HomeMy WebLinkAboutDecision Planner 10/8/2021RINGFIELD
TYPE II TREE FELLING PERMIT
STAFF REPORT & DECISION 6
OREGON
Case Number:
8l l-20-0001l0-TYP2
Project Name:
Mountaingate l't Addition - Lot 82
Tree Felling Permit
Nature of Application:
The applicant submitted a tree felling application in
order to remove 20 trees to prepare the site for
residential development.
Project Location:
Map 17-02-34-43; TLs 1600
Zoning:
Low Density Residential (LDR)
Comprehensive Plan Designation:
Low Density Residential (LDR)
Application Submitted:
May I1,2021
120 Day Waiver Signed:
JuJy 20,2021
Decision Date:
October 8,2021
Appeal Deadline:
October 22,2021
Associated Applications: Building Permit, 8ll-21-002267-DWL; LDAP 811-21-000408-PW
APPLICAIIT'S DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TEAM
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD'S DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TEAM
Site Information: The subject property is located at the intersection of Dogwood Street and Mountaingate Drive
within Mountaingate I't Addition Subdivision. The site is 0.98 acres and is currently a steep, -40% slope, vacant
Applicant:
Gordon R. Hageman
Town & Country Homes LLC
6019 Graystone Loop
Springfield, OR 97478
Applicant's Representative:
Rebecca Shepard
Dougherty Landscape Architects
47 4 W illamette Street #305
Eugene, OR97478
POSITION REVIEW OF NAME PHONE
Project Manager Planning Andrew Larson 541-736-t003
Transportation Planning Transportation Michael Liebler 541-736-r034
Public Works Engineer utilities Clayton McEachern 541-736-1036
Deputy Fire Marshal Fire and Life Safety Eric Phillips-Meadow 541-726-2293
Building Official Building Chris Carpenter 54t-744-4153
I,!I,)
Mountaingate Dr I oBi'
J L
a'
'/
t\
'!
I
I
I
r '-I
\l
il
I I
parcel. There is a variable width slope easement along the northern boundary and adjacent to Dogwood Street.
There is also a 20' wide Private Vegetation Easement along the southern boundary intended to retain or create an
internal buffer of trees and native vegetation along internal property lines and protect the forest viewshed from
lower elevations.
DECISION: APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS. The standards of the Springfield Development Code
(SDC) applicable to each criterion of Tree Felling Approval are listed herein and are satisfied by the
submitted plans unless specifically noted with findings and conditions necessary for compliance. 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.
OTHER USES AUTHORIZED BY THE DECISION: None. Future development will be in accordance with
the provisions of the Springfield Development Code and all applicable local, state and federal regulations.
REVIBW PROCESS: This application is reviewed under Type II procedures listed in Springfield Development
Code Section 5.1-130 and Tree Felling standards of SDC 5.19-100.
Procedural Finding: Staff reviewed the plan diagrams and supporting information outlining the requested tree
felling and replacement. City staff s review comments have been reduced to findings and conditions only as
necessary for compliance with the Tree Felling Criteria of SDC 5.19-125.
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).
Procedural Finding: Notification was sent to adjacent property owners/occupants on June l, 2021 . Staff received
one written comment from the Mountaingate Homeowner's Association.
Public Comment: Don Thumel, President, MGLOA: Comment was received from Don Thumel, President of the
Mountaingate Lot Owners Association (MGLOA), stating that they had not approved the site and architectural
review for this application and wished for the City to deny the Tree Felling application. However, subsequent
communication was received that the proposed house and driveway passed architectural review and that the initial
comment was no longer valid so the comment was withdrawn.
CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL:
Ref. Article 5.19-125 of the Springfield Development Code:
The Development & Public Works Director in consultation with the Fire Chief shall approve, approve with
conditions or deny the request based on the following standards.
A. Whether the conditions of the trees with respect to disease, hazardous or unsafe conditions, danger of
falling, proximity to existing structures or proposed construction, or interference with utility services or
pedestrian or vehicular traffic safety warrants the proposed felling.
Applicant's Submittal: "20 trees are to be removed for the development of a proposed driveway, new
building, and regrading."
Finding: The applicant has submitted to remove 20 trees on-site including 7 fir, 5 maple, and I oak which were
all identified as native species in the Mountaingate 1't Addition Hillside Development Plan. The proposed
removal is in preparation for the approved single-unit residential dwelling and associated driveway access.
Finding: All 20 trees were listed in fair condition on the submitted Tree Preservation & Removal Plan and
none were identified as hazardous to existing structures or utilities. Staff conducted on site visit on July 9,2021
and concurs with the listed 'fair' condition of all trees proposed to be removed and did not identifu any hazard
trees.
Conclusion: As submitte{ this criterion is not applicable.
B. Whether the proposed felling is consistent with State standards, Metro Plan policies and City Ordinances
and provisions affecting the environmental quality of the area, including but not limited to, the
protection of nearby trees and windbreaks; wildlife; erosion, soil retention and stability; volume of
surface runoff and water quality of streamsl scenic quality; and geological sites.
Applicant's Submittal: " N/A. "
Finding: The Springfield Development Code (SDC) is the primary implementing ordinance for environmental
protection policies contained inthe Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan). SDC
Article 5.19-100 - Tree Felling Standards generally implements environmental protection policies of the Metro
Plan for the subject property.
Finding: The area subject to the tree felling request is inside the Urban Growth Boundary OGB) and City
limits and is therefore subject to Springfield land use jurisdiction. The subject trees are predominantly
broadleaf evergreen and deciduous varieties.
Finding: The subject property has not been previously developed with residential dwellings, and due to the size
of the site and its location within an existing residential neighborhood the trees are not considered commercial
timber. Staff has determined that trees have little to no commercial value for the wood products industry.
Therefore, a permit from the Oregon Department of Forestry is not required.
Finding: The subject site is a steep lot, approximately 40o/o, which relies on existing mature vegetation and its
root network to stabilize the hillside.
Finding: The applicant has provided a list of Existing Tree Protection Measures and has stated that "no root
over 2" shall be cut without approval of the urban forester (or approved arborist). Roots shall be cut with
approved saws. No roots shall be cut or torn during trenching with dozer equipment such as backhoes and
trenchers. Utility lines shall be installed by hand digging or tunneling under roots, as necessary to avoid cutting
roots 2" and larger." In addition, the applicant states that "no excavation, grading, or construction activity shall
take place within tree protection areas."
Finding: The applicant's proposal to leave the existing root system and to limit construction activity is in
keeping with common practices and will maintain slope/soil stability until construction commences.
Conclusion: Springfreld Development Code (SDC) Section 5.19-100 - Tree Felling Standards generally
implements environmental protection policies of the Metro Plan and has been applied herein. The proposal is
consistent with tree removal procedures within the urbanized areas of the City, applicable policies and
provisions of State law, the Metro Plan and the Springfield Development Code for protection of environmental
quality.
Conclusion: As conditioned herein, this criterion has been met.
C. Whether it is necessary to remove trees in order to construct proposed improvements as specified in an
approved development plan, grading permits and construction drawings.
Applicant's Submittal: "These improvements result in a site build-out that will necessitate the removal of any of
the existing trees. The project proposed a new house and driveway."
Finding: The applicant's tree felling application matches the building permit submitted, 811-21-002267-DWL.
Conclusion: As proposed, this criterion is satisfied.
D. In the event that no Development Plan has been approved by the City, felling of trees will be permitted
on a limited basis consistent with the preservation of the site's future development potential as
prescribed in the Metro Plan and City development regulations, and consistent with the following
criteria:
1. Wooded areas associated with natural drainage ways and water areas shall be retained to preserve
riparian habitat and to minimize erosionl
2. Wooded areas that will likety provide attractive on-site views to occupants of future developments
shall be retained;
3. Wooded areas along ridge lines and hilltops shall be retained for their scenic and wildlife value;
4. Wooded areas along property lines shall be retained to serve as buffers from adjacent properties;
5. Trees shall be retained in sufficiently large areas and dense stands so as to ensure against wind
throw; and
6. Large-scale clear-cuts of developable areas shall be avoided to retain the wooded character of future
building sites, and so preserve housing and design options for future City residents.
Applicant' s Submittal: " n / a "
Finding: The applicant has submitted to remove 20 trees on-site including 7 fn,5 maple, and I oak which were
all identified as native species in the Mountaingate I't Addition Hillside Development Plan. The proposed
removal is in preparation of an approved single-unit residential dwelling and associated driveway access, 811-
2t-002267-DWL.
Conclusion: As submitted, this criterion is not applicable.
E. Whether the applicant's proposed replanting of new trees or vegetation is an adequate substitute for the
trees to be felled.
Applicant's Submittal: "See sheet TR-l for proposed tree plantings."
Finding: Sheet TR-l indicates l8 new trees will be planted following home and driveway construction; 15
trees along the new driveway and 3 in general landscaping.
Finding: The Hillside Overlay review of Phase III of Mountaingate established a required Vegetation Setback
easement along the southern boundary of Lot 82; the 20' wide Vegetation Setback easement is depicted on the
Plat and shown on the applicant's submittal.
Finding: The Hillside Development Plan (HDP) states "The purpose of these areas is to retain or create an
internal buffer of trees and vegetation along the internal property lines and protect the forest viewshed from
lower elevations. This may be achieved by pruning and shaping existing healthy trees; by thinning younger
existing trees to encourage growth into healthy property spaced mature trees or by planting new trees. The
vegetative setback areas contain primarily Oak and Douglas fir trees, a few maple trees, and various species of
native understory vegetation. In addition, "No native vegetation may be removed from within vegetative
setback areas except as necessary to meet fuel break standards for fire protection and diseased or dangerous
trees as determined by a professional forester or arborist and approved by the city.
Finding: The applicant has proposed to remove 5 Douglas Fir, I Maple, and 1 unidentified deciduous tree from
the 20' wide vegetation setback easement. The trees are identified on the Tree Preservation and Removal Plan
submitted with the Application; trees 4-10. Trees 4-7 are shown to have a root system, as identified as Critical
Root Zone, extending into the proposed building envelope's disturbance area. The grading required to construct
the new home will damage the root system of those trees that would lead to the death of trees 4-7. Staff agrees
with the removal of these trees; however, staff encourages planting replacement native trees following removal
of the trees and final construction.
F'inding: Trees 8-10 identified on the Tree Preservation and Removal Plan and proposed home location do not
show any disturbance to the critical root zone of those trees. Removal of these trees will not be permitted.
Condition of Approval: Trees 8,9, and 10 identified on the Tree Preservation and Removal Plan shall
not be removed from the Vegetation Setback Easement.
Conclusion: As conditioned, this criterion has been met.
F. Whether slash left on the property poses significant fire hazard or liability to the City.
Applicant's Submittal: " n/a."
Finding: Where necessary, removal of slash reduces fire hazards and prevents debris and sediment from being
deposited into drainage courses and stormwater drains. The applicant stated on sheet TR-l that the felled trees
will be removed from the site and erosion control measures will be implemented.
Finding: The applicant's removal of the trees, stumps, woody material, and debris from the site should
significantly reduce the fire hazard liability on the site.
Conclusion: As proposed, this criterion has been met.
G. Whether the felling is consistent with the guidelines specified in the Field Guide to Oregon Forestry
Practices Rules published by the State of Oregon, Department of Forestry, as they apply to the northwest
Oregon region.
Applicant's Submittal: " n/a."
Finding: The site that is subject to the tree felling request is within the Springfreld UGB and City limits, and is
considered within existing urban development. For this reason, the proposed tree removal does not rise to the
level of a regulated timber harvest or commercial logging operation. Therefore, the action is governed by the
applicable provisions of the Springfield Development Code. However, the applicant and their licensed tree
removal contractor will need to follow State forestry guidelines for safe operations and fire prevention during
the removal of trees, slash and debris approved under this permit.
Conclusion: As proposed, this criterion is not applicable.
H. Whether transportation of equipment to and equipment and trees from the site can be accomplished
without a major disturbance to nearby residents.
Applicant's Submittal: "There will be no disturbances to nearby residences as direct access to the property is
provided off Dogwood Street. Please see Tree Removal Plan TR-l for tree locations and haul access details."
Finding: The applicant's tree removal plan indicates that the 20 trees will be removed and hauled offsite via
the primary access roads for the project. The site is directly accessible from the Dogwood Street and is close to
regional sawmills and composting facilities for wood waste and debris. The site's location allows for trucks
and equipment to access the local and regional truck routes and, if necessary, for trees, slash and debris to be
taken to a suitable disposal facility.
Finding: Staff observes there are residential dwellings immediately adjacent to the proposed tree felling area.
The tree removal activity is a short-term step necessary to prepare the site for future house construction.
Therefore, the activity should not create a conspicuous change to the traffic patterns for the area and the
proposed tree felling should not constitute an unusual or adverse impact to the neighborhood.
Conclusion: As proposed, this criterion has been met.
CONCLUSION AND DECISION:
SUMMARY OF CONDITIONS OT- APPROVAL:
1. Trees 8,9, and 10 identilied on the Tree Preservation and Removal Plan shall not be removed from the
Vegetation Setback Easement.
The above findings and conclusions demonstrate that the proposal meets the standards of SDC 5.19-125 for Tree
Felling Permit Approval. This written decision constitutes the Tree Felling Permit.
The following general construction practices apply when tree felling is initiated on site:
Notification shall be provided to the City at least 5 days prior to commencement of the tree felling
operation. Please contact Andrew Larson at 541-736-1003 (direct) or by email: alarson({r;.springfield-
or.gov.
All felling activities, including ingress and egress for the tree removal operations, shall include erosion
control measures in conformance with the City's Engineering Design Standards and Practices Manual.
All felling and removal activities shall be performed in a manner that avoids ground disturbance and soil
compaction extending beyond the established point of access to the tree felling area.
Any soil and debris tracked into the street by vehicles and equipment leaving the site shall be cleaned up
with shovels in a timely manner and not washed into drainage channels or the public stormwater system
lsDC s.l9-l2sl.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
The application and documents relied upon by the applicant, and the applicable criteria of approval are available for
a free inspection at the Development Services Department,225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon. Copies of the
documents will be made for $0.75 for the first page and $0.50 for each additional page.
APPEAL
If you wish to appeal the decision of approval, you must do so by 5:00 PM on October 22,2021. Your appeal
must be submitted in accordance with the Springfield Development Code, Article 15, APPEALS. Note: Appeals
must be submitted on a City form and a fee of $250.00 must be paid to the City at the time of submittal. The fee
will be returned to the appellant if the Planning Commission approves the appeal application.
If you have any questions regarding these matters, please call (541) 736-1003 or send an email to:
alarson(@ sprinefi eld-or. gov.
a
a
a
a