HomeMy WebLinkAboutRecommendation Sheet PLANNER 11/20/2007 (2)
.~
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OFTHECITYOF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON
ORDER AND RECOMMENDATION FOR J
THE AMENDMENT OF.SPRINGFIELD ]
DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTERS 3, 4 ]
AND 51
b G(
JO. NO. L~P 2007-O002~
RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL
I .
NATURE OF THE APPLICATION
. On November 20, ~007, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed
Scribner's errors in the reformatted Springfield Development Code (SDC). The following
application was accepted: j . '. .
. l G,\
Jo. No. LRP 2007-00021- City of Springfield, Applicant -Springfield Development Code
Amendments. "
1. The application was initiated and submitted in accordance with Chapter 5 of the SDC.
Timely and sufficient notice of the public hearing, pursuant to Chapter 5, Section 5.1-135 of
the SDC has been provided.
2. On November 20, 2007, the Planning Commission held a work session and public
hearing on the proposed SDC amendments. The Development Services
Department staff notes and recommendation together with the oral testimony and
written submittals of the persons testifying at that hearing have been considered
and are part of.the record of this proceeding.
CONCLUSION
On the basis of this record, the proposed SDC amendments are consistent with the criteria of .
Section 5.6-115 ofthe Springfield Development Code. This general finding is supported by
the specific findings of fact and conclusion in Attachment 1, Staff Report and Findings. .
ORDER/RECOMMENDATION
GJ...
It is ORDERED by the Springfield Planning Commission that approval of JO. NO.LRP 2007-
0002'it be GRANTED and.a RECOMMENDATION for approval forwarded to the Springfield
City Co ncil W' , . . ' , .
'_ ~r -.. ., -
Planni C mrrussion Chairperson .
ATTEST
AYES: "7 .
NOES: 'd
ABSENf~,.,(
ABSTAIN: ~
Date ReGei'led
I '.
NuV 2 u:2.lDt;'
Planner: BJ
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
DATE OF WORKSESSION/PUBLlC HEARING: November 20, 2007 .
,0 !
TO: Springfield Planning Commission PLANNING COMMISSION
d TRANSMITTAL
FROM: Gary M. Karp, Planner III Gf MEMORAND,UM .
SUBJECT: Springfield Development Code Amendments - Sections 3.2-210;3.2-215;3.2- ,
230;3.3-910;4.2-140; 4.6-135; 4.6-145;4,6-155; 4,7-195; 5.12-120; and 5.17-120
all being corrections to scriber's errors created with the adoption of LRP 2007-
0030 Development Code Reformat; Case Number LRP 2007-00027, City of
Springfield, Applicant . ..
ISSUE
,
The Code reformatting project recently completed result,ed in a number of errors, primarily
grammatical, sequential or omission. This proposal will correct these Scribne~s errors.
DISCUSSION
The recently completed Development Code reformatting process was a substantial undertaking
that resulted in the reorganization of hundreds of Code regulations in what were formerly 45
.Articles. into 6 Chapters. Although numerous redundancies were eliminated; no changes were
made to any of the provisions of the Code, including intent and purpose sections, which act as
policy or policy implementation. However, the sheer volume of the reorganization task resulted
in some' unintentional omissions; some inaccurate references due to renumbering; and some
errors in punctuation. The seven pages of corrections attached to this memorandum constitute
the known extent of Scribner's errors created by the reformatting project. '
RECOMMENDATION/ACTION REQUESTED
. . ',1
Advise the City Council, by motion and sigriature of the attached order and recommendation by
the Planning Commission Chairperson, to approve the proposed amending Ordinance at their
publiC hearing on December 3, 2007.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1: SDC Amendment Staff Report, Findings and Order
Attachment 2: Proposed Amendments to the various Chapters of the SDC
Date Heceived
NUV l! ~ 2001
. ~,
. Planner: BJ
ATTACHMENT 1
SDC AMENDMENT
STAFF REPORT. FINDINGS AND ORDER
APPLICANT
City of Springfield - Jo. No. LRP 2007-0027
REQUEST
Amendment of the Springfield Development Code (SDC) -:- Chapters 3, 4 and 5 (various
Sections of each) to correct Scribner's errors.
BACKGROUND
Beginning in 2005 and culminating on September 17, 2007, the City staff has been engaged in .
the reformatting of the Springfield Development Code. The Council directed this action to be ~
limited to a logical reorganization of regulations and provisions that would facilitate ease of use;
under no circumstances were changes to be made to these regulations or provisions other than
elimination of redundancies. As a result, what was formerly a 45 article code became a6
,chapter code. This magnitude of reorganization called for a very high level of detail tracking,
particularly references to tables, provisions or uses which were all rearranged into new
categories or locations within the document In the first 3 months of use, staff has discovered
several types of errors, including omissions, incorrect citations and some punctuation.
Attachment 2 shows these errors, and their corrections, in legislative format.
SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE CRITERIA FOR SDC AMENDMENTS
,
SDC 5.6-115 of the Springfield Development Code establishes criteria that must be met in order
to approve this request ,"'In reaching a decision on these actions, the Planning
Commission and the City Council shall adopt findings which demonstrate confonnance
to the following: A. The Metro Plan; B. Applicable State statutes; and C.Applicable State-
wide Planning Goals and Admini..:.. ..::Je Rules. "
A. The Metro Plan;"
"The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan [Metro Plan] is the official long-
range general plan (public policy document) of metropolitan Lane County and the cities
of Eugene and Springfield. Its poli~ies and land use designations apply only within the
area under the jurisdiction of the Plan. The Plan sets forth general planning policies and
land use allocations and selVes as the basis for the coordinated development of
programs concerning the use and conservation of physical resources, furtherance of
assets, and development or redevelopment of the metropolitan area. "P. '-1
, Staff Rp.sDonse and Findinq:
These amendments correct Scribner's errors; they do not seek to add, delete or amend the
intent, purpo,se or meaning of any of these provisions, regulations or stanHrPi__ Np\IJj[1.QA~PI!f...J
the original instruction from Council allowed any change to policy implem~; ~1I'J~MIiJ\U
the reformatting end product contained any change to policy implementation;n,qthi,ng i1bout any .
of these proposed corrections changes any policies or the implementation ofp&IICYei l'le1Wi8rtti
. .. . '. 2M
Planner: BJ
4TT4r.I-lLlI=NT 1 - 1
-"
I
in this Code. These changes, as with the reformatted Code, continue to implement the Eugene-
Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan as demonstrated in the findings of Journal LRP
2007-00020 adopted on September 17; 2007.
"B.) Applicable Stafe statutes, '"
Staff Resoonse and Findino:
These amendments are undertaken exclusively to correct omissions, reference citations and
punctuation that resulted in the reformatting of the Springfield Development Code. Nothing
contained in these proposed amendments is of sufficient magnitude, impact ,or effect to rise to
the level of assessment intended by the appliCation of state statutes or administrative rules.
POST ACKNOWLEDGEMENT PROCEDURES
ORS 197.610
"197.610 Local government notice of proposed amendment or new regulation;
exceptions; report to commiss,ion. '"
(1) A proposal to amend a local government acknowledged comprehensive plan or land
use regulation or to adopt a new land use regulation shall be forwarded to the Director of
the Department of Land Conservation and Development at least 45 day's before the first
evidentiary hearing on adoption. The proposal forwarded shall contain'the text and any
supplemental information that the local government believes is 'necessary to inform the
director as to the effect of the proposal. The notice shall include the date set for the first
evidentiary hearing. The director shall notify persons who have requested notice that the
proposal is pending.
(2) When a local government determines that the goals do not apply to a particular
proposed amendment or new regulation, notice under subsection (1) of this section is
not required. In addition, a local government may submit an amendment or new
regulation with less than 45 days' notice if the local government determines that there
are emergency circumstances requiring expedited review. In both cases:
(a) The amendment or new regulation shall be submitted after adoption as provided in
ORS 197.615 (1) and (2); and ' '
(b) Notwithstanding the requirements of ORS 197.830 (2), the director or any other
person may appeal the decision to the board under ORS 197.830 to 197.845......
Staff ResDonse and Findinq:
These amendments have no direct impact or consequential degree of impact on the Goal~
therefore, the 45 day notice to Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD)
prior to the first evidentiary hearing is not required. The Department will receive notice of
,
Council adoption as specified in (2)(a) above. .
"'C. Applicable State-wide Planning Goals and Administrative Rules. ..
GOAL 1: CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT - OAR 660-015-0000(1)
GOAL 2: LAND USE pLANNING OAR 660-015-0000(2)
Date Received
NOV 20 2001'
" ,
Planner: BJ
v
ATTAl"l-Il.Il=MT 1 _ ?
.:
GOAL 3: AGRICULTURAL LAND OAR 660-015-0000(3)
GOAL 4: FOREST LANDS OAR 660-015-0000(4)
GOAL 5: NATURAL RESOURCES. SCENIC AND HISTORIC AREAS. AND OPEN SPACES
OAR 660-P15-0000(5)
GOAL 6: AIR, WATER AND Ij.ND RESOURCES QUALITY OAR 660~15-O000(6)
GOAL 7: AREAS SUBJECT TO NATURAL HAZARDS
GOAL 8: RECREATIONAL NEEDS OAR 660-015-0000(8)
GOAL 9: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ,OAR 660-O15~000(9)
GOAL 10: HOUSING OAR 660-015-0000(10)
GOAL 11: PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES OAR 660-015-0000(11)
GOAL 12: TRANSPORTATION OAR 660-015-0000(12)
GOAL 13: ENERGY CONSERVATION OAR 660-015-0000(13)
GOAL 14: URBANIZATION OAR 660-015-0000(14) ,
GOAL 15: W1LLAMETTE RIVER GREENWAY OAR 660-015-000(15)
, GOAL 16: ESTUARINE RESOURC~S OAR 660-015-000(16)
GOAL 17: COASTAL SHORELANDS OAR 660-O15~00(17)
1, GOAL 18: BEACHES AND DUNES OAR 660-015-000(18)
GOAL 19: OCEAN RESOURCES OAR 660-015-000(19)
Staff ResDonse and Findinq:
, Goal 1 Citizen Involvement: The public hearings to consider these amendments were noticed in
the Eugene Register Guard on Monday, November 12, 2007. A public hearing on these
amendments was conducted by the Planning Commission on Tuesday, November 20, 2007; a
pUblic hearing on these amendments was conducted by the City Council on Monday, December
3,2007. '
Goal 2 Land Use Planning: Although these amendments are exclusively corrections to an
existing land use document, that document was adopted in compliance with the Goals;
implements an acknowledged comprehensive plan in compliance with the Goals; and therefore
furthers the state's interest in the proper and appropriate observation of I~use planning goals
and guid~lines. " ' , " ' uate Received
NOV 2 U 200j
Planner: BJ
&TTM'l-ll.U:tJT 1 _ r.l
Goals 3-15. These amendments do not change any of the provisions, standards or regulations
in the recently reformatted Code. Nothing about these amendments rises to the level of
assessmentofimpact or relation to the Goals contemplated by the legislature or the ,
Commission when post acknowledgment provisions were adopted.
Goals 16-19. These goals do not apply beCause there are no coastal, ocean, estuarine, or
beach and dune resources within the City's jurisdiction.
There are no State-wide Planning Goals or Administrative Rule which apply to this amendment
or which this amendment seeks to implement other than compliance with Goal 1 , Citizen
Involvement, pertaining to public notice. Notice of Planning Commission and City Council work
sessions and public hearings were printed in the Eugene Register Guard and placed on the
City's web site on November 12; 2007.
CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION/REQUESTED ACTION
Staff has demonstrated consistency with criteria of approval listed in SDC Chapter 5, Section
5.6-115; with Metro Plan policies; with State statutes; and with State-wide Planning Goals and
Administrative Rules where such law applies to these amendments. '
Staff recommends the Planning Commission: approve the attached Order and forward the
proposed amendment of Chapters 3, 4 and 5 of the SDC to the City.Council with a
recommendation for adoption. '
,
Date Received
NOV 2 u 2009-
Planner: BJ
ATTAr.HM~NT 1 - 4
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY 01:' SPRINGFIELD, OREGON
ORDER AND RECOMMENDATION FOR]
THE AMENDMENT OF SPRINGFIELD ]
DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTERS 3, 4 ]
AND 51
JO. NO. LRP 2007-00027
RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL
NATURE OF THE APPLICATION
On November 20, 2007, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed
Scribner's errors in'the reformatted Springfield Development Code (SDC). The following
application was accepted:
,
Jo. No. LRP 2007-00027 - City of Springfield, Applicant - Springfield Development Code
Amendments. .'
1. The application was initiated and submitted in accordance with Chapter 5 of the SDC.
Timely and sufficient notice of the public hearing, pursuant to Chapter 5, Section 5.1-135 of
the SDC has been provided.
"
2. On November 20,2007, the Planning Commission held a work session and public
hearing on the proposed SDC amendments. The Developmerit Services , '
Department staff notes and recommendation together with the oral testimony and
written submittals of the persons testifying at that hearirig have been considered
and are part of the record of this proceeding.
CONCLUSION
On the basis of this record, the proposed SDC amendments are consistent with the criteria of
Section 5.6-115 of the Springfield Development Code. This general finding is supported by
the specific findings of fact and conclusion in Attachment 1, Staff Report and Findings.
ORDERlRECOMMENDA TION
It is ORDERED by the Springfield Planning Commission that approval of JO. NO. LRP 2007-
00027, be GRANTED and a RECOMMENDATION for approval forwarded to the Springfield
CityCO~# "
Plann~~S~i~ Chairperson
ATTEST
, AYES: "7
NOES: 'd
ABSENf~,.,(
ABSTAIN: ~
Date Received '
'NU V 2 u 200:'7:
Planner: BJ
ATTACHMENT 2
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE VARIOUS CHAPTERS OF-THE SDC
I
Commentary: General: Since adoption of the reformatted SDC on September 1"f1'. Planning
staff has found anumber of minor text issues that are attributable to what are known as
'scribner's errors'.
Commentary: Ref. Section 3.2-210. "RV's as a residential use' was how the original text req,d.
During the SDC reformat staff review, a decision was made to change the text to 'RV's as a
permanent new use' to differentiate it from "RV's,as a temoorarv use - Emergency Medical
Hardship' (emphasis added). In order to assist Code ,Enforcement personnel in processing
Code violations involving RV's; retuming to the original text is necessary.
I 3.2-210 Schedule Of Use Cate!lories,
The following uses are permitted in the districts as indicated, subject to the provisions,
additional restrictions and exceptions specified in this Code. Uses not specifically listed may be
approved as specified in Section 5.11-100.
UP" = PERMITTED USE subjeCt to the standards of this Code.
US" = SPECIAL DevELOPMENT STANDARDS subject to speciallocational and/or siting
standards as specified in Section 4.7-100.
UD" = DISCRETIONARY USE subject to review and analysis under Type III procedure (Section
5.9-100) at the Planning Commission or Hearings Official level.
UN" = NOT PERMITTED
U." = SITE PLAN REVIEW REQUIRED
.; _iSJ(fiiibiiJ;tJS':w,
RVs'as a [1l9RllaR9~t FIll"':] reside~tial use
RVs in existing RV or Manufactured Dwelling Parks
RVs as a temporary use - Emergency Medical Hardship (Section
5.10-1001 '
P
N
N
, ,
Commentary: Ref. Section 3.2-215. In converting thelot/parcel coverage standards to a table.,
the 'by all covered structures. description was inadvertently omitted. This text is being added.
I 3.2-215 Base Zone DeveloDment Standards
The following base zone development staridards are established.
Date Received
NUV 2 u 21100:
Planner: BJ
ATTA"'UUC~IT ? ~ 1
On iots/parcels with more than 15 percent slope, the maXimum impervious surface inciusive of
structures, patios, and driveways, shall not exceed 35 percent, unless specified in Section 3.3-500.
Commentary: Ref. Section 3.2-2300.5. The correct acronym should be .MOR"
I 3.2-230 Cluster Subdivisions
D. Permitted Dwellings, Structures and Uses. The following dwellings,structures
and uses are permitted in all residential districts:
5. Multi- Family dwellings (in MD[S]R and HDR zoning districts)
Commentary: Ref. Table 4.2-3. The notations have been corrected.
( -
Table 4.2-3
Single Faniiiy ,
and Du{!lexes NA NA NA NA NA
Multi-Familv Residential I 24 feet 30 feet 10 feet 20 feet 60 feet
Commerciari Public land I 24 feet I 35 feet 15 feet 35 feet 60 feet
Industrial I 24 feet I 35 feet 15 feet 35 feet 60 feet
(1) Wider driveways may be permitted to accommodate traffic demands and/or to improve traffic
~fe~. '
(2) Greater curb radii may be permitted where high volumes of large trucks are anticipated.
(3) Measured from the face of the curb to thelirst stall' or aisle.
Commentary: Ref. Section 3.3-9108. Acjdress changes are necessary.
I 3.3-910 ApPlicability
This Section applies in the following instances to all structures and sites:
B. On the adopted Historic Landmark Inventory within the City or itS urbanizing areas,
including the following individually designated Historic Landmarks:
~:~~~~~i~St~ei-
i 1.0.0.F. BuildinQ 346 Main Street
I Pacific Power & Light Building 590 Main Street
te, Received
I NUV 2 U200.1.1
'Planner: BJ
ATTA,.....Ul=tJT ') _ '}
I Southern Pacific Railroad Depot
I Brattain I Hadlev House
I Stewart House
I Douglas House
[31Q S. 7th] 101 South A
Street
1260 Main Street
214 [2nd Street] Pioneer.
PJ<Yf(. We!lt
[96' ~. :'1""] 33620saae
Street -
I
J
Commentary: Ref. Section 4.2-140. There are numerous references throughout the SDC
stating that street trees are required. During the SDC reformat staff review, a decision was '
, made replace the word .Iocated" with the word .required". This revision was never made.
. I 4.2-140 Street Trees
sireet trees are those trees [located] reauired within the public right-of-way. The primary
purpose of street trees is to create a streetscape that benefits from the aestljetic and
environmental qualities of an extensive tree canopy along the public street system. Street trees
are attractive amenities that improve the appearance of the community, providing shade and
visual interest. Street trees also improve air quality, reduce stlirmwater runoff and moderate the
micro-climate impacts of heat absorbed by paved surfaces. Street trees may be located within
planter strips, in individual tree wells within a sidewalk, round-abouts, or medians.
Commel1tary: Ref. Section 4.6-135.C.2. A comma, rather than a period is required here.
I 4.6-135 Loading Areas - Facility Design and Improvements
C. The minimum sizes required for commercial and industrial loading areas are as
follows: , '
1. 250 square feet for buildings of 5,000 to 20,000 square feet of gross floor
area.
2. 500 square feet for buildings of 20.000 to 50,000 square feet of gross floor
area.
3. 750 square feet for buildings in.excess 0150,000 square feet of gross floor
area.
Commentary: Ref. Section 4.6-135.8. A Closed parenthesis is 'added.
I 4.6-145 Bicycle Parkina - Facility Design
B. Each bicycie parking space shall be at least 2 by 6 feet with an overhead
clearance of 7 feet, and with a 5-foot access aisle beside ,or between each row of
bicycle parking, and between parked bicycles and a wall or structure (the
dimensions for commonly used bicycle racks are shown in Figure 4.6-8.1
Bicycles may be tipped vertically for storage but not hung aboHthe floor.
Bicycle parking shall be provided at ground level unless an el,', "it!eQib.~p.ived
accessible to an approved bicycle storage area. Each require Icycre p~~1fg-
spa~ shall be accessible without removing another bicycle.' NOV 21/ 200;21
,planner: BJ
ATTAf"I-IUI:MT ? _ ':l
. . / .
Commentary: Ref. Section 4.6-150. There are two Sections 4.6-150. This Section, which
discusses bicycle parking should be numbered 4.6-155.
- - -.~ - -
I 4.6-15rt115 Bicvcle Parking - Number of Spaces Hequired
J
Commentary: Ref. Section 4.7-195. In Subsection A., staff found inconsistencies in the list of
zones proposed to be deleted. More generic text is proposed to eliminate this issue. Subsection
A.B., should read "one" parking space.
14.7-195 PublicIPrivate Elementaryl Middle Schools
J
A. [Residential, CeR'lR'lllnity CeR'lR'lers::;!~, ' MI and HI and PLO OistriGt Oe'lelellR'lent
Standaros.] Schools are identified in the Metro Plan as key urban services
which shall be orovided in an efficient and 10Qical manner to keeo pace with
"demand. Schools mav be located in any zone that Dermits schools. A unique
relationship exists between schools and the community, which requires special
consideration when applying screening standards. Maintaining clear sight lines
for the security and safety of children is desirable and may be achieved through
the use of non-opaque fencing and/or landscaping. The standards in Section
5.17-1 00, are applied only when required to screen playground structures,
spectator seating facilities, parking, storage yards and trash receptacles or where
significant conflicts are determined by the Director.
, 8. Parking is limited to two spaces for each teaching(station in the school
plus on~ parking space for each 100 square feet of public indoor
assembly area. All parking lots and driveways shall be designated to
separate bus and passenger vehicle traffic. All parking lots shall have
sidewalks raised a minimum of 6 inches above grade where pedestrians
have to cross parking lots to enter or leave the school grounds. '
Commentary: Ref. Section 5.12-120. Typos in Subsection D.6. F. 7. are corrected and
duplicate submittal requirements in Subsections G. through O. have either been deleted and/or
renumbered in Subsection F.
I 5.12-120 Tentative Plan Submittal Requirements
A Tentative Plan application shall contain the elements necessary to demonstrate that the
provisions of this Code are being fulfilled.
D. . A Response to Transportation issues complying with the provisions of this Code.
6. The location of existing and proposed street lighting: including the type,
height and area [i] Qf illumination;
~
F. Additional information and/or applications required at the time ofTentative Plan
application submittal shall include the following items, where applicable:
1. A brief narrative explaining the purpose of the propDat~Re~iMid
the existing use of the property. NOV 2 u 20na}
Planner: BJ
ATTA~UU~MT ? _ A
,~
2. If the applicant is not the property own.er, written permission from the
property owner is required.
3. 'A Vicinity Map drawn,to scale showing bus stops, streets, driveways,
pedestrian connections, fire hydrants and other transportationJfire access
issues within 200 feet of the proposed land division and all existing
Partitions or Subdivisions immediately adjacent to the proposed land
division.
4. Howthe Tentative Plan addresses the standards of any applicable overlay
District. ' ,
5. How the Tentative Plan addresses Discretionary Use criteria, where
applicatile.
6. A Tree Felling Permit as specified in Section 5.19-100."
7. A Geotechnical Report for slopes of 1,5 percent or grea~erand as
specified in Section 3.3-500, and/or if the required Site:Assessment in
Section 5: 12-120~. indicates the proposed development area has
unstable soils and/or high water table as specified in th~ Soils Survey of
Lane County.
8. An Annexation application as specified in Section 5.7-100 where a
development is proposed outside pf the city limits but within City's urban .
service area and can be serviced by sanitary sewer.
9. A wetland delineation approved by the Department of State Lands shall "'
be submitted concurrently where there is a wetland on the property.
10. Evidence that any required Federal or State permit has been applied for
or approved shall be submitted concurrently.
11. All public improvements proposed to be installed and to include the
approximate time of installation, and method offinancirig.
[~2. .\ title feileR IlFellared 'lnthiR eRe R:leRlIl Elf the date sf sblllFRittal.]
1 [3]~. Proposed deed restrictions and a draft of a Homeowner's
Association Agreement, wtJere appropriate.
[VI. If t~e land divisieR is te be pl-:--sed, a FbltllFe OelJelllllFReRt Plan
for the FemaiRder ef the Ilrallefty shalllle Ilrllvided, iRSlbldiR!I
timiRg alut fiA3F1ci31 preJAsisRS. "
, r
G. :l:1e Illsatie~: T:' '.vidlAs Elf all ellistil1!j aRd IlFElll9Sed side'Mllks, lledestJ:iaR lFails
,an, d asses6'lJaYs, iASllldil1!1 tile lesatilll1, size and type ~f i'IU.~"~ "h~el trees
iR aRY FeqlliFed 1l1aRter stRll. , . ,ale ecelved
,NUV 2 u 200J
" ,p'anner:, BJ
ATTAf'UUCMT ? _ I::
II. ' Th::! afll'lr-Gximate,let'-JlaF{)ellayeut aAd the ..ppco";m..:e dimensiens ef easA blJilding
site" where applicable, and tl:Je tefl and tee ef SlK al"-:' "" s~llfles te scale. .
I. ~::! leGatiens and size ef all existing and flrepesed lJtilities, insllJding but net
. ,limited to, ~~~~~.; SB1J.:er maiAE, &teJ'JR dF3ins. -:Jater liABS, ele;~ri61 teleJ:)RsAe, n'
&3ble, and ~::: r:~::::::. '~ l1e Gase ef mlJltipl::: l'lr~:~rlles, insllJde a lJtjlity plan
sho'Ning how the mlJltiple panhandle p3rsels '....i11 be served by these utilities.,
J. :he leGatioR, widths and 1'l1JFIlose ef all existing er prepee;ed easements en and
:::'::'Jti~3 the I'lrepesedlanddp.<isiC3~; r-:'~~::!'IQcatio~ sf a1Y exiE:ting er flrepesed
reserve Eltrips.
.~ ~e lesatiens e.f all a,aaa la lie GeGicated er reSeFVeG fer plJblis loise, 'Mitll the
plJFIlese, senditien er Iimitatiens ef the reseryatiens sleaFly inGicated.
L ~Il Gimensions ef the prefleSeG lets/(3arcels to inGllJGe sEllJar-e feetage
salGlJlatiens.
M. Th'J leGatien anG elJtline te scale Elf all elEistiRg EltruGtlJres te remain en tile
I'lrGperty and their r-eEllJired selbasks f1:G:f: U:1l /lr-epesed new pre peR}' lines.]'
,
[H] 13. Cluster Subdivisions shall also address the design standards,specffied in
Section 3.2-230.
[0] 14. Where the Subdivision ofa manufactured dwelling park or mobile home
park is proposed, the Director may waive certain submittal requirements
specified in Subsections A. through M. However, the Tentative Plan shall
address the applicable standards listed under the park Subdivision approval
criteria specified in Section 5.12-125.
Commentary: Ref. Section 5.17-120. In Subsection A. the required minimum size of the
drawing is too small to accommodate the scale required in Subsection A.1. It 'should have been
deleted, but was not. In Subsection CA., on-site lighting standards are more specifically
addressed in Subsection H. 'In Subsection I., written permission is more specifically addressed
in Subsection 5.4-'1058.2. -
I 5.17-120 Submittal Reauirements
All Site Plan applications that contain structures over 4,000 square feet of gross floor area shall be
prepared by an Oregon licensed Architect or Engineer. The services of an Oregon registered
Engineer may also be required by the City in order to resolve utility issues, especially stormwater
management, street design and transportation issues, site constraint and/or water quality. A Site
Plan shall contain all the elements necessary to demonstrate that provisions of,this Code are
being fulfilled and shall include but not be limited to the following:
, ,
A. General requir'ements. A Site Plan shall be drawn in ink on quality paper [AG
6I!'::,,;~ 1.12'- r .,'2" IE 14'~ and shall contain the following information:
1.
The scale (appropriate to the area involved and sufficient to~how detail o!..l
the plan and related data, for example: 1" = 30', 113ater ne@Smfeu
north arrow, and date of preparation. '
,NOV2U2009
Planner: BJ
~TTAr~U~MT ? _ ~
C. An Access, Circulation and Parking Plan complying with the provisions of this Code
and containing the following information;
4. Exterior lighting [: i~:':J::ling the type, hsigAt aREI area afill:J~:~329A] as
, soecified in Subsection H.. below;
I. Additional information and/or applications required at the time of Site Plan Review
applications submittal shall include the following items; where applicable:
2. If the applicant is not the property owner, written permission from the
property owner is required as soecified in Section 5.4-105B.2.
Date Rece\ved '
: NOV 2 \I 200n-!
Planner: SJ
ATTAI"UUCl.IT " _ 7