HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010 03 02 Discretionary Use Verizon MEMOMEMORANDUM CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
DATE OF HEARING: March 2, 2010
TO: Springfield Planning Commission
FROM: Steve Hopkins, Planner II
WORK SESSION &
REGULAR SESSION
PLANNING COMMISSION
TRANSMITTAL MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Request by Verizon Wireless to construction a wireless communication facility.
ISSUE: On December 24, 2009, Verizon Wireless submitted a Discretionary Use (DU)
application to construct a wireless communication facility. If approved, this will allow
construction of a 65’ monopole and a 12’x26’ equipment shelter within a 30’x40’ fenced area.
ACTION REQUESTED
The Planning Commission (PC) is charged with determining if the proposed wireless
communication facility is an appropriate use at this site. Based on evidence presented at the
hearing, the PC should review the application for compliance with the approval criteria in SDC
5.9-120.
DISCUSSION:
The site is at 3365 Game Farm Rd. It is the SUB electric substation on MLK Blvd. across from
RiverBend. The applicant has submitted a site plan review application and a Drinking Water
Protection Overlay application for concurrent review. The issues have been separated into
those that need to be addressed by the DU application and those that will be addressed in the
site plan/DWP applications.
Issues to related to the DU:
• The Fire Marshal is requiring emergency access and fire flow. The issue is the type of
occupancy of the equipment building. The generator and fuel storage put the equipment
building in an “S” Occupancy, which requires emergency access and fire flow. If the
generator and fuel are removed, the equipment building can be a “U” Occupancy, which
does not require emergency access and fire flow.
Issues to related to the site plan review:
• The DWP is being reviewed by SUB and will be implemented in the Site Plan Review.
The generator and fuel storage must be identified to address secondary containment.
As proposed, it will be a diesel generator. If the applicant changes that to a natural gas
generator, it will resolve the DWP concern, but not the Fire Code occupancy issue.
• Landscaping will need permanent underground irrigation
• The outside light must contain a full cut off shield
• A facility permit from the County is required for access to Game Farm Rd.
Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the Discretionary Use, but require access
from Game Farm Rd. It will be the responsibility of the applicant to redesign the site with
adequate emergency access and fire flow, or revise the equipment building as a “U”
Occupancy.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1: Staff report containing findings of fact and conclusions law to support approval of
the application.
Attachment 2: Order for approval of the application.
Attachment 3: Comments from Jon Driscoll dated February 12, 2010.
Attachment 4: Email string between the city and the applicant concerning the occupancy issue.
February 10, 2010.
Attachment 5: Partition 2002-P1627. Submitted February 10, 2010.
Attachment 6: Applicant’s supplemental submittal date February 5, 2010.
Attachment 7: Comments from Lane County Transportation dated January 15, 2010.
Attachment 8: Applicant’s original submittal dated December 24, 2009.
STAFF REPORT
Hearing Date: March 2, 2010
Project Proposal: Discretionary Use for a Wireless facility
Case Number: DRC2009-00051
Project Location: 3365 Game Farm Rd.
Map and Tax lot: 1703220000904
Property size: 1,200 sf leased area inside a 2.32 acre parcel.
Base Zone: MDR (Medium Density Residential)
Overlay District(s): Drinking Water Protection Overlay, 1-5 Year Time of Travel Zone of the
Sports Way Wellhead.
Metro Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential, Nodal Overlay
Pre-Submittal Meeting Date: March 17, 2009
Application Submitted Date: December 24, 2009
Other Applications: DRC2009-00052 (Drinking Water Protection); DRC2009-00050 (Site Plan)
Staff: Steve Hopkins, AICP, Planner 2
Applicant Representative Land Owner
Verizon Wireless
5430 NE 122nd Ave.
Portland OR 97230
Konrad Hyle
15618 SW 72nd Ave.
Portland OR 97224
Springfield Utility Board
250 A Street
Springfield OR 97477
GAME FARMMARTIN LUTHER KING JETHAN
NICHOLAS
Attachment 1-1
Summary
On December 24, 2009, Verizon Wireless submitted a Discretionary Use (DU) application to
construct a wireless communication facility in the MDR (Medium Density Residential)
The facility includes a 65’ high monopole, a 12’x26’ prefabricated equipment structure
contained within a 30’x40’ fenced area. Fence is 6’ high cyclon
zone.
e with 3 strands of barbed wire
d
by the DU application and those that will be addressed in the site plan/DWP
type of
ing can be a
As
concern, but not the Fire Code occupancy issue.
ess
y.
etermine if the church is an appropriate
options:
d on testimony at the hearing, or
3. deny the application.
on top. The leased area will be surrounded by landscaping.
The applicant has submitted a site plan review application and a Drinking Water Protection
Overlay application for concurrent review. The issues have been separated into those that nee
to be addressed
applications.
Issues to address in the DU:
• The Fire Marshal is requiring emergency access and fire flow. The issue is the
occupancy of the equipment building. The generator and fuel storage put the
equipment building in an “S” Occupancy, which requires emergency access and fire
flow. If the generator and fuel storage are removed, the equipment build
“U” Occupancy, which does not require emergency access or fire flow.
• The DWP is being reviewed by SUB and will be implemented in the Site Plan Review.
The generator and fuel storage must be identified to address secondary containment.
proposed, it will be a diesel generator. If the applicant changes that to a natural gas
generator, it will resolve the DWP
Issues to address in the site plan review:
• Landscaping will need underground irrigation
• Outside light must contain a full cut off shield
• A facility permit from the County is required for access to Game Farm Rd.
Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the Discretionary Use, but require acc
from Game Farm Rd. It will be the responsibility of the applicant to redesign the site with
adequate emergency access and fire flow, or revise the maintenance building as a U Occupanc
The Commission should take public testimony and d
use at this site. The Commission has three
1. approve as recommended, or
2. approve but add/modify conditions base
Staff recommends approval of the Discretionary Use, subject to the conditions of approval. The
attached order reflects that recommendation. If the Commission chooses to deny the
application, the order will need to be revised to support that decision. In that case, the
Commission should close the hearing and move the item to the next public hearing (March 16).
The revised order will be presented to the Commission on that date.
Attachment 1-2
Procedural Findings:
• On January 19, 2010, the City’s Development Review Committee reviewed the
application. City staff’s review comments have been reduced to findings and conditions
as necessary to demonstrate compliance with the Wireless Telecommunications Systems
Facilities Criteria of Approval contained in SDC 4.3-145.
• Notice of the public hearing was sent to adjacent property owners/occupants within 300
feet of the subject site on February 9, 2010. The applicant and parties submitting
testimony at the public hearing have appeal rights and are mailed a copy of this decision
• Notification was published in the Register Guard on February 8, 2010.
for consideration.
t review process for wireless telecommunications systems (WTS)
facilitie
standards specified
in Subs
g
quipment, unless height limit provisions
ause the site is zoned MDR and
onclusion: The Director concludes the proposal complies with SDC 4.3-145(A).
B.
required by the FAA. All other
t
es a permanent underground irrigation system.
(A), this light shall contain a full cut off shield. This will
onclusion: The Director concludes the proposal complies with SDC 4.3-145(B).
SDC 4.3-145 Wireless Telecommunications Systems Facilities
A. The developmen
s is as follows:
3. Discretionary Approval (Type III Review). In addition to the
ections 1. and 2. above, the following standards also apply:
b. All WTS facilities that exceed the height limit of the underlying zoning
district on any site, including equipment shelters, buildings and cabinets housin
WTS land line switching/connection e
are exempted elsewhere in this Code.
Finding: The proposal requires Discretionary Use approval bec
the tower exceeds the height limit of the MDR zoning district.
C
Standards for siting WTS facilities are as follows:
2. All WTS facilities shall be landscaped at the base of towers/poles, and completely
around equipment shelters. Lighting of towers shall be as
lighting shall be deflected away from adjoining property.
Finding: The perimeter of the leased area will be landscaped. Although the applicant does no
propose any irrigation, SDC 4.4-105(G) requir
This will be verified during site plan review.
Finding: The lighting consists of a single wall pack located near the door of the equipment
shed. In accordance with SDC4.5-110
be verified during site plan review.
C
Attachment 1-3
C. A
n A.1.,
s only shall submit the following
inform
e removal shall
s attached to the applicant’s submittal as Exhibit 5. The
bond is
agreeing to allow collocation on
ant’s submittal as Exhibit 5. It is also contained in a letter dated
Decem
tached WTS facilities
equired information and
e if
there w
ating shall
be prov
cture is not of sufficient height to meet engineering
fficient structural strength to
erference for one or both WTS facilities will
t.
l
t’s
ow a tower height of 65 feet at the proposed site meets their signal and data
needs.
pplication requirements for WTS facilities are as follows:
1. WTS providers whose proposal conforms with the provisions of Subsectio
above requiring building and electrical permit
ation with the application for permits:
a. A copy of that portion of the lease agreement (or lease memo) with the
property owner, that includes collocation provisions (where applicable), facility
removal within 90 days of abandonment, and a bond to guarante
be submitted for review prior to development permit approval.
Finding: The lease agreement i
attached as Exhibit 9.
b. A signed statement from the applicant
the applicant’s structure (where applicable).
Finding: The required collocation statement is included in the lease agreement and is
attached to the applic
ber 21, 2009.
c. A map of the City showing the approximate geographic limits of the “cell”
to be created by the facility. This map shall include the same information for all
other facilities owned or operated by the applicant within the City, or extending
within the City from a distant location, and any existing de
of another provider within 1,000 feet of the proposed site.
Finding: Refer to applicant’s Exhibit 4. The maps contain the r
demonstrate the proposed site will serve the immediate area.
Finding: The applicant has stated they contacted RiverBend Hospital to determin
as any interest in a rooftop facility. There was no interest by RiverBend.
d. An engineer’s analysis/report of the recommended site location area for
the proposed facility. If an existing structure approved for collocation is within
the area recommended by the engineer’s report, reasons for not colloc
ided demonstrating at least one of the following deficiencies:
i. The stru
requirements;
ii. The structure is not of su
accommodate the WTS facility;
iii. Electromagnetic int
result from collocation; or
iv. The radio frequency coverage objective cannot be adequately me
Finding: Refer to applicant’s Exhibit 4. There are no existing towers within the viable
range, so four potential locations were examined. There were two sites on Internationa
Way, one on Pheasant Blvd, and the proposed site on Game Farm Rd. The applican
tests sh
Attachment 1-4
e. A plot plan showing: the lease area; antenna structure; height above gr
and setback from property lines; equ
ade
ipment shelters and setback from property
as
equipment structure contained within a 30’x40’ fenced
area. F p. The leased area will
be surrounded by landscaping.
.
Findin
or at nearest
s
Findin
radio e
Findin ireless
operati
vider, if different.
Findin
Findin -890 MHz at 100 watts and
1965-19
schedule.
Findin
Findin ial/Nodal Overlay by the
Metro P l.
inding: An FAA determination is not required for this site. Refer to applicant’s Exhibit
.
s with the provisions of Subsection A.2.,
above r ents
of Secti
lines; access; connection point with land line system; and all landscape are
intended to screen the WTS facility.
Finding: Refer to applicant’s Exhibit 2. The proposed facility includes a 65’ high
monopole, a 12’x26’ prefabricated
ence is 6’ high cyclone with 3 strands of barbed wire on to
f. The method of stealth design (where applicable)
g: Stealth design is not required and none is proposed.
g. An engineer’s statement that the RF emissions at grade,
habitable space when attached to an existing structure complies with FCC rule
for these emissions; the cumulative RF emissions if collocated.
g: Refer to the applicant’s Exhibit 6. The proposed facility was evaluated by a
ngineer who is licensed in Oregon and found to comply with the FCC rules.
h. A description of the type of service offered (including, but not limited to:
voice, data, video) and the consumer receiving equipment.
g: The facility will contain cellular and Personal Communcations Service w
on with antennas atop a new monopole tower.
i. Identification of the provider and backhaul pro
g: Qwest will be the provider and backhaul provider.
j. Provide the RF range in megaHertz and the wattage output of the
equipment.
g: Total wattage is 140Watts. The breakdown is 880
70 MHz at 40 Watts.
k. Provide the facilities maintenance
g: Maintenance will occur once a month.
l. Provide the zoning and Metro Plan designation of proposed site.
g: The site is designated Medium Density Resident
lan. The site is zoned Medium Density Residentia
m. Provide any required FAA determination.
F
7
2. WTS providers whose proposals conform
equiring Site Plan Review approval shall submit, in addition to the requirem
on 5.17-120, the following information.
Attachment 1-5
b. Photo simulations of the proposed WTS facility from the 4 cardinal
s.
c. The distance from the nearest WTS facility and nearest collocation site.
3. WTS pr
above requirin
b. ia:
ut not limited to:
TS
sed height; and
gorous approval process
Finding: Refer to the letter dated December 16, 2009, and attached as applicant’s Exhibit
4. The letter addresses all the Discretionary Use criteria.
ommission or Hearings Official shall use the proceeding criteria in place
Official shall not grant approval of the request unless each of these
inding: The Discretionary Use criteria contained in SDC 5.9-120 have not been used to
valuate this proposal.
and any
MLK Blvd. However, this option is strongly discourage because that is an
sportation
compass points and/or abutting right-of-way, whichever provide the most
accurate representation of the proposed facility from a variety of vantage point
Finding: The photo simulations are attached to applicant’s Exhibit 3.
Finding: The nearest existing tower is 3.5 miles SW of the proposed site.
oviders whose proposals conform with the provisions of Subsection A.3.,
g Discretionary Use approval shall submit the following information:
Responses to the following Discretionary Use criter
i. An engineer’s statement demonstrating the reasons why the WTS
facility shall be located at the proposed site (including, b
service demands, topography dropped coverage);
ii. An engineer’s statement demonstrating the reasons why the W
facility shall be constructed at the propo
iii. Verification of good faith efforts made to locate or design the
proposed WTS facility to qualify for a less ri
(building permit or site plan approval).
Conclusion: The Director concludes the proposal complies with SDC 4.3-145(C).
D. The Planning C
of the Discretionary Use criteria in Section 5.9-120 to evaluate the proposal. The Planning
Commission or Hearings
criteria has been met.
F
e
Conclusion: The Director concludes the proposal complies with SDC 4.3-145(D).
E. Failure to comply with the standards, provisions and conditions of this Section,
other applicable Section of this Code, may constitute grounds for revocation of a City approval
to locate and operate a WTS facility.
Finding: The applicant has considered addressing the emergency access issue with an
emergency access to
arterial road with a posted speed limit of 45 mph. In the opinion of the city tran
planner, that would not be a safe access point. Refer to the comments from Jon Driscoll dated
February 9, 2010.
Condition of Approval #1: The site shall take all access from Game Farm Rd.
Attachment 1-6
DRC2009-000561 Verizon Wireless Page 7 of 7
Finding: Comments from Lane County Transportation Planning: “Although there are several
utility related facility permits exist on file associated with the subject property, facility permit
for the existing driveway could not be found. Regardless of the existing driveway use, wh
development with new added traffic is proposed, the driveway approach must be reviewed
facility
en a
. A
permit is required. It is not clear from the applicant’s statement whether the pole will be
nty right-of-way or disrupt the traffic on Game Farm Road during
assembled on site or transported as a single unit. If prefabricated towers are planned for
transporting to the site, LC 15.230 (1) Table 3 should be consulted for truck size and weight
limit.
The applicant must obtain additional facility permits if the tower installation work is likely to
encroach into the Cou
installations or maintenance. Please contact 682-6902 or visit
http://www.lanecounty.org/Roads/ROWPermits.htm for information about facility permi
and associated fees.”
ts
Condition of Approval #2: Prior to final site plan approval, submit a copy of the approved
Lane County facility permit for the access to Game Farm Rd.
Finding: Comments from the Springfield Fire Marshal's Office indicate they do not support the
proposed site plan. The issue is the type of occupancy of the equipment building. The
generator and fuel storage put the equipment building in an “S” Occupancy, which requires
emergency access and fire flow. If the generator and fuel storage are removed, the equipment
building can be a “U” Occupancy, which does not require emergency access or fi
re flow. Staff
ecommends approving the DU, and allowing the applicant to revise the site plan to comply
ith the Fire Code in the manner they feel is most beneficial to them. Including a condition to
The Director concludes the proposal, as conditioned, complies with SDC 4.3-
etermination: Based on the findings of fact, conclusions of law and the evidence in the record,
e Director determines the proposal complies with the Wireless Telecommunication approval
riteria contained in SDC 4.3-135, subject to the conditions of approval attached as Exhibit A.
r
w
this effect would be redundant since compliance with the fire code is implicit.
Conclusion:
145(E).
D
th
c
Summary of Conditions
Condition #1: The site shall take all access from Game Farm Rd.
ondition #2: Prior to final site plan approval, submit a copy of the approved Lane County
facility permit for the access to Game Farm Rd.
C
Attachment 1-7
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
A DISCRETIONARY USE HEARING FOR (
A WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY (
(
Case Number: DRC2009-00051 (
FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND ORDER (
NATURE OF THE APPLICATION
Verizon Wireless submitted an application to construct a wireless telecommunication facility
located at 3365 Game Farm Rd. The Springfield Development Code (SDC) Section 3.2-210 lists
“Certain Wireless Telecommunication Systems Facilities” as a discretionary use in the MDR
(Medium Density Residential) zoning district, requiring action by the Planning Council to
approve.
1. The application conforms to the provisions of Section 4.3-135 of the Springfield
Development Code. Timely and sufficient notice of the public hearing, pursuant to
Section 5.1-135 of the Springfield Development Code was provided.
2. On March 2, 2010, a public hearing on the proposed use was held. The Development
Services staff notes, including criteria of approval, findings, and recommendations,
together with the testimony and submittals of those persons testifying at the hearing or
in writing, have been considered and are part of the record of this proceeding.
CONCLUSION
The proposed church is presented for approval as a discretionary use under SDC Section 3.2-210
“Certain Wireless Telecommunication Systems Facilities” in the MDR (Medium Density
Residential) zoning district.
On the basis of this record, the requested discretionary use is consistent with the criteria of
approval of Section 4.3-135 of the Development Code. This general finding is supported by the
specific findings of fact and conclusion in the Staff Report that is attached hereto.
Attachment 2-1
Planning Commission Order
DRC2009-00051
March 2, 2010
Page 2 of 2
DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
It is the DECISION of the Planning Commission of Springfield that Journal Number DRC2009-
00051, Discretionary Use, be approved with conditions.
This DECISION was presented to and approved by the Planning Commission on March 2,
2010.
__________________________________
Planning Commission Chairperson
ATTEST:
AYES: _____
NOES: _____
ABSENT: _____
ABSTAIN: _____
Attachment 2-2
From: DRISCOLL Jon
Sent: Friday, February 12, 2010 12:10 PM
To: HOPKINS Steve
Cc: BARNETT Brian
Subject: RE: Site Plan Tentative DRC2009‐00050 Verizon Wireless‐Springfield Utility
Board Cell Tower
Steve,
I understand that the applicant for the Verizon cell tower has not been able to find a feasible way to give
access to Fire, Life and Safety to its site at 3365 Game Farm Road. I just wanted to formally give you
input from Transportation’s view for the proposal (not shown on their site plan) of using Martin Luther
King Boulevard as an emergency access.
I have great concern that adding such an emergency access would be possible cause of accidents in the
future. Arterial roadways are meant to bring traffic in high volumes from one place of interest to
another quickly and efficiently. That is why we have designed Pioneer Parkway and MLK Blvd. to have
no curb breaks besides street intersections from F Street to Game Farm Road. This creates a smooth
somewhat highway feel for those 2.3 miles without a single driveway access or even an alley way to
impede the arterial traffic flow. The newly constructed roadway that abuts this site to the east also has
built into it a certain driver expectancy that there will be no access gained from a driveway—especially
while rounding the corner.
Therefore, I would consider it unwise and unsafe to add an access to Martin Luther King Boulevard from
the potential Verizon site. If an emergency would occur and the access utilized, it could potentially
cause many more accidents, so I cannot support the idea.
I hope this helps bring clarity and understanding to the “Why” behind the dissent.
Sincerely,
Jon
Jon Driscoll EIT, PLS, WRE
Transportation Engineer in Training
City of Springfield, Public Works
225 Fifth Street
Springfield, OR 97478
Phone: (541) 726-3679 Fax: (541) 726-3781
jdriscoll@ci.springfield.or.us
Attachment 3-1
From: HOPKINS Steve
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 11:05 AM
To: 'konrad.hyle@taic.net'; 'Benjamin Freeman'; GORDON Gilbert
Cc: KAUFMAN Kip
Subject: RE: Site Plan Tentative DRC2009-00050 Verizon Wireless-Springfield
Utility Board Cell Tower
Attachments: Partition 2002-P1627.pdf
Konrad,
Please forward this to your contact person at SUB.
As discussed on the phone this morning, the facility will contain a generator, but the fuel type
has not been finalized. This requires emergency access and fire flow. For access, the Fire
Marshal will accept a foot path from MLK to the equipment building. Fire flow requires a
hydrant. The best hydrant location is near MLK and the footpath. Although I expect that a 7’
PUE adjacent to MLK has been recorded, I have not found any evidence of one. I expected it
would be on the partition plat. The hydrant and water line could go within a PUE. One option
is to have the recording this PUE as a condition of the site plan.
My report recommends approval of the DU to the Planning Commission. The site specific
issues will need to be resolved before the site plan is approved. SUB is concerned the cell tower
site plan will conflict with their substation site plan. I am aware of their concerns. There is no
conflict with the proposed landscape plan or the footpath to MLK.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Steve
From: Konrad Hyle [mailto:konrad.hyle@taic.net]
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2010 2:27 PM
To: HOPKINS Steve; 'Benjamin Freeman'; GORDON Gilbert
Subject: RE: Site Plan Tentative DRC2009-00050 Verizon Wireless-Springfield Utility Board Cell
Tower
Sounds good – I can call you each on your desk phones and conference you in unless there is a
better number? Konrad
From: HOPKINS Steve [mailto:shopkins@ci.springfield.or.us]
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2010 2:22 PM
To: 'konrad.hyle@taic.net'; 'Benjamin Freeman'; GORDON Gilbert
Subject: RE: Site Plan Tentative DRC2009-00050 Verizon Wireless-Springfield Utility Board Cell
Tower
How about 10 am tomorrow?
Attachment 4-1
From: Konrad Hyle [mailto:konrad.hyle@taic.net]
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2010 1:52 PM
To: HOPKINS Steve; 'Benjamin Freeman'; GORDON Gilbert
Cc: konrad.hyle@taic.net
Subject: RE: Site Plan Tentative DRC2009-00050 Verizon Wireless-Springfield Utility Board Cell
Tower
Hi Steve Hopkins and Gilbert Gordon –are you available for a phone conference toady or
tomorrow to discuss this? Thanks Konrad
From: HOPKINS Steve [mailto:shopkins@ci.springfield.or.us]
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2010 10:30 AM
To: 'Benjamin Freeman'; konrad.hyle@taic.net
Subject: FW: Site Plan Tentative DRC2009-00050 Verizon Wireless-Springfield Utility Board
Cell Tower
Ben,
Here are the comments from the Fire Marshal. He is saying that access and fire flow are
required whether the building has an occupancy S1 or S2. Only a U occupancy will exempt it
from access and fire flow requirements.
What I will do is recommend approval of the DU application to the planning commission. If
they approve it, the access and fire flow can be addressed during the site plan review.
Contact me today by phone and we can discuss all your options.
Steve Hopkins, AICP
Planner II
Urban Planning Division,
Development Services Dept.
City of Springfield
726-3649
Attachment 4-2
From: GORDON Gilbert
Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 11:53 AM
To: HOPKINS Steve
Cc: GERARD Alan; FECHTEL Melissa; DRISCOLL Jon; KAUFMAN Kip
Subject: FW: Site Plan Tentative DRC2009-00050 Verizon Wireless-Springfield Utility Board
Cell Tower
Steve,
Here are the Springfield Fire Marshal’s Office comments to Mr. Freeman’s responses:
1. Irrespective of the building classification, fire service delivery is required as a key urban
service for this occupancy.
2. The change in the occupancy classification does not change the access and water supply
requirements listed in the fire code.
3. Two things:
a. Operationally, water is required to generate Class A and B foam. Hydrants
are required for sustained operations. Also, this does not exempt the
structure from the fire flow requirements in the fire code.
b. Access from Martin Luther King, Jr. Parkway was discussed with City of
Springfield Transportation Engineer Jon Driscoll. Jon advised me that City of
Springfield Public Works Transportation would deny this access due to
safety reasons.
4, 5 and 6 assumed that access would be taken from Martin Luther King, Jr. Parkway. Again,
per Transportation Engineering, this would be denied.
7. See 3a.
If you need any further information, feel free to contact me.
Gilbert R. Gordon
Deputy Fire Marshal
Springfield Fire and Life Safety
225 Fifth Street
Springfield, OR 97477
Phone: 541-726-2293
E-Mail: ggordon@ci.springfield.or.us
Attachment 4-3
From: HOPKINS Steve
Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 09:33
To: GORDON Gilbert
Subject: FW: Site Plan Tentative DRC2009-00050 Verizon Wireless-Springfield Utility Board
Cell Tower
Gilbert,
This is the response from Verizon regarding the proposed cell tower. Will this change any of
your comments?
Steve
From: Benjamin Freeman [mailto:ben.freeman@taic.net]
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 4:00 PM
To: HOPKINS Steve
Cc: 'Brandon Dole'; konrad.hyle@taic.net
Subject: RE: Site Plan Tentative DRC2009-00050 Verizon Wireless-Springfield Utility Board Cell
Tower
My only thought on this is did the Planning Dept/City Engineer/Fire Marshall receive the
latest version of the Zoning Drawings to review in determining this conclusion? These
incorporated the comments submitted based upon the planning department’s comments and
the meeting addressed below; by Konrad Hyle.
I would also like to address the points brought up by the Fire Marshall’s office noted below:
Springfield Fire Marshal's Office Comments:
1. 2007 Oregon Structural Specialty Code (the equipment shelter) is S-1 occupancy.
The shelter is actually S-2 occupancy not an S-1. (Refer to the attached drawings and
calculations and specifications correctly identifying the Oregon Gold Seal Approved
equipment shelter).
2. Generator will be fueled by diesel which is regulated by the 2007 Springfield Fire Code for
operational permits. Even if the generator is powered by natural gas, it would still require the
fire department to provide service due to its occupancy classification.
Please refer to the corrected occupancy classification. The application for the emergency
back-up generator permit would be applied for during the building permitting stage.
3. The hammerhead turnaround does not meet the 120 foot design requirements per 2007
Springfield Fire Code.
As depicted by the 150’ buffer line on sheet A1.0 (attached) the proposed cell site is
within this buffer a term of agreement already agreed to by the Fire Marshall’s office.
Further other than the generators fuel and the sub walls of the equipment shelter, there
is little that would burn that a water suppression method would be necessary. Instead a
chemical fire would use foam as a suppression method. Access to the proposed cell site
would not be made from the access drive but from MLK Parkway over land. My only
suggestion to improve upon this option is to addition of a Fire Access Gate to the East
Attachment 4-4
side of the proposed cell site fenced area. A request that wasn’t requested for by the City
Fire Marshall’s Office, but I feel would be desirable by the Fire Marshall’s office.
4. The inside turn radius to access the new road is too sharp. The inside turn radius shall not be
less than 28 feet, and the wall to wall turning radius shall be 45 feet.
Access to the proposed cell site would not be made from the access drive but from MLK
Parkway over land thus this access requirement is mitigated.
5. No cross section of the new access road was provided. Fire apparatus access roads shall
support an 80,000 lb. imposed load.
Due to the alternate available method to gain access to the proposed cell site no upgrade
to the site access driveway would be necessary, and is mitigated.
6. "No Parking-Fire Lane" signs shall be posted on both sides of the fire apparatus access road
per.
See above.
7. Water Supply: The generator building's location exceeds the maximum 400 foot distance from
the nearest fire hydrant to the furthest point on the building away from the fire hydrant.
The site is an unmanned cell site any fire oriented from within the tower; shelter, cell site
would require a Class A, B or C fire suppression method not water to extinguish it fully.
Additionally the shelter does have its own fire automated suppression system.
If you have any additional questions I am more than happy to address any issues that come up.
We would like to resolve this out standing issue, in order to complete land use and move on to
the building permitting phase.
Benjamin J. Freeman
Project Coordinator
Technology Associates
Ofc.: 503-549-0001x4019
Cell: 503-319-7554
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
Attachment 4-5
From: Konrad Hyle [mailto:konrad.hyle@taic.net]
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 1:16 PM
To: 'HOPKINS Steve'
Cc: ben.freeman@taic.net; konrad.hyle@taic.net; 'Brandon Dole'
Subject: RE: Site Plan Tentative DRC2009-00050 Verizon Wireless-Springfield Utility Board Cell
Tower
Steve,
We thought we had addressed the issues in a meting with fire Marshall and City Engineering
previously but I don’t have the details on that meeting. I know we modified the design after the
meeting and thought that addressed the concerns.
We are agreeable to change fuel source to natural gas to avoid the drinking water protection
issues.
The shelter building is unmanned and is protected from fire with an automatic fire suppression
system. It is my understanding that would eliminate the requirements stated below from Fire
Marshall.
I have copied our architect and construction coordinator so they can also provide detail and
follow up with you on this issue.
Thanks Konrad
From: HOPKINS Steve [mailto:shopkins@ci.springfield.or.us]
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 11:24 AM
To: 'konrad.hyle@taic.net'
Subject: RE: Site Plan Tentative DRC2009-00050 Verizon Wireless-Springfield Utility Board Cell
Tower
Konrad,
Contact me regarding your application. In order to keep the hearing on March 2, I will need to
finish my report by the end of this week. It will be based on the information currently in the
record, so if you would like to supplement what you submitted, I will need it before Friday.
Steve
From: Konrad Hyle [mailto:konrad.hyle@taic.net]
Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 4:56 PM
To: HOPKINS Steve
Cc: konrad.hyle@taic.net
Attachment 4-6
Subject: RE: Site Plan Tentative DRC2009-00050 Verizon Wireless-Springfield Utility Board Cell
Tower
Steve – our previous contact Sharon Gretch had met with City Engine and Fire Marshall on
these same issues and the site plans were revised to address the concerns. I have a call into our
architect to follow up – once I hear back I will contact you. Konrad
From: HOPKINS Steve [mailto:shopkins@ci.springfield.or.us]
Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 1:16 PM
To: 'konrad.hyle@taic.net'
Subject: FW: Site Plan Tentative DRC2009-00050 Verizon Wireless-Springfield Utility Board
Cell Tower
Konrad,
At the Development Review Committee meeting, the Fire Marshal said he needs access and fire
flow at the site. His comments are contained below. Give me a call and we can discuss how to
address this issue.
Steve Hopkins, AICP
Planner II
Urban Planning Division,
Development Services Dept.
City of Springfield
726-3649
From: GORDON Gilbert
Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 9:29 AM
To: HOPKINS Steve
Cc: GERARD Alan; FECHTEL Melissa; MCKEE Bart (SUB); WALTER Eric; DRISCOLL Jon
Subject: Site Plan Tentative DRC2009-00050 Verizon Wireless-Springfield Utility Board Cell
Tower
Site Plan Tentative DRC2009-00050 Verizon Wireless/Springfield Utility Board
Address: 3365 Game Farm Road
Existing Use: Springfield Utility Board substation
Proposal: Install 65 foot cell tower
Planner: Steve Hopkins, Planner II
Fire Department Comments:
Springfield Fire Marshal's Office cannot support this proposal at this time. The building
required to house the generator is classified by the 2007 Oregon Structural Specialty Code is an
S-1 occupancy. Also, the generator will be fueled by diesel which is regulated by the 2007
Attachment 4-7
Page 8 of 8
Springfield Fire Code for operational permits (Section 105.6.16, #3 and #5). Even if the generator
is powered by natural gas, it would still require the fire department to provide service due to its
occupancy classification.
Other issues include the following:
Access:
1. The hammerhead turnaround does not meet the 120 foot design requirements per 2007
Springfield Fire Code Figure D103.1;
2. The inside turn radius to access the new road is too sharp. The inside turn radius shall not be
less than 28 feet (Figure D103.1) and the wall to wall turning radius shall be 45 feet;
3. No cross section of the new access road was provided. Fire apparatus access roads shall
support an 80,000 lb. imposed load (SFC 503.2.3 and SFC Appendix D102.1);
4. "No Parking-Fire Lane" signs shall be posted on both sides of the fire apparatus access road
per SFC 503.3 and SFC Appendix D103.6.
Water Supply: The generator building's location exceeds the maximum 400 foot distance from
the nearest fire hydrant to the furthest point on the building away from the fire hydrant (SFC
508.5.1).
Based on the above findings, Springfield Fire and Life Safety recommends denial of this site
plan application.
Discretionary Use: DRC2009-00051 Verizon Wireless/Springfield Utility Board
Address: 3365 Game Farm Road
Existing Use: Springfield Utility Board substation
Proposal: Install 65 foot cell tower
Planner: Steve Hopkins, Planner II
Fire Department Comments: No fire department comment on this discretionary use.
Gilbert R. Gordon
Deputy Fire Marshal
Springfield Fire and Life Safety
225 Fifth Street
Springfield, OR 97477
Phone: 541-726-2293
E-Mail: ggordon@ci.springfield.or.us
Attachment 4-8
Attachment 5-1
Attachment 5-2
Attachment 6-1
Attachment 6-2
Attachment 6-3
Attachment 6-4
Attachment 6-5
Attachment 6-6
Attachment 6-7
Attachment 6-8
Attachment 6-9
Attachment 6-10
Attachment 6-11
Attachment 6-12
Attachment 6-13
Attachment 6-14
Attachment 6-15
Attachment 6-16
Attachment 6-17
Attachment 6-18
Attachment 6-19
Attachment 6-20
Attachment 6-21
Attachment 6-22
Attachment 6-23
Attachment 6-24
Attachment 6-25
Attachment 6-26
Attachment 6-27
Attachment 6-28
Attachment 6-29
Attachment 6-30
Attachment 6-31
Attachment 6-32
Attachment 6-33
Attachment 6-34
Attachment 6-35
Attachment 6-36
Attachment 6-37
Attachment 6-38
Attachment 6-39
Attachment 6-40
Attachment 6-41
Attachment 6-42
Attachment 6-43
Attachment 6-44
Attachment 6-45
Attachment 6-46
Attachment 6-47
Attachment 6-48
Attachment 6-49
Attachment 6-50
Attachment 6-51
Attachment 6-52
Attachment 6-53
Attachment 6-54
Attachment 6-55
Attachment 6-56
Attachment 6-57
Attachment 6-58
Attachment 6-59
Attachment 6-60
Attachment 6-61
Attachment 6-62
Attachment 6-63
Attachment 6-64
Attachment 6-65
Attachment 6-66
Attachment 6-67
Attachment 6-68
Attachment 6-69
Attachment 6-70
Attachment 6-71
Attachment 6-72
From: BAJRACHARYA Shashi [Shashi.BAJRACHARYA@co.lane.or.us]
Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 1:44 PM
To: HOPKINS Steve
Cc: BAJRACHARYA Shashi; BARRY Celia; BERNARD Mark A; FIELDS Phil;
LEMHOUSE Brad; PETSCH John S
Subject: DRC2009‐00050, Verizon, Springfield, Game Farm Road
TP File: 9873
City File: DRC2009‐00050
Applicant: Verizon Wireless
Agent: Konrad Hyle
Assessors Map 17‐03‐22 Lot 904
Owner: Springfield Utility Board
Address: 3365 Game Farm Road, Springfield
Proposal: Install a new wireless communication tower
Comments from Lane County Transportation Planning
The subject property is located inside the city limits of the City of Springfield abutting Game Farm Road.
Game Farm Road is functionally classified as an Urban Major Collector Road in the Lane County
Transportation System Plan. It is a 2‐lane, 24‐foot wide road. The Assessor's map shows a 65‐foot right
of way at this location.
The applicant is proposing to install a 65‐foot monopole mounted with antennas at two levels and an
equipment shelter. The 40'x30' area will share an existing driveway, currently used by Springfield Utility
Board for site access. The existing 20‐foot wide, paved driveway taking access from Game Farm Road is
proposed for an extension to serve the proposed site. The proposed mono tower location and
equipment shelters are located on a flag lot, about 600 feet from the right of way line. The proposed
monopole is not likely to cause visual obstructions. The following are applicable Lane Code
requirements.
LC 15.205 Facility Permits
15.205(1)‐ placement of facilities and development of within the right‐of‐way of a county road
shall be authorized through facility permits issued by the Director. Facilities includes, but is not limited
to , road improvements, sidewalks, utility placements, excavation, clearing, grading, or any other facility,
thing, or appurtenance.
Although there are several utility related facility permits exist on file associated with the subject
property, facility permit for the existing driveway could not be found. Regardless of the existing
driveway use, when a development with new added traffic is proposed, the driveway approach must be
reviewed. A facility permit is required. It is not clear from the applicant’s statement whether the pole
will be assembled on site or transported as a single unit. If prefabricated towers are planned for
transporting to the site, LC 15.230 (1) Table 3 should be consulted for truck size and weight limit.
The applicant must obtain additional facility permit if the tower installation work is likely to encroach
into the County right‐of‐way or disrupt the traffic on Game Farm Road during installations or
maintenance. Please contact 682‐6902 or visit http://www.lanecounty.org/Roads/ROWPermits.htm for
information about facility permits and associated fees.
Attachment 7-1
Thanks for providing us the opportunity to comment on the proposal.
Shashi Bajracharya, P.E.
Engineering Analyst
Transportation Planning Division
Lane County PWD,
3040 N Delta Highway
Eugene, OR 97408
(541) 682‐6932
(541) 682‐8554
Attachment 7-2