Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutComments PLANNER 9/10/2008 ]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 tentative subdivision Assessors Map and Tax Lot Number(s): 17-03-25-11 TL 2300 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 Submittal Deadline: March 10, 2008 (Sept 17 for expedited review) Associated Applications: DWP (DRC2008-00061) City of Springfield Review Team Planninq I Buildinq I Fire and Life Safety I PIP Coordinator and Utilities I Police i PW Utilities I Trans. Enqineerinq I Trans. Planninq , Construction Inspector Name Steve Hopkins Dave Puent Gilbert Gordon Les Benoy TElna Steers Les' Benoy Kristi Krueqer Jon Driscoll Todd Sinqleton T~eemG'~N!['SJoazELl1Q'eMENrr.RE~fEW.1iE~M- - Applicant Land Owner Jack Mandel Jeff Belle Lowes HIW, Inc. SC Springfield, LLC 1530 Faraday Ave, Suite 140 7510 Longley Lane, Suite 102 Carlsbad CA 92008 Reno NV 89511 phone 726-3649 726-3668 726"2293 726-3725 ,726-3731 726-3725 726-4584 726-3679 726-5931 ~_:; iE~' rfjJJfrt!ftfflffliiJ \h.W",,,,^ JiM ..if!}3i!^ .,:~ Applicant's 'Representative Jeremy McPherson WRG Design, Inc. 5415 SW Westgate Dr, Suite 100 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 Pia", reduced to 81h"x 11" Complete Incomplete See Planning Note(s) , l2ijl III 1 8 Yz" x 11" Copy of Site Plan o Copy of the' deed and a preliminary title report issued within the past 30 days documel}ting 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) ~ ~ 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. Complete Incomplete See Planning Note(s) ~ iii Brief Narrative o Site Plan Complete 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 rs::<l f(2SI Incomplete See Planning Note(s) "'" ~ ~ ~ P}I ~ IS'l ~ 2 IS'l lZZ$l ~ Iii1 ~ l2ijl 3 l2] ~ ~~~-- .. ,"^"""-, [g] li!m 4 ,~ l2] ~ 5 iGh.~ [g] ~ I"1/'! ~ 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. The applicant must indicate which phases apply to the Site Plan application being submitted. ' Complete Incomplete See Planning Note(s) I"1/'! tz::5J ~ o Landscape Plan Complete Incomplete l2] ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ li!m o Architectural Plan Complete. Incomplete ~ ~ See Planning , Note(s) 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 See Planning, Note(s) 6 Exterior elevations of all buildings and , PRE2008-00061 Lowes ~ ~ 7 structures proposed for the development site, including height Conceptual floor plans o On-Site Lighting Plan Complete Incomplete See Planning Note(s) ~ l2] 8 Location, orientation, and maximum height of exterior light fixtures, both free standing and attached III [g] 10 , Type and extent of shielding, including cut-off angles and type of illumination, wattage, and luminous area Photometric test report for each light source ~~.. = ,~ ~ 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 water system. 3. Master 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 the 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, 4half size drawings and 2 CDs PRE2008-00061 Lowes TENTATIVE LAND DIVISION APPLICATION , PRE-SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST Deputy Fire Marshal: Gilbert Gordon Case #: PRE2008-00052 FIRE o Tentative Land Division Plan Complete Inco'mplete, See Fire Note(s) ~ Location, widths and names of all existing and proposed streets, alleys, dedications or other right- of-ways within or adjacent to the proposed land division Location of existing and required fire hydrants I'S'%I ~ I'S'%I l2::81 ~ Fire Notes: L Additional comments not related to the completeness of the application: . Subdivision: . L "No Parking-Fire Lane" signs shall be posted on one side of 28 foot wide local roads shown on Plan Sheet C6, Detail 3. Placement of the signs shall follow the recommendations of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 2. "No Parking-Fire Lane" signs shall be required on both outside (right) lanes on Martin Drive if parking is normally allowed in bike lanes. Tree Felling: Landscaping: A 3 foot clear space shall be maintained around the circumference of fire hydrants (2007 SFC 508.5.5). Landscaping: Immediate access to fire department 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 SFC912.3). - Drinking Water Protection Overlay: No comment at this time. Phase 1, based on the applicant's submittal, will not be introducing any permanent storage, dispensing or use of hazardous materials for it's scope. Additional comments will be provided at future phases. PRE2008-00061 Lowes 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) 1iI Copy of ROW Approach Permit Application l2] o Traffic Impact Study - four (4) copies of a study prepared by a Traffic Engineer in accordance with SDC 4.2-105 AA. Traffic Impact Studies (TIS) allow the City to analyze and evaluate the traffic impacts and mitigation of a development on the City's transportation system. In general, a'TIS 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 TIS must also address, if needed, City, Metro Plan and state land use and transportation policies and objectives. Complete Incomplete ~ See Transportation Note(s) '1 Traffic Impact Study o Site Plan Complete Incomplete l2] See Transportation Note(s) , 2 Access to streets, alleys, and properties to be served, including the lo'cation and dimensions of existin'g and proposed curb cuts and curb cuts proposed to be closed o Improvement and Public Utilities Plan Complete Incomplete liI ~ ~ See Transportation Note(s) 3 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 PRE2008-00061 Lowes . ~._..i ~ r;;o;;'I IZSI 4 liI l2] 5 ~ ~ 6 proposed streets, alleys, dedications, or 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. Th,e 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 construction 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 is not shown, so there are only two access points to the site as depicted. No cross section of the paving area is shown. 6. Show the location of existing and required traffic control devices 7. Because the .PIP has not been submitted, a 120-day waiver is strongly recommended. 8. Additional comments not related to the completeness of the application: o Alter "existing" to another more appropriate word for infrastructure not yet in place, but planned for Phase 1. o Martin Blvd. is shown as Martin Drive on Sheet C1 of the Master Plan. o OnDD7 the truck turning template crosses over parking lot islands, and into the opposing lane along the arterial Marcola Road. o .. Attached shows at greater length issues with the TlA. PRE2008-00061 Lowes TENTATIVE SITE PLAN REVIEW APPLICATION PRE-SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST Engineer: Les Benoy Case#: Marcola Meadows PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING o Site Assessment of Existing Conditions' C9mplete ~ IS3'I l!SSI 1iJ"., ~= - ~ ~ [jij, ~" - ~ ~ Incomplete See PW Note(s) ~ Prepared by an Oregon licensed Landscape Architect or Engineer Vicinity Map ~ 1 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. Fo~ existing structures to remain, also indicate present use, size, setbacks from property lines, and distance between buildings The name,location, i:limensions, direction of flow and top of bank of all watercourses and re'quired riparian setback that are shown on the Water Quality Limited Wate~course 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 The Time 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 ~ l!!IJ l2] 2 ~ 3 l2] 4 ~ 5 PRE2008-00061 Lowes o ' Improvement and Public Utilities Plan must be in compliance with the regulations of SDC 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) l2] ~ '1'%"1 I.S g ~, ~ fiil ~ l2] 6 7 8 o Grading and Paving Plan Complete Incomplete See PW Note(s) lil lil l2] lil ~ 1'%"1.' ~ ~ ~ t=J. lil l2] ~ I!!I lil 1'%"1 f225J 9 A 10 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 public facilities Location and size of existing and proposed utilities on and adjacent 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 drainageways 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 Scoping Sheet attached. The plan, calculations, and documentation must be consistent with the Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual. Complete Incomplete See PW Note(s) PRE2008-00061 Lowes [g] 11l~1If 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 existing 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 QDS 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 backflowprevention & 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 drainage must go to sanitary system and follow building & plumbing codes. 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 that 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 "wat~r quality treatment facility" instead of the word "pond". . The Site Plan Storm Drainage Report (August 29, 2008) states correctly on Page 2 PRE2008-00061 Lowes that "No detention will occur prior to being conveyed offsite". The following sentence is however misleading; it states: "No detention will be required onsite as all detention requirements will be managed offsite'as a part of the Marcola Meadows Development." It should be noted that storm runofffrom 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 swale at the extreme southwest corner of the subdivision is a water quality facility, not a detention facility. The Subdivision Storm Drainage plan was approved 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 . 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 I~beled. . Identify legend used for elevation call-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 pr::event vehicles from driving into the swale. . Vents and traps should be shown or identified for catch basins connected to the sanitary sewer. . . Sheet DD2should 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 I. . Sheet DD2 refers to the site as "parcel." Unless the site is part of a partition, it should be referred to as a "lot." . It is recommended for clarity that existing features be grayed or shaded back when shown on drawin9s with both existing and proposed features. ' . PRE2008-00061 Lowes 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 l2] ~ ~ l2] ~ " ., ~ ~ ~... ,- ~ ~ F2if. I!iW ~. ~ ~ ~ P}I , i!!!!! [g] I!iW ~ Where a multi-family development is proposed, any additional materials to dem-onstrate 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 conc'urrently 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 m-ust 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 . . SDC5.9-100 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 PRE2008-00061 Lowes THIS APPLICATION IS: . 0 COMPLETE FOR PROCESSING [;gJ INCOMPLETE AND NEEDS MISSING INFORMATION NOTED ABOVE City Planner Date This is not a decision on your applic;ation. 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 wh~n 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 indicate 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 PRE200S'-00061 Lowes Notice of Decision - Tree Felling Project Name: The Villages at Marcola Meadows, Phase 1 Project Proposal: Tree felling Case Number: DRC2008-00054 Project Location: North of Marcola Road between 23'd and 31"streets. Property size: 1 00 acres Base Zone: MDR (Medium Density Residential), CC (Community Commercial), MUC (Mixed Use Cqmmercial) Overlay District(s): Drinking Water Protection Overlay, Nodal Development Overlay Metro Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential, Commercial, Nodal Development Pre-Submittal Meeting Date: August 6, 2008 Application Submitted Date: August 13, 2008 Decision Issued Date: September 15, 2008 Appeal Deadline Date: September 30, 2008 Other Application(s): Subdivision (SUB2008-00036), DWP (DRC2008-00055) I City of Sprin~ield i Point of Contact 1 Building I Fire and We Safety I PIP Coordinator and Utilities I Planning I Police 1 PW engineer 1 PW Utilities I Survey 1 Survey 1 Trans. Engineering I Trans. Planning ,I Construction Inspector I Marcola Meadows 1 Point of contact 1 Land Owner 1 Owner Representative I Satre - Landscape Marco/a Meadows Phase I Tree Felling Name. Steve Hopkins Dave Puent Gilbert Gordon 1 Les Benoy 1 Steve Hopkins T ana Steers Matt Stouder Les Benoy Chris Moorhead Dennis Ernst Kristi Krueger I Jon Driscoll Todd Singleton phone 726-3649 ' 726-3668 726-2293 726-3725 726-3649 726-3731 736-1035 726-3725 736-1011 726-2095 726-4584 726-3679 726-5931 I Name 1 Rick Satre 1 J eft Belle 1 Bob Martin I Jeff Bond Phone 465-4721 775-853-4714 775-345-4062 465-4721 Case No: SUB2008-00054 1 I I 1 I, 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 1016 Site: -L r I , J- r I I ----<-. !~Q II ~ h <! 1<1 OTlO rr HAYDE~ BRIDGE I Streets N Local N Collector " N Collector N Arterial N Arterial D Project boundary ED Well Spld-parks.shp City Limits I 9/0B Summary of proposal: This Tree Felling is in conjunction with Phase 1 of the Villages at Marcola Meadows. Phase 1 divides the land into 14 lots ranging insize from less than 1 acre to over 22 acres. The Pierce Ditch bisects the site and will be reconfigured into a greenway amenity. ltwill also function as a water quality and storin drainage facility. , <' The site contains 161 existing trees and 3 tree thickets. The applicant proposes to remove 113 trees and 2 tree thickets. The site will be replanted with 491 trees along the new roads (Martin and Belle) and in the medians. Pierce Ditch will be relocated, and reconfigured to become a greenway. 517 trees will be planted in the greenway. There will be 48 trees and one hawthorn thicket that remain. The site will be replanted with 1008 trees, as shown in the approved planting pl\ill contained in SUB2008-00031. As.part of the subdivision, the frontage on 31st Street will be improved. The trees in the right of way next to the drainage ditch will be removed. They will be replaced with, . street trees. Marco/a Meadows Phase I Tree Felling Case Na. SUB2008-00054 1016 Decision: Tentative Approval with conditions, as of the date of this letter. The standards of the Springfield Development Code (SDC) applicable to each criterion of approval are listed herein and are satisfied by the submitted plans and notes unless specifically not"d with findings and conditions necessary for compliance. The Final Plat must conform to the submitted plans as conditioned herein. 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 SDC, filed easements and agreements, and all applicable local, state and federal regulations. Review Process: This application is reviewed under Type II procedures listed in SDC 5.1-130, and the Tree Felling Criteria of Approval, SDC 5.19-125. Procedural Findings: . 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. . Notice was sent to adjacent property owners/occupants within 300 feet of the subject site on August 13, 2008. ' . On August 20, 2008, the City's Development Review Committee reviewed the proposed plans.' City staff's review comments have been reduced to findings and conditions only as necessary for compliance with the Tentative Plan Criteria of Approval contained in SDC 5.12-125. This decision was issued on the 30th day of the 120 days mandated by the state. Comments Received: The applicant and parties submitting written comments during the notice period have appeal rights and are mailed a copy of this decision for consideration. No written comments were received. 5.19-125 Criteria Tree Felling The Director, in consultation with the Public Works Director and the Fire Chief shall approve, approve with conditions or deny the request based on the following criteria: 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. , Finding: Trees will be removed based on their proximity to the site improvements. These trees will be in the future right-of-way, near the Peirce Ditch that will be reconfigured, or within the stormwater ditch along 31st Street. Marco/a Meadows Phase f Tree Felling Case No, SUB1008.00054 3 of 6 B. Whether the proposed felling is consistent with State standards, Metro Plan policies and City Ordinances and provisions affecting the environmentaI.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 streams; scenic quality; and geological sites. Finding: 59 trees will be removed from the slopes of the Pierce Ditch, which will be reconfigured and relocated. 39 trees from the entire site will be used as large woody debris in the mitigation site within the new greenway. Finding: There are no identified geological sites on this site. Because the site is a former ,agricultural field and is generally flat, the proposed tree felling is not anticipated to negatively affect the scenic quality of the area or create erosion or retention problems. In addition, the Land Drainage and Alteration Permits associated with the development require erosion control. ' C. Whether it is necessary to remove trees in order to construct proposed improvements as specified in an approved development plan,' grading peqnits and construction drawings. Finding: On December 20, 2007, the Springfield Plaruting Commission approved the Master Plan for the Villages at Marcola Meadows. On September 11, 2008, Phase 1 of, that project was given tentative approval in 5002008-00036. Removal of. the indicated trees is necessary in order to construct the proposed development. The trees will be in the future right-of-way, near the Peirce Ditch that will be reconfigured, or within the stormwater ditch along 31st Street. 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. Finding: This criterion is not applicable. Refer to Finding #4. E. Whether the applicant's proposed replanting of new trees or vegetation is an adequate substitute for the trees to be felled.. Finding: The proposed replanting is an adequate substitute for the trees to be felled. The replantiilg will conform to the planting and landscape plan that was approved as part of the Phase 1 improvements. F. 'Whether slash left on the property poses significant fire hazard or liability to the City. Marco/a Meadows Phase I Tree Felling Case No, SUB200B-00054. 4. 016 Finding: Any material not used in the mitigation site will be removed, so no slash will be left on the property. G. Whether the felling is consistent with the guidelines specified in the Field Guide to Oregon Forestry Practices RuIes published by the State of Oregon, Department of Forestry, as they apply to the northwest Oregon region. , Finding: The species chosen for replanting are listed on the Springfield's approved species list and are compatible with commercial scale development. Finding: According to the Engineering Design St~dards and Practices Manual (EDSM) the proposed street trees along Oak Prairie Drive (London Plane) require a minimum 8' wide planting strip. Although the center median is 8' wide, the planting strip next to the sidewalk is only 5' wide. In addition, the comments from the city maintenance division recommend against this tree. A condition of approval for the subdivision allows London Plane (Bloodgood variety) in the median, and requirested oak, sugar maples or ashes in the planter strip. H. Whether transportation of equipment to and equipment and trees from the site can be accomplished without a major disturbance to nearby residents. Finding: Tree felling activities will occur in the context of development of the site. The haul route will utilize Geraldine Place and the driveway from Lot 11 to Marcola Rd. DETERMINATION: Based on the evidence in the record. the Director determines the nrooosal comolies with SDC 5.12-125IAI-IIl. subiect to the Conditions of Aooroval attached to this reoort. Condition of Aooroval: The followiIU! I!eneral construction practices applv when tree fellinl! is initiated on site: . Notification shall be orovided to the Citv at least 5 davs prior to "ommencement of the tree felline: ooeration. Please contact Steve Hopkins at 726-3649 or shopkins@ci.snrinl!:field.or.us. . All fellinl!activities. includinl! incress and ecress for the tree fellin2; operations, shall include erosion control measures in conformance with the Citv's En'Zineerinl' Desil'n Standards and Practices Manual. . Anv soil and debris tracked into the street bv vehicles and eciuipment leavin2; the site shall be cleaned UP with shovels in a timely manner and not washed into the storm drain svstem. Additional Information: The application, all documents, and evidence relied upon by the applicant, and the applicable criteria of approval are available for free inspection and copies are Marcolo Meadows Phase f Tree Felting Case No, SU8200B-00054 5016 available for a fee at the Development Services Department, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon. Appeal: This Type II decision may be appealed to the Planning Commission. The appeal may be filed with the Development Services Department by an affected party. The appeal must be in accordance with SDC, Section 5.3-100, Appeals. An Appeals application must be submitted to the City with a fee of $250.00. The fee will be returned to the appellant if the Planning Commission approves the appeal application. In accordance with SDC 5.3-115(B) which provides for a 15-day appeal period and Oregon Rules of Civil Procedures, Rule 10(c) for service of notice by mail, the appeal period for this decision expires at 5:00 p.m. on September 30, 2008. Questions: Please call Steve Hopkins in the Planning Division of the Development Services Department at (541) 72~3649 if you have any questions regarding this process. Prepared by: Steve Hopkins, AICP Planner II Development Services - Urban Planning Division , Marco/a Meadows Phase I ,Tree Felling Case No, SUB2008-00054 ' '6016