western edge of Pioneer Parkway West. The applicant is proposing to construct a 150-foot high monopole cellular tower with equipment cabinets and fenced enclosure about 30 feet from the eastern boundary and 24 feet from the northern boundary of the subject property. Monopole cellular towers are classified as “high visibility” wireless telecommunications system (WTS) facilities in accordance with Section 4.3-145.E of the Springfield Development Code (SDC). High visibility wireless telecommunications system facilities (ie. monopoles or lattice towers) are allowable in the Light Medium Industrial (LMI) District subject to Discretionary Use approval in accordance with SDC Section 4.3-145.F.5 and Table 4.3-1. Photo 1 – Site Air Photo Proposed Tower Location Attachment 1, Page 1 of 16 Photo 2 – Oblique Aerial View Looking East The property is zoned and designated mixed use Community Commercial/Light Medium Industrial (CC/LMI) in accordance with the Springfield Zoning Map and the adopted Gateway Refinement Plan diagram (Figure 1). Staff observes that the subject site is surrounded by existing industrial buildings and uses, so provisions of the LMI zoning district have been applied to this property. High visibility wireless telecommunication systems facilities are allowable in the Light Medium Industrial district subject to Discretionary Use approval in accordance with SDC 4.3-145.F.5, Table 4.3-1, and 4.3-145.H. The property has an undeveloped “panhandle” frontage on Laura Street along the west boundary. However, access to the site will be derived from the adjacent EWEB corridor or the industrial property to the north. The applicant is examining two alternatives for providing legal and physical access to the tower enclosure in the northeast corner of the site. Staff advises that either alternative would be acceptable, provided an executed and recorded access easement is obtained from the adjacent property owner. Utility connections will be extended from connection points along the perimeter of the property, including the Pioneer Parkway right-of-way. The applicant has submitted a Site Plan Review application under separate cover (Case TYP216-00050) for the proposed wireless telecommunications system facility and compound. A more detailed review of the site access and utility configuration is provided in the accompanying Site Plan Review report (Attachment 2). Notification and Written Comments Notification of the December 20, 2016 public hearing was sent to all property owners and residents within 300 feet of the site on November 28, 2016. Notification was also published in the legal notices section of The Register Guard on December 13, 2016. Public notification was also sent to all property owners and residents within 300 feet of the site on November 22, 2016 for the companion Site Plan Review application submitted under separate cover (Case TYP216-00050). Staff received one written response from Suzanne Fenner, 328 Scotts Glen Drive, Springfield, 97477 (Attachment 4). Staff advises that the written comments pertain specifically to radio frequencies and electromagnetic radiation emanating from wireless telecommunications system facilities. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is responsible for regulatory oversight of radio Proposed Tower Laura St Shady Lp Scotts Glen Dr Q St Shelley St Attachment 1, Page 2 of 16 frequency emissions. In accordance with the Federal Telecommunications Act (1996) and SDC 4.3-145.F, the City cannot prohibit the provision of personal wireless services on the basis of radio frequency emissions or other federally-regulated standards. For this reason, staff recommends that the Planning Commission accepts Ms. Fenner’s comments as information only. The respondent was encouraged to submit new testimony for the public hearing and/or testify at the public hearing meeting and to direct their comments specifically to the criteria of approval for this proposal. Figure 1 – Zoning Map Extract Zoning Map Legend Light Medium Industrial (LMI) Low Density Residential (LDR) Community Commercial (CC) High Density Residential (HDR) Mixed Use CC/LMI Public Land and Open Space (PLO) Criteria of Approval Section 5.9-100 of the SDC contains the criteria of approval for the decision maker to utilize during review of Discretionary Use requests. The Criteria of Discretionary Use approval are: SDC 5.9-120 CRITERIA A. The proposed use conforms with applicable: Proposed Tower Location Scotts Glen Dr Shelley St SITE Attachment 1, Page 3 of 16 1. Provisions of the Metro Plan; 2. Refinement plans; 3. Plan District standards; 4. Conceptual Development Plans or 5. Specific Development Standards in this Code; B. The site under consideration is suitable for the proposed use, considering: 1. The location, size, design and operating characteristics of the use (operating characteristics include but are not limited to parking, traffic, noise, vibration, emissions, light, glare, odor, dust, visibility, safety, and aesthetic considerations, where applicable); 2. Adequate and safe circulation exists for vehicular access to and from the proposed site, and on-site circulation and emergency response as well as pedestrian, bicycle and transit circulation; 3. The natural and physical features of the site, including but not limited to, riparian areas, regulated wetlands, natural stormwater management/drainage areas and wooded areas shall be adequately considered in the project design; and 4. Adequate public facilities and services are available, including but not limited to, utilities, streets, storm drainage facilities, sanitary sewer and other public infrastructure. C. Any adverse effects of the proposed use on adjacent properties and on the public can be mitigated through the: 1. Application of other Code standards (including, but not limited to: buffering from less intensive uses and increased setbacks); 2. Site Plan Review approval conditions, where applicable; 3. Other approval conditions that may be required by the Approval Authority; and/or 4. A proposal by the applicant that meets or exceeds the cited Code standards and/or approval conditions. D. Applicable Discretionary Use criteria in other Sections of this Code: 1. Wireless telecommunications systems facilities requiring Discretionary Use approval are exempt from Subsections A-C above, but shall comply with the approval criteria specified in Section 4.3-145. 2. Alternative design standards for multifamily development are exempt from Subsections A – C above, but shall comply with the approval criteria specified in Section 3.2-245 Attachment 1, Page 4 of 16 3. Fences requiring Discretionary Use approval are exempt from Subsections A – C above, but shall comply with the approval criteria specified in Section 4.4-115.C. 4. The siting of public elementary, middle and high schools requiring Discretionary Use approval is exempt from Subsections A – C above, but shall comply with the approval criteria specified in Section 4.7-195. Finding: Wireless telecommunications systems facilities are exempt from Criteria A-C in accordance with Section 5.9-120.D.1 of the Springfield Development Code. Therefore, only Criterion D is listed herein. Proposed Findings In Support of Discretionary Use Approval Criterion: Discretionary Use criteria of approval: D. Applicable Discretionary Use criteria in other Sections of this Code: 1. Wireless telecommunications systems facilities requiring Discretionary Use approval are exempt from Subsections A-C above, but shall comply with the approval criteria specified in Section 4.3-145. Procedural Finding: The approval criteria for wireless telecommunications system facilities are listed in SDC 4.3-145.F – General Standards. The proposed monopole tower is classified as a “high visibility” facility in accordance with SDC 4.3-145.E. The applicable standards for wireless telecommunications systems facilities are as follows: 1) Design for co-location. All new towers shall be designed to structurally accommodate the maximum number of additional users technically practicable. Applicant’s Submittal: “The tower will be able to collocate up to four carriers with the antennas and ground equipment. The exact number of antennas for the carriers will be determined upon an engineering study for each.” Finding 1: The applicant has designed the wireless telecommunications system (WTS) facility to accommodate additional users, thereby allowing for co-location at the subject site. The applicant’s submittal (Attachment 3 to the AIS) shows the location of at least three additional antenna arrays that could be mounted below the T-Mobile Wireless antenna array. Tower loading for the currently proposed and potential future antenna arrays will be reviewed through the building permitting process for the facility. Conclusion: This standard has been met. 2) Demonstrated Need for New WTS Facilities. Applications shall demonstrate that the proposed WTS facility is necessary to close a significant gap in service coverage or capacity for the carrier and is the least intrusive means to close the significant gap. Applicant’s Submittal: “The purpose of the [proposed site development] is to expand and complete cell phone coverage for T-Mobile customers. The geographic service area is indicated in the applicant’s submitted study and show a need for this tower in the area selected. T-Mobile’s FCC license requires that they provide the best possible coverage to Attachment 1, Page 5 of 16 their customers along with 911 emergency service, and when there is a gap in coverage they are obligated to correct that issue.” Finding 2: The applicant’s submittal (Attachment 3) shows the existing gap in coverage, along with the location of the existing Verizon Wireless facilities near Gateway Mall and on Quarry Hill. According to the applicant’s submittal the coverage and capacity gaps can be addressed by the proposed monopole tower. Conclusion: This standard has been met. 3) Lack of Coverage and Lack of Capacity. The application shall demonstrate that the gap in service cannot be closed by upgrading other existing facilities. In doing so, evidence shall clearly support a conclusion that the gap results from a lack of coverage and not a lack of capacity to achieve adequate service. If the proposed WTS facility is to improve capacity, evidence shall further justify why other methods for improving service capacity are not reasonable, available or effective. Applicant’s Submittal: “This site was chosen due to a gap in coverage for T-Mobile in the area and also to expand their coverage. T-Mobile has two towers within a 5-mile radius: one is located at 800 8th Street to the south of our proposed tower site that does not cover the gap in coverage and a second tower at 3022 Gateway Loop to the [northwest] of our proposed tower site; this tower also does not give coverage to the area of our proposed site. Sprint Wireless has a tower at Olympic and 28th Street that is at full capacity and has no ground space available; it would not provide the coverage that T-Mobile need due to tower height and location. The two existing sites [at Gateway Loop and 8th Street] are already experiencing congestion for most of the time of the day. By mid-2017 this will become critical and will severely impact our customer experience in Springfield. Also, areas located northeast and southwest of the proposed site are experiencing weak coverage, not suitable for in-building servicing [and] being limited to in-vehicle service only.” Finding 3: The applicant’s submittal indicates that there is an existing coverage gap in the area to be served by the proposed monopole tower. The proposed facility addresses the coverage gap according to the applicant’s submittal and supporting information. Conclusion: This standard has been met. 4) Identify the Least Intrusive Alternative for Providing Coverage. The application shall demonstrate a good faith effort to identify and evaluate less intrusive alternatives, including, but not limited to, less sensitive sites, alternative design systems, alternative tower designs, the use of repeaters, or multiple facilities. Subsection F.5. defines the type of WTS facilities that are allowed in each zoning district. Applicant’s Submittal: “This site was chosen due to a gap in coverage for T-Mobile in the area and also to expand their coverage. Several candidates were reviewed for the site but this site provided the best screening from Pioneer Parkway W (large arborvitaes along the east and north property lines) as well as access to power and fiber lines (along the east side of Pioneer Parkway W). The lease area is also used by the property owner for equipment and is located in a light industrial setting. The nearest residential is approximately 300 feet to the east and it is screened by the arborvitaes along the east property line of our lease area, large pine trees along Pioneer Parkway W along both sides of the Parkway as well as in the median Attachment 1, Page 6 of 16 area. The residential area is not going to be able to see the tower (see the enclosed photosims) and will not be impacted visually.” Finding 4: The applicant’s submittal and supporting information demonstrates that the location and design of the proposed monopole tower is necessary to address the coverage and capacity gap in this area of Springfield. Conclusion: This standard has been met. 5) Location of WTS Facilities by Type. Subsection E. defines various types of WTS facilities by their visual impact. These are: high visibility, moderate visibility, low visibility and stealth facilities. Table 4.3-1 lists the type of WTS facilities allowed in each of Springfield’s zoning districts. Finding 5: In accordance with SDC 4.3-145.E, wireless transmissions system facilities that are monopole or lattice towers are considered “high visibility”. In accordance with SDC Table 4.3-1, high visibility facilities are allowable in the Light Medium Industrial district. Finding 6: In accordance with SDC 4.3-145.H, high visibility wireless transmissions system facilities require Type III Planning Commission review. The applicant has submitted concurrent Discretionary Use (Case TYP316-00003) and Site Plan Review (Case TYP216-00050) applications for Planning Commission review. Pursuant to SDC 4.3-145l.H.4.a, on November 14, 2016, this application was referred to the Springfield City Council for consideration of transferring the review and approval authority from the Planning Commission to the City Council. The City Council declined this opportunity to replace the Planning Commission as approval authority for this application, therefore a public hearing before the Planning Commission has been scheduled for December 20, 2016. Conclusion: This standard has been met. 6) Maximum Number of High Visibility WTS Facilities. No more than 1 high visibility facility is allowed on any 1 lot/parcel. Finding 7: The applicant is proposing a high visibility wireless transmissions system facility on the subject property, and there are no other similar facilities on the property or adjoining sites. Conclusion: This standard has been met. 7) Separation Between Towers. No new WTS tower may be installed closer than 2,000 feet from any existing or proposed tower unless supporting findings can be made under Subsections F.2, 3 and 4 by the Approval Authority. Finding 8: The applicant’s submittal confirms that the nearest wireless telecommunications system tower operated by T-Mobile Wireless or any other carrier is more than 2,000 feet from the subject site. Conclusion: This standard has been met. Attachment 1, Page 7 of 16 8) WTS Facilities Adjacent to Residentially Zoned Property. In order to ensure public safety, all towers located on or adjacent to any residential zoning district shall be set back from all residential property lines by a distance at least equal to the height of the facility, including any antennas or other appurtenances. The setback shall be measured from that part of the WTS tower that is closest to the neighboring residentially zoned property. Finding 9: The subject property is zoned Light Medium Industrial, and therefore the proposed facility is not on a residential zoning district. The proposed tower location is approximately 30 feet inside the east boundary of the site and is also separated by the 170-foot wide Pioneer Parkway corridor from the nearest residential property. The proposed tower is 150 feet high, which ensures that the tower is set back more than the height of the tower from the nearest residential property. The applicant’s submittal demonstrates that the tower will be sufficiently removed from residential properties in accordance with SDC 4.3-145.F.8. Conclusion: This standard has been met. 9) Historic Buildings and Structures. No WTS facility shall be allowed on any building or structure, or in any district, that is listed on any Federal, State or local historic register unless a finding is made by the Approval Authority that the proposed facility will have no adverse effect on the appearance of the building, structure, or district. No change in architecture and no high or moderate visibility WTS facilities are permitted on any building or any site within a historic district. Proposed WTS facilities in the Historic Overlay District area also subject to the applicable provisions of Section 3.3-900. Finding 10: The proposed wireless telecommunications system facility is not located on a historic building, or within the designated Historic Overlay District as depicted in SDC 3.3- 910. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Conclusion: This standard has been met. 10) Equipment Location. The following location standards shall apply to WTS facilities: a. No WTS facility shall be located in a front, rear or side yard building setback in any base zone and no portion of any antenna array shall extend beyond the property lines; Finding 11: In accordance with SDC 3.2-420, the minimum front yard and through lot rear yard building setback is 10 feet. The subject property does not abut residential or Campus Industrial properties so there are no other specific building setback requirements. Finding 12: The proposed monopole tower, equipment cabinets, fenced enclosure, and related appurtenances are not located within a required building setback area and the top- mounted antenna array does not project into a setback area or across a property line. Conclusion: This sub-element of the standard has been met. b. Where there is no building, the WTS facility shall be located at least 30 feet from a property line abutting a street; Attachment 1, Page 8 of 16 Finding 13: In accordance with SDC 3.2-420, the minimum front yard and through lot rear yard building setback is 10 feet. The subject property has frontage on Laura Street along the west boundary and abuts Pioneer Parkway West along the east boundary. Because there are no existing buildings on the property, the 30-foot standard applies for the front and through lot rear yard setback. The applicant’s proposed site plan indicates that the tower is to be set back at least 30 feet from the east (rear) property line. Conclusion: This sub-element of the standard has been met. c. For guyed WTS towers, all guy anchors shall be located at least 50 feet from all property lines. Finding 14: According to the applicant’s project narrative, the proposed monopole tower is a freestanding structure and does not require guy wire support. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Conclusion: This sub-element of the standard has been met. 11) Tower Height. Towers may exceed the height limits otherwise provided for in this Code. However, all towers greater than the height limit of the base zone shall require Discretionary Use approval through a Type III review process, subject to the approval criteria specified in Subsection I. Finding 15: The subject property is not contiguous with any residentially zoned properties, but the LDR zoning district abuts the eastern boundary of the site. In accordance with SDC 3.2- 420, the maximum height of a building or structure in the LMI District is no greater than that permitted in the LDR District for a distance of 50 feet. The maximum building height in the LDR District is 30 feet. Finding 16: The Development Code standard for building height limitation does not specify a 50-foot setback from a residential property line, only the zoning district boundary. Staff observes that the LDR zoning district boundary includes the 170-foot wide Pioneer Parkway corridor immediately east of the subject site. Therefore, the effective separation distance between the nearest residential property line and the proposed monopole tower is approximately 200 feet. For this reason, staff recommends that the subject Discretionary Use permit includes a waiver to the building height limitations applicable to the eastern 50 feet of the site. RECOMMENDED CONDITION OF APPROVAL: 1. The WTS facility is approved with a waiver to the building height limitations applicable to the eastern 50 feet of the subject property. A 150-foot tall WTS tower is thereby allowable with a 30-foot setback from the eastern property line where a 50-foot setback otherwise would be required in accordance with SDC 3.2-420. Conclusion: As conditioned herein, this standard has been met. 12) Accessory Building Size. All accessory buildings and structures built to contain equipment accessory to a WTS facility shall not exceed 12 feet in height unless a greater height is necessary and required by a condition of approval to maximize architectural Attachment 1, Page 9 of 16 integration. Each accessory building or structure located on any residential or public land and open space zoned property is limited to 200 square feet, unless approved through the Discretionary Use process. Finding 17: As depicted in the applicant’s submittal, the proposed equipment cabinets will be approximately 8 feet in height. The cabinets are not considered an occupied building space, but will likely require building permits for construction. Finding 18: In accordance with SDC 4.7-105, accessory structures are to be constructed in conjunction with or after construction of a primary structure. The monopole tower will be considered the primary structure on the property until further site development occurs. Therefore, an accessory structure is allowable on the property. Conclusion: This standard has been met. 13) Visual Impact. All WTS facilities shall be designed to minimize the visual impact to the greatest extent practicable by means of placement, screening, landscaping, and camouflage. All facilities shall also be designed to be compatible with existing architectural elements, building materials, and other site characteristics. The applicant shall use the least visible antennas reasonably available to accomplish the coverage objectives. All high visibility and moderate visibility facilities shall be sited in a manner to cause the least detriment to the viewshed of abutting properties, neighboring properties, and distant properties. Finding 19: As stated in the applicant’s narrative, the ground-mounted equipment is proposed within an area screened by arborvitae hedges along the eastern and northern boundaries of the property. The applicant is proposing to retain the screening vegetation and to replace arborvitaes that would be removed to accommodate utility connections along the eastern boundary of the site. Finding 20: The applicant has submitted sketches and photo simulations of the proposed monopole tower from nearby vantage points (see Attachment 3). The applicant’s narrative states that the existing sequoia and fir trees along the Pioneer Parkway corridor will provide buffering and visual screening from nearby residential areas. Conclusion: This standard has been met. 14) Minimize Visibility. Colors and materials for WTS facilities shall be nonreflective and chosen to minimize visibility. Facilities, including support equipment and buildings, shall be painted or textured using colors to match or blend with the primary background, unless required by any other applicable law. Finding 21: The applicant has not specifically stated the colors of the monopole tower and ground-mounted equipment in the submittal. The photo simulations depict a white monopole tower that could be highly reflective and conspicuous. Staff advises that the tower, equipment cabinets, and related appurtenances will need to be constructed with neutral, non-reflective colors to minimize visibility. The proposed finish materials and colors will need to be identified on the Final Site Plan for the facility. Attachment 1, Page 10 of 16 RECOMMENDED CONDITION OF APPROVAL: 2. The applicant shall use neutral, non-reflective colors for the monopole tower, ground-mounted equipment, and related appurtenances. The selected colors and materials shall minimize the visibility of the facilities to the greatest extent practicable. Conclusion: As conditioned herein, this standard has been met. 15) Camouflaged Facilities. All camouflaged WTS facilities shall be designed to visually and operationally blend into the surrounding area in a manner consistent with existing development on adjacent properties. The facility shall also be appropriate for the specific site. In other words, it shall not “stand out” from its surrounding environment. Finding 22: The proposed monopole tower is not defined as a camouflage facility. The surrounding properties are developed with industrial buildings and structures, and there is a high voltage power transmission line that runs along the western edge of the Pioneer Parkway corridor (see photo simulations in Attachment 3). Conclusion: This standard has been met. 16) Façade-Mounted Antenna. Façade-mounted antennas shall be architecturally integrated into the building design and otherwise made as unobtrusive as possible. If possible, antennas shall be located entirely within an existing or newly created architectural feature so as to be completely screened from view. Façade-mounted antennas shall not extend more than 2 feet out from the building face. Finding 23: The proposed monopole tower is a freestanding structure and is not mounted on a building façade. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Conclusion: This standard has been met. 17) Roof-Mounted Antenna. Roof-mounted antennas shall be constructed at the minimum height possible to serve the operator’s service area and shall be set back as far from the building edge as possible or otherwise screened to minimize visibility from the public right-of-way and adjacent properties. Finding 24: The proposed monopole tower is a freestanding structure and is not mounted on a rooftop. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Conclusion: This standard has been met. 18) Compliance with Photo Simulations. As a condition of approval and prior to final staff inspection of the WTS facility, the applicant shall submit evidence, e.g. photos, sufficient to prove that the facility is in substantial conformance with photo simulations provided with the initial application. Non-conformance shall require any necessary modification to achieve compliance within 90 days of notifying the applicant. Finding 25: The applicant’s photo simulations and project narrative do not indicate that the proposed wireless transmissions system facility will be as shown on the pictures, or that a Attachment 1, Page 11 of 16 specific color palette has been selected for the tower and appurtenances. Staff is recommending Condition #2 for the selection of neutral, non-reflective colors to be used for the tower, ground-mounted equipment, and related appurtenances. The applicant’s photo simulations also will need to be updated to incorporate any color and material changes to the tower and associated equipment. RECOMMENDED CONDITION OF APPROVAL: 3. Prior to approval of the Final Site Plan (Case TYP216-00050), the applicant shall submit photo simulations of the monopole tower, ground-mounted equipment, and related appurtenances that accurately depict the colors and materials to be used for the project. Conclusion: As conditioned herein, this standard has been met. 19) Noise. Noise from any equipment supporting the WTS facility shall comply with the regulations specified in OAR 340-035-0035. Finding 26: The applicant has not provided a noise analysis for the project. The proposed equipment cabinets are freestanding and may be equipped with cooling units that would generate some noise. The applicant is not proposing to install a backup power generator that would cycle periodically so noise generated by the facility will be minimal. Because the proposed tower location is adjacent to the busy Pioneer Parkway corridor and within a developed industrial area, staff does not anticipate that the proposed equipment cabinets will produce noises levels that regularly approach or exceed existing ambient noise levels. Additionally, the proposed project site is more than 170 feet from the nearest residential dwellings and is buffered by surrounding screening vegetation. Conclusion: This standard has been met. 20) Signage. No signs, striping graphics, or other attention-getting devices are permitted on any WTS facility except for warning and safety signage that shall: a. Have a surface area of no more than 3 square feet; b. Be affixed to a fence or equipment cabinet; and c. Be limited to no more than 2 signs, unless more are required by any other applicable law. Finding 27: The applicant’s site plan does not include information on signage. Staff anticipates that the equipment shelter and fence will need to be equipped with federally- and state-required warning and safety signs pertaining to radio frequency fields and other applicable hazards. The safety signs will need to meet the limitations of SDC 4.3-145.F.20 in all other respects, including but not limited to total surface area and placement of the signs. Staff recommends that the applicable signage information is included in the Final Site Plan for the WTS facility. Attachment 1, Page 12 of 16 RECOMMENDED CONDITION OF APPROVAL: 4. The Final Site Plan (Case TYP216-00050) shall include a plan sheet detailing the location, size, and type of required safety and warning signs to be installed at the WTS facility. Any required signage shall comply with the provisions of SDC 4.3- 145.F.20. Conclusion: As conditioned herein, this standard has been met. 21) Traffic Obstruction. Maintenance vehicles servicing WTS facilities located in the public or private right-of-way shall not park on the traveled way or in a manner that obstructs traffic. Finding 28: The proposed wireless telecommunications system facility is directly accessible via private driveways off Laura Street. The applicant’s proposed site plan provides for access and parking that is internal to the site and set back from the public right-of-way. As proposed, the site design will not cause traffic to be obstructed. Access to the subject property is discussed in greater detail in the accompanying staff report for Case TYP216-00050 (Attachment 2). Conclusion: This standard has been met. 22) Parking. No net loss in required on-site parking spaces shall occur as a result of the installation of any WTS facility. Finding 29: The proposed tower and equipment enclosure is located in a the extreme northeast corner of a vacant industrial property that is currently used for storing construction equipment and machinery. The applicant is proposing to use an existing driveway approach from Laura Street for access to the fenced equipment compound. Vehicles accessing the WTS compound would park on a gravel pad adjacent to the equipment enclosure and tower, and no parking spaces would be displaced. Therefore, the proposed wireless transmissions system facility does not appreciably affect the availability of parking or building area for a future industrial development on the site. Conclusion: This standard has been met. 23) Sidewalks and Pathways. Cabinets and other equipment shall not impair pedestrian use of sidewalks or other pedestrian paths or bikeways on public or private land. Finding 30: The proposed wireless transmissions system facility is located internal to the industrial site. There are no existing or planned pedestrian or bicycle facilities that pass near or through the area occupied by the proposed development. Therefore, the proposal will not have an adverse impact on future pedestrian or bicycle movements. Conclusion: This standard has been met. 24) Lighting. WTS facilities shall not include any beacon lights or strobe lights, unless required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or other applicable authority. If beacon lights or strobe lights are required, the Approval Authority shall review any available alternatives and approve the design with the least visual impact. All other site Attachment 1, Page 13 of 16 lighting for security and maintenance purposes shall be shielded and directed downward, and shall comply with the outdoor lighting standards in Section 4.5-100, unless required by any other applicable law. Applicant’s Submittal: “There will be no lighting or marking required of this site.” Finding 31: The applicant’s submittal indicates that no beacon or strobe lights are planned or required for the monopole tower. Additionally, the equipment cabinets are not within an enclosed building or structure so no outdoor lights are proposed for the site. If site lighting is to be installed within the fenced compound, the lights will need to be fully shielded and downcast to prevent glare and light trespass onto nearby properties and public rights-of-way. Conclusion: This standard has been met. 25) Landscaping. For WTS facilities with towers that exceed the height limitations of the base zone, at least 1 row of evergreen trees or shrubs, not less than 4 feet high at the time of planting, and spaced out not more than 15 feet apart, shall be provided in the landscape setback. Shrubs shall be a variety that can be expected to grow to form a continuous hedge at least 5 feet in height within 2 years of planting. Trees and shrubs in the vicinity of guy wires shall be of a kind that would not exceed 20 feet in height or would not affect the stability of the guys. In all other cases, the landscaping, screening and fence standards specified in Section 4.4-100 shall apply. Finding 32: The proposed wireless transmissions system tower exceeds the height limitations of the base Light Medium Industrial zoning district because it is proposed within 30 feet of the eastern property line. The applicant is proposing to retain and replace existing evergreen shrubs that are planted along the eastern and northern boundaries of the property. The proposed screening vegetation meets the landscaping requirement for the site. Conclusion: This standard has been met. 26) Prohibited WTS Facilities. a. Any high or moderate visibility WTS facility in the Historic Overlay District. b. Any WTS facility in the public right-of-way that severely limits access to abutting property, which limits public access or use of the sidewalk, or which constitutes a vision clearance violation. c. Any detached WTS facility taller than 150 feet above finished grade at the base of the tower. Finding 33: As stated and depicted in the applicant’s project narrative and submittal materials, the proposed monopole tower is an allowable facility in the Light Medium Industrial zoning district. The proposed development is not within the Historic Overlay District or the public right-of-way. The top of the tower structure is 150 feet above finished grade. As such, the proposed monopole tower is not classified as a prohibited wireless transmissions system facility. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Conclusion: This standard has been met. Attachment 1, Page 14 of 16 27) Speculation. No application shall be accepted or approved for a speculation WTS tower, ie. from an applicant that simply constructs towers and leases tower space to service carriers, but is not a service carrier, unless the applicant submits a binding written commitment or executed lease from a service carrier to utilize or lease space on the tower. Finding 34: The applicant’s project narrative and submittal materials indicate that the wireless carrier (T-Mobile) is proposing the monopole tower as a necessary component of their network facilities in Springfield, both in terms of maintaining coverage and improving capacity. Therefore, this standard does not apply. Conclusion: This standard has been met. 2. Alternative design standards for multifamily development are exempt from Subsections A – C above, but shall comply with the approval criteria specified in Section 3.2-245. Finding 35: The proposed development is not a multi-family residential facility. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. 3. Fences requiring Discretionary Use approval are exempt from Subsections A – C above, but shall comply with the approval criteria specified in Section 4.4-115.C. Finding 36: The proposed development does not include a fence requiring Discretionary Use approval. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. 4. The siting of public elementary, middle and high schools requiring Discretionary Use approval is exempt from Subsections A – C above, but shall comply with the approval criteria specified in Section 4.7-195. Finding 37: The proposed development is not a public school. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. Conclusion: Staff has reviewed the application and supporting information submitted by the applicant for the Discretionary Use request. Based on the above-listed criteria, and with the recommended conditions contained herein, staff finds that the proposal meets criterion D.1 of SDC 5.9-120. Staff recommends conditional support for the request because the proposal meets the stated criteria for Discretionary Use approval. Additionally, approval of the Discretionary Use would facilitate conditional approval of the accompanying Site Plan Review application for a wireless telecommunications system submitted under separate cover (Case TYP215-00050). Conditions of Approval SDC Section 5.9-125 allows for the Approval Authority to attach conditions of approval to a Discretionary Use request to ensure the application fully meets the criteria of approval. The specific language from the code section is cited below: 5.9-125 CONDITIONS The Approval Authority may attach conditions as may be reasonably necessary in order to allow the Discretionary Use approval to be granted. Attachment 1, Page 15 of 16 Staff has reviewed the Discretionary Use request and supporting information provided by the applicant, and recommends four conditions of approval as summarized here: RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The WTS facility is approved with a waiver to the building height limitations applicable to the eastern 50 feet of the subject property. A 150-foot tall WTS tower is thereby allowable with a 30-foot setback from the eastern property line where a 50-foot setback otherwise would be required in accordance with SDC 3.2-420. 2. The applicant shall use neutral, non-reflective colors for the monopole tower, ground-mounted equipment, and related appurtenances. The selected colors and materials shall minimize the visibility of the facilities to the greatest extent practicable. 3. Prior to approval of the Final Site Plan (Case TYP216-00050), the applicant shall submit photo simulations of the monopole tower, ground-mounted equipment, and related appurtenances that accurately depict the colors and materials to be used for the project. 4. The Final Site Plan (Case TYP216-00050) shall include a plan sheet detailing the location, size, and type of required safety and warning signs to be installed at the WTS facility. Any required signage shall comply with the provisions of SDC 4.3-145.F.20. The proposed wireless telecommunications system facility has been reviewed and recommended conditions of approval are described in the Site Plan Review application for this development submitted under separate cover (Case TYP215-00050) and incorporated herein by reference. Based on the applicant’s submittal and testimony provided at the public hearing, the Planning Commission may choose to apply additional conditions of approval as necessary to comply with the Discretionary Use criteria. Additional Approvals The subject Discretionary Use request is the necessary first step for the applicant to proceed with development plans for the site. The companion Site Plan Review application (Case TYP215-00050) is intended to address the specific Development Code and detailed site planning requirements for the proposed wireless telecommunications system facility. Attachment 1, Page 16 of 16 Type II TENTATIVE SITE PLAN REVIEW, staff report & RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS Project Name: Skyway Towers Site Plan Review Project Proposal: Construct a 150-foot high monopole wireless transmissions system facility on a vacant industrial site Case Number: TYP216-00050 Project Location: 2037 Laura Street (Map 17-03-27-10, TL 2200) Zoning: Mixed Use Light Medium Industrial/Community Commercial (LMI/CC) Comprehensive Plan Designation: LMI/CC (Gateway Refinement Plan) Overlay Districts: Drinking Water Protection Overlay District (DWP) Pre-Submittal Meeting Date: 10/11/2016 Application Submitted Date: 10/28/2016 Date of Planning Commission Decision: 12/20/2016 Appeal Deadline Date: 1/4/2017 Associated Applications: PRE16-00045 (Development Issues Meeting); PRE16-00057 (Pre-Submittal); TYP316-00003 (Discretionary Use) APPLICANT’S DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TEAM Applicant: Justin Jones Skyway Towers LLC 3637 Madaca Lane Tampa FL 33618 Applicant’s Representative: Tony Wilson AMS Wireless 1068 E. Carter Street Boise ID 83706 Property Owner: John Hyland John Hyland Construction Inc. 1941 Laura Street Springfield OR 97477 CITY OF SPRINGFIELD’S DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TEAM POSITION REVIEW OF NAME PHONE Project Manager Planning Andy Limbird 541-726-3784 Transportation Planning Engineer Transportation Michael Liebler 541-736-1034 Public Works Engineer Utilities Clayton McEachern 541-736-1036 Public Works Engineer Sanitary & Storm Sewer Clayton McEachern 541-726-1036 Deputy Fire Marshal Fire and Life Safety Gilbert Gordon 541-726-2293 Building Official Building David Bowlsby 541-736-1029 Shady Lp Proposed Tower Location Laura Street Attachment 2, Page 1 of 14 Page 2 of 14 Site Information: The subject development site is a vacant, panhandle-shaped industrial property on the east side of Laura Street just north of the intersection with Scotts Glen Drive. The property is classified as a “through lot” because the rear (east) boundary abuts the western edge of Pioneer Parkway West. The industrial property is vacant and currently provides a gravel storage yard for construction equipment and machinery. Access to the property is via a gravel driveway that crosses the adjoining EWEB corridor. The proposed wireless telecommunications system facility is a 150-foot tall monopole tower to be located in the extreme northeast corner of the property. In accordance with SDC 4.3-145.E and SDC Table 4.3-1, wireless telecommunications system facilities consisting of standard monopoles or lattice towers are classified as high visibility facilities. High visibility facilities are allowable in the Light Medium Industrial (LMI) district subject to Discretionary Use approval. The applicant submitted a concurrent Discretionary Use Request for a 150-foot tall monopole wireless telecommunications system facility under separate cover (Case TYP316-00003). The Springfield Planning Commission will be conducting a public hearing on the Discretionary Use request at the regular meeting on December 20, 2016. The site is zoned and designated mixed use Light Medium Industrial/Community Commercial (LMI/CC) in accordance with the Springfield Zoning Map and the adopted Gateway Refinement Plan diagram. Other properties in the vicinity of the project area are zoned LMI/CC (including properties that are contiguous with the subject site); Public Land and Open Space (south of the site); and Low Density Residential (east and west of the site). The site is within the mapped 20+ Year Time of Travel Zone (TOTZ) for the Sports Way drinking water wellhead and, therefore, is not subject to specific requirements of the Drinking Water Protection Overlay District, SDC 3.3-200. However, provisions for water quality protection during site construction and operation have been inserted as conditions of this decision in order to protect local surface waters and groundwater resources. DECISION: This decision grants Tentative Site Plan Approval. The standards of the Springfield Development Code (SDC) applicable to each criterion of Site Plan Approval are listed herein and are satisfied by the submitted plans unless specifically noted with findings and conditions necessary for compliance. Final Site Plans must conform to the submitted plans as conditioned herein. This is a limited land use decision made according to City code and state statutes. Unless appealed, the decision is final. Please read this document carefully. (See Page 13 for a summary of the recommended conditions of approval.) OTHER USES AUTHORIZED BY THE DECISION: None. Future development will be in accordance with the provisions of the Springfield Development Code, filed easements and agreements, and all applicable local, state and federal regulations. REVIEW PROCESS: This application is reviewed under Type II procedures listed in Springfield Development Code Section 5.1-130 and the site plan review criteria of approval SDC 5.17-125. The subject application was submitted and deemed complete on October 28, 2016. Therefore, this application was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission on the 53rd day of the 120 days mandated by the State. Pursuant to SDC 4.3-145.H.4.a, on November 14, 2016, the accompanying Discretionary Use application (Case TYP316-00003) was referred to the Springfield City Council for consideration of transferring the review and approval authority from the Planning Commission to the City Council. The City Council declined this opportunity to replace the Planning Commission as approval authority for the Discretionary Use application. Therefore, a public hearing before the Planning Commission was scheduled for December 20, 2016. Procedural Finding: Applications for Limited Land Use Decisions require the notification of property owners/occupants within 300 feet of the subject property allowing for a 14 day comment period on the application (SDC Sections 5.1-130 and 5.2-115). The applicant and parties submitting written comments during the notice period have appeal rights and are mailed a copy of this decision for consideration (See Written Comments below and Appeals at the end of this decision). Attachment 2, Page 2 of 14 Page 3 of 14 Procedural Finding: On December 6, 2016, the City’s Development Review Committee reviewed the proposed plans (9 Sheets – AMS Wireless, Sheets T-1, A-1(1), A-1(2), A-3 and PS-1 to PS-3; and SMW Engineering Group Sheets 1 and 2), Coverage and Capacity Study, and other supporting information. City staff’s review comments have been reduced to findings and recommended conditions only as necessary for compliance with the Site Plan Review criteria of SDC 5.17-125. Finding: The Planning Commission will be conducting a public hearing on the proposed site plan application on December 20, 2016. The City has not received any written testimony that is germane to the criteria of approval for the Discretionary Use or Site Plan Review applications submitted for the proposed development. If testimony is provided at the public hearing meeting on December 20, 2016, the Planning Commission can vote to approve, deny, or amend the findings and recommended conditions of approval as stated in this staff report. Procedural Finding: In accordance with SDC 5.17-125 to 5.17-135, the Final Site Plan shall comply with the requirements of the SDC and the conditions imposed by the Planning Commission in this decision. The Final Site Plan otherwise shall be in substantial conformity with the tentative plan reviewed. Portions of the proposal approved as submitted during tentative review cannot be substantively changed during Final Site Plan approval. Approved Final Site Plans (including Landscape Plans) shall not be substantively changed during Building Permit Review without an approved Site Plan Modification Decision. WRITTEN COMMENTS: Procedural Finding: In accordance with SDC 5.1-130 and 5.2-115, notice was sent to adjacent property owners/occupants within 300 feet of the subject site on November 22, 2016. One written response was received from Suzanne Fenner, 328 Scotts Glen Drive, 97477 (Attachment 4). Staff advises that the written comments pertain specifically to radio frequencies and electromagnetic radiation emanating from wireless telecommunications system facilities. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is responsible for regulatory oversight of radio frequency emissions. In accordance with the Federal Telecommunications Act (1996) and SDC 4.3-145.F, the City cannot prohibit the provision of personal wireless services on the basis of radio frequency emissions or other federally-regulated standards. Ms. Fenner’s written comments are not directed to the City’s criteria of approval for this application and, instead, fall under federal jurisdiction. For this reason staff recommends that the comments are received as information only. CRITERIA OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL: SDC 5.17-125, Site Plan Review Standards, Criteria of Site Plan Approval states, “the Director shall approve, or approve with conditions, a Type II Site Plan Review Application upon determining that criteria A through E of this Section have been satisfied. If conditions cannot be attached to satisfy the criteria, the Director shall deny the application.” A. The zoning is consistent with the Metro Plan diagram, and/or the applicable Refinement Plan diagram, Plan District map, and Conceptual Development Plan. Finding 1: The site is zoned and designated mixed use Light Medium Industrial/Community Commercial (LMI/CC) in accordance with the Springfield Zoning Map and the adopted Gateway Refinement Plan diagram. The applicant is not proposing to change the zoning for the site. Finding 2: In accordance with SDC 4.3-145.F.5 and Table 4.3-1, High Visibility wireless telecommunications system facilities are allowable in the Light Medium Industrial District subject to Discretionary Use and Site Plan Review procedures. Conclusion: This proposal satisfies Criterion A. B. Capacity requirements of public improvements, including but not limited to, water and electricity; sanitary sewer and stormwater management facilities; and streets and traffic safety controls shall not be exceeded and the public improvements shall be available to serve the site at the time of development, Attachment 2, Page 3 of 14 Page 4 of 14 unless otherwise provided for by this Code and other applicable regulations. The Development & Public Works Director or a utility provider shall determine capacity issues. Finding 3: Approval of this proposal would allow for construction of a 150-foot tall monopole wireless transmissions system facility within a fenced enclosure, along with ground-mounted equipment cabinets and ancillary structures on a vacant industrial parcel. Finding 4: For all public improvements, the applicant shall retain a private professional civil engineer to design the site improvements in conformance with City codes, this decision, and the current Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual (EDSPM). The private civil engineer also shall be required to provide construction inspection services. Finding 5: The Development Review Committee reviewed the proposed site plan on December 6, 2016. City staff’s review comments have been incorporated in findings and recommended conditions contained herein. Conclusion: The proposal satisfies this sub-element of the criterion. Water and Electricity Improvements Finding 6: SDC 4.3-130 requires each development area to be provided with a water system having sufficiently sized mains and lesser lines to furnish adequate supply to the development and sufficient access for maintenance. Springfield Utility Board (SUB) coordinates the design of the water system within Springfield city limits. Finding 7: The proposed development is a non-combustible wireless telecommunications system tower with ground-mounted utility cabinets and related structures that are not designed or intended for occupation. There is no water service proposed to the tower enclosure and none is required. Finding 8: In accordance with SDC 4.3-125, wherever possible utility lines are to be placed underground. The applicant is proposing to install new underground electrical and telecommunication connections to the existing transmission lines that run along the western edge of Pioneer Parkway West. To accommodate the proposed utility connections, utility easements may be necessary. A permit for work within the Pioneer Parkway right-of-way also will be required prior to initiating construction. Finding 9: SUB Electric typically requires provision for access to the fenced compound to allow for meter reading or to pull the meter in the event of an emergency. Access to the compound can be provided by way of a SUB-installed lock used in tandem with a T-Mobile wireless lock, or a key to the T-Mobile wireless lock issued to SUB personnel. Recommended Conditions of Approval: 1. The Final Site Plan shall provide for utility easements as may be required by SUB Electric and other utility providers for the underground electrical and telecommunication lines serving the development site. 2. Prior to approval of the Final Site Plan, any required utility easements shall be executed and recorded at Lane County Deeds & Records and the applicant shall provide evidence thereof to the City. 3. The Final Site Plan shall provide for installation of a SUB Electric supplied lock or issuance of a key to SUB Electric personnel for the fenced compound surrounding the transformer and utility cabinets. Access to the fenced compound shall be afforded SUB Electric personnel for the purpose of reading the electrical meter or pulling the meter in the event of an emergency. Attachment 2, Page 4 of 14 Page 5 of 14 Conclusion: The existing SUB Water and Electric facilities are adequate to serve the site. As conditioned herein, the proposal satisfies this sub-element of the criterion. Sanitary Sewer and Stormwater Management Facilities Sanitary Sewer Finding 10: Section 4.3-105.A of the SDC requires that sanitary sewers shall be installed to serve each new development and to connect developments to existing mains. Additionally, installation of sanitary sewers shall provide sufficient access for maintenance activities. Finding 11: The proposed wireless telecommunications system facility is designed and intended as a non- occupied utility compound. There is no water service or floor drains planned for the development site, and the applicant is not requesting a connection to the public sanitary sewer system. Therefore, sanitary sewer service is not required. Conclusion: The proposal satisfies this sub-element of the criterion. Stormwater Management (Quantity) Finding 12: SDC 4.3-110.B requires that the Approval Authority shall grant development approval only where adequate public and/or private stormwater management systems provisions have been made as determined by the Development & Public Works Director, consistent with the EDSPM. Finding 13: SDC 4.3-110.C states that a stormwater management system shall accommodate potential runoff from its entire upstream drainage area, whether inside or outside of the development. Finding 14: SDC 4.3-110.D requires that runoff from a development shall be directed to an approved stormwater management system with sufficient capacity to accept the discharge. Finding 15: SDC 4.3-110.E requires new developments to employ drainage management practices that minimize the amount and rate of surface water runoff into receiving streams, and that promote water quality. Finding 16: The applicant is not proposing to construct an appreciable amount of new impervious surface with this application. Impervious surfaces would be limited to the platform-mounted equipment cabinets and tower structure on an existing gravel surface. The limited amount of new impervious surface and provision for perimeter landscaping does not warrant the construction of stormwater management facilities. Stormwater management facilities will be necessary at such time as the site develops with a primary industrial use. Conclusion: The proposal satisfies this sub-element of the criterion. Stormwater Management (Quality) Finding 17: Under Federal regulation of the Clean Water Act (CWA), Endangered Species Act (ESA), and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), the City of Springfield is required to obtain, and has applied for, a Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit. A provision of this permit requires the City to demonstrate efforts to reduce the pollution in urban stormwater to the Maximum Extent Practicable (MEP). Finding 18: Federal and Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) rules require the City’s MS4 plan to address six “Minimum Control Measures”. Minimum Control Measure 5, “Post-Construction Stormwater Management for New Development and Redevelopment”, applies to the proposed development. Attachment 2, Page 5 of 14 Page 6 of 14 Finding 19: Minimum Control Measure 5 requires the City of Springfield to develop, implement and enforce a program to ensure the reduction of pollutants in stormwater runoff to the MEP. The City also must develop and implement strategies that include a combination of structural or non-structural Best Management Practices (BMPs) appropriate for the community. Finding 20: Minimum Control Measure 5 requires the City of Springfield to use an ordinance or other regulatory mechanism to address post-construction runoff from new and re-development projects to the extent allowable under State law. Regulatory mechanisms used by the City include the SDC, the City’s EDSPM, and the Stormwater Facilities Master Plan (SFMP). Finding 21: As required in SDC 4.3-110.E, “a development shall be required to employ drainage management practices approved by the Development & Public Works Director and consistent with Metro Plan policies and the Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual”. Finding 22: Section 3.02 of the City’s EDSPM states the Development & Public Works Department will accept, as interim design standards for stormwater quality, water quality facilities designed pursuant to the policies and procedures of the City’s EDSPM and the City of Eugene Stormwater Management Manual. Finding 23: Sections 3.02.5 and 3.02.6 of the City’s EDSPM states all public and private development and redevelopment projects shall employ a system of one or more post-developed BMPs that in combination are designed to achieve at least a 70 percent reduction in the total suspended solids in the runoff generated by the development. Section 3.03.4.E of the manual requires a minimum of 50 percent of the non-building rooftop impervious area on a site shall be treated for stormwater quality improvement using vegetative methods and 100% of the area shall be pre-treated. Finding 24: As stated above, the applicant is not proposing an appreciable amount of new impervious surface on the site. Therefore, no stormwater treatment measures will be required as part of this development proposal. Conclusion: The proposal satisfies this sub-element of the criterion. Streets and Traffic Safety Controls Finding 25: The subject site is within the extreme northeastern corner of an existing, vacant industrial parcel that has frontage on Laura Street along the west boundary. Along the site frontage, Laura Street is developed as a minor collector street with curb and gutter, paving, centerline striping, bicycle lanes, sidewalks, and street lighting. The applicant is not proposing to improve the frontage beyond the existing condition, and no public street improvements are required for the proposed development. Finding 26: The traffic generated by the proposed development (after construction and installation of the facility) would be limited to occasional visitation by maintenance personnel. The traffic volumes would not be appreciably different than the current traffic generated by the construction equipment and machinery storage that is occurring on the property. Finding 27: It is expected that the existing transportation facilities would be adequate to accommodate the anticipated vehicular and pedestrian traffic patterns generated by the proposed development in a safe and efficient manner. Conclusion: The proposal satisfies this sub-element of the criterion. C. The proposed development shall comply with all applicable public and private design and construction standards contained in this Code and other applicable regulations. Finding 28: Criterion C contains three different elements with sub-elements and applicable code standards. The site plan application as submitted complies with the code standards listed under each sub-element unless Attachment 2, Page 6 of 14 Page 7 of 14 otherwise noted with specific findings and conclusions. The elements, sub-elements and code standards of Criterion C include but are not limited to: 1. Infrastructure Standards in accordance with SDC 4.1-100, 4.2-100 & 4.3-100 Water Service and Fire Protection (4.3-130) Public and Private Easements (4.3-120 – 4.3-140) Wireless Telecommunications System Facilities (4.3-145) 2. Conformance with standards of SDC 5.17-100, Site Plan Review, and SDC 3.2-400 Light Medium Industrial Zoning District Light Medium Industrial Schedule of Uses (3.2-410) Light Medium Industrial District Development Standards (3.2-420) Landscaping, Screening and Fence Standards (4.3-145.F.13, 4.3-145.F.25 & 4.4-100) On-Site Lighting Standards (4.5-100) Vehicle Parking, Loading and Bicycle Parking Standards (4.6-100) 3. Overlay Districts and Applicable Refinement Plan Requirements Drinking Water Protection Overlay District Gateway Refinement Plan C.1 Public and Private Improvements in accordance with SDC 4.1-100, 4.2-100 & 4.3-100 Water Service and Fire Protection (4.3-130) Access Finding 29: All fire apparatus access routes are to be paved all-weather surfaces able to support an 80,000 lb. imposed load in accordance with the 2014 Springfield Fire Code (SFC) 503.2.3 and SFC Appendix D102.1. The applicant is proposing to use an existing gravel driveway that crosses the adjacent EWEB corridor and connects with Laura Street. EWEB representatives have indicated that the depth of burial for the water pipeline is not known, so access cannot be assured from this driveway until further investigation is done. More discussion about access to the subject site is found in the next subsection below. Finding 30: Access to the proposed project area is afforded from Laura Street and adjacent private driveways. The nearest responding fire stations (Stations #4 and #5) are located at 1475 5th Street and 2705 Pheasant Blvd. Finding 31: The applicant is proposing to install a fenced and gated enclosure within the northeast corner of the subject property, which itself has perimeter fencing and gated access. To ensure fire and emergency access can be provided to the subject site, the applicant will need to install Public Works locks (for manually operated gates) or a Knox box keyed system (for electronically operated gates). Water Supply Finding 32: The proposed cellular tower and ground-mounted equipment cabinets are considered utility installations for the purpose of determining fire protection requirements. A public fire hydrant is located on the southwest corner of Laura Street at the intersection with Scotts Glen Drive. However, this hydrant is not located within 600 feet of the proposed monopole tower, equipment cabinets and fenced compound. A new public fire hydrant will need to be installed to provide coverage for the subject site or, alternatively, the applicant will need to secure a right to access a shared private fire hydrant on an adjacent property. The fire hydrant will need to meet the requirements of the 2014 Springfield Fire Code 507.5.1, NFPA 24 (if private) and Springfield Utility Board Water Division (if public). Finding 33: Staff observes that a private fire hydrant is located on the north side of the shared driveway just outside the northern boundary of the site. The operational condition of this hydrant is not known, but it is Attachment 2, Page 7 of 14 Page 8 of 14 assumed to be functional for the purpose of this review. Use of this private fire hydrant for fire protection at the subject site would require an executed agreement with the owner(s), a gated emergency access along the northern fence line, and a private access easement across the adjacent property (Tax Lot 2119). Recommended Conditions of Approval: 4. The Final Site Plan shall provide for installation of a Knox box keyed gate entry system for electronically operated gates, or Public Works locks for manually operated gates providing access to the property and the tower compound. 5. The Final Site Plan shall provide for installation or shared use of a suitable fire hydrant located within 600 feet of the monopole tower and ancillary structures. 6. Prior to approval of the Final Site Plan, the applicant shall execute and record an access easement and shared use agreement for any private fire hydrants providing fire protection to the site and provide evidence thereof to the City. Conclusion: As conditioned herein, the proposal satisfies this sub-element of the criterion. Public and Private Easements (4.3-120 – 4.3-140) Finding 34: SDC 4.3-140.A requires applicants proposing developments to make arrangements with the City and each utility provider for the dedication of utility easements necessary to fully service the development or land beyond the development area. The minimum width for PUEs adjacent to street rights-of-way and internal to private properties shall be 7 feet, unless the Development & Public Works Director requires a larger easement to allow for adequate maintenance access. Finding 35: As stated and conditioned previously in this report, a utility easement may be required to accommodate the underground electrical and telecommunication lines serving the proposed cellular tower. Finding 36: The property has an undeveloped panhandle frontage on Laura Street. The applicant is proposing to use an existing gravel driveway that crosses the adjacent EWEB corridor to reach the monopole tower enclosure at the northeast corner of the property. The proposed driveway access is dependent upon a concurrence and easement from EWEB for crossing the buried water pipeline on the adjoining property. The applicant will need to execute and record an access easement across the EWEB corridor prior to approval of the Final Site Plan. Alternatively, the applicant could obtain an easement from the adjoining property to the north for access to the development site. Staff observes that a gated driveway access along the northeast fence line of the property would also facilitate access to the nearby private fire hydrant discussed above (see Condition 5). Recommended Condition of Approval: 7. Prior to approval of the Final Site Plan, the applicant shall execute and record a private access easement and construct a shared driveway across an adjoining property to afford legal and physical access to the site. Alternatively, the Final Site Plan shall provide for installation of a dedicated site driveway along the panhandle frontage of the property to serve the development area. Conclusion: Safe and efficient provision of public access and utilities requires the provision of corresponding access and utility easements. As conditioned herein, the proposal satisfies this sub-element of the criterion. Wireless Transmissions System Facilities (4.3-145) Finding 37: In accordance with SDC 4.3-145.E, the Planning Commission is the approval authority for high visibility wireless telecommunications system facilities in Springfield. High visibility facilities include traditional monopoles and lattice towers that are not camouflaged or designed as imitation trees. In accordance Attachment 2, Page 8 of 14 Page 9 of 14 with SDC Table 4.3-1, high visibility facilities are allowable in the Light Medium Industrial district subject to Discretionary Use approval. Therefore, the proposed development requires approval of a Discretionary Use permit initiated by Case TYP316-00003 and approval of a Tentative Site Plan initiated by the subject application, Case TYP216-00050. Finding 38: Specific details of the proposed wireless telecommunications system facility are reviewed and addressed in the staff report for the Discretionary Use permit submitted under separate cover (Case TYP316-00003) and incorporated herein by reference. Finding 39: The City classifies wireless telecommunications system providers as local utilities that are subject to utility licensing in accordance with Section 4.602 of the Springfield Municipal Code. Failure to obtain or abide by the City’s utility licensing provisions could result in municipal enforcement procedures described in Chapter 5 of the Municipal Code. T-Mobile will be required to obtain City utility licensing for the proposed facility and for existing facilities if licensure has not been obtained previously. Recommended Conditions of Approval: 8. Prior to approval of the Final Site Plan, the applicant shall obtain Discretionary Use approval for a high visibility wireless telecommunications system facility as initiated by Case TYP316-00003. 9. Prior to issuance of Final Occupancy and commencement of operations on the site, T-Mobile shall obtain a City utility license as may be required for operation of wireless telecommunications system facilities within Springfield and provide evidence thereof to the City. Conclusion: As conditioned herein, the proposal satisfies this sub-element of the criterion. C.2 Conformance with Standards of SDC 5.17-100, Site Plan Review, and SDC 3.2-400, Light Medium Industrial Zoning District Light Medium Industrial Schedule of Uses (3.2-410) Finding 40: In accordance with SDC 3.2-410, wireless telecommunications system facilities are allowable in the LMI District subject to the special provisions of SDC 4.3-145. SDC Table 4.3-1 states that high visibility wireless telecommunications system facilities such as a monopole towers are allowable in the LMI District subject to Discretionary Use permitting. Finding 41: The applicant has submitted a request for Discretionary Use approval for the subject development under separate cover (Case TYP316-00003), which is incorporated herein by reference. The Discretionary Use request will be reviewed by the Planning Commission at a public hearing meeting on December 20, 2016. Conclusion: The proposal satisfies this sub-element of the criterion. Light Medium Industrial Standards (3.2-420) Finding 42: In accordance with SDC 3.2-420, the minimum parcel size for properties in the LMI District is 10,000 ft2 with at least 40 feet of public street frontage for a panhandle parcel. Finding 43: The proposed development site is approximately 62,290 ft2 (1.43 acres) with 40 feet of panhandle parcel frontage on Laura Street. The parcel size and frontage meets the requirements of SDC 3.2-420. Finding 44: In accordance with SDC 3.2-420, the minimum building setbacks for structures is 10 feet for front and through lot rear yards. There is no side yard setback for structures unless required by Building and Fire Codes, or other Development Code provisions. Attachment 2, Page 9 of 14 Page 10 of 14 Finding 45: In accordance with SDC 4.3-145.F.10.b, a WTS facility (ie. monopole tower) cannot be located in a required front, rear, or side yard building setback. Where there is no building, the WTS facility is to be set back at least 30 feet from a property line abutting a street. Finding 46: The proposed development is set back about 600 feet from the west (front yard) property line, about 24 feet from the north (side yard) property line, and about 30 feet from the east (through lot rear yard) property line. The 30-foot rear yard setback also represents the required setback from a public street (Pioneer Parkway West). The proposed setbacks meet the requirements of SDC 3.2-420. Finding 47: In accordance with SDC 3.2-420, there is no maximum building height for structures within the LMI District provided the development site is more than 50 feet from a residential district property line. Finding 48: The proposed monopole tower is 150 feet high and is located more than 200 feet from the nearest residential property line, which meets the requirements of SDC 3.2-420. Finding 49: In accordance with SDC 3.2-420, there is no maximum lot coverage for structures within the LMI District provided the required building and parking lot setbacks are observed. Finding 50: The proposed development site occupies a fractional amount of the potential site building coverage, which meets the requirements of SDC 3.2-420. The site is considered vacant for the purpose of this review, and future development of the property will be subject to the provisions of the SDC. Conclusion: The proposal satisfies this sub-element of the criterion. Landscaping, Screening and Fence Standards (4.3-145.F.13, 4.3-145.F.25 & 4.4-100) Finding 51: In accordance with SDC 4.4-100, all required setbacks are to be landscaped. Acceptable forms of landscaping include trees, shrubs, turf grass and ground cover plants. The site is a vacant industrial parcel with panhandle frontage on Laura Street. The frontage on Laura Street is landscaped with turf grass and the applicant is proposing to install a new street tree on the property in accordance with SDC 4.3-145.F.25 and 4.4-105.B. Finding 52: In accordance with SDC 4.3-145.F.25, additional screening vegetation is required for wireless telecommunications system facilities that exceed the height limitations of the base zone. The applicant’s proposed 150-foot tall monopole tower does not exceed the height limitations of the district. Finding 53: In accordance with SDC 4.3-145.F.13, the visibility of wireless transmissions system facilities is to be minimized to the greatest extent practicable by camouflage, screening and landscaping. The applicant’s proposed site plan retains existing screening vegetation along the eastern and northern edges of the site. The applicant is proposing to replace existing arborvitae trees that could be impacted during installation of underground utilities necessary to serve the development. Finding 54: The existing and proposed vegetative screening meets the requirements of the City’s Development Code. Conclusion: The proposal satisfies this sub-element of the criterion. On-Site Lighting Standards (4.5-100) Finding 55: In accordance with SDC 4.5-110.B.2.b, the maximum height of a freestanding light fixture within an industrial district is the height of the principal building on the site or 25 feet, whichever is less. According to the submitted site plan, the applicant is not proposing to install work lights or site lighting within the fenced monopole tower compound. In the event that site lighting is installed in the future, the lights will need to be shielded and downcast, and should be mounted at or around the 8-foot level above finished grade. Attachment 2, Page 10 of 14 Page 11 of 14 Conclusion: The proposal satisfies this sub-element of the criterion. Vehicle Parking, Loading and Bicycle Parking Standards (4.6-100) Finding 56: In accordance with SDC Tables 4.6-2 and 4.6-3, there is no vehicle or bicycle parking requirement for unoccupied utility facilities. It is anticipated that T-Mobile personnel will occasionally visit the site for routine maintenance, and short-term parking is available within the gravel storage area outside the fenced compound. There will be no impacts to the subject property, adjacent industrial properties, or public streets. Conclusion: The proposal satisfies this sub-element of the criterion. C.3 Overlay Districts and Applicable Refinement Plan Requirements Finding 57: The site is within the adopted Gateway Refinement Plan area. The development site is located within an area that is zoned and designated for a combination of Light Medium Industrial/Community Commercial uses. Properties in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development are developed with industrial buildings and uses, and the subject site is currently used for storage of construction equipment and machinery. For these reasons staff has determined that LMI zoning provisions are appropriate for the subject property. In accordance with SDC 4.3-145.F.5 and Table 4.3-1, High Visibility wireless telecommunications facilities are allowable in the LMI district subject to Discretionary Use and Site Plan Review procedures. Finding 58: The subject site is located within the mapped 20+ year Time of Travel Zone (TOTZ) for the Sports Way drinking water wellhead. Therefore, the site is not subject to specific provisions of the Drinking Water Protection Overlay District found in SDC 3.3-235. However, SUB Drinking Water Source Protection requests that a Springfield Wellhead Protection Area sign is posted on the site to remind the property owner and tenants of the need to observe groundwater protection measures during site construction and operation. The site operator’s emergency phone number will need to be posted on the wellhead protection sign. A Wellhead Protection Area sign can be obtained for a nominal cost from Amy Chinitz, SUB Drinking Water Source Protection Coordinator at 541-744-3745. Finding 59: As a “Best Practices” recommendation for this site, care must be taken during site construction and operation to prevent contamination from chemicals that may spill or leak onto the ground surface, including fuel and automotive fluids (such as lubricants and antifreeze, etc.). Fluid-containing equipment, including vehicles parked on the site, shall be monitored for leaks and spills. Any chemical spills or leaks must be cleaned up immediately and cleanup materials disposed off-site in accordance with Lane County and State DEQ requirements. Recommended Condition of Approval: 10. The Final Site Plan shall provide for installation of a wellhead protection sign at a conspicuous and visible location within the development site. Conclusion: As conditioned herein, the proposal satisfies this sub-element of the criterion. D. Parking areas and ingress-egress points have been designed to: facilitate vehicular traffic, bicycle and pedestrian safety to avoid congestion; provide connectivity within the development area and to adjacent residential areas, transit stops, neighborhood activity centers, and commercial, industrial and public areas; minimize curb cuts on arterial and collector streets as specified in this Code or other applicable regulations and comply with the ODOT access management standards for State highways. Finding 60: Installation of driveways on a street increases the number of traffic conflict points. The greater number of conflict points increases the probability of traffic crashes. Effective ways to reduce the probability of traffic crashes include: reducing the number of driveways; increasing distances between intersections and driveways; and establishing adequate vision clearance areas where driveways intersect streets. Each of these Attachment 2, Page 11 of 14 Page 12 of 14 techniques permits a longer, less cluttered sight distance for the motorist, reduces the number and difficulty of decisions that drivers must make, and contributes to increased traffic safety. Finding 61: In accordance with SDC 4.2-120.C, site driveways shall be designed to allow for safe and efficient vehicular ingress and egress as specified in Tables 4.2-2 through 4.2-5, the City’s EDSPM, and the Springfield Development & Public Works Department’s Standard Construction Specifications. Ingress-egress points must be planned to facilitate traffic and pedestrian safety, avoid congestion, and minimize curb cuts on public streets. Finding 62: The applicant is proposing to use an existing industrial driveway onto Laura Street to serve the development site. Access will be derived from either the EWEB corridor along the southern edge of the site, or from an existing shared driveway outside the northern edge of the site. As stated and conditioned herein, for either proposed access configuration a private access easement will need to be executed and recorded prior to Final Site Plan approval (see Condition 7). A shared driveway will need to be installed to assure physical access to the development site. The two available options for proposed site driveways are both suitable for the proposed use, which is limited to construction traffic during initial installation of the wireless telecommunications system facility and occasional maintenance vehicles thereafter. Conclusion: The proposal satisfies this criterion. E. Physical features, including, but not limited to: steep slopes with unstable soil or geologic conditions; areas with susceptibility of flooding; significant clusters of trees and shrubs; watercourses shown on the Water Quality Limited Watercourse Map and their associated riparian areas; wetlands; rock outcroppings; open spaces; and areas of historic and/or archaeological significance, as may be specified in Section 3.3-900 or ORS 97.740-760, 358.905-955 and 390.235-240, shall be protected as specified in this Code or in State or Federal law. Finding 63: The Natural Resources Study, the National Wetlands Inventory, the Springfield Wetland Inventory Map, Wellhead Protection Overlay and the list of Historic Landmark Sites have been consulted and there are no natural features on this site that warrant protection. Finding 64: The applicant is not proposing to remove any qualifying trees from the property to facilitate site development. In accordance with SDC 5.19-110.A, a tree felling permit is required for removal of more than 5 trees greater than 5-inches in diameter in any 12-month period. Therefore, this requirement is not applicable. Finding 65: Stormwater runoff from the subject site flows to the Willamette River system. This river is listed with the State of Oregon as a “water quality limited” stream for numerous chemical and physical constituents, including temperature. Provisions have been made in this decision for protection of stormwater quality. The proposed site development will not create an appreciable amount of new impervious surface requiring constructed stormwater management facilities for runoff quantity or quality control. Finding 66: As previously noted and conditioned herein, groundwater protection must be observed during construction and operation on the site. The applicant shall install and maintain Wellhead Protection Area signage on the site to ensure the continued protection of surface water and groundwater resources. Conclusion: The proposed development provides storm and ground water quality protection in accordance with SDC 3.3-200 and receiving streams have been protected in accordance with SDC 4.3-110 and 4.3-115. The proposal satisfies this criterion. CONCLUSION: The Tentative Site Plan, as submitted and conditioned herein, complies with Criteria A-E of SDC 5.17-125. Staff recommends approval of the Tentative Site Plan subject to the recommended conditions contained herein and as summarized below. Attachment 2, Page 12 of 14 Page 13 of 14 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The Final Site Plan shall provide for utility easements as may be required by SUB Electric and other utility providers for the underground electrical and telecommunication lines serving the development site. 2. Prior to approval of the Final Site Plan, any required utility easements shall be executed and recorded at Lane County Deeds & Records and the applicant shall provide evidence thereof to the City. 3. The Final Site Plan shall provide for installation of a SUB Electric supplied lock or issuance of a key to SUB Electric personnel for the fenced compound surrounding the transformer and utility cabinets. Access to the fenced compound shall be afforded SUB Electric personnel for the purpose of reading the electrical meter or pulling the meter in the event of an emergency. 4. The Final Site Plan shall provide for installation of a Knox box keyed gate entry system for electronically operated gates, or Public Works locks for manually operated gates providing access to the property and the tower compound. 5. The Final Site Plan shall provide for installation or shared use of a suitable fire hydrant located within 600 feet of the monopole tower and ancillary structures. 6. Prior to approval of the Final Site Plan, the applicant shall execute and record an access easement and shared use agreement for any private fire hydrants providing fire protection to the site and provide evidence thereof to the City. 7. Prior to approval of the Final Site Plan, the applicant shall execute and record a private access easement and construct a shared driveway across an adjoining property to afford legal and physical access to the site. Alternatively, the Final Site Plan shall provide for installation of a dedicated site driveway along the panhandle frontage of the property to serve the development area. 8. Prior to approval of the Final Site Plan, the applicant shall obtain Discretionary Use approval for a high visibility wireless telecommunications system facility as initiated by Case TYP316-00003. 9. Prior to issuance of Final Occupancy and commencement of operations on the site, T-Mobile shall obtain a City utility license as may be required for operation of wireless telecommunications system facilities within Springfield and provide evidence thereof to the City. 10. The Final Site Plan shall provide for installation of a wellhead protection sign at a conspicuous and visible location within the development site. WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE BY THE APPLICANT TO OBTAIN FINAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL? Upon approval of the Tentative Site Plan by the Springfield Planning Commission, the applicant shall submit five (5) copies of a Final Site Plan, the Final Site Plan application form and fees, and any additional required plans, documents or information as required by the Planning Commission decision to the Current Development Division within 90 days of the date of the Planning Commission decision (ie. by March 20, 2017). The Final Site Plan application form and fee information is available on the City’s website here: http://www.springfield- or.gov/DPW/Permits.htm#LandUsePermits. In accordance with SDC 5.17-135 – 5.17-140, the Final Site Plan shall comply with the requirements of the SDC and the conditions imposed by the Planning Commission in this decision. The Final Site Plan otherwise shall be in substantial conformity with the tentative plan reviewed and approved. Portions of the proposal approved as submitted during tentative review cannot be substantively changed during final site plan approval. Approved Final Site Plans (including Landscape Plans) shall not be substantively changed during Building Permit Review without an approved Site Plan Decision Modification. Attachment 2, Page 13 of 14 Page 14 of 14 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT: In order to complete the review process, a Development Agreement is required to ensure that the terms and conditions of site plan review are binding upon both the applicant and the City. This agreement will be prepared by Staff upon approval of the Final Site Plan and must be signed by the property owner prior to the issuance of a building permit. The applicant may submit permit applications to other City departments for review prior to final site plan approval in accordance with SDC 5.17-135 at their own risk. All concurrent submittals are subject to revision for compliance with the final site plan. A development agreement in accordance with SDC 5.17-140 will not be issued until all plans submitted by the applicant have been revised. CONFLICTING PLANS CAUSE DELAYS. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The application, all documents, and evidence relied upon by the applicant, and the applicable criteria of approval are available for free inspection and copies are available for a fee at the Development & Public Works Department, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon. APPEAL: This Type II Tentative Site Plan decision is accompanied by, and is subordinate to, the Type III Discretionary Use Request initiated by Case TYP316-00003 and is therefore considered a Type III decision of the Planning Commission. As such, this decision may be appealed to the Springfield City Council. The appeal may be filed with the Development & Public Works Department by an affected party. Your appeal must be in accordance with SDC 5.3-100, Appeals. An Appeals application must be submitted with a fee of $2,420.00. The fee will be returned to the applicant if the City Council approves the appeal application. In accordance with SDC 5.3-115.B which provides for a 15-day appeal period and Oregon Rules of Civil Procedures, Rule 10(c) for service of notice by mail, the appeal period for this decision expires at 5:00 PM on January 4, 2017. QUESTIONS: Please call Andy Limbird in the Current Development Division of the Development & Public Works Department at (541) 726-3784 or email alimbird@springfield-or.gov if you have any questions regarding this process. PREPARED BY Andy Limbird Andy Limbird Senior Planner Attachment 2, Page 14 of 14 Attachment 3, Page 1 of 27 Attachment 3, Page 2 of 27 Attachment 3, Page 3 of 27 Attachment 3, Page 4 of 27 Attachment 3, Page 5 of 27 Attachment 3, Page 6 of 27 AREA MAPLOCATION MAPDRAWING INDEXPROJECT DESCRIPTIONSHEET NO:SHEET TITLET-1 TITLE SHEET & PROJECT DATA0xINSTALL 150'-0" MONOPOLExINSTALL 8' H-FRAMExINSTALL NEW CHAINLINK FENCExINSTALL (1) HYBRID CABLE (HIGH CAPACITY)xINSTALL (6) CMA-BDHH-6521-EO-6 ANTENNASxINSTALL (3) FHFB'sxINSTALL (3) FRIG'sxINSTALL (2) FSMF (U19+L21)xINSTALL (1) FBBC CABINETxINSTALL (1) FCOA CABINETREVISIONS:DRAWING NOTICE:THESE DOCUMENTS ARE CONFIDENTIAL ANDARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF AMS WIRELESSAND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED,DISSEMINATED OR REDISTRIBUTED WITHOUTTHE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF AMSWIRELESS.SITE NAME:SITE NUMBER:SITE ADDRESS:SHEET DESCRIPTION:SHEET NUMBER:PLANS PREPARED FOR:PLANS PREPARED FOR:2037 LAURA ST.SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477LANE COUNTYTITLE SHEETT - 1BY-GULLYENGINEERING LICENSE:PLANS PREPARED BY:REV ENGINEEROR-04000DESCRIPTIONDATE BY REVKE CMSITESITE0AMS WIRELESS20710 ARBOR BEND CT | HUMBLE TX 77346270.316.7546 | KYLE@AMSWIRELESS.ROCKSSUR-1 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEYPRELIMINARY CD'S11/01/16SITE NAME:PO04028ASITE NUMBER:STREET ADDRESS:SPRINGFIELD CENTRALTMobile2037 LAURA ST.SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477SITE ID:OR-04000 BY-GULLY4('0)+0''4&#6'<10+0)#&/+0+564#614&#6'5+6'#%37+5+6+10&#6'&#6'2412'46;190'4/1$+.'%105647%6+10/#0#)'4&#6'&#6'12'4#6+105219'4#22418#.&#6'6'.%1#22418#.&#6'APPROVALSPROJECT INFORMATIONJOHN HYLANDHYLAND CONSTRUCTION, INCP.O. BOX 7867 SPRINGFIELD, OR 97475(541) 762-8081LANDLORD NAME:SPRINGFIELD CENTRALSITE NAME:TBDUSID NO.:2037 LAURA ST.SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477SITE ADDRESS:17-03-27-10-02200MAP AND TAX LOT NO:1ƒ LATITUDE:LONGITUDE::ƒ GROUND ELEVATION:447.9'RAD CENTER:146'-0" AGLZONING JURISDICTION:CITY OF SPRINGFIELDCOUNTY:LANETOWER TYPE:PROPOSED MONOPOLEHEIGHT:150'-0" AGLPROJECT DIRECTORYAMS WIRELESS20710 ARBOR BEND CT.HUMBLE, TX 77346(541) 762-8081PROJECT MANAGER:TONY WILSONCONTACT:(208) 371-0042PHONE:POWER COMPANY:SPRINGFIELD UTILITY BOARD (SUB)(541) 746-8451SKYWAY TOWERS, LLC3637 MADACA LANETAMPA, FL 33618(813) 960-6200APPLICANT :TELCO PROVIDER:COMCAST(800) 934-6489GENERAL NOTESTHE FACILITY IS UNMANNED AND NOT FOR HUMAN HABITATION. ATECHNICIAN WILL VISIT THE SITE AS REQUIRED FOR ROUTINEMAINTENANCE. THE PROJECT WILL NOT RESULT IN ANYSIGNIFICANT DISTURBANCE OR EFFECT ON DRAINAGE; NOSANITARY SEWER SERVICE, POTABLE WATER, OR TRASH DISPOSALIS REQUIRED AND NO COMMERCIAL SIGNAGE IS PROPOSED.TMobileSKYWAY TOWERS, LLC3637 MADACA LANETAMPA, FL 33618(813) 960-6200DRIVING DIRECTIONSFROM EUGENE: PROCEED ON I-105 E FOR 1.1 MILES, MERGE ONTOOR-126 OR PIONEER PARKWAY EAST FOR 2.5 MILES, TAKE EXIT FORSPRINGFIELD CITY CENTER .4 MILES, TURN LEFT ONTO W Q ST .2MILES, TURN LEFT ONTO LAURA ST .1 MILES AND THE SITE WILL BEON THE RIGHT.00A-1OVERALL SITE PLANA-2 DETAILED SITE PLAN0A-3SITE ELEVATION AND ANTENNA LAYOUT0228013TAX ACCOUNT NO.:0SUR-2 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY0A-4 FENCE DETAILS0L-1LANDSCAPE PLAN0E-1GROUNDING PLAN0E-2 GROUNDING / CONDUIT DETAILSKECMFINAL CD'S11/14/160E-3UTILITY FRAME DETAILSAttachment 3, Page 7 of 27 REVISIONS:DRAWING NOTICE:SITE NAME:PLANS PREPARED FOR:PLANS PREPARED FOR:SITE ADDRESS:SHEET DESCRIPTION:SHEET NUMBER:OVERALL SITE PLANSCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0" (1/16"=1'-0" ON 22"x34" SHEET)1OVERALL SITE PLANA - 1PROPOSED PROJECTAREA (SEE DETAILED SITEPLAN A-2)ENGINEERING LICENSE:PLANS PREPARED BY:DESCRIPTIONDATE BY REV(E) OVERHEAD POWERLINESLAURA STREET PROPOSED INGRESS /EGRESSPROPOSED 150'-0"MONOPOLE(E) BUILDINGTHESE DOCUMENTS ARE CONFIDENTIAL ANDARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF AMS WIRELESSAND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED,DISSEMINATED OR REDISTRIBUTED WITHOUTTHE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF AMSWIRELESS.SITE NUMBER:KE CMAMS WIRELESS20710 ARBOR BEND CT | HUMBLE TX 77346270.316.7546 | KYLE@AMSWIRELESS.ROCKSTMobileSKYWAY TOWERS, LLC3637 MADACA LANETAMPA, FL 33618(813) 960-6200NOTES:1. THE PROJECT WILL NOT RESULT IN ANY SIGNIFICANT DISTURBANCE OREFFECT ON DRAINAGE; NO SANITARY SEWER SERVICE, POTABLE WATER, OR TRASH DISPOSAL IS REQUIRED AND NO COMMERCIAL SIGNAGE IS PROPOSED.2. SITE IS LOCATED IN THE 99 TIME OF TRAVEL ZONE (TOT)3. EXISTING SOIL TYPE IS 119 SALEM-URBAN LAND COMPLEX(E) BUILDING(E) BUILDING(E) BUILDING(E) GATE(E) PERIMETER FENCESCOTT GLEN DRIVESOUTHBOUND PIONEER PARKWAY(E) CONCRETE PAD(E) PARKING LOT(E) BUILDINGPROPOSED MINIMUM 2" CALIPER'GLOBE' NORWAY MAPLE ORAPPROVED VARIATION FROMAPPENDIX 6A OF CITY OF SPRINGFIELDAPPROVED STREET TREES. (SEESHEET L-1 FOR DETAIL)22'-0"13'-0"(E) FIRE HYDRANTBY-GULLYOR-040001. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.2. (1) CHEM. ROD K2L-10CS OR LYNCOLE K2-10CS OR APPROVED EQUAL TO BE INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURE'S SPECIFICATIONSAND BONDED TO TOWER GROUND RING. (OR DRIVEN GROUND RODS)3. GRADING OF SITE TO BE LIMITED TO THE AREA WITHIN THE LEASE PREMISES. CONTRACTOR TO GRADE SITE TO DIRECT FLOWAWAY FROM TOWER.4. CONTRACTOR SHALL RE-SEED OR RESURFACE ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO ORIGINAL CONDITIONS.5. SCRAPE TOP 6" OF TOPSOIL TO REMOVE ROOTS AND WEEDS PRIOR TO COMPACTING BASE & INSTALLING CRUSHED LIMESTONESITE FINISH.6. HOFFMAN TELCO BOX TO HAVE 3/4" PLYWOOD INSERT, GFI RECEPTACLE & GROUND BAR INSTALLED INSIDE A 3' x 3' NEMA 3R ENCLOSURE AND BONDED TO MAIN GROUND SYSTEM. AN ADDITIONAL GROUND TO BE ATTACHED TO EXTERIOR OF CABINET.7. ALL PVC CONDUITS SHALL BE SCH 80 UNLESS ENCASED IN CONCRETE.8. ALL MATERIALS FURNISHED AND INSTALLED SHALL BE IN STRICT ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES, REGULATIONS,ORDNANCES. SUBCONTRACTORS SHALL ISSUE APPROPRIATE NOTICES ADN COMPLY WITH ALL LAWS, ORDNANCES, RULES, REGULATIONS AND LAWFUL ORDERS OF ANY PUBLIC AUTHORITY REGARDING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK.9. ALL WORK PERFORMED SHALL COMPLY ALL APPLICABLE MUNICIPAL AND UTILITY COMPANY SPECIFICATIONS AND LOCAL JURISDICTION CODES, ORDNANCES, AND APPLICABLE REGULATIONS.10. DRAWINGS AND DETAILS ARE NOT TO BE SCALED AND ARE INTENDED TO SHOW OUTLINE ONLY.11. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE, THE WORK SHALL INCLUDE FURNISHING MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, APPURTENANCES, AND LABORNECESSARY TO COMPLETE ALL THE INSTALLATIONS AS INDICATED IN THE DRAWINGS AND DETAILS.12. THE SUBCONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL ALL EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURE'S RECOMMENDATIONS UNLESS SPECIFICALLY STATED OTHERWISE.13. IF SPECIFIED EQUIPMENT CANNOT BE INSTALLED AS ON THESE DRAWINGS; THE SUBCONTRACTOR SHALL PROPOSE AN ALTERNATIVE INSTALLATION SPACE FOR APPROVAL BY THE OWNER.14. THE SUBCONTRACTOR SHALL LEGALLY AND PROPERLY DISPOSE OF ALL SCRAP METALS.15. THE SUBCONTRACTOR SHALL LEAVE THE PREMISE IN CLEAN CONDITION.16. SUBCONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL EXISTING DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY WORK. ALL DIMENSIONS OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS MUST BE VERIFIED. SUBCONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THEOWNER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO ORDERING ANY MATERIALS OR PROCEEDING WITH CONSTRUCTION.17. ALL SAFETY PRECAUTIONS MUST BE TAKEN DURING CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS.18. TOWER AND FOUNDATIONS STRUCTURAL BY OTHERS.GENERAL NOTESPRELIMINARY CD'S11/01/162037 LAURA ST.SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477LANE COUNTYKECMFINAL CD'S11/14/16PROPOSED POWERCONDUIT FROM EXITINGPOWER POLE TO NEWH-FRAME; TO BE RAN 18"FROM PROPOSED FIBERCONDUITPROPOSED 2'-0" X 2'-0" FIBER/ TELCO VAULT OUTSIDE OFCOMPOUND FENCE ; TO BEINSTALLED FLUSH WITHFINISH GRADEPROPOSED 2'-0" X 2'-0"FIBER / TELCO VAULT ATBASE OF EXISTINGPOWER POLE; TO BEINSTALLED FLUSH WITHFINISH GRADEPROPOSED FIBER CONDUITFROM PROPOSED FIBER /TELCO BOX IN ROW TOFIBER / TELCO VAULTOUTSIDE OF COMPOUND; TOBE INSTALLED A MINIMUMOF 18" FROM PROPOSEDPOWER CONDUITPROPOSED FIBER CONDUIT FROMPROPOSED FIBER / TELCO BOX INROW TO SKYWAY NEMAENCLOSURE; TO BE INSTALLED AMINIMUM OF 18" FROM PROPOSEDPOWER CONDUITAttachment 3, Page 8 of 27 DETAILED SITE PLANA - 1REVISIONS:DRAWING NOTICE:SITE NAME:PLANS PREPARED FOR:PLANS PREPARED FOR:SITE ADDRESS:SHEET DESCRIPTION:SHEET NUMBER:ENGINEERING LICENSE:PLANS PREPARED BY:DESCRIPTIONDATE BY REV124'-2" 24'-9"50'-0"50'-0"SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" (1/2"=1'-0" ON 22"x34" SHEET)DETAILED SITE PLANSOUTHBOUND PIONEER PARKWAY25'-2"8'-0"8'-0"PROPOSED 15'-0" x 15'-0"T-MOBILE LEASE AREAPROPOSED 8'-0" x 8'-0"PLATFORM (EXACTEQUIPMENT LOCATION TOBE DETERMINED)PROPOSED 12'-0" ACCESSGATEPROPOSED 6'-0" CHAINLINKFENCE WITH BARBED WIRETOP (SEE SHEET A-4)PROPOSED 6'-0"CHAINLINK FENCEWITH BARBED WIRETOP (SEE SHEET A-4)(E) CHAINLINK FENCEPROPOSED INGRESS /EGRESS TO LAURA STTHESE DOCUMENTS ARE CONFIDENTIAL ANDARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF AMS WIRELESSAND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED,DISSEMINATED OR REDISTRIBUTED WITHOUTTHE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF AMSWIRELESS.SITE NUMBER:KE CMAMS WIRELESS20710 ARBOR BEND CT | HUMBLE TX 77346270.316.7546 | KYLE@AMSWIRELESS.ROCKSTMobileSKYWAY TOWERS, LLC3637 MADACA LANETAMPA, FL 33618(813) 960-6200(E) CHAINLINK FENCE30'-0"(E) VEGETATIVE BUFFER(E) TREEPROPOSEDH-FRAMEPROPOSED POWERCONDUIT FROM EXITINGPOWER POLE TO NEWH-FRAME; TO BE RAN 18"FROM PROPOSED FIBERCONDUITPROPOSED 150'-0"MONOPOLEPROPOSED 8'-0" ICEBRIDGE5'-10"24'-2"15'-0"15'-0"18'-4"PROPOSED 50'-0" x 50'-0"LEASE PREMISES7"EXISTING LANDSCAPEBUFFER. ANY TREESDAMAGED DURINGCONSTRUCTION TO BEREPLACED WITHEQUIVALENT TYPE ANDSIZE.NOTES:1. THE PROJECT WILL NOT RESULT IN ANY SIGNIFICANT DISTURBANCE OREFFECT ON DRAINAGE; NO SANITARY SEWER SERVICE, POTABLE WATER, OR TRASH DISPOSAL IS REQUIRED AND NO COMMERCIAL SIGNAGE IS PROPOSED.2. SITE IS LOCATED IN THE 99 TIME OF TRAVEL ZONE (TOT)3. EXISTING SOIL TYPE IS 119 SALEM-URBAN LAND COMPLEXBY-GULLYOR-04000PROPOSED NEMAFIBER / TELCOENCLOSUREPROPOSED METERBANKPROPOSED 2'-0" X 2'-0" FIBER/ TELCO VAULT OUTSIDE OFCOMPOUND FENCE ; TO BEINSTALLED FLUSH WITHFINISH GRADE(E) OVERHEAD POWERPROPOSED T-MOBILEANTENNAS (2) PERSECTOR 3 SECTORSTOTAL; SEE SHEET A-3(E) PROPERTY LINE(E) PROPERTY LINEPRELIMINARY CD'S11/01/162037 LAURA ST.SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477LANE COUNTYKECMFINAL CD'S11/14/1638'-9"PROPOSED FIBER CONDUITFROM PROPOSED FIBER /TELCO BOX IN ROW TO FIBER /TELCO VAULT OUTSIDE OFCOMPOUND; TO BE INSTALLEDA MINIMUM OF 18" FROMPROPOSED POWER CONDUITPROPOSED FIBER CONDUIT FROMPROPOSED FIBER / TELCO BOX INROW TO SKYWAY NEMAENCLOSURE; TO BE INSTALLED AMINIMUM OF 18" FROM PROPOSEDPOWER CONDUIT5'-0" UTILITYEASEMENT10'-0"3'-0"Attachment 3, Page 9 of 27 REVISIONS:DRAWING NOTICE:SITE NAME:PLANS PREPARED FOR:PLANS PREPARED FOR:SITE ADDRESS:SHEET DESCRIPTION:SHEET NUMBER:SITE ELEVATION N.T.S.1SITE ELEVATION &ANTENNA LAYOUTA - 3ENGINEERING LICENSE:PLANS PREPARED BY:DESCRIPTIONDATE BY REVOVERALL HEIGHT OF MONOPOLE “$*/FINISH GRADE “$*/N.T.S.PROPOSED ANTENNA LAYOUT SECTOR GƒPROPOSED CELLMAXCMA-BDHH/6521/E0-6ANTENNAS (2) PERSECTOR; 3 SECTORSTOTAL2PROPOSED T-MOBILEEQUIPMENT ON 8'-0" x8'-0" PLATFORM (EXACTLAYOUT TO BEDETERMINED)PROPOSED ICE BRIDGEPROPOSED 8'-0"CHAINLINK FENCESECTOR AƒSECTOR BƒTHESE DOCUMENTS ARE CONFIDENTIAL ANDARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF AMS WIRELESSAND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED,DISSEMINATED OR REDISTRIBUTED WITHOUTTHE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF AMSWIRELESS.SITE NUMBER:KE CMAMS WIRELESS20710 ARBOR BEND CT | HUMBLE TX 77346270.316.7546 | KYLE@AMSWIRELESS.ROCKSTMobileSKYWAY TOWERS, LLC3637 MADACA LANETAMPA, FL 33618(813) 960-6200PROPOSED T-MOBILE RAD CENTER “$*/FUTURE CO-LOCATION RAD CENTER “$*/FUTURE CO-LOCATION RAD CENTER “$*/FUTURE CO-LOCATION RAD CENTER “$*/PROPOSED 150'-0"MONOPOLEN.T.S.ANTENNA DETAIL 3SCALE : N.T.S.CELLMAX CMA-BDHH/6521/E06WEIGHT = 12 LBSHxWxD=81" x 15" x 5.2"PROPOSED FHFB (1) PERSECTOR; 3 SECTORSTOTALPROPOSED FRIG (1) PERSECTOR; 3 SECTORSTOTALPROPOSED CELLMAXCMA-BDHH/6521/E0-6ANTENNAS (2) PERSECTOR; 3 SECTORSTOTALPROPOSED12'-0"ACCESS GATEPROPOSED T-MOBILE ANTENNA TIPHEIGHT “$*/BY-GULLYOR-04000PRELIMINARY CD'S11/01/162037 LAURA ST.SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477LANE COUNTYKECMFINAL CD'S11/14/16Attachment 3, Page 10 of 27 CRUSHED LIMESTONE SITE SURFACING N.T.S.4FENCE DETAILA - 4REVISIONS:DRAWING NOTICE:SITE NAME:PLANS PREPARED FOR:PLANS PREPARED FOR:SITE ADDRESS:SHEET DESCRIPTION:SHEET NUMBER:ENGINEERING LICENSE:PLANS PREPARED BY:DESCRIPTIONDATE BY REVN.T.S.PROPOSED ANTENNA LAYOUT 1THESE DOCUMENTS ARE CONFIDENTIAL ANDARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF AMS WIRELESSAND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED,DISSEMINATED OR REDISTRIBUTED WITHOUTTHE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF AMSWIRELESS.SITE NUMBER:KE CMAMS WIRELESS20710 ARBOR BEND CT | HUMBLE TX 77346270.316.7546 | KYLE@AMSWIRELESS.ROCKSTMobileSKYWAY TOWERS, LLC3637 MADACA LANETAMPA, FL 33618(813) 960-6200N.T.S.BARBED WIRE ARM DETAIL5BARBED WIRE ARM (SEEDETAIL THIS PAGE)BY-GULLYOR-040001/2" CROWN#7 GA. ALUMINUM COIL WIRE @ BOTTOM OFFABRIC. NO GAP BETWEEN FINISH GRADEAND FENCE FABRIC.1/4" x 3/4" STRETCHERBAR WITH BANDSPLUNGER BAR ANDLATCH STOPMUSHROOM STOP1" CLEARANCEMIN.FINISHED GRADE (TOP OFSITE AREA SURFACING)EXISTING FINISH GRADEGATE POST 3"SCH. 40 (TYP)1/4" X 3/4" STRETCHER BARWITH BANDSSTEEL CAP-TYP.GATE FRAME 1-1/2" SCH 40FRAME (TYP.)3 STRAND STD. BARBWIRE-TYP.TOP RAIL 1-1/4"SCH 403/8" TRUSS BAR (EACHFENCE CORNER, GATES, &END POST)2" GALV. CHAIN LINK MESH(11 GA.)6'-0" 7'-0"SIGN10'-0" O.C. MINIMUMCONC. MUSHROOM STOP DETAILN.T.S.2SLOT FOR GATE PLUNGER(SLOT TO BE PARALLEL TOFENCE)2)§&586+('GRAVEL10" TO 12" CLEAN BASEVAPOR BARRIEREXISTING SOIL1-1/2" DOMEMETAL MUSHROOM STOPWITH SLOT PARALLEL W/CLOSED GATEPLAN2'-0"1'-0"MIRAFI FABRIC4" - CRUSHED LIMESTONEROLLED / COMPACTEDPROOF ROLLEDCOMPACTED SUB GRADEBARBED WIRE FENCE CORNER DETAILN.T.S.3BARBED WIRE TO BEFASTENED AT CORNERPOST W/ STRAPS.BARBED WIRE ACCESSGROOVE-TYP.TOP RAIL6- 1 / 4 " 6- 1 / 4 " 1'-1/2"1'-1/4"ƒPRELIMINARY CD'S11/01/16LINE POST 1-1/2"SCH. 40 (TYP)CORNER POST 2"SCH. 40 (TYP)2037 LAURA ST.SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477LANE COUNTYKECMFINAL CD'S11/14/16Attachment 3, Page 11 of 27 OVERALL SITE PLANSCALE: 1/32" = 1'-0" (1/16"=1'-0" ON 22"x34" SHEET)3LANDSCAPE PLANL - 1REVISIONS:DRAWING NOTICE:SITE NAME:PLANS PREPARED FOR:PLANS PREPARED FOR:SITE ADDRESS:SHEET DESCRIPTION:SHEET NUMBER:PROPOSED PROJECTAREA (SEE DETAILED SITEPLAN A-2)ENGINEERING LICENSE:PLANS PREPARED BY:DESCRIPTIONDATE BY REV(E) OVERHEAD POWERLINESLAURA STREET PROPOSED INGRESS /EGRESSPROPOSED 150'-0"MONOPOLE(E) BUILDINGTHESE DOCUMENTS ARE CONFIDENTIAL ANDARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF AMS WIRELESSAND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED,DISSEMINATED OR REDISTRIBUTED WITHOUTTHE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF AMSWIRELESS.SITE NUMBER:KE CMAMS WIRELESS20710 ARBOR BEND CT | HUMBLE TX 77346270.316.7546 | KYLE@AMSWIRELESS.ROCKSTMobileSKYWAY TOWERS, LLC3637 MADACA LANETAMPA, FL 33618(813) 960-6200(E) BUILDING(E) BUILDING(E) BUILDING(E) GATE(E) PERIMETER FENCESCOTT GLEN DRIVESOUTHBOUND PIONEER PARKWAY(E) CONCRETE PAD(E) PARKING LOT(E) BUILDINGPROPOSED MINIMUM 2" CALIPER'GLOBE' NORWAY MAPLE ORAPPROVED VARIATION FROMAPPENDIX 6A OF CITY OF SPRINGFIELDAPPROVED STREET TREES. (SEESHEET L-1 FOR DETAIL)22'-0"13'-0"(E) FIRE HYDRANTACERPLATANOIDES 'VAR'1TREE LISTQUANTITY SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME'GLOBE'NORWAY MAPLESIZE & CONDITION2" CALIPER, 8' HEIGHT /5'-6'SPREAD, SINGLE TRUNK,SPECIMENNOTES3' MULCH RING, TREEGATOR 15 GAL. WATERINGBAGBY-GULLYOR-04000EXISTING LANDSCAPEBUFFER. ANY TREESDAMAGED DURINGCONSTRUCTION TO BEREPLACED WITHEQUIVALENT TYPE ANDSIZE.TREE PLANTING DETAILN.T.S.2TREE LISTN.T.S.1NOTES:1. CONTRACTOR TO REPLACE ANY TREES ALONG PROPERTY LINE DAMAGEDDURING CONSTRUCTION WITH SAME TYPE OR APPROVED EQUAL BYTHE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD.PRELIMINARY CD'S11/01/162037 LAURA ST.SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477LANE COUNTYKECMFINAL CD'S11/14/16REMOVE DEAD OR BROKENBRANCHESDO NOT PRUNE LEADERREMOVE NURSERY APPLIED TREE WRAPTAPE OR STRING FROM TREE TRUNKAND CROWN. REMOVE ANY TAGS OR LABLES.REMOVE SUCKERSORGANIC MULCH MIN. 3" DEEP LEAVING6" DIAMETER CIRCLE OF BARE SOILAROUND TRUNK OF TREEIDENTIFY TRUNK FLARE AND SET ROOTBALL LEVEL TO GRADE OR SLIGHTLYABOVE GRADE (1/2")CENTER ROOTBALL IN PLANTING HOLE. LEAVEBOTTOM OF PLANTING HOLE FIRM. DO NOTAMEND SOIL UNLESS PLANTING IN POOR ORSEVERELY DISTURBED SOIL OR BUILDINGRUBBLE. USE WATER TO SETTLE SOIL ANDREMOVE AIR POCKETS AND FIRMLY SET TREE.GENTLY TAMP IF NEEDEDBREAK UP (SCARIFY) SIDES OF PLANTING HOLEREMOVE NURSERY MATERIAL SURROUNDINGROOTBALLPRUNE GIRDLING ROOTSMETEL "T" POST BURIED MIN. 1'INTO UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE,SEE NOTESHOLE HEIGHT EQUALS ROOTBALL HEIGHT NOTES: 1. NON-BINDING STRAPS AND RUBBER HOSES TO BE USED WITH "T" POST. 2. USE THREE (3) "T" POST FOR TREES GREATER THAN 3" CAL., TWO (2) POST FOR TREES LESS THAN 3" CAL. 3. REMOVE POST AFTER 1-YEAR.PLANTING MIXRAISED FORWATERDETENTIONAttachment 3, Page 12 of 27 GROUNDING PLANE - 1REVISIONS:DRAWING NOTICE:SITE NAME:PLANS PREPARED FOR:PLANS PREPARED FOR:SITE ADDRESS:SHEET DESCRIPTION:SHEET NUMBER:ENGINEERING LICENSE:PLANS PREPARED BY:DESCRIPTIONDATE BY REV1SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" (1/2"=1'-0" ON 22"x34" SHEET)GROUNDING PLANSOUTHBOUND PIONEER PARKWAYPROPOSED 12'-0" ACCESSGATEPROPOSED 6'-0" CHAINLINKFENCE WITH BARBED WIRETOP(E) CHAINLINK FENCEPROPOSED INGRESS /EGRESS TO LAURA STTHESE DOCUMENTS ARE CONFIDENTIAL ANDARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF AMS WIRELESSAND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED,DISSEMINATED OR REDISTRIBUTED WITHOUTTHE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF AMSWIRELESS.SITE NUMBER:KE CMAMS WIRELESS20710 ARBOR BEND CT | HUMBLE TX 77346270.316.7546 | KYLE@AMSWIRELESS.ROCKSTMobileSKYWAY TOWERS, LLC3637 MADACA LANETAMPA, FL 33618(813) 960-6200PROPOSED 150'-0"MONOPOLEPROPOSED 8'-0" ICEBRIDGEPROPOSED 50'-0" x 50'-0"LEASE PREMISESBY-GULLYOR-04000(E) PROPERTY LINEPROPOSED TEST WELL1. GROUNDING IS REQUIRED FOR FACILITIES AND STRUCTURES TO REDUCE THE HAZARDS OF ELECTRICALSHOCK TO PERSONNEL, PROTECT WIRING AND COMPONENTS FRO DAMAGE, REDUCE LONGITUDINAL CURRENTS AND REDUCE NOISE.2. GROUNDING SHALL COMPLY WITH ARTICLE 250 OF THE NATIONAL ELECTRIC CODE.3. SURFACE CONNECTIONS SHALL BE MADE TO BARE METAL. PAINTED SURFACES SHALL BE FILED TO ENSUREPROPER CONTACT. APPLY NON-OXIDIZING AGENT TO CONNECTIONS.4. GROUNDING CONDUCTORS SHALL BE RUN THROUGH PVC SLEEVE WHERE ROUTED THROUGH WALLS, FLOORS AND CEILING.5. EXOTHERMIC WELDS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURE'S RECOMMENDATIONS.ALL CONDUCTORS USED IN THE GROUND RING AND GROUND RING STUBS SHALL BE #2 SOLID WIRE. ALL STUBS SHALL BE CONNECTED TO THE GROUND RING USING EXOTHERMIC WELDS WITH TAC 2 BY 2 MOLDSAND #90 WELD METAL.GROUNDING SPECIFICATIONS:1. THE TRENCH FOR THE GROUND RING SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 2 FEET DEEP OR BELOW FROST LINE.2. THE TRENCH SHALL BE INSTALLED AROUND THE TOWER MIN. 2' CLEAR OF FOUNDATION.3. ONCE ALL THE DIRT IS REMOVED FROM THE TRENCH, THE GROUND RODS WILL BE SPACED AT A MINIMUMOF 6' APART FROM EACH OTHER. THE GROUND RODS TO BE DRIVEN INTO THE GROUND TO A MAXIMUM OF6" ABOVE THE GROUND AT TRENCH LEVEL. THE TOP OF THE GROUND ROD MUST BE 1" - 6" BELOW GRADE.4. AFTER THE ROUND RODS HAVE BEEN INSTALLED, MAKE A MEASUREMENT AND CUT FOR THE #2 WIRE TO BEINSTALLED FOR THE GROUND RING ENSURE THE #2 IS LONG ENOUGH TO MAKE A CONTINUOUS RUN FORTHE GROUND RING.5. THE GROUND RING MUST BE ONE WIRE AND SHOULD BE EXOTHERMICALLY WELDED AT THE END OF THEGROUND RING.6. START AT ONE OF THE GROUND RODS AND MAKE AN EXOTHERMIC WELD CONNECTION BETWEEN THE GROUND ROD AND THE #2 WIRE. CONTINUE THE STEP UNTIL ALL GROUND RODS HAVE BEEN CONNECTEDTO THE #2 WIRE FOR THE GROUND RING.7. ONCE YOU HAVE MADE A CONTINUOUS RUN WITH THE #2 WIRE FROM EACH GROUND ROD AND BACK TO WHERE YOU MADE THE FIRST CONNECTION OF THE GROUND ROD, OVERLAP THE #2 WIRE BY 1' AND SPLICETHE #2 WIRE TO ITSELF WITH A 2 TO 2 EXOTHERMIC WELD MOLD. THIS SHOULD BE THE ONLY SPLICE MADEWITHIN THE GROUND RING.8. AFTER THE GROUND RING HAS BEEN INSTALLED YOU WILL NEED TO MAKE AN ADDITIONAL MEASUREMENTFOR THE STRINGERS THAT WILL BE CONNECTED TO THE GROUND RING AND BROUGHT OUT ABOVE GRADE.STRINGERS WILL BE BROUGHT OFF THE GROUND RING TO THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS TO BE CONNECTEDTO THE FOLLOWING.A. TWO STRINGERS FOR THE LGB LOCATED A THE BASE OF THE TOWER.GROUNDING RING INSTALLATION:1. GROUNDING CONNECTIONS SHALL BE MADE USING EXOTHERMIC WELDS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.2. CLEAN SURFACES TO SHINY METAL WHERE GROUND WIRES ARE EXOTHERMICALLY WELDED TO GALVANIZED SURFACES. TREAT ALL EXOTHERMIC WELDS WITH A GALVANIZING PAINT OR TOUGH UP WITHGLAVANOX OR EQUIVALENT.3. PRIOR TO INSTALLING LUGS ON GROUND WIRES AND/OR TO MAKING ANY OTHER MECHANICAL CONNECTIONS, APPLY GALVANOX OR EQUIVALENT. PRIOR TO BOLTING GROUND WIRES TO BOLTING GROUND WIRES TO GROUND BARS, APPLY GALVANOX OR EQUIVALENT.4. CONNECTIONS SHALL BE MADE MADE WITH STAINLESS STEEL BOLTS, NUTS AND LOCK WASHERS 3/8" DIAMETER MINIMUM.5. WHERE BARE COPPER GROUND WIRES ARE ROUTED FROM ANY CONNECTION ABOVE GRADE TO THE GROUND RING, INSTALL WIRE IN 1/2" PVC SLEEVE, FROM 1" ABOVE GRADE AND SEAL TOP WITH SILICONEMATERIAL.6. PREPARE ALL BONDING SURFACES FOR GROUNDING CONNECTIONS BY REMOVING ALL PAINT AND CORROSION DOWN TO SHINY METAL. FOLLOWING CONNECTION, APPLY APPROPRIATE ANTIOXIDIZATIONPAINT.7. GROUNDING WIRE CONNECTIONS SHALL BE 3-CRIMP C-TAP COMPRESSION TYPE (ABOVE GRADE COMPRESSION FITTINGS) OR EXOTHERMIC WELDS. SPLIT BOLTS ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE.8. CONNECTIONS SHALL BE CRIMPED USING THE PROPER HYDRAULIC CRIMPING TOOL.9. ALL TERMINATIONS AT EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURES, PANELS AND WHERE EXPOSED FOR GROUNDING CONDUCTOR TERMINATION SHALL BE PERFORMED UTILIZING TWO HOLE BOLTED TONGUE COMPRESSIONTYPE WITH STAINLESS STEEL SELF-TAPPING SCREWS.GROUNDING RING CONNECTIONS:COPPER CLAD GROUND RODCADWELDTEST / INSPECTION WELL#2 SOLID COPPER WIRE / TINNEDLEGENDPROPOSED GATEJUMPERSPROPOSED (2)GROUND LEADS TOFUT GROUND BARPROPOSED TOWERGROUND RINGPROPOSED GROUND LEADTO EACH FENCE CORNER(TYP.)PROPOSED 5/8" x 8'-0"COPPER CLAD GROUNDROD (TYP.)PROPOSED COMPOUNDGROUND RINGPRELIMINARY CD'S11/01/16PROPOSED H-FRAMEPROPOSED NEMAENCLOSUREPROPOSED METERBANKPROPOSED 2'-0"x 2'-0" FIBER /TELCO VAULTS2037 LAURA ST.SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477LANE COUNTYKECMFINAL CD'S11/14/16Attachment 3, Page 13 of 27 GROUNDING / CONDUITDETAILSE - 2REVISIONS:DRAWING NOTICE:SITE NAME:PLANS PREPARED FOR:PLANS PREPARED FOR:SITE ADDRESS:SHEET DESCRIPTION:SHEET NUMBER:ENGINEERING LICENSE:PLANS PREPARED BY:DESCRIPTIONDATE BY REV5SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" (1/2"=1'-0" ON 22"x34" SHEET)UNDERGROUND CONDUIT DETAILTHESE DOCUMENTS ARE CONFIDENTIAL ANDARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF AMS WIRELESSAND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED,DISSEMINATED OR REDISTRIBUTED WITHOUTTHE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF AMSWIRELESS.SITE NUMBER:KE CMAMS WIRELESS20710 ARBOR BEND CT | HUMBLE TX 77346270.316.7546 | KYLE@AMSWIRELESS.ROCKSTMobileSKYWAY TOWERS, LLC3637 MADACA LANETAMPA, FL 33618(813) 960-6200TYPE GTBY-GULLYOR-040001. WIRING SHALL BE AWG STRANDED COPPER WITH THHN OR EQUIVALENT INSULATION. #12 MINIMUM INSTALLED IN 1/2" MINIMUM CONDUIT. SIGNAL WIRING SHALL BE INSULATED #22 AWG. NO BX OR ROMEX CABLE PERMITTED. CONDUITS SHALL BE SURFACE MOUNTED.2. WIRING DEVICES AND EQUIPMENT SHALL BE UL LISTED SPECIFICATIONS GRADE.3. MATERIALS SHALL BE NEW AND CONFORM TO THE APPLICABLE STANDARDS ESTABLISHED FOR EACH ITEMBY THE ORGANIZATIONS LISTED BELOW:- AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TESTING MATERIALS (ASTM)- UNDERWRITER'S LABORATORY (UL)- NATIONAL ELECTRICAL MANUFACTURING ASSOCIATION (NEMA)- AMERICAN STANDARDS ASSOCIATION (ASA)- NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION (NFPA)4. INSULATION OF MATERIALS SHALL COMPLY WITH REGULATIONS OF:- THE NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE (NFPA 70)- THE NATIONAL ELECTRICAL SAFETY CODE (ANSI C-2)- THE LIFE SAFETY CODE (NFPA 101)- LOCAL BUILDING CODES5. THE ENTIRE SYSTEM SHALL BE SOLIDLY GROUNDING USING LOCKNUTS AND BONDING NUTS ON CONDUITSAND PROPERLY BONDED GROUND CONDUCTOR. RECEPTACLES AND EQUIPMENT BRANCH CIRCUITS SHALLBE GROUNDED WITH A FULL SIZED EQUIPMENT GROUNDING CONDUCTOR RUN IN CIRCUIT'S CONDUIT.6. OUTLET AND JUNCTION BOXES SHALL BE ZINC-COATED OR CADIUM PLATED STEEL. NOT LESS THAN 4" SQUARE AND SUITABLE FOR THE TYPE SERVICE AND OUTLET. OUTLET AND JUNCTION BOXES SHALL BE SURFACE MOUNTED AND LABELED WITH BRANCH CIRCUIT BREAKER NUMBER.7. PROVIDE ONE TIME 1 LB HIT WITH HAMMER FOR TEST ON ALL CADWELDED CONNECTIONS. APPLY 2 COATSOF COLD GALVANIZING PAINT TO ALL CADWELDS.8. EXOTHERMIC WELD "TYPES" SHOWN ARE EXAMPLES. CONSULT WITH PROJECT MANAGER FOR SPECIFICTYPES OF EXOTHERMIC WELDS TO BE USED FOR THIS PROJECT.9. ALL GROUND CONDUCTOR CONNECTIONS ABOVE GRADE SHALL BE BURNDY HYROUND COMPRESSION GROUNDING CONNECTORS OR EXOTHERMIC WELD AT THE CONTRACTOR'S OPTION. ALL GROUND CONDUCTORS SHALL BE CRIMPED OR EXOTHERMIC WELD UNLESS INDICATED TO BE BOLTED.10. GROUNDING TO PROVIDE RESISTANCE OF 5 OHMS OR LESS.11. ALL CAD WELDS ABOVE GRADE TO BE GROUND SMOOTH AND PAINTED.12. NON-METALLIC SEAL-TITE OR APPROVED TUBING TO BE PLACED ON ALL ABOVE GRADE GROUND LEADS.TUBING TO BE MINIMUM 12" BELOW FINISH GRADE TO 3" FROM CAD WELD CONNECTION.13. ALL MECHANICAL CONNECTIONS TO BE PROTECTED W/ COPPER SHIELD OR APPROVED EQUAL.14. MINIMUM BEND RADIUS FOR #2 AWG SOLID WIRE TO BE 6".GROUNDING SPECIFICATIONS:EXOTHERMIC WELD DETAILS N.T.S.1TYPE VBTYPE VBCTYPE GL LUG(EXIST TOWERGROUND TAB)HEAT SHRINK ONGATES ONLYBURNDY DETIALSN.T.S.2TYPE YGIBSTYPE YA3CL-2TC38TYPE BD18G92TYPE KC TO PIPETYPE KC TOFLAT SURFACELONG BARREL FORDOUBLE CRIMPGROUND INSPECTION WELLN.T.S.3ELECTRIC / TELCO TRENCHN.T.S.42'-0" LONG x 6" DIA.SCHEDULE 40 WHITEPVCPARALLEL TYPEEXOTHERMICALLYWELDED TO GROUNDROD#2 AWG BARE TINNEDSOLID COPPER WIRE(GROUND RING)CRUSHED ROCK INSIDEBELOW AND AROUNDSLEEVE. EXOTHERMICWELD SHALL REMAINVISIBLE1" WIDE SLOT FORGROUND WIRE.EXTEND 2" ABOVEGROUND WIRE.REMOVABLE COVER.COVER SHALL BEREMOVABLE BY HANDNO TOOLS SHALL BEREQUIRED FORREMOVAL.FINISH GRADEAS REQUIRED6"TO PRIMARYBONDSPROVIDE YELLOW"CAUTION ELECTRICLINES BURIED BELOW"WARNING TAPE (2 TYP.)COMPACTED FILL TO95% STD. PROCTORDENSITYCOMPACTED SAND2-1/2" ELECTRICALCONDUIT SCH. 40 PVC24" TRENCH OR AS PERLOCAL CODE(2) 4" TELCO CONDUITSSCH. 40 PVCPER LOCAL CODE 1'2'-0"1'-6"PUSH ON PIPE CAP DONOT GLUECONDUIT ABOVEGRADE SCH. 80 PVC ORGALV. PIPE. TAPEWRAP ALL BURIEDMETAL AND THREADEDSLEEVES.PVC SCH. 80 LONGRADIUS BENDSPROVIDE 1/4" BULLROPE OR BRAIDEDNYLON PULL CORDTIED TO 4" WASHER EA.END.UNDERGROUND CONDUITSHALL BE SCHEDULE 40PVC; SCHEDULE 80UNDER TRAFFIC BEARINGAREASHORIZONTAL RUNS OFGRADE OR 2" ABOVECONCRETE6"PRELIMINARY CD'S11/01/162037 LAURA ST.SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477LANE COUNTYKECMFINAL CD'S11/14/16Attachment 3, Page 14 of 27 UTILITY FRAME DETAILSE - 3REVISIONS:DRAWING NOTICE:SITE NAME:PLANS PREPARED FOR:PLANS PREPARED FOR:SITE ADDRESS:SHEET DESCRIPTION:SHEET NUMBER:ENGINEERING LICENSE:PLANS PREPARED BY:DESCRIPTIONDATE BY REV2N.T.S.OVERALL VIEWTHESE DOCUMENTS ARE CONFIDENTIAL ANDARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF AMS WIRELESSAND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED,DISSEMINATED OR REDISTRIBUTED WITHOUTTHE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF AMSWIRELESS.SITE NUMBER:KE CMAMS WIRELESS20710 ARBOR BEND CT | HUMBLE TX 77346270.316.7546 | KYLE@AMSWIRELESS.ROCKSTMobileSKYWAY TOWERS, LLC3637 MADACA LANETAMPA, FL 33618(813) 960-6200BY-GULLYOR-04000PRELIMINARY CD'S11/01/162037 LAURA ST.SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477LANE COUNTYKECMFINAL CD'S11/14/16800 AMP UTILITY FRAMEN.T.S.1Attachment 3, Page 15 of 27 PHOTO SIM MAP DATA ¤ 2016 BING MAPS N REVISIONS: PLANS PREPARED BY: SITE NAME: SITE ID: SITE ADDRESS: SHEET DESCRIPTION: SHEET NUMBER: DESCRIPTIONSITE ADDRESS:BY-GULLYOR-04000 BY-GULLY PHOTOSIMULATION1941 LAURA ST., SPRINGFIELD, OR 974771941 LAURA ST. SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 PHOTO SIMULATION DATE BY REV 11/16/16 KE OR-04000 AERIAL LOCATION OR-04000 BY-GULLY PHOTO SIMULATION PROPOSED 150'-0" MONOPOLE TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER PHOTO SIMULATION 1941 LAURA ST. | SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 IMAGE DATA ¤ 2016 BING MAPS PHOTO SIMULATION - 150'-0" MONOPOLE MAP DATA ¤ 2016 BING MAPS N VIEWING LOCATION IMAGE DATA ¤ 2016 BING MAPS EXISTING VIEW PROPOSED 150'-0" MONOPOLE NOTES 1. PHOTO SIMULATION FROM SOUTHBOUND PIONEER PARKWAY. 2. PHOTO SIMULATION IS SCHEMATIC AND BEST REPRESENTATION OF PROPOSED TOWER AND SITE CONDITIONS. FINAL CONDITIONS MAY VARY FROM SIMULATION. PS - 1 PROPOSED T-MOBILE RAD CENTER SITE SITE VIEWAttachment 3, Page 16 of 27 PHOTO SIM MAP DATA ¤ 2016 BING MAPS N REVISIONS: PLANS PREPARED BY: SITE NAME: SITE ID: SITE ADDRESS: SHEET DESCRIPTION: SHEET NUMBER: DESCRIPTIONSITE ADDRESS:BY-GULLYOR-04000 BY-GULLY PHOTOSIMULATION1941 LAURA ST., SPRINGFIELD, OR 974771941 LAURA ST. SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 PHOTO SIMULATION DATE BY REV 11/16/16 KE OR-04000 AERIAL LOCATION OR-04000 BY-GULLY PHOTO SIMULATION PROPOSED 150'-0" MONOPOLE TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER PHOTO SIMULATION 1941 LAURA ST. | SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 IMAGE DATA ¤ 2016 BING MAPS PHOTO SIMULATION - 150'-0" MONOPOLE MAP DATA ¤ 2016 BING MAPS N VIEWING LOCATION IMAGE DATA ¤ 2016 BING MAPS EXISTING VIEW PROPOSED 150'-0" MONOPOLE NOTES 1. PHOTO SIMULATION FROM LAURA ST. FACING EAST. 2. PHOTO SIMULATION IS SCHEMATIC AND BEST REPRESENTATION OF PROPOSED TOWER AND SITE CONDITIONS. FINAL CONDITIONS MAY VARY FROM SIMULATION. PS - 2 PROPOSED T-MOBILE RAD CENTER SITE SITE VIEWAttachment 3, Page 17 of 27 PHOTO SIM MAP DATA ¤ 2016 BING MAPS N REVISIONS: PLANS PREPARED BY: SITE NAME: SITE ID: SITE ADDRESS: SHEET DESCRIPTION: SHEET NUMBER: DESCRIPTIONSITE ADDRESS:BY-GULLYOR-04000 BY-GULLY PHOTOSIMULATION1941 LAURA ST., SPRINGFIELD, OR 974771941 LAURA ST. SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 PHOTO SIMULATION DATE BY REV 11/16/16 KE OR-04000 AERIAL LOCATION OR-04000 BY-GULLY PHOTO SIMULATION PROPOSED 150'-0" MONOPOLE TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER PHOTO SIMULATION 1941 LAURA ST. | SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 IMAGE DATA ¤ 2016 BING MAPS PHOTO SIMULATION - 150'-0" MONOPOLE MAP DATA ¤ 2016 BING MAPS N VIEWING LOCATION IMAGE DATA ¤ 2016 BING MAPS EXISTING VIEW PROPOSED 150'-0" MONOPOLE NOTES 1. PHOTO SIMULATION FROM SHADY LOOP FACING WEST. 2. PHOTO SIMULATION IS SCHEMATIC AND BEST REPRESENTATION OF PROPOSED TOWER AND SITE CONDITIONS. FINAL CONDITIONS MAY VARY FROM SIMULATION. PS - 3 PROPOSED T-MOBILE RAD CENTER VIEW SITE SITEAttachment 3, Page 18 of 27 Coverage and Capacity Study for Springfield area •Existing sites PO02307A and PO02313 are already experiencing congestion for most of the time of the day.By mid 2017 this will became critical and will severely impact our customer experience in Springfield area. •Also,areas located NE and SW of the proposed site are experiencing weak coverage,not suitable for In-Building service,being limited to In-Vehicle service only.Attachment 3, Page 19 of 27 City of Springfield New Proposed site PO04028 Congested site PO02307A Congested site PO02313A Attachment 3, Page 20 of 27 New Proposed site PO04028 Daily Call distribution Attachment 3, Page 21 of 27 Current Best Server area Attachment 3, Page 22 of 27 Current Coverage Level Areas with weak In-Building CoverageAttachment 3, Page 23 of 27 Future Coverage Level Attachment 3, Page 24 of 27 New site’s contribution to enhance coverage and offloading traffic Attachment 3, Page 25 of 27 Future Best Server area Attachment 3, Page 26 of 27 Conclusions •Existing sites PO02307A and PO02313A are already experiencing congestion for most of the time of the day. •By bringing on-air PO04028A, we estimate that the traffic load of PO02313A will be reduced by 40-45%, while traffic of PO02307A will be reduced by 30-35%. •New traffic will be picked up from In-Building Commercial and Residential where the current coverage is limited to In-Vehicle only.Attachment 3, Page 27 of 27 Attachment 4, Page 1 of 9 Attachment 4, Page 2 of 9 Attachment 4, Page 3 of 9 Attachment 4, Page 4 of 9 Attachment 4, Page 5 of 9 Attachment 4, Page 6 of 9 Attachment 4, Page 7 of 9 Attachment 4, Page 8 of 9 Attachment 4, Page 9 of 9 BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON REQUEST FOR DISCRETIONARY USE + CASE NO. TYP316-00003 + FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, + AND ORDER NATURE OF THE APPLICATION The applicant submitted a Discretionary Use request for a high visibility wireless telecommunications system facility consisting of a 150-foot tall monopole tower at 2037 Laura Street (Assessor’s Map 17-03-27-10, Tax Lot 2200). The site is within the mixed use Community Commercial/Light Medium Industrial (CC/LMI) District and the Springfield Development Code (SDC) Section 4.3-145.H lists high visibility wireless telecommunications system facilities as a Discretionary Use in the LMI District. The Discretionary Use request requires action by the Planning Commission before successive land use actions can be approved for the site. 1. On October 28, 2016 the following application for a Discretionary Use was accepted: Allow for a high visibility wireless telecommunications system facility (cellular tower) in the Light Medium Industrial District, Case Number TYP316-00003, Justin Jones, Skyway Towers LLC, applicant. 2. The application was submitted in accordance with Section 5.4-105 of the Springfield Development Code. Timely and sufficient notice of the public hearing, pursuant to Section 5.2-115 of the Springfield Development Code, has been provided. 3. On December 20, 2016 a public hearing on the Discretionary Use request was held. The Development & Public Works Department staff notes including criteria of approval, findings and recommendations, together with the testimony and submittals of the persons testifying at that hearing have been considered and are part of the record of this proceeding. CONCLUSION Supported by substantial evidence in the record, the requested Discretionary Use application is consistent with the criteria of Section 5.9-120 of the Springfield Development Code. This general finding is supported by the specific findings of fact and conclusions in the attached staff report (Exhibit A) attached hereto. ORDER It is ORDERED by the Planning Commission of Springfield that Case Number TYP316-00003, Discretionary Use Request, be approved. This ORDER was presented to and approved by the Planning Commission on December 20, 2016. EXPIRATION OF APPROVAL This approval expires three (3) calendar years after the date of approval by the Planning Commission, or upon expiration of the accompanying Site Plan Review approval, Case TYP216-00050, whichever date is later. Attachment 5, Page 1 of 2 APPEAL Pursuant to SDC Section 5.2-155, this Type III decision is final unless appealed to the Springfield City Council in accordance with SDC Section 5.3-120. Only those persons who participated either orally or in writing have standing to appeal the Planning Commission’s decision. An appeal application shall be filed with the Director within 15 calendar days of the Planning Commission’s decision (ie. by 5:00 pm on January 4, 2017) to be considered valid. The appeal application shall be accompanied by the fee prescribed by the City Council ($2,420.00). The filing fee will be refunded to the appellant if one or more of the appeal allegations are upheld by the City Council, or if the decision is amended, remanded or reversed. _______________________________ Planning Commission Chairperson ATTEST AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Attachment 5, Page 2 of 2 BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW + CASE NO. TYP216-00050 + FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, + AND ORDER NATURE OF THE APPLICATION The applicant submitted a Site Plan Review application for construction of a 150-foot tall monopole tower with fenced enclosure and equipment cabinets at 2037 Laura Street (Assessor’s Map 17-03-27-10, Tax Lot 2200). The site is within the mixed use Community Commercial/Light Medium Industrial (CC/LMI) District and the Springfield Development Code (SDC) Section 5.17-105.B.2.g lists wireless telecommunications system facilities as requiring Site Plan Review in the LMI District. The Site Plan Review application is being processed concurrently with a Discretionary Use request requiring action by the Planning Commission before the subject development can be approved for the site. 1. On October 28, 2016 the following application for Site Plan Review was accepted: Allow for a 150-foot tall wireless telecommunications system facility (cellular tower) with fenced enclosure and equipment cabinets in the Light Medium Industrial District, Case Number TYP216-00050, Justin Jones, Skyway Towers LLC, applicant. 2. The application was submitted in accordance with Section 5.4-105 of the Springfield Development Code. Public notification and request for comments, pursuant to Section 5.1-130.B of the Springfield Development Code, has been provided. 3. On December 20, 2016 the Planning Commission reviewed the subject application for Site Plan Review in conjunction with the applicant’s request for Discretionary Use. The Development & Public Works Department staff notes including criteria of approval, findings, and recommended conditions of approval, along with the testimony received at the public hearing, have been considered and are part of the record of this proceeding. CONCLUSION On the basis of this record, the requested Site Plan Review application is consistent with the criteria of Section 5.17-125 of the Springfield Development Code. This general finding is supported by the specific findings of fact, conclusions, and conditions of approval in the attached staff report (Exhibit A) attached hereto. ORDER It is ORDERED by the Planning Commission of Springfield that Case Number TYP216-00050, Site Plan Review application, be approved. This ORDER was presented to and approved by the Planning Commission on December 20, 2016. EXPIRATION OF APPROVAL This approval expires two (2) calendar years after the date of approval by the Planning Commission unless extended in accordance with the provisions of SDC Section 5.17-140. Attachment 6, Page 1 of 2 APPEAL Pursuant to SDC Sections 5.1-135 and 5.2-155, this Type II decision is final unless appealed to the Springfield City Council in accordance with SDC Section 5.3-120. Only those persons who participated either orally or in writing have standing to appeal the Planning Commission’s decision. An appeal application shall be filed with the Director within 15 calendar days of the Planning Commission’s decision (ie. by 5:00 pm on January 4, 2017) to be considered valid. The appeal application shall be accompanied by the fee prescribed by the City Council ($250.00). The filing fee will be refunded to the appellant if one or more of the appeal allegations are upheld by the City Council, or if the decision is amended, remanded or reversed. _______________________________ Planning Commission Chairperson ATTEST AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Attachment 6, Page 2 of 2