HomeMy WebLinkAboutNotice PLANNER 3/7/2008
I
bJop~
.\
A
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
N~S~
ue..
3-('0"J
STATE OF OREGON
}
} 55.
}
County of Lane
. I, Brenda Jones, being first duly sworn, do hereby depose and say as follows:
1. I state that I am a Secretary for the Planning Division of the Development
Services Department, City of Springfield, Oregon.
2. I state that in my capacity as Secretary, I prepared and caused to be
mailed copies of Notice of Decision DRC2008-00008 Site Plan Review
(See attachment "A") on March 7, 2008 addressed to (see Atta9hment
"B"), by causing said letters to be placed in a U.S. mail box with postage
fully prepaid thereon.
Brenda Jones
Planning Secretary
STATE OF OREGON, County of Lane
JrJwL 1 ,2008 Personally appeared the above named Brenda Jones,
Secretary, who acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be their voluntary act. Before
me:
r~~~~~-= '"s~Jb~~1:r - -=~"T
;' ..... NOTARY PUBLIC. OREGON . I
COMMISSION NO. 385725 j
, . u" MY COMMISSION EXPIRESNOV. 12, 2008 i
. - -------......... .. ...........----...,
~~/.AN) .
, . I
My Commission Expires: II/; Z /z. f) C ~
~.
Notice of Decision -Site Plan Review
If
!
Project Name: Aramark
Project Proposal: construct a 25,000 sf uniform distribution/ service facility with an industrial
mat laundering operation
Case Number: DRC2008-00008
Project Location: 1210 and 1230 40th Street
Property size: 2.5 acres
Base Zone: HI (Heavy Industrial)
Overlay District(s): Drinking Water Protection Overlay (1-5 yr TOTZ)
Metro Plan Designation: Heavy Industrial
Refinement PlanfDesignation: Mid-Springfield/Heavy Industrial
Pre-Submittal Meeting Date: February 19, 2008
Application Submitted Date: January 29, 2008
Decision Issued Date: March 7, 2008
Appeal Deadline Date: March 7, 2008
Other Application(s): Drinking Water Protection Overlay,(DRC2008-00009)
I CITY .OF SPRINGFIELI)'DEVEr:bpMENTREVIEW.ifEAM;r"ii{;~~~g',;Pf"\i?f;1il;itw,tiJ;,;;i;&iill'!l!\;;lj)1j.j;~l;;;tftJ
'"C. .'.;..':;",V -..', - :" ,',-, " "'"""",,,';" ,:,."" ',. " _,.,,,- ~"::::i,,''-(:-<:::''::-;-'_: ._,,~'t:_~,.J:;.:'W:':i!y:fC',,~, ,>,.-..'.......'~2.... '-'.' .-~~',,;'s, '".!<t_,',-;Z H';;:..IJ:"~~,'!.'!i"""...'"~),<<;,y:.j,,,.. .:_/", ,...} .E~k,;.,...:J!,';...\,;.'<;"" '--:'""f''''')''''',1.<*,...?.,,)'$g4,\~,,.,.., ',<!'-" R\'j;t,."",{ I
I POSITION REVIEW OF I NAME PHONE I
I Project Manager Planning Steve Hopkins 726-3649 I
I Transportation Planning Engineer Transportation Gary McKenney 726-4585 I
Public Works Civil Engineer
I Deputy Fire Marshall
I Community Services Manager
Utilities, Sanitary &
Storm Sewer
Eric Walter
736-1034
Fire and Life Safety
Building
Gilbert Gordon
726-2293
726-3668
Dave Puent
-j+:w,.t~;n;~:M;l?-!WJ';;'f%'\:L{'i~f~:Q1;)~'\'i."-i;;~':'\!,w,;.t~';;:;.;r~R~;~Z-:...J[,,~~J.~l.!J!"t'ii\;;Y.;i<"'f!~'ilJ2i:;r
\'A,PPLIGANTfS:J:?Ey,ELOP,MENTiREV
\tiii*;~'jj~mi:rt1;it~o!,::~:\'i~'~-f},~\<h%t4:1iMtllrr+':\ii~;8(~~t~4i!-irittA~??.L_
Owner
Irish Glen LLC
PO Box 2266
Eugene OR 97402
Representative:
John Harruner
Irish Glen LLC
PO Box 2266
Eugene OR 97402
Aramark
Case No. DRQOOB-OOOOB
':,'r
Site:
""'""'"
~we"h~It'hP
11'-20
IV ~;~9System ~.:~
1\/ Sewer Une
Tax lots
o 100 200 Feet
Summary of proposal: Construct a 25,000 sf uniform distribution/ service facility with an
industrial mat laundering operation. .
Decision: Tentative Approval with conditions, as of the date of this letter. The standards of
the Springfield Development Code (SDq applicable to each criterion of approval are listed ".
herein and are satisfied by the submitted planS and notes' unless specifically noted with findings
and conditions necessary for compliance. The Final Site Plan 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, rued 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 Site Plan Review criteria in SDC 5.17-100,
Aramark
Case No. DRGOO8cOOOOB
2
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 applications (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 January 30, 2008.
. On February 19, 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 Site Plan Criteria of
Approval contained in SDC 5.17-125. This decision was issued on the 36th day of the 120
days mandated by the state. .
. In accordance with SDC 5.17-135, .the Final Site Plan shall comply with the requirements
of the SDC and the conditions imposed by the Director in this decision. The Final Plat
otherwise shall be in substantial conformity with the tentative plan reviewed. Portions
of the proposal approved as submitted during tentative review cannot be substantively
changed during Final Plan al'proval.
Comments Received: No written comments were received.
\
SDC 5.17-125 Site Plan Review Criteria of Approval
. i
The Director shall approve or approve with conditions: a Type II Site Plan Review application
upon determining that approval criteria A. through E., below have been satisfied. If conditions
cannot be attached to satisfy the approval criteria, the Director shall deny the application.
A. The zoning is consistent ,with the Metro Plan diagram, and/or the' applicable
Refinement Plan diagram, Plan District map, and Conceptual Development Plan.
. Finding: The site is zoned HI (Heavy Industrial), This area is designated HI (Heavy
Industrial) by the Metro Plan and the Mid-Springfield Refinement Plan. The applicant
proposes construction of a 25,000 sf uniform distribution/ service facility with an
industrial mat laundering operation. This is an allowed use in the HI zone.
Conclusion: The t"~y~sal complies with SDC 5,17-125(A).
B. Capacity requirements of public and private facilities, including but not limited to,
water and electricity; sanitary sewer and stormwater management facilities; and streets
and traffic safety controls shall not be exceeded and the public improvements shall be
available to serve the site at the time of development, unless otherwise provided for by
this Code and other applicable regulations. The Public Works Director ora utility
provider shall determine capacity issues.
Aramark
Case Na. DRGOOB-<JOOOB
3
Aramark
,
SANITARY AND STORM WATER
Finding: The applicant has proposed connecting the existing 8" sanitary sewer located
in 40th St. at two existing lateral locations. Both locations have an existing lateral serving
this site and include existing clean-outs located iI1 the existing 10' public utility
easement. The northerly comlection is to serve the building and the southerly
connection is to serve the trash enclosure located at the southwest comer of site.
Finding: The available capacity of the public sanitary sewer system serving this site is:
An estimated 3 GPM peak sanitary sewer flow rate for non-service water; and
An estimated 30 <;PM total peak sanitary sewer flow rate.
Finding: The submitted plans and project description show peak flow rates that exceed
the capacity of the public sewer system. Peak flow must be limited with a surge tank or
other method so the capacity of the public system is not exceeded.
Condition of Approval #1: Prior to final site plan approval. the applicant shall revise
the plans to demonstrate the sanitary discharge will not exceed the capacity of the public
svstem.
WATER OUALITY
Finding: To comply with Sections 4.3-110.D & E, stormwater runoff from the site will be
directed into a series of water quality bio swales prior to discharge into the public
system. The public system is located in the 40th St. system where there is an existing 24"
storm water pipe and where there are two storm drain laterals available to serve the site.
Finding: Section 3.03.3. B of the City's EDSPM requires all public and private
development and redevelopment projects to employ a system of one or more post-
development Best Management Practices (BMP' s) that in combination are designed .
to achieve at least a 70% reduction in TSS (Total Suspended Solids) in the runoff
generated by that development. In addition, Section 3.03.6 states: "a minimum of
50% of the non-building rooftop impervious area on a site shall be treated for
stormwater quality improvement using vegetative methods."
Finding: To meet the requirements of the City's MS4 permit, the Springfield
Development Code, and the City's EDSPM, the applicant has proposed two private
vegetative water quality swales. The vegetative seed mix and applications rates have
been specified on plans; however, an "erosion control" seed mix has not been proposed
for bio swales.
Finding: The vegetation proposed for use in the swales will serve as the primary
pollutant removal mechanism for the stormwater runoff, and will remove suspended
solids and pollutants through the processes of sedimentation and filtration. Satisfactory
pollutant removal will occur only when the vegetation has been fully established. .
Condition of ApProval #2: The bio swales shall be shall be fullv ve2:etated with all
ve2:etation species established Prior to 'approval of Final Site plan, Alternativelv, if this
condition cannot be met. the applicant shall provide and maintain additional interim
erosion control/water aualitv measures acceptable to the Public Works Department that
will suffice until such tiine as the ve2:etation becomes fullv established.
Case Na. DROOOB.flOOOB
. 4
Aramark
Finding: The drainage plan for the site will need to incorporate the conditions of
approval contained in the Drinking Water Protection Overlay application '(DRC2008-
00009). Those conditions are attached to this report for convenient reference.
TRAFFIC
Finding: 40th Street abutting the development site is a 40-foot wide two-lane local street
roadway within a 62-foot wide right of way. The street is improved with asphalt
paving, curb/ gutter, sidewalks and street lighting, which support multi-modal travel.
Estimated traffic volume on 40th Street is less than 1,000 vehicles per day.
Finding: Based on ITE Land Use Code 110 (General Light Industrial) the total trip
generation from this development upon completion of the proposed development
would be as follows:
o Average Weekday = 45 employees x 3.02 trips/ employee = 136 trips
o PM Peak Hour = 45 employees x 0.44 trips/ employee = 20 trips
Finding: Existing and proposed off-site transportation facilities would be adequate to
accommodate additional trips that would be generated by the proposed development.
UTILITIES. EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY
Finding: 40th St. is fully improved and no public improvements are required. No
modifications are being proposed to existing commercial driveway approaches. Storm
and sanitary sewer laterals are already constructed. .
Finding: Springfield Utility Board coordinates the design of the water system within .
Springfield city limits. The plans indicate that an existing 12" water line located within
the existing 10' PUE is available to serve proposed development.
Finding: The applicant has shown an existing 10 foot public utility easement along the
frontage of 40th Street, satisfying Section 4.3-140(A) of the SDC.
VEHICLE AND BICYCLE PARKING
Finding: According to SDC 4.6-100, the re'quired number of bicycle parking spaces is 9
(ratio of 1 per 3000 sf) and 10 have been provided outside. At least 2 spaces must be
provided for long term parking. According to the narrative, these will be inside the .
building,
Finding: According to SDC 4.36-125, the ratio of vehicle parking is 1 space for each 500
square feet industrial of gross floor area (manufacture and assembly).' This requires' 50
parking spaces and 56 have been provided. '
Finding: Not more than 30 percent of the total par,king spaces in a parking lot may be
designated for compact cars. .There are 14 provided and the maximum is 16.
LIGHTING
Finding: The pole lights will be no more than 25' high and contain full cut off shields. This
complies with SDC 43.5-110.
Case No. DRC200B-OOOOB
s.
Finding: The wall-mounted lighting is no more than 12' high but does not contain cut off
shields. Prior to final site plan approval, submit cut sheets that demonstrate the wallpacks
will contain full cut off shields.
Condition of Aooroval #3: Prior to final site plan approval, submit cut sheets that
demonstrate the wall-mounted lig:hting: will contain full cut of shields and be directed
downward.
Conclusion: As conditioned, the proposal complies with SDC 5,17-125(B).
C. The proposed development'shall comply with all applicable public and private design
and, construction standards contained in this Code and other applicable regulations.
Finding: The distance to existing fire hydrants from the back of the building exceeds 600
feet (maximum allowable distance per 2007 Springfield Fire Code 508.5.1, exception 2).
Two fire hydrants will be needed, spaced approximately 450 feet apart (2007 Springfield
Fire Code Table CI05.1). They must provide a minimum of 1500 gallons per minute
from each fire hydrant (2007 Springfield Fire Code Appendix BI05.3.1). The fire
hydrants shall be installed, tested and approved to NFP A 24-Standard for Installation of
Private Fire Service Mains and their Appurtenances, 2007 edition, prior to combustible
materials being brought on site per 2007 Springfield Fire Code 1412.1,
Condition of Aooroval #4: Install two fire hvdrants to the satisfaction of the Springfield
Deoutv Fire Marshal, The hvdrants shall be tested and approved prior to approval of
the final site olano
Finding: Fire apparatus access to and around the building shall support an 80,000 lb.
imposed load (2007 Springfield Fire Code 503,2.3 and SFC Appendix 0102.1). .
Condition of Aooroval #5: The site plan shall include a fire lane surrounding: the
buildinl!: that will suooort an 80,000 lb load.
Finding: The comments from'the Deputy Fire Marshall indicate the Hazardous Material
Management Plan (HMMP) does not meet 2007 Springfield Fire Code requirements for a
hazardous materials management plan. In addition, the Hazardous Materials Inventory
Statement (HMIS) is incomplete. Contact GilbertGordon at 726-2293 or
I!I!0rdon@ci.sorirumeld.oLus for further information.
Condition of Aoproval #6: Prior to approval of the final site olan, submit a Hazardous
Materials Manal!:ement Plan (HMMP\. The plan shall be lecible and drawn
aooroximatelv to scale. Seoarate distribution svstems are allowed to be shown on
seoarate oal!es (2007 SFC 2701.5.1\. The HMMP shall include a facility site olan
desi=atinl!: the followinl!::
Aramark
o Storal!:e and use areas.
'0 Maximum amount of each material stored or used in each area.
o Ranl!:e of container sizes.
o Locations of emerg:encv isolation and mitig:ation valves and' devices
o Product convevinl!: oioing: containing: liquids or I!:ases. other than utilitv-
owned fuell!:as lines and low-pressure fuelg:as lines. .
Case No. DRClOOB-OOOOB
6
.
"
On and off oositions of valves for valves that are of the self-indicatin~ tvoe.
Stora~e olail showin~ the intended stora~e arran~ement. includin~ the
location and dimension of aisles.
The location and tvoe of emer~encv eouioment.
.
.
Condition of Aooroval #7: Prior to aooroval of the final site olan. submit a Hazardous.
Materials Inventorv Statement (HMlS) that contains the followin~ information:
.
Manufacturer's name.
Chemical name. trade names. and hazardous inlITedients.
Hazard classification.
Material Safetv Data Sheet or equivalent.
United Nations (UNt North America (NA) or the Chemical Abstract Service
{CAS) identification number.
Maximum auantitv stored or used on-site at one time in lbs. or ~allons.
Stora~e conditions related to the storage tvDe. temoerature. or oressure.
.
.
.
.
.
.
State of the material: ~as.liquid. or solid.
Oven or closed use.
NFP A 704 classification.
.Location of chemicals stored and ill bulk use in the buildin~(s) (2007 SFC
2701.5.2).
Conclusion: AB conditioned, the proposal complies with SDC 5.17-125(C).
.
.
.
.
D. Parking areas and ingress-egress points have been designed to: facilitate vehicular
traffic, bicycle and pedestrian safety to avoid congestion; provide connectivity within
the development area and to adjacent residential areas, transit stops, neighborhood
activity centers, and commercial, industrial and public areas; minimize driveways 011
arterial'and collector streets as specified in this Code or other applicable regulations and
comply with the.ODOT access management standards for State highways..
Finding: The lots have previously approved access points and the site plan utilizes those
access points,
Finding: Direct access to the development site is proposed via two existing 36-foot wide
entrance/ exit driveways onto 40th Street serving the primary parking area. The
northerly driveway would utilize an existing a 36 ft.x 100 ft private access easement.
shared with the lot to the north of the site..
Conclusion: The proposal complies with SDC 5.17-125(D).
E Physical features, including, but not limited to: steep slopes with unstable soil or
geologic conditions; areas with susceptibility of flooding; significant clusters of trees
and shrubs; watercourses shown on the WQLW Map and their associated riparian are~s;
wetlands; rock outcroppings; open spaces; and areas of historic and/or archaeological
Aramark
Case Na. DRQOO/l-{)OOOB
7
significance, as may be specified in Section 3.3-900 or ORS 97.740-760, 358.905-955 and
390.235-240, shall be protected as specified in this Code or in State or Federal law.
Finding: The site within the 1-5 year Time of Travel,Zone for the Drinking Water
Protection Overlay. Those standards are addressed in a separate application (DRCZOO8-
00009).
Finding: The Natural Resources Study, the National Wetlands Inventory, the Springfield
Wetland Inventory Map and the list of Historic Landmark Sites were consulted. No
historic or cultural resources have been identified on this site.
Conclusion: The proposal complies with SDC 5.17-125(B).
DETERMINATION: Based on the evidence in the record. the Director determines the site
olan comolies with SDC 5.17-125IA\-IEl. subiect to the Conditions of Aooroval attached to
this reoort.
What Needs To Be Done?
Submit a final site plan within 90 days (June 5, 2008).
SDC 5.17-135 states: "Within 90 days of an affirmative decision by the Approval Authority, a
complete Final Site Plan shall be submitted to the Development Services Department. The
Final Site Plan submittal shall incorporate all approval conditions listed in the staff report. The
Final Site Plan shall become null and void if construction has not begun within two years of
the signing of the Development Agreement required in Section 5.17-140."
A Final Site Plan application is charged upon subInittal of the compl~te application imd all
required documents and after all conditions of approval are met, including the construction of
public and private improvements and extension of tltilities required through this decision, The
Final Site Planshall comply with the requirements of the SDC and the conditions imposed by
the Director in this decision, The Final Site Plan otherwise shall be in substantial conformity
with the tentative plan reviewed. Portions of the proposal approved as submitted during
tentative review cannot be substantively changed during final site plan approval. Approved
Final Site Plans (including Landscape Plans) shall not be substantively changed during Building
. Permit Review without an approved Site Plan Decision Modification.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT: fu accordance with SDC 15.17-140, a Development
Agreement is required to ertsure that the terms and conditions of site plan review are binding
upon both the applicant and the City. This agreement will be prepared by Staff upon approval
of the Final Site Plan and must be signed by the property owner prior to the issuance of a
building permit.
SECURITY AND ASSURANCES. All required improvements shall be installed prior to the
issuance of a certificate of occupancy or final building inspection. Refer to SDC 5,17-150 for
details regarding bonding for required improvements.
Aramark
Case No. DRClOOB.{)OOOB
8
Summarv of Conditions of ADDroval.
Unless other wise stated, all conditions shall be met prior to approval of the final site plan.
Condition of Approval #1: Prior to finalsite plan approval, the applicant shall revise
the plans to demonstrate the sanitary discharge will not exceed the capacity of the public
system.
Condition of Approval #2: The bio swales shall be shall be fully vegetated with all
vegetation species established prior to approval of Final Site plan. Alternatively, if this
condition cannot be met, the applicant shall provide and maintain additional interim
erosion control/water quality measures acceptable to the Public Works Department that
will suffice until such time as the vegetation becomes fully established.
Condition of Approval #3: Submit cut sheets that demonstrate the wall-mounted lighting
will contain full cut of shields and be directed downward.
Condition of Approval #4: Install two fire hydrants to the satisfaction of the Springfield
Deputy Fire Marshal. TJ;1e hydrants shall be tested and approved prior to approval of
the final site plan. .
Condition of Approval #5: The site plan shall be revised to include a fire lane
surrounding the building that will support an 80,000 lb load.
Condition of Approval #6: Submit a Hazardous Materials Management Plan (HMMP).
The plan shall be legible and drawn approximately to scale. Separate distribution
systems are allowed to be shown on separate pages (2007 SFC 2701.5.1). The HMMP
shall include a facility site plan designating the following:
. Storage and use areas.
. Maximum amount of each material,stored or used in each area.
. Range of container sizes.
. Locations of emergency isolation and mitigation valves and devices
. Product conveying piping containing liquids or gases, other than utility-
owned fuel gas lines and low-pressure fuel gas lines..
. On and off positions of valves for valves that are of the self-indicating type.
. Storage plan showing the intended storage arrangement, including the
location and dimension of aisles.
. The location and type of emergency equipment.
Condition of Approval #7: Submit a Hazardous Materials Inventory Statement (HMIS)
that contains the following information:
. Manufacturer's name.
. Chemical name, trade names, and hazardous ingredients.
. Hazard classification.
. Material Safety Data Sheet or equivalent.
Aromark
Case No. DRC200/l-0000B
9
o United Nations (UN), North America (NA) or the Chemical Abstract Service
(CAS) identification number.
o Maximum quantity stored or used on~site at one time in lbs. or gallons.
o Storage conditions related to the storage type; temperature, or pressure.
o State of the material: gas, liquid, or solid.
o Open or closed use.
o NFP A 704 classification.
o Location of chemicals stored and in bulk use in the building(s) (2007 SFC
2701.5.2).
The following conditions are contained in the DWP application (DRC2008-00009). They are
included here for convenient reference.
General
. 1. All Dense Non-Aqueous Phase LiqUids are prohibited.
a. The contractor and all subcontractors are required to provide the owner's
engineer with copies of Material Safety Data Sheets for all chemicals proposed
for use on-site prior to use or delivery to the property.
b. Based on these MSDSs, the engineer will determine if the chemical is approved
for use on this site (i.e., whether or not the product contains DNAPLs). The
engineer may contact the SUB Water Quality Protection Coordinator (744-3745)
with any questions about evaluating products for DNAPLs.
c. A copy of the MSDS for all chemicals used on the project shall remain on the job
site as required by law.
2. Chemicals used during construction,including paint and cleaning materials/wastes,
must not enter the soil or be washed into the storm water system. All chemicals shall be
stored in areas that provide secondary containment.
3. No fill materials containing hazardous materials shall be used on this site.
4. Wellhead protection signs shall be placed (during construction and operations) adjacent
to loading docks, parking lots and trash enclosures.
Drainage system
5. The drainage system for the parking lot shall include oil/ water separators.
6. Emergency cut-off valves shall be installed up-gradient of each bio-swale.
7. The catch basins serving the loading docks shall be connected to the sanitary sewer. In
addition, a cut-off trench in the loading dock shall be installed up-gradient to the catch
basins to prevent rainwater from entering the sanitary sewer.
Aramark
Case No. DRODD/l..DDDDB
10
Chemical Storage and Secondary Containment
8. All chemicals/hazardous materials shall be stored in areas with appropriate secondary
containInent. Sealants used in containment areas, should be compatible with chemicals
stored within them.
9. Rooftop mounted equipment and other fluid-containing equipment located outside the
buildIDg should be sealed and provided with secondary containment or a weather
resistant enclosure.
10. Any landscape chemicals stored outdoors (fertilizers, pesticides, etc.) shall be covered
and placed in an area that provides secondary containment.
Additional Information: The application, all documents, and evidence relied upon by the
applicant, and the applicable criteria of approval are available for free inspectiol). and copies are
available for a fee at the Development Services Department, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield,
Oregon.
Appeal: This Type II Tentative Site Plan Review and Tree Felling 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 IS-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 March 22, 2008.
Questions: Pl~ase call Steve Hopkins ill the Planning Division of the Development Services
Department at (541) 726-3649 if you have any questions regarding this process.
Prepared by:
0~4
Steve Hopkins, AICP
Planner II
Development Services - Urban Planning Division
Aramork
Case No. DRC200B-OOOOB
II
. ,
, ~- - 1''1
. .
, "
cn , .JF SPRINGFIELD
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
225 5th ST
SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477
-I
Irish Glen LLC
PO Box 2266
Eugene, Oregon 97402
"
'f J
..'
. .'
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
225 5th ST
SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477
-"
John Hammer
Irish Glen LLC
PO Box 2266
Eugene, Oregon 97402