The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutComments PLANNER 8/29/2008 . " ,., [City of Springfield Development Services Department 225 Fifth Street Springfield, OR 97477 SITE PLAN REVIEW PRE-SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST Project Name: Phase 2 of Marcola Meadows Project Proposal: Lowes site plan Case Number: PRE2008-00061 Project Address: Lot 11 of the tentativesubdivi~ion Assessors Map and Tax Lot Number(s): Zoning: Community Commercial (CC) Overlay District(s): Drinking. Water Protection (DWP) Applicable Refinement Plan: N/A Refinement Plan Designation: N/A Metro Plan Designation: Commercial Pre-Submittal Meeting Date: September 10, 2008 Application Subrrittal Deadline: March 10,2008 (?ept 17 for expedited review) Associated Applications: DWP (DRC2008-00061) I City of Springfield Review Name phone I Team ' I Planninq Steve Hopkins 726-3649 I I Buildinq 'Dave Puent 726-3668 I I Fire and Life Safety Gilbert Gordon 726-2293 I , PIP Coordinator and Utilities Les Benoy 726-3725 I I Police Tana Steers 726-3731 I I PW Utilities Les Benoy 726-3725 I I Trans. Enqineerinq Kristi Krueqer 726-4584 I I Trans. Planninq Jon Driscoll 726-3679 I I Construction Inspector Todd Sinqleton 726-5931 I "~eel!le~Nlt"SIl)'EMEI!GeMENlt"RE~J!EWJlIiE~8""JI1.".I"\I\la\l~ Applicant Land Owner Applicant's Representative Jack Mandel Jeff Belle Jeremy McPherson Lowes HIW, Inc. SC Springfield,LLC WRG Design, Inc. 1530 Faraday Ave, Suite 140 7510 Longley Lane, Suite 102 5415 SW Westgate Dr, Suite 100 Carlsbad CA 92008 Reno NV 89511 Portland OR 97221 PRE2008-00061 Lowes TENTATIVE SITE PLAN REVIEW APPLICATION PRE-SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST PLANNING o Application fee - discuss the applicable fees o Copy of the Site Plan reduced to 81h"x 11" ,I Complete Incomplete See Planning Note(s) 1 ~ '~"" """,,-.. %'U. 8 y," x 11" Copy of Site Plan o Copy of the deed and a preliminary title report issued within the past 30 days documenting ownership and listing all encumbrances. If the applicant is not the property owner, written permission from the property owner is required. Complete Incomplete See Planning Note(s) ~ liiiiI.. ~. Deed and Preliminary Title Report o Brief narrative explaining the purpose of the development, the existing use of the property, and any additional information that may have a bearing in determining the action to be taken. The narrative should also include the proposed,number of employees and future expansion plans, if known. i Complete Incomplete See Planning Note(s) ~ ~ Brief Narrative o Site Plan Complete Incomplete See Planning Note(s) l2] R I!!:.I I>>'l ~ 2 Prepared by an Oregon Licensed Architect, Landscape Architect, or Engineer Proposed buildings: location, dimensions, size (gross floor area applicable to the parking requirement for the proposed use(s)), setbacks from property lines, and distance between buildings Location and height of existing or proposed fences, walls, outdoor equipment, storage, trash receptacles, and signs Location, dimensions, and number of typical, compact, and disabled parking spaces; including aisles, wheel bumpers, directional signs, and striping Dimensions of the development area, as well as area and percentage of the site proposed for buildings, structures, parking and PRE2008-00061 Lowes IZ:'J [g] R I!!J !0:iJ t!2!l ~ 3 [g] Tifi;l ~ r:::?I ~ ~ r:::?I ~ ~ 4 ~ 5 III [g] ~ vehicular areas, sidewalks, patios, and other impervious surfaces Observance of solar access requirements as specified in the applicable zoning district On-site loading areas and vehicular and pedestrian circulation Location, type, and number of bicycle parking spaces Area and dimensions of all property to be conveyed, dedicated, or reserved for common open spaces, recreational areas, and other similar public and semi-public uses Location of existing and proposed transit facilities o Phased Development Plan Where applicable, the Site Plan application must include a phasing plan indicating any proposed phases for development, including the boundaries and sequencing of each phase. Phasing must progress in a sequence promoting street connectivity between the various phases of the development and accommodating other , required public improvements, including but not limited to, sanitary sewer, stormwater management, water, and electricity. Jhe applicant must indicate which phases apply to the Site Plan application being submitted. Complete Incomplete See Planning: Note(s) See Planning, Note(s) 6 Exterior elevations of all buildings and PRE2008-00061 Lowes 1"71 ~ ~ 0' Landscape Plan Complete Incomplete See Planning' Note(s) [;gJ 1"71 ~ p;;;-j l.=.t R ~ Tifi;l E2iJ r:::?I JZit:U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o Architectural Plan Complete Incomplete P}I l:J 1"1?1 ~ Phased Development Plan Drawn by a Landscape Architect Location and dimensions of.landscaping and open space areas to include calculation of .landscape coverage Screening in accordance with SDC 4.4-110 Written description, including specifications, of the permanent irrigation system Location and type of street trees List in chart form the proposed types of landscape materials (trees, shrubs, ground cover). Include in the chart genus, species, common name, quantity, size, spacing and method of planting fC?,l ~ 7 structures proposed for the development site, including height Conceptual floor plans o On-Site Lighting Plan Complete Incomplete See Planning Note(s) . ~ ~ 8 Iii1 ~ WI ~ 10 'Location, orientation, and maximum height of exterior light fixtures, both free standing and attached Type and extent of shielding, including cut-off angles and type of illumination, wattage, and luminous area Photometric test report for each light source Iii1 l!!t1 1'<<'1 14:SJ. 9 Planning Notes: 1. Use sheet DD3. Submit on 8 1/2 x 11 sheet. 2. Submit drawing of trash enclosure. It must be hydraulically separated from the storm ~~ater system. cJvMaster plan condition #46 requires 50% vegetative treatment of non-buildable rooftop area. State if & how that is accomplished. " 4. The truck route includes the driveway from Lot 11 to Marcola Rd. The subdivision does not include that driveway as part of the truck route. 5. Short term bike parking: the rack must be at least 5 feet from the wall. SDC4.6-145(B). , 6. The elevations must be drawn to scale. Color is not required if the reduced drawings are in color. 7. The floor plans are required to verify the DWP requirements and drainage plan are not in conflict. 8. The lighting plan (sheets SSl and SS2) was not submitted. 9. Submit cut sheets for all outdoor lights. 10. Submit a photometric report for the lighting plan. Refer to SDC 4.5-110(A) Additional comments not related to the completeness of the application: . PIP not yet submitted. There are two options: submit the complete application with a 120-day waiver or do not submit the application until the PIP is submitted. In either case, the Site Plan can't be tentatively approved until the proposed public infrastructure is adequate to serve ttle development. Refer to SDC 5.17-125(B). . The TIA analyzes traffic signals at intersections that will not contain signals: Marcola at Martin and the Lowes driveway on Marcola. The report should mention there will be a roundabout at Martin and Marcola and a non-signalized control at Lowes driveway. A roundabout tends to increase the capacity of an intersection, so a traffic control may not be warranted at the estimated time (Warranted at build-out). This will be addressed in the subdivision and the PIP. . Number of copies: 22 copies, 4 half size drawings and 2 CDs PRE2008"00061 Lowes TENTATIVE SITE PLAN REVIEW APPLICATION PRE-SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST , Deputy Fire Marshal: Gilbert Gordon Case #: PRE2008-00061 fIRE o Site Plan Complete Incomplete See Fire Note(s) [;ZI ~ On-site vehicular circulation fRl ~. o Improvement and Public Utilities Plan Complete Incomplete See Fire Note(s) Ii!iil ~ , Location of existing and required fire hydrants and similar public facilities Ii!iil ~. Fire Notes: 1. Additional comments not related to the completeness of the application: A. Provide a Hazardous Materials Management Plan (HMMP). The HMMP shall include a facility site plan designating the following: 1. Storage and use areas. 2. Maximum amount of each material stored or used in each area. 3. Range of container sizes. 4. Locations of emergency isolation and mitigation valves and devices 5. Product conveying piping containing liquids or gases, other than utility-owned fuel gas lines and low-pressure fuel gas lines. 6. On and off positions of valves for valves that are of the self-indicating type. 7. Storage plan showing the intended storage arrangement, including the location and dimension of aisles. 8. The location and type of emergency equipment. The plans shall be legible and drawn approximately to scale. Separate distribution systems are allowed to be shown on separate pages (2007 SFC 2701.5.1). B. Provide a Hazardous Materials Inventory Statement (HMIS). The HMIS shall include the following information: 1. Manufacturer's name. 2. Chemical name, trade names, and hazardous ingredients. 3. Hazard classification. 4., MSDS or equivalent. 5. United Nations (UN), North America (NA) or the Chemical Abstract Service (CAS) identification number. Revised 9{24/07 6. Maximum qiJantity stored or used on-site at one time inlbs. or gallons. 7. Storage conditions related to the storage type, temperature, or pressure. 8. State of the material: gas, liquid, or solid. 9. Open or closed use. 10. NFPA 704 classification. 11. Location of chemicals stored and in bulk use il'l the building(s) (2007 SFC 2701.5.2). C. Landscaping: A 3 footclear space shall be maintained around the circumference of fire hydrants (2007 SFC 508.5.5). D. Landscaping: Immediate access to fire departmel'lt connections shall be maintained at all times and without obstruction by fences, bushes, trees, walls or any other object for a minimum of 3 feet (2007 SFC 912.3). . E. Fire apparatus access roads for the heavy pavement areas shall support an 80,000 lb. , imposed load per 2007 Springfield Fire Code 503.2.3 and SFC Appendix D102.1. Revised 9{24/07 TENTATIVE SITE PLAN REVIEW APPLICATION PRE-SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST Engineer: Les Benoy Case#: Marcola Meadows PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING o Site Assessment of Existing Conditions Complete r;:s:;r ~ r;:s:;r ~ ~ Er23 l2] fiiiiil I.M!U ~_.. =; >0" ~ Revised 10/25/07 Incomplete, See PW Note(s) ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ 2 ~. 3 ~ 4 [g] 5 Prepared by an Oregon licensed Landscape Architect or Engineer , Vicinity Map The name, location, and dimensions of all existing site features including buildings, curb cuts, trees and impervious surface areas, clearly indicating what is remaining and what is being removed. For existing structures to remain, also indicate present use, size; setbacks from property lines, and distance between buildings , The" name, location, dimensions, direction of flow and top of bank of all watercourses and required riparian setback that are shown on the Water Quality Limited Watercourse Map on file in the Development Services Department The'100-year floodplain and floodway boundaries on the site, as specified in the latest adopted FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps or FEMA approved Letter of Map Amendment or Letter of Map Revision .. TheTime of Travel Zones, as specified in SDC 3.3-200 and: delineated on the Wellhead Protection Areas Map on file in the Development Services Department , ' Physical features including, but not limited to trees 5" in diameter or greater when measured 4 Y2 feet above the ground, significant clusters of trees and shrubs, riparian areas, wetlands, and rock outcroppings Soil types and water table information as mapped and , specified in the Soils Survey of Lane County. A Geotechnical Report prepared by an Engineer must be submitted concurrently if the Soils Survey indicates the proposed development area has unstable soils and/or a high water table o Improvement and Public Utilities Plan must be in compliance with the regulations of SD<;: Sections 5.17-100, 4.1-100, 4.2-100, and 4.3-100 and must include the following information: Complete Incomplete See PW Note(s) [g] ~- =1 ~~.~ fiiil I1St ~ IjJ l2] ~ ~ 6 o Grading and Paving Plan Complete [g] l2] 7 8 Incomplete See PW Note(s) ~ ~ [g] 9 23 "',~ ~ A IjJ ~ 10 'f00 . , ~ P}I ~ ~ ~ 11 Prepared by an Oregon licensed Civil Engineer , Location and width of all existing and proposed easements Location of existing and required power poles, transformers, neighborhood mailbox units, and similar pubiic facilities Location and size of existing and proposed utilities on andiadjacent to the site, including sanitary sewer mains, stormwater management systems, water mains, power, gas, telephone, and cable TV. Indicate the proposed connection points , , Prepared by an Oregon licensed Civil Engineer Planting plan prepared by an Oregon licensed Landscape Architect where plants are proposed as part of the stormwater management system Roof drainage patterns and discharge locations Pervious and impervious area drainage patterns 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 draipageways to be retained Existing and proposed spot elevations and contours lines drawn at 1 foot intervals (for ,land with a slope over.10 percent, the contour lines may be at 5 foot intervals) Amount of proposed cut and fill o Stormwater Management System Study-- provide four'(4) copies of the study with the completed Stormwater ScopingSheet attached. The plan, calculations, and documentation must be consistent with the Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual. . Complete I'VI ~ Revised ~O/25/07 Incomplete' See PW Note(s) , Scoping Sheet and attached Stormwater Management System Study PW Notes: 1. Dimension existing pavement structures 2. Show/State FEMA floodplain status on plan set. 3. Show Time of Travel zones on plan,set. 4. Show top of bank for water course.' 5. Show soil types on plan set. 6. There are numerous existing and proposed easements on or adjacent to the site which are not shown or are not labeled clearly or consistently. An example is the existing easement for the water line south of the building on DD2 that is shown as proposed but is listed as exi~ting on DDS. The information should be clarified and correctly listed on all drawings. The Subdivision Tentative Plan suggests that a public drainage or maintenance easement will cross the' north site property line at an oblique angle. The Site Plan must show all required public and private easements, including drainage ,and maintenance access easements for the Willow Creek Greenway. ' 7. No proposed power poles, transformers, or mailbox units are identified. Sheet DDS , shows what appear to be pedestrian crossings but the symbols are not shown in the legend nor are ramps shown. These symbols should be added to the legend and dimensions added to the drawing. ,8. Franchise utilities such as gas, telephone, and cable television are not identified on the plans. Stormwater main sizes were not labeled. Size of roof drains and outfalls to Willow Creek Greenway were not labeled. Stormwater quality catch basins are not identified on the.. plans. It is not clear if water system is public or privates, clarify and label. Label any public sanitary sewer facilities. Provide fire hydrant detail. Show location of building fire system backflow prevention & note if it is inside the building. Provide slopes and elevations of sanitary system. For sanitary drains at the Garden Center, trash enclosure and truckwell, sanitary sewer drains are required to be. trapped, vented and primed per the Oregon Plumbing Code; provide a detail for this. 9. Roof drainage patterns are not shown. Are the Garden Center and Truckwell covered? If they are covered, roof drains must be shown and go to storm system. In addition.. interior drain~emust go to sanitary system and follow building & plumbing codes. 17 lur 10.Sizes, slopes and elevations of stormwater systems not labeled. Stormwater quality catch basins are not identified on plans. Plans do not show enough detail of off- site drainage swales and elements th.at receive site storm water. 11. Show amount of cut/fill on plan set. Additional comments not related to the completeness of the application: . We have a concern regarding the design of the swales for water quality treatment of the parking lot as proposed on sheet DD6. Pollutants discharged near the ditch inlets could directly enter the storm drainage system without flowing through sufficient length of the swale for treatment. Show sufficient contact time in swale or provide solution to offer sufficient treatment time. . The Site Plan Storm Drainage Report (August 29, 2008) states (Pg 2), in reference to the southern portion of the site: "".the remaining area will drain to a pond provided as part of the Marcola Meadows Development." This sentence should be clarified with the insertion of the words "water quality treatment facility" instead of the word "pond". . . The Site Plan Storm Drainage Report (August 29, 2008) states correctly on Page 2 that "No detention will occur prior to being conveyed offsite". The following sentence is however misleading; it states: "No detention will be required onsite Revised 10/25/07 as all detention requirements ~ill be managed offsite as a part of the Marcola Meadows Development." It should be noted that storm runoff from the southern portion of the Site does not pass through any detention facilities between the point it leaves the Site and the'~point where it leaves the subdivision, because the --Q' ~wale at the extreme southwest corner of the subdivision is a water quality .. ' f cility, not a detention facility.' The Subdivision Storm Drainage plan was pproved as part of the Subdivision Tentative Plan Decision, dated September XX, 2008 (SUB2008~00036). ,; . . The Applicant's statements regarding offsite stormwater detention (Pg 19 and Pg 30 of the Pre-Submittal Narrative),are inconsistent with the Subdivision plan for stormwater management (Sheet C4), which describes this as ",proposed vegetated treatment water quality facility". . Location of the gate near the northeast corner of the building could restrict access to the fire hydrant . No back flow protection is shown for the fire loop around the proposed building o Not clear which part of the garden .center is covered. It appears that a large uncovered area is draining to the sanitary sewer. . Existing grades north of the bUilding are unclear. Contours are not labeled. . Identify legend used for elevation c:all-outs on Sheet DD4 . . Existing grade spot elevations and existing contours do not match at the southeast corner of the site. . It appears that there will be no curbs along the parking lot swales or landscape islands yet no curb stops are shown to prevent vehicles from driving into the swale. ' . Vents and traps should be shown or identified for catch basins connected to the sanitary sewer. . Sheet DD2 should show existing conditions. Currently, this sheet shows many proposed features that are either part of Phase I work or part of the site development, without clarifying which phase. This sheet should show existing conditions and clearly label what is to be constructed in Phase 1. ' . , Sheet DD2 refers to the site as "parcel." Unless the site is part of a partition, it should be referred to as a "lot." , o It is recommended for clarity that existing features be grayed or shaded back when shown on drawings with both existing and proposed features. ~, Revised 10/25/07 TENTATIVE SITE PLAN REVIEW APPLICATION PRE-SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST Transportation Engineer/Planner: Jon Driscoll Case#: PRE2008-00061 Applicant: Lowes, Phase 2 of Marcola Meadows TRANSPORTATION o Right-of-Way Approach Permit application must be provided where the property has frontage on a Lane County or an Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) facility. Complete Incomplete See Transportation Note(s) [g] r::;1 ~ Copy of ROW Approach Permit Application o Site Plan Complete Incomplete ~ E'1 ~ See Transportation Note(s) 2 Access to streets, alleys, ahd properties to be served, including th~ location and dimensions of existing and proposed curb cuts and curb cuts proposed to be closed o Improvement and Public, Utilities Plan Complete Incomplete See Transportation Note(s) [g] 3 ~ ~ 4 Location and type of existing and proposed street lighting Location, width, and construction material of all existing and proposed sidewalks, sidewalk ramps, pedestrian access ways, and trails Location, widths (of paving and right-of- way) and names of all existing and proposed streets, alleys, dedications, or r:0=I U E'1 ~ 5 Revised 10/25/07 [g] 6 other right-of-ways within or adjacent to the proposed development, including ownership and maintenance status, if applicable Location of existing and required traffic control devices Transportation Notes: '1. The TIA inCluded does not rightly address Marcola Road. Alter the TIA by removing the two proposed traffic signals on Marcola Drive (leaving the existing one at 28th Street), and include the roundabout at Martin Drive. ** 2. Dimension driveways and access widths to abutting "frontage roads" or parking lots. 3; Show location and type of existing and proposed street lighting. 4. Show the location, width, and cons,truction material of all existing and proposed sidewalks, sidewalk ramps. 5. Depict the location, widths (of paving and right-of-way) and names of all existing and proposed streets and easements within or adjacent to the proposed development, including ownership and maintenance status. The main access easement (Part of Phase I) is not shown, so there are only two access points to the site as depicted. Please include a copy of this access/maintenance agreemetn. No cross section of the paving area is shown., 6. Show the location of existing and required traffic control devices Additional comments not related to the completeness of the application: - , . Alter "existing"'to another more appropriate word for infrastructure not yet in place, but planned for Phase 1. . Martin Blvd. is shown as Martin Drive on Sheet C1 of the Master Plan. . OnDD7 the truck turning template crosses over parking lot islands, and into the opposing lane along the arterial Marcola Road. ** Attached shows at greater length issues with the TIA, i 'V , Revised 10/25/07 SITE PLAN REVIEW APPLICATION PRE-SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST ~ \5~Rigfif;'o 'fr,o'nta'if TRANSPORTATION (Supplementary) . . @'~'~iJ;~~~~\ff.R~~ilJi.~~pli.c!'itiQ.[~rriu.st~Ee~P~Yi(j[q~.ynere?,the"QrOR-effy"has a regOrh~0epat;tment~of~T:ra nspbr.tatiorh~(,0GOT)%faci I ity] o Traffic Impact Study-four copies of a study prepared by a Traffic Engineer in accordance with SDC Section 4.2-105(A)(4). Traffic Impact Studies (TIA) allow the City to analyze and evaluate the traffic impacts and mitigation of a development on the City's transportation system. In general, a TIA must explain how the traffic from a given development affects the transportation system in terms of safety, traffic operations, access and mobility, and immediate and adjoining street systems. A TIA must also address, if needed, City, metro plan and state land use and transportation policies and objectives. ' Complete Incomplete See Notes, ~#1 I'Y;I~~ ~.U". Ij'il l.3Zd o Site Plan Complete Incomplete See Notes ~#2 ,~- ~ Traffic Impact Study , Access to streets, alleys and properties to be served, including the location and dimensions of existing and proposed curb cuts and curb cuts proposed to be closed Complete Incomplete o Improvement and Public Utilities Plan ~ See Notes [g]#3 '~ ~ [2]#4, 5 ~ ~#6 9110108 Location and type of existing and proposed street lighting Location, widths and names of all existing and , proposed streets, alleys, dedications or other right-of- ways within or adjacent to the proposed development Location of existing and required traffic control devices ' 6 Notes; Note #1 - See miiin Transportation checklist. Note #2 - No dimensions are shown for lane widths at site entrances: northwest (Martin Rd.), west ( Martin Rd.) and southeast (Marcola Rd.). Incomplete (mk) Note #3 - Proposed oncsite lighting has not been included in the plans. Locations, types, and other details for on-site lighting need to be shown in the plans per Section 5.17-120 H of the Springfield Development Code. .Incomplete (bkc) Note #4 - The widths of the 30' Wide Private Joint Access Easements and AC Paving to the East, West and South of the site are not clearly named and dimensioned. Incomplete (fpm) , Note #5 - The utility easements shown are inconsistent with those presented in the Final Master Plan and SubdivisionTentative Plan (refer to Condition #20 of LRP2007-00028). Differentiation between Public and Private is not consistently indicated. The water easement south of the building is now a 15~ easement shown as existing per Sheet DDS, in conflict with the 20' PUE shown in the MP & STP. There is a new proposed water line easement shown around the building which was not shown or approved in either the MP or STP, Incomplete (ajh/jlh) Note #6 - Existing and proposed traffic control should be shown at a minimum at the access points to Martin and Marcola Roads. Incomplete (sdr) Additional comments not related to the completeness of the application: . DD7 - Design vehicle crosses a curb island in the parking lot, crosses into the opposing travel lane at the south entrance, crosses a curb isla'nd in Martin Road, and encroaches into the turn lane in Marcola Road. The truck wheel path alignment shown will require modifications to the parking area curb design near Marcola Road (mk/fpm). . DD8 - Per EDSP 1.02.14, "Design vehicles are required to begin and end their turn in the travel lane closest to the curb without encroaching into bike lanes (if applicable)." The truck wheel paths shown encroach on lanes beyond the travel lane closest to the curb in many locations; modifications to curb openings and striping will be required in the parking area, the driveway approaching Marcola Road.and the Marcola Road/driveway intersection itself (fp,m).' 9/10/08 7 ANY REQUIRED ADDITIONAL MATERIALS, APPLICATIONS OR PERMITS IT IS THE APPLICANT'S RESPONSIBILITY TO DETERMINE IF ADDITIONAL STANDARDS OR APPLICATIONS APPLY TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. THE APPLICANT SHOULD CONSIDER UTILIZING EITHER THE DEVELOPMENT ISSUES MEETING OR THE PRE- APPLICATION REPORT FOR MORE DETAILED INFORMATION: Applicable Not Applicable 1l$'I... ~ Ij) ~ ~ ~ Ij) riiiilI lMt Ij) Ij) [2] ~ ~ [2] [2] . Where a multi-family development is proposed, any additional materials to demonstrate compliance with SDC 3.2-240 Riparian Area Protection Report for properties located within 150 feet of the top of bank of any Water Quality Limited Watercourses (WQLW) or within 100 feet of the top of bank of any direct tributaries of WQLW A Geotechnical, Report prepared by an engineer must be submitted concurrently if there are unstable soils and/or a high water table present Where the development area is within an overlay district, address the additional standards of the overlay district If five or more trees are proposed to be removed, a Tree Felling Permit as specified in SDC 5.19-100 A wetland delineation approved by the Oregon Division of State Lands must be submitted concurrently where there is a wetland on the property Any required federal or state permit must be submitted concurrently or evidence the permit application has been submitted for review Where any grading, filling or excavating is proposed with the development, a Land and Drainage Alteration permit must be submitted prior to development Where applicable, any Discretionary Use or Variance as specified in SDC 5.9-100 and 5.21-,100 ' , An Annexation application, as specified in SDC 5.7-100, where a development is proposed outside of the city limits but within the City's urban service area and can be serviced by sanitary sewer PRE200S-00061 Lowes 1: . '. THIS APPLICATION IS: o COMPLETE FOR PROCESSING [;gJ INCOMPLETE AND NEEDS MISSING INFORMATION NOTED,ABOVE City Planner Date This is not a decision on your application. Springfield Development Code Section 5.4- 105 and Oregon Revised Statutes 227.178 require the City take final action on a limited land use decision within 120 days after the application is deemed complete. The 120-day processing period for this application begins when all the missing information is submitted or when you request that the City proceed without the information. You must indicate by either signing this form or by submitting a written response to the City within seven days of the date of this form asserting your intentions regarding the provision of the missing information. If you il'ldicate herein or in your written response that the missing information will be submitted, then you have 180 days from the date the application was submitted for Pre- Submittal Review to provide the City with the missing information. If you refuse to submit the missing information, then upon receipt of the full application packet and processing fee; the City will deem the application complete for purposes of starting the 120-day clock and begin processing the application. No new information may be submitted after the start of the 120-day period unless accompanied by a' request for an extension of the 120-day processing time. Upon receipt of a request for extension, the City may extend the 120-day period for a reasonable period of time. The City may also require additional fees if the new information is submitted after the Notification to Surrounding Property Owners is sent out and a second notification is required or if the new information substantially affects the application proposal and additional review is required. I, the owner/applicant, intend to submit all missing items indicated herein to the City within the ISO-day timeline. Owner/Applicant's Signature Date PRE2008-00061 Lowes