The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutApplication APPLICANT 3/11/2022City of Springfield Development & Public Works 225 Fifth Street Springfield, OR 97477 Development Issues Meeting (DIM) SPRINGFIELD w 0 Required Project Information (Applicant: Prospective Applicant Name: 'set IJCCY+- 132crr del complete this section) Phone: 5-11 � 206- 938 1 company: NlckEnl'ZrE Sew 0 Q I Fax: Address: 1566 I—A-x ( 91- EPR(rJcf-'CLD. oR 1*4- Prospective NEt�-+lam->,rtj Applicant's Rep.: .: Phone:I ' Sa S - OS4-'� Company: Cit1+7'PC-LL Cort -c -yiu 9-E Fax: Address: L,tt S -T -x 3ac, ELLELE+sc do - o - Pro ert Owner: J&f-t 0 1 tiV'G,ST7-e"7:r (_ LC Property Phone: Company: Fax: Address: ASSESSOR'S MAP NO: 1--- o3 -34- 4L{ TAX LOT NO(S): 6 IL4 0 Z Property Address: L/4 3 C) B (,J . Size of Property: `L - SL /1z, 21, "J s f -F_ Acres ❑ Square Feet ❑ Description of if you are filling in this form by hand, please attach your proposal description to this application. Proposal: Existing Use: # of Lots/Parcels: 1 Av . Lot/Parcel Size: 2 .S1 A -..gds Density: du/acre Prospective Applicant: ` '3 Date: 22. i ure S Prirl C.Erc �R-�t..,r� Print Required Project Information (City Zntake Staff. 2j complete Case No.: -22� isOODi I' PR -t Date: It �2aZ2 Reviewed b l!i A lication Fee: Technical Fee: $O Postage Fee: $0 TOTAL FEES: $ 6�} 6' tTD PROJECT NUMBER: Revised 5/21/13 KL 1 of 3 Development Issues Meeting Process The purpose of a Development Issues Meeting is to give an applicant the opportunity to discuss his/her development proposal with the development review staff of the City. The discussion can be general or specific, depending on the details provided with the application. A Development Issues Meeting provides information to an applicant related to the current development conditions and standards of the City. The Development Issues Meeting is not a land use decision and does not confer any development rights, establish any conditions, or bind the applicant or the City to any course of action. The meeting conveys the status of known development opportunities and constraints. The status may change over time as development conditions or standards change. 1. Applicant Submits a Development Issues Meeting Application • The application must conform to the Development Issues Meeting Submittal Requirements Checklist on page 3 of this application packet. • Development issues meetings are conducted every Thursday. • We strive to conduct the development issues meetings within three to four weeks of receiving the application. • The applicant's proposal is circulated to the relevant staff in preparation for the meeting. 2. Applicant and the City Conduct the Development Issues Meeting • The applicant and any design team should attend the development issues meeting. • The meeting is scheduled for one hour. • Staff attending the meeting will be prepared to discuss the issues raised in the submittal by the applicant. Other issues raised during the meeting may also be discussed. • The meeting is informal and the City will issue no staff report. Revised 5/21/13 KL 2 of 3 Development Issues Meeting Submittal Requirements Checklist Application Fee - refer to the Development Code Fee Schedule for the appropriate fee calculation formula. A copy of the fee schedule is available at the Development & Public Works Department. The applicable application, technology, and postage fees are collected at the time of complete application submittal. Development Issues Meeting Application Form LP Five (5) Questions - list specific questions the applicant would like staff to answer during the meeting. So that each question may be fully evaluated, the list is limited to five questions. ❑ Four (4) Copies of the Proposed Plan - suggested information valuable for staff to review the proposal is listed below. It is not necessary to include all of these items on the site or plot plan. However, applicants are encouraged to address as many as possible given that the level of information that will be derived from the meeting is commensurate with the level of detail provided in the application. Applicants are also encouraged to include additional information on the plan as listed in the Springfield Development Code (SDC) 5.12-120, Land Divisions - Partitions & Subdivisions - Tentative Plan Submittal Requirements or 5.17-120, Site Plan Review Submittal Requirements. ❑ Drawn in ink on quality paper no smaller than 11" x 17" ❑ Scale appropriate to the area involved and sufficient to show detail of the plan and related data, such as 1" = 30', 1" = 50' or 1" = 100' ❑ North arrow ❑ Date of preparation ❑ Street address and assessor's map and tax lot number ❑ Dimensions (in feet) and size (either square feet or acres) of the development area ❑ Location and size of existing and proposed utilities, including connection points ❑ On-site drainage collection system and flow patterns, the size and location of drain lines and catch basins, dry wells, and natural drainageways to be retained ❑ Area and dimensions of all property to be conveyed, dedicated, or reserved for common open spaces DIMS Related to Land Divisions ❑ Approximate location, number and dimensions of proposed lots ❑ How streets in the proposal area connect with existing streets DIMS Related to Site Plan Review ❑ Proposed and existing buildings: location, dimensions, size (gross floor area), setbacks from property lines, distance between buildings, and height ❑ Area and percentage of the site proposed for buildings, structures, driveways, sidewalks, patios and other impervious surfaces ❑ Parking and circulation plan Revised 5/21/13 KL 3 of DIM Meeting Questions • How can we occupy the property without going through the change of use, site plan review, or any other land use processes? o Our intention is to occupy the property without changes to the exterior of the building or site. o What types of improvements would trigger these or other land use processes? • How can we occupy the property without needing to annex into the City of Springfield? o Our intention is to occupy the property without changes to the exterior of the building or site. o What improvements or uses would require annexation? • Are there any known issues with the property that we will need to address upon purchasing the building or occupancy? o Please provide feedback from the building department, SUB, planning and the fire marshall (and any other departments that would have oversight) • What specific updates would need to be made if we wanted to come up to current standards on everything regarding the property? • Could you please detail what opportunities may be available if the property is within an enterprise zone, urban renewal district, opportunity zone, or any other special initiatives that may be of benefit to keeping our business in Springfield? Warehouse 1355195 1703344401402 GBA: 29700 sqft YR Built: 1979 01 4430 Franklin Blvd, Eugene, OR —_—. SE.IMS.E.IMSEC. MTI7S.R3WWM. �:."°j lane County 17033 SPRINGFlELD Duncan & Brown SPRINGFlELD 1]033 Ornlid & Swinney Fire Protection and Security 610 30th Street, Springfield, OR 97478 (0th Street, Fez: Springfield, , OR Annual Fire Sprinkler Inspection Report m wwa OwnerfProperty Manager: Silva Management Occupant: Big B Tire Sheet: 4430 Franklin Blvd Phone: 541-229-3203 city & Stale: Eugene, OR Date: 42812020 Owners Section (To be answered by owner or owner's representative) A Have there been any changes in the occupancy classification, machinery or operations since Rhe last. inspection? B. Have Men: been any changes or repairs to the fire protection systems since the last inspection? C. If afire occurred since the last inspection, have all damaged sprinkler system components been replaced? D. Name of the Owner or Ownets representative answering the above: Inspector's Section (Ail responses reference current inspection) Yes NIA No 1. GENERAL ✓ a. Is the building occupied? V1 I 1b. Are all systems in service? ✓ c. Does Mere appear to be proper clearance between the top of all storage and the sprinkler deflector? d. In building areas protected by a wat system, does it appear to be heated, including its blind attics and perimeter areas, where accessible? ✓® e. Have the sprinkler systems been extended to all visible areas of the building? if not, what areas are not spdnklemd? ✓ f. Does the fire hose on the sprinkler system appear to be in satisfactory condition? ✓ I g. Have fire hoses been tested? DATE: N/A 2. CONTROL VALVES a. Are sprinkler system main control valves readily visible and in the appropriate open or closed Position? ✓ b. Are all control valves in good condition? ✓ it c. Are all the ocntrol valves locked, sealed or equipped with a tamper switch? Control Valve Maintenance Table Controlvaives No. Type Open Secured Closed Signs Abnormal Conditions Cly connection 1 Key Yes No No No None Conlrel valves fork trPive!Yer. -. _ Pump oon8d valor Section =trd valves System coned valves 1 OS&Y Yes Yes No Yes None Othercontrdvalves 3A. TANKS AND PUMPS ✓ a. Do fire pumps, gravity, surface or pressure tanks appear to be in good external condition? .11 b. Does it appear that gravity, surface and pressure tanks are at the proper pressure and/or water levels? 319, FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION AND CHECK VALVES ✓� a. It appears that the fire department connections are in satisfactory condition, couplings free, ups or plugs in place and check valves tight? b. Are fire department connections visible and accessible? ✓I c. Is Mere a current record of a 5 year check valve inspection on the fire department connection? DATE: 2019 ✓® d. Is the fire department connection check valve accessible? Page 1 of 3 Yes WA No 4A. WET SYSTEMS ✓ a. Are confrol valves in the appropriate open or dosed position? ✓ b. Is there a curtant record of a 5 year internal investigation and alarm check inspection? DATE: 2016 J c. Was a water flow test of main drain made at the sprinkler riser? d. No. of systems: 1 Make & model: 4 -Star alarm valve with water motor gong No. of systems: Make & model: Wet System/Water Flow Test Test Pipe Test Pipe size Static Psi Before Flow Pressure Sialic Psi After Flow Switch Timing Riser 2. 94 60 70 WMG OOD PSI PSI PSI Outlet 4B. ANTI -FREEZE SYSTEM ®✓ a. Have all known and readily apparent anti -freeze systems been tested? K Date anti -freeze systems were tested. DATE: N/A Anti -freeze Test Anfimfireete Type Freeze Point Anti -Freeze Loop Location S. DRY SYSTEMS (SEE ITEMS 13 TO 16) ✓ a. Is the dry valve in service? ✓ b. Do dry valves appear to be protected from freezing? ✓ c. When was the system piping last ck'd for blockage, corrosion, or foreign materials? DATE: WA d. Were readily accessible and visible low points drained during this inspection? ✓ e. Did quick -opening devices operate satisfactorily? DATE: N/A ✓ I. Date dry -pipe valve trip tested - control valve partially open: DATE: WA ✓ g. Date dry -pipe valve trip tested - control valve fully open: DATE: N/A ✓ h. Did the heating equipment in the dry -pipe valve room operate at the time of inspection? ✓ 1. Did dry valve trip property? ✓ j. If supplying freezer, has ice plug check been performed? DATE: WA Dry Systems No. of systems: Make & model: No. of systems: _ Make & madel: Dry System Trip Test Make Modelme to Trip WaterAlr np Time arm Make Thm Test ressure Preswre Point Water Operated Pipe Test Reached WithMlithcut Pressure Proper OOD PSI PSI PSI Outlet 6. SPECIAL SYSTEMS �✓ a. Did the deluge or pre -action valves operate property during testing? DATE: WA 7. ALARMS ✓ a. Did ureter motor(s) and gong(s) operate during testing? ✓ b. Did electric alarm(s) operate during testing? ✓ c. Did supervisory alarm service test satisfactorily? ✓ d. Does the system have more than 20 heads? ✓ e. Is the system monitored? By: Outside Bell Only Page 2 M 3 Yes NIA No S. SPRINKLERS ✓ a. Do sprinklers appear to be free of corrosion or loading and visible obstructions? ✓ b. Are extra sprinklers available on the premises? ✓ c. Does the exterior condition of the fire spinkler system appear to be satisfactory? ✓ d. Have dry sprinklers older than 10 years been tested? DATE: N/A ✓ e. Have quick response sprinkler older than 20 years been tested? DATE: N/A ✓ f. Have sprinkler older than 50 years been tested: DATE: 1970 ✓ g. Have high temp heads 325° and above been checked: DATE: WA 9. GAUGES ✓�a. Have gauges been tested or changed in the last 5 years? DATE: 2016 10. FIRE HYDRANTS ✓�a. Have hydrants been flow tested and inspected? DATE: N/A 11. STANDPIPE F-77F]a. Has otandpipe been inspected and tested in the last 5 years? DATE: N/A 12. FORWARD FLOW ®J a. Has forward flow test be done? DATE: No record Static Residual GPM 13. Explain arty "No" answers and comments: None 14. Adjustments or corrections made during the inspection: 15. Although these comments are not the result of an engineering review, the following desirable improvements are recommended: 16. SYSTEM DESIGN a. Is there a backflow device on the water supply pipe? No Brand and Model: N/A b. Is there a system design nameplate permanently attached to the riser? Yes c. Hydraulic calculation information: 17 heads /.1912000 / 41.201490 Signature of Inspector. E6411 A&IJ Data: 4.28-20 Page 3 of 3 AUTOMATIC PRESS /I HEATPRESS FRONT OFFICE/ RECEPTION MANUAL PRESS GAS DRYER AUTOMATIC PRESS i PRINT STAGING Dark Room/Bathrooms RECEIVINGIPARTIALS TAGGING STORAGE SPECIAL FINISHING FULFILLMENT PROCESSINGISHIPPING/SHIPPING SUPPLY STORAGE EMB STAGING 6 12 SY TRIMMING/ OC EPATCHESI EAOI FULFILLMENT STORAGE LIES 6 RECEIVING I SHIPPING Misc Storage