HomeMy WebLinkAboutApplication APPLICANT 10/5/2021City of Springfield
225 Fifth Street
Springfield, OR 97477
Attn: Andrew Larson
October 5, 2021
Re: NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE SUBMITTAL wamrnRnreuRm¢x1RluEmao
Proposed 3 -Parcel Partition at 5524 B Street — Case 811 -21 -000199 -TYPE II846 ASTREET
3VPINGFlEID. OREGON %Il]
154113039830
W W W.METROPIANNINGSOM
Dear Andrew,
The following is a response to the August 24, 2021 letter written to Metro Planning, Inc. on behalf of the City
of Springfield Planning and Development regarding insufficient application materials provided for the Type II
Partition Application referenced above. Please accept this letter as a formal response to City staffs specified
incomplete information. All specified incomplete information is addressed in this letter and supplemental
materials are attached (Revised Site Plan). Additionally, we have included a revised Written Statement to
clarify the actuality of the existing conditions of the subject property which were inconsistent in previous
application submittals (see first response below regarding Proposed Parcel 1). Specified incomplete
items/information from City of Springfield are bulleted and in bold text; Metro Planning responses follow in
blue, regular type.
• The location of the existing residence on proposed Parcel 1 including setbacks, lot coverage, and solar access
compliance.
Regarding Proposed Parcel 1, *'please note that there is NO existing dwelling on proposed Parcel 1. `•
Previously submitted written statements, intended obviously to correspond with the Proposed 3 -Parcel Partition Site
Plan, in fact did not; previously submitted written statements and site plans are inconsistent with one another. In
actuality, and in accordance with the Site Plan, NOTthe written statement, there is NO existing dwelling on proposed
Parcel 1. The house and all trees previously existing an the subject property burned dawn completely on 10/28/2020, in
a house/property fire.
All Incomplete Submittal Items concerning the "existing home" on proposed Parcel 1— location, setbacks, lot coverage,
solar access compliance, and utilities, are not applicable; no existing dwelling is present on the subject property.
• The location of the existing sewer main in B Street and the proposed tie in points for Parcels 2 & 3 and the
location of the existing sewer service serving the existing home on Parcel 1.
Location of the existing sewer main in B Street, and proposed tie in points for all three Proposed Parcels have been
added to the attached revised Proposed Partition Site Plan.
• A planting plan for the proposed rain garden including the number of each species provided.
This information has been added to the revised Proposed Partition Site Plan, including plant count and species. For ease
of Spfld City Planning staff review, the following is a written summary of the Proposed Rain Garden as designed by
Favreau Engineering, and indicated in detail on the attached revised Proposed Partition Site Plan.
The rain gardens will be filled with 12" of topsoil (3 -way mix). Vegetation in the rain gardens shall be planted per
Scheme I of the City of Eugene Stormwater Manual Section 239. Plants to be 1' on center. Estimated plant count and
species is as follows: Zone A— Carex Obnuptas, 52 count in 4" pots; Juncus Patens 52 count in 4" pots. Zone B —
Camassia Quamash 26 count in 4" pots; Deschampsia Caespitosa 26 count in 4" pots.
• Construction details for soakage drainage trench and rain garden are in drainage report but not show on the
plat/partition plan; show detail on the partition plan.
Construction details for soakage drainage trench and rain garden have been added and detailed on the attached revised
Proposed Partition Site Plan.
• Provide utility trench detail showing water, electric, sewer, and communication lines with required
separation. This detail may be combined with the driveway construction detail.
This detailed information has been added and detailed on the attached revised Proposed Partition Site Plan.
• Provide the proposed driveway cross section for the shared panhandle driveway including specifications that
it can support an 90,000 lb load for emergency access; show detail on the partition plan. This driveway must
be 20' wide and must come far enough into the property to be within 150' of the most remote corner of all
buildings to be constructed.
A new detailed cross section of the proposed driveway is included on the attached revised Proposed Partition Site Plan.
According to Springfield Development Code 3.2-220(A)(5)(b) which specifies standards for a multiple panhandle
lots/parcels, the driveway on the attached Proposed Partition Site Plan is 18' wide extending the entire length from the
front property line to the pan of the rear lot/parcel. The proposed driveway lies within a 26' access easement, with 13'
designated to each panhandle lot, as specified in previously noted SDC. The length of the proposed driveway is 143'
from the front property line to the pan of the rear lot/ parcel. Prior to development, an appropriate 21Y wide emergency
access portion of driveway which extends far enough into property to be within 150' of the most remote corner of all
buildings can be revised as needed.
• Driveway construction detail within the B Street right of way; the driveway must be shifted to the east to
accommodate future driveway wings when the B Street right of way is fully improved. Typically, this is a
minimum of 4' from the property line.
The attached revised Proposed Partition Site Plan has been revised to indicate all driveway construction details within
the B Street right of way. The proposed driveway has been sited with consideration of addressing all relevant
engineering design concerns regarding the B Street right of way. Accommodations for future improvements can be
revised as a condition of Approval as needed.
• Show existing and proposed electric and water services; note that all new utilities must be underground
including services to the existing house. This may be shown on the driveway cross section.
A new detailed cross section of the proposed driveway is included on the attached revised Proposed Partition Site Plan.
The attached Proposed Partition Site Plan has been revised to include indications in the driveway cross section showing
underground location of proposed utilities, including water and electric services. Again, please note that there is no
existing dwelling on proposed Parcel 1, so existing electric and water service indication is not applicable.
Thank you for your time reviewing these additionally submitted materials which serve to complete the Proposed 3-
Parcel Partition Application for 5524 B Street —Case 811-21-000199-Type II. We have revised and resubmitted the
Written Statement for this application, but please accept this letter as formally addressing the Springfield Planning and
Engineering staff's review of the initial application and subsequent incomplete information.
Please do not hesitate to reach out to us with any further questions or needed materials at (541) 302-9830 or
kkeidel@metroplan ing.com.
Sincerely,
Katie Keidel
Assistant Planner
Metro Planning, Inc
846 A STREER
SPRINGFIELD. OREGON 97477
15411302-9830
WWWAURORLANNING.COM
TENTATIVE PARTITION FOR CHAD WILSON
Document Date:
10/05/2021
Applicant's Request:
Requestfor approval for Tentative Partition
Application to create a 3 Lot Partition
Property Owner/ Applicant:
Chad Wilson and Katie Lewis
PO Box 5143
Eugene, OR 97405
Surveyor:
Ryan Erickson
EGR & Associates
2535 B Prairie Rd.
Eugene, OR 97402
Engineer:
Eric Favreau, P.E.
Favreau Engineering
(541)556-4425
Project Planner:
Metro Planning, Inc,
c/o Jed Truett, AICP
846 A Street
Springfield, OR 97477
Tel (541) 302-9830
Location:
5524 B St.
Springfield, OR 97478
Subject Property:
Assessor's Map 17-02-33-42
Tax Lot 00300 & 00700
Property Size:
.41 acres (17,952 sq ft)
Zoning:
R-1 (Low Density Residential)
Comprehensive Plan:
Low Density Residential (per Metro Plan)
Number of Parcels Proposed:
3
Size Proposed Parcel l:
4501 Sq Ft
Size Proposed Parcel 2:
5814 Sq Ft (including pole)
Size Proposed Parcel 3:
7637 Sq Ft (including pole)
Written Statement—Tentative Partition Plan fora -Lot Partition
Background
The applicant owns two adjacent parcels: Tax Lot 17-02-33-42-00700 and Tax Lot
17-02-33-42-00300. The applicant is proposing to partition these two parcels into three lots. There are no
existing dwellings or trees on the subject property. No development is proposed with this application except for
the platting of two lots into three.
Density:
The partition as proposed will have a density of 7.3 dwelling units per acre.
This written statement addresses SDC 5.12.115 Tentative Plan —General, SDC 5.12-120 Tentative Plan Submittal
Requirements, and SDC 5.12-125 Tentative Plan Criteria, and demonstrates how this Proposed Partition
Application and Site Plan meet all of the SDC requirements and criteria.
SDC 5.12-115 Tentative Plan—General
Any residential land division shall conform to the fallowing standards:
A. The lot/parcel dimensions shall conform to the minimum standards of this Code. When lots/parcels are
more than double the minimum area permitted by the zoning district, the Director shall require that
these lots/parcels be arranged:
1. To allow re -division; and
2. To allow for the extension of streets to serve future lots/parcels.
3. Placement of structures on the larger lots/parcels shall be subject to approval by the Director
upon a determination that the potential maximum density of the larger lot/parcel is not impaired.
In order to make this determination, the Director may require a Future Development Plan as
specified in Section 5.12-120E.
Response:
The subject property is in an area zoned LDR (Low Density Residential), on an East-West street.
Parcel 1 conforms to the Minimum Area and Minimum Street Frontage requirements for a Standard Lot/Parcel
in a Spfld LDR zone on an East-West street, which requires (at minimum) 45 ft of street frontage and 4,500 sq It
of area.
As proposed, Parcel 1 has 59 ft of street frontage, and 4,501 sq ft in area, so meeting the above stated
requirements.
Parcels 2 & 3 conform to the Minimum Area and Minimum Street Frontage requirements for Multiple
Panhandle Lots/Parcels in a Spfld LDR zone, which require (at minimum) 26 ft street frontage (or an equivalent
easement) and 4,500 sq ft of area.
As proposed, Parcels 2 & 3 share 26 ft panhandle of street frontage, as required. Parcel 2 has an area of 5,814
sq ft and Parcel 3 has an area of 7,637 sq ft, and so meet the minimum area requirements.
:e^ P�ani,mg, In.
All three proposed parcels meet the standards as specified in SDC 3.2-215 and are detailed in this Written
Statement in Section 5.13-130.
No Lots/Parcels are more than double the minimum area permitted.
This standard has been met.
B. Double frontage lots/parcels shall be avoided, unless necessary to prevent access to residential
development from collector and arterial streets or to overcome specific topographic situations.
Response: The proposed tentative partition will not result in the creation of double frontage parcels; this
standard does not apply.
C. Panhandle lots/parcels shall comply with the standards specified in Sections 3.2-215 and 4.2-120A. In
the case of multiple panhandles in Subdivisions, construction of necessary utilities to serve all approved
panhandle lots/parcels shall occur prior to recording the Plot.
Response: All three lots will have a driveway access via a shared driveway, although Parcel 1 may opt for a
separate drive directly off B St. Parcels 2 & 3 are panhandle lots and will have a shared access easement of 26'
wide, or 13' each. As a condition of approval for this Tentative Partition, construction of necessary utilities will
occur prior to recording the Plat.
D. Block length for local streets is as specified in Section 4.2-115.
Response: 42-115 is no longer a code section. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. The proposed tentative
partition utilizes an existing street network.
SDC 5.12-120 Tentative Plan Submittal Requirements
A Tentative Plan application shall contain the elements necessary to demonstrate that the provisions of this
Code are being fulfilled. EXCEPTION. In the case of Partition applications with the sole intent to donate land to a
public agency, the Director, during the Pre -Submittal Meeting, may waive any submittal requirements that can
be addressed as part of a future development application.
A. General Requirements.
1. The Tentative Plan, including any required future Development Plan, shall be prepared by on
Oregon Licensed Land Surveyor on standard sheets of 18" x 24". The services of and Oregon
registered Engineer may also be required by the City in order to resolve utility issues (especially
stormwater management street design and transportation issues), and site constraint and/or
water quality issues.
Response: The Proposed Partition Site Plan has been prepared by Ryan Erickson, a licensed Oregon Land
Surveyor as required.
2. The scale of the Tentative Plan shall be appropriate to the area involved and the amount of
detail and data, normally 1"= 50; 1"=100' or 1"= 200'.
Response: The scale of the Tentative Plan is 1" = 20'; which is appropriate to the size of the development site
and the amount of data needing to be shown.
3. A north arrow and the date the Tentative Plan was prepared.
Response: A north arrow and date are included on the Proposed Partition Site Plan drawing that is included
with this application.
4. The name and address of the owner, applicant, if different, and the Land Surveyor and/or
Engineer who prepared the Partition Tentative Plan.
Response: This information is shown on the face of the Proposed Partition Site Plan.
5. A drawing of the boundaries of the entire area owned by the partitioner or sub -divider of which
the proposed land division is a part.
Response: A thicker, black line is drawn around the subject property to easily show the area owned by the
partitioner. See attached Proposed Partition Site Plan.
6. City boundaries, the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and any special service district boundaries
or railroad right -of --way, which cross or abut the proposed land division.
Response: No city limit, UGB, or railroad right-of-way are adjacentto the subject property.
7 Applicable zoning districts and the Metro Plan designation of the proposed land division and of
properties within 100 feet of the boundary of the subject property.
Response: The subject property in an area zoned LDR (Low Density Residential), and designated L (low density
residential) in the Metro Plan.
B. The dimensions (in feet) and size (either in square feet or acres) of each lot/parcel and the
approximate dimensions of each building site, where applicable, and the top and toe of cut and
fill slopes to scale.
Response: The proposed parcel sizes and dimensions are clearly labeled on the attached Proposed Partition Site
Plan drawing.
9. The location, outline to scale and present use of all existing structures to remain on the
property after platting and their required setbacks from the proposed new property lines.
Response: There are no existing structures on the site.
10. The location and size of existing and proposed utilities and necessary easements and
dedications on and adjacent to the site, including but not limited to sanitary sewer mains,
stormwater management systems, water mains, power, gas, telephone, and cable TV. Indicate
the proposed connection points.
Response: All existing utilities are located at the street. The public sanitary and storm sewer systems as well as
water and electricity are located within the B Street right-of-way. Notes 4, 5, and 6 on the Proposed Partition Site
Plan
11. The locations widths and purpose of all existing or proposed easements on and abutting the
proposed land division, the location of any existing or proposed reserve strips.
Response: All locations, widths, and purpose of proposed easements on and abutting the proposed land division
are shown on the attached Proposed Partition Site Plan; there are no existing or proposed reserve strips.
12. The locations of all areas to be dedicated or reserved for public use, with the purpose,
condition or limitations of the reservations clearly indicated.
Response: There are no areas being dedicated or reserved for public use; thus this requirement is not
applicable.
B. ASite Assessment of the Entire Development Area. The Site Assessment shall be prepared by on
Oregon Licensed Landscape Architect or Engineer and drawn to scale with existing contours at Ifoot
intervals and percent of slope that precisely maps and delineates the areas described below. Proposed
modifications to physical features shall be clearly indicated. The Director may waive portions of this
requirement if there is a finding that the proposed development will not have on adverse impact on
physical features or water quality, either on the site or adjacent to the site. Information required for
adjacent properties may be generalized to show the connections to physical features. A Site Assessment
shall contain the following information.
Response: The enclosed Proposed Partition Site Plan prepared by Ryan Erickson, PLS, an Oregon licensed land
surveyor identifies all physical features of the subject property as required.
1. The name, location, dimensions, direction of flow and top of bank of all watercourses that are
shown on the Water Quality Limited Watercourses (WLQW) Map on file in the Development
Services Department,'
Response: There are no watercourses shown on the Water Quality Limited Watercourses Map that encumber
the subject property; thus this requirement is not applicable.
2. The 100year floodplain and floodway boundaries on the site, as specified in the latest adopted
FEMA Flood Insurance Maps or FEMA approved Letter of Map Amendment or Letter of Map
Revision,
Response: The subject property is located outside of the 500 -year floodplain and floodway boundaries as
indicated on FIRM Map Number 41039C1166F dated 09/27/1985; thus this requirement is not applicable.
3. The Time of Travel Zones, as specified in Section 3.3-200 and delineated on the Wellhead
Protection Areas Map on file in the Development Service Department
Response: The subject property falls within the 99 -year time of travel zone for wellhead protection.
4. Physical features including, but not limited to significant clusters of trees and shrubs,
watercourses shown on the (WLQ W) Map and their riparian areas, wetlands, and rock
outcroppings;
Response: There are no clusters of trees and shrubs, watercourses, riparian areas, wetlands, or rock
outcroppings within the boundaries of the subject property.
5. Soil types and water table information as mapped and specified in the Soils Survey of Lane
County,, and
The Natural Resource conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey indicates the soil type covering the subject
property consists of one -hundred percent (100%) Coburg -Urban land complex (32), with a depth to watertable
of about 18-30 inches.
6. Natural resource protection areas as specified in Section 4.3-117.
Response: There are no natural resource protection areas present on the subject property; thus this
requirement is not applicable.
C. A Stormwater Management Plan drawn to scale with existing contours at 1foot intervals and percent
of slope that precisely maps and addresses the information described below. In areas where the percent
of slope is 10 percent or more, contours maybe shown at 5 footintervals. This plan shall show the
stormwater management system for the entire development area. Unless exempt by the Public Works
Director, the Cityshall require that on Oregon licensed Civil Engineer prepare the plan. Where plants are
proposed as partof the stormwater management system, an Oregon Licensed Landscape Architect may
also be required. The plan shall include the following components:
1. Roof drainage patterns and discharge locations,-
2.
ocations2. Pervious and impervious area drainage patterns,
3. The size and location of stormwater management systems components, including but not
limited to: drain lines, catch basins, dry wells and/or detention ponds, stormwater quality
measures; and natural drainage -ways to be retained,
4. Existing and proposed site elevations, grades and contours,. and
5. A stormwater management system plan with supporting calculations and documentation as
required in Section 4.3-110 shall be submitted supporting the proposed system. The plan,
calculations and documentation shall be consistent with the Engineering Designs Standards and
Procedures Manual to allow staff to determine if the proposed stormwater management system
will accomplish its purposes.
Response: A stormwater drainage and management plan for each proposed parcel has been engineered by Eric
Favreau of Favreau Engineering, and detailed on the attached Proposed Partition Site Plan.
D. A Response to Transportation issues complying with the provisions of this Code.
1. The locations, condition, e.g., fully improved with curb, gutter and sidewalk, AC mat, or gravel,
widths and names of all existing streets, alleys, or other rights-of-way within or adjacent to the
proposed land division;
Response: The subject site has 85 it of frontage on B Street. B Street does not have a curb, gutter or sidewalk
and is made of gravel. There is a ditch adjacent to the property in the B Street right-of-way that will serve as the
destination for stormwater exiting the site. An irrevocable petition for future improvements can be signed by
the applicant.
2. The locations, widths and names of all proposed streets and other rights-of-way, to include the
approximate radius of curves and grades. The relationship of all proposed streets to any projected
streets as shown on the Metro Plan, including the TransPlan, any approved Conceptual
Development Plan and the latest version of the Conceptual Local Street Map,
Response: There are no proposed streets or other rights-of-way adjacent to the subject site; thus this
requirement is not applicable.
3. The locations and widths of all existing and proposed sidewalks, pedestrian trails and
accessways, including the location, size and type of plantings and street trees in any required
plonterstrip:
Response: There are not any existing and proposed sidewalks, pedestrian trails and accessways. The applicant
can sign an irrevocable petition to improve the sidewalk, curb, gutter, street trees, paving, etc.
4. The location of existing and proposed traffic control devices, fire hydrants, power pales,
transformers, neighborhood mailbox units and similar public facilities, where applicable;
Response: As referenced on the Proposed Partition Site Plan, the nearest fire hydrant is approximately 90 feet
West of the Southwest corner of the subject property on the North right of way of B Street.
As indicated on the Proposed Partition Site Plan there is a Power Pole with light on the Northeast corner of B
and 55`^ streets. There are no other public facilities such as traffic control devices, transformers, or
neighborhood mailbox units located adjacent or within the development site.
5. The location and dimensions of existing and proposed driveways, where applicable;
Response: The proposed location and dimension specifications of driveway are included on the Proposed
Partition Site Plan and will take place in the panhandles of the property. The panhandle driveway will be shared
and will be installed at the time of site development. All panhandle driveway standards will be met per SDC 3.2-
220.
6. The location of existing and proposed street lighting: including the type, height and area of
illumination;
Response: As illustrated on the Proposed Partition Site Plan, there is an existing streetlight on the Northeast
corner of B and 55`" Street. No additional streetlights are proposed.
7. The location of existing and proposed transit facilities;
Response: There are no existing or proposed transit facilities adjacent, or within, the subject property. The
nearest transit facility is located near the intersection of Main Street and 5411 Street and served by Lane Transit
District (LTD) Route 11.
8. A copy of a Right -of --way Approach Permit application where the property has frontage on on
Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) facility, and
Response: B Street is a city street and not ODOT facility; thus, this requirement is not applicable.
9. ATraffic Impact Study prepared by a Traffic Engineer, where necessary, as specified in Section
4.2-105A.4.
Response: Based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 7th Edition, single-
family detached houses have an average trip generation rate of 9.57 vehicles daily. A single-family dwelling on
each of the three parcels proposed generating 9.57 trips per parcel per day results in fewer peak hour or
average daily trips necessary for a traffic impact study to be required.
E. A Future Development Plan. Where phasing and/or lots/parcels that are more than twice the minimum
lot/parcel size are proposed, the Tentative Plan shall include a Future Development Plan that:
1. Indicates the proposed redivision, including the boundaries, lot/parcel dimensions and
sequencing of each proposed redivision in any residential district, and shall include a plot plan
showing building footprints for compliance with the minimum residential densities specified in
Section 3.2-205,
2. Addresses street connectivity between the various phases of the proposed development based
upon compliance with the Springfield Transportation System Plan (including the Conceptual
Street Map), the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), applicable Refinement Plans. Plan Districts,
Master Plans, or the Code,
3. Accommodates other required public improvements, including but not limited to, sanitary
sewer, stormwoter management water and electricity;
4. Addresses physical features, including but not limited to, significant clusters of trees and
shrubs, watercourses shown on the Water Quality Limited Watercourse Map and their associated
riparian areas, wetlands, rock outcroppings and historic features; and
S. Discusses the timing and financial provisions relating to phasing.
Response: No phasing plan is being proposed.
F. Additional information and/or applications required at the time of Tentative Plan application submittal
shall include the following items, where applicable:
1. A brief narrative explaining the purpose of the proposed land division and the existing use of
the property,
P -.ye 1 8
Response: This written statement serves as a narrative explaining the purpose of the proposed partition and the
existing use of the subject property. ***PLEASE NOTE: As of October 5, 2021, an additional letter accompanies
this written statement with supplemental information to further address incomplete application items as
formally indicated by City of Spfld Planning Staff in a letter dated August 24, 2021.This application has been
resubmitted to correct any errors in prior Written Statements which indicated that there was an existing
dwellingstill remaining on Proposed Parcel 1 of the subject property.***
2. If the applicant is not the property owner, written permission from the property owner is
required,
Response: The attached application form has been signed by the property owner.
3. A Vicinity Map drawn to scale showing bus stops, streets, driveways, pedestrian connections,
fire hydrants and other transportation/fire access issues within 200 feet of the proposed land
division and all existing Partitions or Subdivisions immediately adjacent to the proposed land
division;
Response: A vicinity map is shown on the Proposed Partition Site Plan sheet.
4. How the Tentative Plan addresses the standards of any applicable overlay district;
Response: Not applicable.
5. How the Tentative Plan addresses Discretionary Use criteria, where applicable;
Response: The proposed parcels are for low density residential use, and so no Discretionary Use is requested.
6. A Tree Felling Permit as specified in Section 5.19-100;
Response: There are no trees on the property.
7. A Geotechnical Reportfor slopes of 15 percent or greater and as specified in Section 3.3-500,
and/or if the required Site Assessment in Section 5.1-21208. indicates the proposed development
area has unstable sails and/or high water table as specified in the Soils Survey of Lane County;
Response: The site is flat and there are not high water tables.
B. An Annexation application as specified in Section 5.7100 where a development is proposed
outside of the city limits but within City's urban growth boundary and can be serviced bysonitary
sewer,
Response: The subject property is located within the city limits; thus no annexation application is necessary.
9. A wetland delineation approved by the Department of State Lands shall be submitted
concurrently where there is a wetland on the property;
Response: There are no existing wetlands on the subject site; thus this requirement is not applicable.
Octobei 20".
10. Evidence that any required Federal or State permit has been applied for or approved shall be
submitted concurrently;
Response: No federal or state permits are required with this partition application; thus this requirement is not
applicable.
11. All public improvements proposed to be installed and to include the approximate time of
installation and method of financing;
Response: There are no proposed public improvements with this proposed partition application.
12. Proposed deed restrictions and a draft of a Homeowner's Association Agreement, where
appropriate,
Response: No deed restrictions or Homeowner's Association are proposed; thus this requirement is not
applicable.
13. Cluster Subdivisions shall also address the design standards specified in Section 3.2230;
Response: This application is for a tentative partition and not a cluster subdivision.
14. Where the Subdivision of a manufactured dwelling park or mobile home park is proposed, the
Director may waive certain submittal requirements specified in Subsections A. through M.
However, the Tentative Plan shall address the applicable standards listed under the park
Subdivision approval criteria specified in Section 5.12-125.
Response: This application is for a tentative partition and not a subdivision of a manufactured dwelling park.
5.13-130
The Director shall approve or approve with conditions a Tentative Plan application upon determining that all
applicable criteria have been satisfied. If conditions cannot be attached to satisfy the approval criteria, the
Director shall deny the application. In the case of Partitions that involve the donation of land to a public agency,
the Director may waive any approval criteria upon determining the particular criterion can be addressed as part
of o future development application.
A. The request conforms to the provisions of this Code pertaining to lot/parcel size and dimensions.
Response:
Parcel 1 is on an East-West street in a LDR zone and meets the requirements of a minimum of 4,500 ft of area
and 45 ft of street frontage.
Parcels 2 and 3 both meet the minimum area of 4,500 sq ft each, and street frontage of 26 It total (13' each),
for development requirements for Multiple Panhandle lots in a Low -Density Residential zone.
Below are specific details of each lot, demonstrating that each conforms to the respective required sizes and
dimensions, and are included on the Proposed Partition Site Plan.
Lot Area:
The proposed Parcel 1 is 4,501 sq. ft., and so meets the requirement.
The proposed Parcel 2 is 5,814 sq ft., and proposed Parcel 3 (LDR Panhandle Lot) minimum is 4,500 sq ft is
7,637 sq ft., and so meet the requirement.
Lot Frontage:
Proposed Parcel 1 has 59 ft of street frontage, and so meets the requirement.
Proposed Parcels 2 & 3 have 13 ft each of street frontage, for a total of 26 ft of street frontage, and so meets
the requirement.
8. The zoning is consistent with the Metro Plan diagram and/or applicable Refinement Plan diagram, Plan
District map, and Conceptual Development Plan.
Response: The zoning of the subject property is Low -Density Residential. In the Metro Plan, this area is
designated as Low -Density Residential. The minimum density in the LDR zone is 6 units per acre and the
maximum is 14. The proposed development is approximately 7 units per acre.
C. Capacity requirements of public and private facilities, including but not limited to, water and
electricity, sanitary sewer and storm water 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 unless otherwise provided for by this Code and other applicable regulations. The Public
Works Director or a utility provider shall determine capacity issues.
Response: A public sanitary mainline and water mainline are located within the B Street rights-of-way. Parcel 1
will be served by the existing lateral line that served the previously existing dwelling. Parcels 2 and 3 will be served
by a future line/lateral that will connect to the existing line. Stormwater drainage will be managed by three private
soakage trenches sized to accommodate runoff from each home plus 1/3 of the driveway surface.
D. The proposed land division shall comply with all applicable public and private design and construction
standards contained in this Code and other applicable regulations.
Response: All the existing public and private facilities meet the design and construction standards of the SDC.
There are no public improvements proposed with this partition application. In addition, the future private
utilities will be constructed according to ad applicable SDC and other regulations. This approval criterion will be
satisfied.
E. Physical features, including, but notlimited to: steep slopes with unstable soil or geologic conditions;
areas with susceptibility of flooding; significant clusters of trees and shrubs; watercourses shown on the
WQLW Map and their associated riparian areas, other riparian areas and wetlands specified in Section
4.3-117, 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.
Response: The subject property does not have steep slopes, susceptibility to flooding, clusters of trees,
watercourses and riparian areas, open spaces, historical significance, etc. This criterion is not applicable.
F. 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, tronsitstops, neighborhood activity centers, and commercial, industrial and public
areas, minimize driveways 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.
Response: The proposal is for single family dwellings. Parking will be provided on each lot.
G. Development of any remainder of the property under the same ownership can be accomplished as
specified in this Code.
Response: The applicant acknowledges and accepts the terms under this condition.
H. Adjacent land can be developed or is provided access that will allow its development as specified in
this Cade.
Response: All adjacent land is developed; therefore, this criterion is not applicable.
1. Where the Partition of property that is outside of the city limits but within the City's urbanizable area
and no concurrent annexation application is submitted, the standards specified below shall also apply.
Response: Not applicable. The proposed development is within the city limits; therefore, this criterion does not
apply.
J. Where the Subdivision of a manufactured dwelling park or mobile home park is proposed, the following
approval criteria apply:
Response: This tentative partition is not part of a manufactured dwelling park or mobile home park; therefore,
this criterion does not apply.