HomeMy WebLinkAboutNotice PLANNER 7/26/2006
I
0.
__ i,~,-
'i.'l-I. 1;1
~
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
STATE OF OREGON }
}ss.
County 0' 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 Departmynt, City of Springfield, Oregon.
2. I state that in my capacity as Secretary, I prepared and caused to be
,mailed copies of Notice of Amended Decision for.DRC2oo&:OOO33;
Springfield Justice Center, Site Plan Review See attachment "A") on
July 26, 2006 addressed to (see Attachment "B"), by causing said letters
to be placed in a U.S. mail box with postage fully prepaid thereon.
~~~
Brenda Jones U
Planning Secretary
STATE OF OREGON, County of Lane
~ . "
, __ Z (p , 2006, Personally appeared the above named Brenda Jones,
~ ret~~ who acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be their voluntary act. Before
-- ---------~-----_...-~.,\
I. OFFICIAL SEAL ,,;
I . . SANDRA MARX "
I .. i NOTARY PUBLIC - OREGON I
I .". COMMISSION NO. 385725 I
~ = -= ~~ ~~~~~~9~?:~~~~~2:~~
. ~ 'or} /IN;L
My Commission Expires: I~J;Z/ 0 !
. 7 bh I. (JD
Date Received:~/~
Planner: AL
'0 ,
.'~ P;; ,
. . 225 FIFTH'STREET
SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477
(541) 726-3753
,FAX (541) 726-3689
www.ci.springlield.or.us
'_1~qe'
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Jerry Smith, ChiefofPolice
Springfield Po.liceDepartment
344 A Street
Springtield, OR 97477
July 25, 2006 ,
Dear Chief Smith:
Please be advised that the City'of Springfield has issued an amended Site Plan Review decision
for the Springfield Justice Center to address conditions of approval that could not be met within
the timeframe originally specified (90 days). Because this project is to be completed over a 2-3
year period, several conditions will be addressed during' each relevant phase of construction (eg.
, tree felling; utility relocation; alley closure; etc.). The City has made ,minor textual changes to
,Conditions I, 9 and 12 on the enclosed Amended Decision t9 provide a more flexible timetable
for these conditions to be .met. You are being notified of this amended decision as the named
applicant for this ~pplication.
If you have any questions' please contact the undersigned at (541) 726-3784 or by email at:
alimbird0!ci.sorindield.or.us. "
J;j2;.;
~ Limbird "
. Planner II '
Date Received: . //.<~/,?aJo
Planner: AL
-----:--- - ."- ----.----....
ATTACHMENT A
TYPE.II TENTA:QVE SITE PLAN REVIEW, STAFF
REPORT & DECISION
Project Name: Springfield Justice Center Site Plan Review
Project Proposal: Construct a new municipal Justice Center consisting of a police and courts building
. with attached jail on an existing d~veloped site.
Case Number: DRC2006,00033
Project Location: Between A Street and B
Street; and between 4th Street and Pioneer
Parkway East.
Zoning: Public Land and Open Space (PLO)
. ,
Metro Plan Designation: MUC
Pre~SiJbmittal Meeting Date: None
Application Submitted Date: Apr. 17,2006
Revised Plan Submitted Date: June 9, 2006
I
Amended Decision Issued Date: 'July 25, 2006
Appeal Deadline Date: August 9, 2006
APPLICANT'S'DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TEAM
Owner! Applicant:
Project Architect:
Project Engineer:
Chief Jerry Smith
Springfield Police Department
344 A Street .
Springfield OR 97477
Carl 'Sherwood
Robertson Sherwood Architects
132 East Broadway, Suite 540'
Eugene OR 97401
Matt Keenan
KPFFConsulting Engineers
132 East Broadway, Suite 532
Eugene OR 97401
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD'S DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TEAM
. '
I POSITION
I Project Manager
Transportation Plannin~ En~ineer
I Public Works EIT
I Public Works EIT
I Deputy Fire Marshal
I Community Services Manager
REVIEW OF
Planning
Transportation
Utilities
Sanitary & Storm Sewer
Fire and Li fe Safety
Building
PHONE
726-3784
726-4585
736-1035
736-] 035
726-2293
726-3668
NAME
Andy Limbird
Gary McKenney
Matt Stouder
Matt Stouder
Gilbert Gordon
Daye Puent
DatEI Received: 7//U ~P6
Planner: AL I'
Site Information:' The subject site comprises one downtown: City block (approximateiy 1.47 acres)
including the mid-block alley right,of,way north of A Street between 4'h Street and Pioneer Parkway East.
The Assessor's Map description is 17003-35,3 I,' Tax Lots 1500-2400: The proposed development area
contains the existing police and municipal courts building, an adjoinin'g commercial lease building, and
public and reserved police parking lots located in the north half of the block:
Zoning for the site is Public Land and Open Space (PLO) in accordance with planning action ZON2006,
00007, and consistent.with provisions of the Metro Plm; and the Downtown R~finement Plan. Properties
to the east, south and west of the ,proposed development ,area are zoned and desib'11a((~d Mixed Use
CommerciaVNodal Development (MUCfNDO). Properties to the north of the subject site are zoned, PLO
and Medium Density Residential (MDR). .
, The proposed uses on the site include a police and municipal courts building with attached jail, and
perimeter landscaping. 'In combination, the police, courts and jail uses have been defined as a. "Justice
Center" .within the Public Land and Open Space district of the Springfield Development Code. "Justice
Center" is listed as a discretionary use in the PLO district, and ,the Springfield Plannillg Commission
. granted Discretionary:Use approval for the Justice Center with planning action DRC2006~00013.
. .
The subject site is within the Doivntowil Refincment Plan 'area. It is not adjacent to a Water Quality'
Limited Watercourse or within a FEMA 100 year flood zone. Tne site is outside the Time of Travel Zone
for Springfield drinking water wellheads, and therefore. is not subject to the provisions of the Drinking
Water Protection Overlay District, SDC Article 17. '
. . .
DECISION: This decision grants Tentative Site Plan Approval. The'standardsofthe Springfield
, . Development Code (SDC) appliCable to each criterion of Site Plan Approval are listed herein and
are satisfied by the submitted pl,lOS unless specifically noted with findings and conditions necessary
for compliance. Final Site Plans 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
decisi(!n is final. Please read this document carefu!ly,.. . .
. (See Page 15 for a smllmary ofthe, conditions of approval.)
pTHER USES AUTHORIZED BY THE DECISION: None. Future development will be in
accordance with the provisions of the Springfield Development Code, filed easements. and agreements,
and all applicable local: state and federal regulations. "
. , '
, .
REVIEW PROCESS: This 'appli~ation is reviewed under Type iI procedll~es listed in Springfield
Development Code Section 3.080"and the site plan review ciiteria of approval SDC 31.060.' The subject.
appli,cationwas'initially submitted on April 17,2006, and revised plans were submitted on June 9, 2006.'
'. This decision is issued on the 3 I " day of the 120 days mandated by the State.
Procedural Finding: Application~ 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 3.080 and 14,O}0). The applicant and parties subrr\itting written comments
during the notice period have appeal rights and are mailed a copy of this decision for consideration (See
Written Comments belo\v and Anneals at the end of this decision) .
Procedural Finding: On May 2,2006, the City's Development Review Committee reviewed the proposed
plans, and supporting infonnation submitted with the initial application. Revised plans containing more
,detailed information were subsequently prepared and submitted for review on June 9, 2006 (12 sheets -
Robertson Sherwood Architects,' Sheets G I, G2 and A I ,A3; Cameron McCarthy Gilbert & Scheibe,
Landscape Architects, Sheets L1'L3; and KPFF Consulting Engin~ers, Sheets CI, CLI, C2 & C3). The
DatE, 1,<eceived: : i:;-~/~6
Planner: AL ,,' .
Page 2 of 16
City staffs review comments have been reduced to findings and conditions only as necessary for
compliance with the Site Plan Review criteria ofSDC 31.060.
, .
'Procedural Finding: In accordance with SDC.3 1:080,100, the Final Site Plan shall comply with the
, requirements of the SDC and the conditions imposed by the Director in this decision.' The Fiilal Site Plan
otherwise shall be in substantial conformity'with the, tentative plan reviewed. Portions of the proposal
, approved as submitted during te~tative review c~nnot be substantively changed during Final Site Plan
approval. Approved Final Site Rlans (including Landscape Plans) shall not be substantively changed
. during Building Permit Review without an approved' Site Plan Decision Modification.
WRITTEN COMMENTS:
Procedural Finding: In accordance with SDC 3.080 and .14.030, notice was sent to adjac'ent property
owners/occupants within 300 feet of the subject site on April 21, 2006. Planning staff received one
written comment regarding this application. Mr. Bruce Berg, 448, D Street, submitted the following'
statement:
'''As a former city councilman:' nearby resident and past president of the Washburne neighborhood, I
am writing to offer my comments about the proposa! for the Springfield Justice Center and Jai(
First, I. am fully supportive ofithe needfor thisfacility and will vOlefor whatever tax needed to make.
it happen. It is in the design that I offer some reservations, Specifically, I have serious concerns of
the shutting down ofB Street. It is a collector street. unlike A, and I would encourage the designers -
and council to rework the facility so that A or 4'" Street is closed, not B. B'Streetprovides immediate
and quick access needed not justfor residents, butfor emergenc): services as well. Frankly. as much
as the police use B Street cll/:rently, I'm slI/pri,wM they want it clos~d with the new de.\'ign. Iwould
ah:o encourage .easy acc€ss .kom the center to main street vendors to encourage business in the core
area. Thank you.'" .
~. ..
Staff Response: The initi~l site plan submission depicted closure of a segment of B Street right-of-way
'lying between '4'h Street and Pioneer Parkway East, and was included in the notification to adjaceqt
landowners and referral agencies. However, the segment of B. Street is not incorporated within the
revised site plan at this time. Pot~ntial vacation of B Street will be undertaken as a separate and distinct
planning process involving adjaceht landowner notification and public hearing proceedings. FurthernlOre,
before undertaking the street vac~tion process, .all reasonable site design alternatives to vacation of B
Street will be examined. The.current site .desif,'ll will not compromise access to and from the do~ntown
core for commercial traffic or emergency vehicles as no portions of public streets are involved.
CRITERIA OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL:
SDC 3 I .060, Site Plan Review 'Standards, Criteria of' Site Plan' Approval states,. "the' Director shall
approve, or approve with' conditions, a Type ,]1 Site Plan Review Application upon detennining that
criteria(J) through (5) of this 'Section have been satisfied. If conditions Calmot be attached to satisfy the
criteria, the Director. shall deny the application." .
(1) The zoning is consistent with the Metro Ptall diagram, and/or the applicable Refinement
Plan diagram, Plan District map, and Conceptual Development Plan.
Finding 1: The site is designated Pub'lic Land arid Open Space (PLO) in the Downtown
R~finement Pian. The site was recently rezoned to PLO (Planning Action ZON2006-00007)
which is consistent with .the refin~ment plan designation, and there are no proposed changes to
the zoning for the site: .
Conclusion: As proposed', the tentative site plan satisfies Criterion I.
Date, Heceived: '1/~. /;kJo(,
Planner: AL -:-jj:"
Page 3 of 16
. (2) Capacity .requirements of public improvements, including but not limited to, water and
electricity;, sauitary sewer aud storm water 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 tim~ of development, unless otherwise provided for by this Code and
other applicable regulations. The Public Works Director or a utility provider shall
, .
determine capacity issues.
Finding 2: Approval of this proposal would allow for construction of a 63,000 square foot police
and municipal courts building with attached 37,400 square foot jail. Development is proposed to
be split into two phases with construction occurring over approximately three years.
, .
. . ,
Finding 3: For all public improvements, the applicant ,shall retain' a private professional civil
engineer to design the site improvements in conformance with City codes, this decision, and the
current Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual (EDSPM). 'The private civil
engineer also shall be required to provide construction inspection services.
Finding 4: The Development Review Committee reviewed the proposed site plan and the
surrounding public 'services. Staff also undertook a detailed review of the revised site plan
'submitted June 9, 2006.:City and agency staff's review comments have been incorporated in
findings and conditions herein. . Except for the following, the proposed public and private
improvements are sufficient to serve the proposed development.
Water and Electricity Improvements
. '
. ' '
. Finding 5: SDC 32.120(3) requires each development area to be provided with a water system
having suffi'ciently sized mains and lesser lines to furnish adequate supply to the development and
sufficient access for maintenance. Springfield' Utility Board coordinates the design of the water
system within Springfield city limits. . '
'Finding 6: Water service is aVallable to serve the site, and backflow prevention devices are
required. Chuck Davis of:SUB Water Department (726,2396) is the contact person. Please refer
to the letter from Bart McKee. S.UB Senior Civil Engineer dated May 1, 2006.
Finding 7: There is an existing overhead electrical transmission line within the mid-block alley
west of 4'h Street between A Street and B Street. 'There are also telecommunication, telephone
and City sewer lines within the alley. The alley is to be vacated to accommodate development of
__ the police/courts building and jail; therefore, the electrical service, telecommunication lines, and
sewer lines must be relocated. An alternate routing of the electrical service has 'not been shown
on the tentative site plan. Ed Head of Springfield Utility Board (SUB) Electric (726,2395) is the
contact person for electrical system planning. The applicant also shall coordinate removal and
relocation 'of underground cable television, telephone and other telecommunication lines with
Com cast and Qwest.
Finding 8: SDC 32.120(2) states, "Wherever possible, utility lines shall be placed underf,'found."
, Finding 9: ' Public rights,of-way are available on the perimeter of the site for routing and/or re-
ro~ting underground utilities to serve the proposed development.
Finding 10: Lighted bollards are proposed at the jail and police/courts buildiI).g entrances, and at
the entrance and egress poirits for the secure courtyard and police vehicle access driveways.
However, the_ City does not have. an operating and maintenance agreement with SUB Electric for
Date, Recei~ed:7lJl:ro{)6
Planner: AL "
Page 4 of 16
lighted ballards. The ballards will have to. b~'relacated aut af the street rights,af,wayand/ar fed'
from a metered building circuit and nat the streetlight pawer b'fid.
Condition 1: Priar to. appraval af the Final Site Plan, the 'undergraund routing af relacated
electrical, telephane, televisian and ather telecammunicatian lines shall be depicted an the site
, plan to. the extent practicable. Final rautingof undergraund utilities will be' deternlined at time af
building canstructian.
Condition 2: Priar to. approval af the Final Site Plan, the, lighted bollards shall be relacated
aut side the -street rights-af,way ar pravisian shall be made for providing metered electrical
service from the adjacent buildings.
. Canclusian: As conditianed herein, SUB Water and Electric facilities and ather utilities are
available to. serve the site, and the tentative, site plan satisfies this sub_element afthe criterian.
Sanitary Sewer and'Stormwater Manageinent Facilities
Sanitarv Sewer
Finding II: Sectian 32.100 af the SDC requires that sanitary sewers shall be installed to. serve
each new develapment and to. connect developments to. existingnlains. Additianally, installatian
af sanitary sewers shall pr!Jvide'sufficient access'rarmaintenance activities.
Finding 12: The applicant haspropased relacating the existing 12-inch public sanitary sewer line
(currently lacated in the nlid-black alley) starting at a paint ane black east af the develapment site,
at S"i Street, and routing the sewer line alang A Street as shawn an Plan Sheets C I and C 1.1. The
relacated sewer in A Street is prapased to run west to. Pianeer Parkway East, where it turns
narthward and cannects to. an existing manhale lacated at the intersectian with B Street.
Finding 13: The existing sanitary sewer line lacated within the nlid,black alley between S,hStreet
and Pianeer Parkway East also. provides service to. tax lats 2700, 2800 and 2900 lacated east af '
the subject' site. . Currentiy, these tax lats are accupied by. the First Christian Church and the
Carter Building. The applicant's propasal to. relocate the sewef'line in S", Street and'A Stre~t
daes liat include provisians to ensure sewer serVice is maintained far these tax lats.
Finding 14: PianeerParkway East is a right-af-way cantrolled by ODOT, as it is considered part
af the state highway system. Canstructian af a'new public sanitary sewer line in a state highway
.. right,af,way will require'; facilities pernlit issued by ODOr..' "'.
Condition 3': 'Priar to. approval af the Final Site Plan, the applicant shall revise the plans' to.
provide far sewer service laterals to. replace the existing sewer. service cannectians far tax lats
2700, 2800 and 2900.
Condition 4: Priarto approval af the canstruction pl'an drawings, the applicant:shall abtain
approval froni .oDOT to ~onstruct a new public sanitary sewer line in Pianeer Parkway East as
shawn an the plan drawings.
Canclusian: Asconditianed herein, the tentative site plan satisfies this sub-eleme~t af the'
criterian.
:
DatE, rieceived'
" Planner: AL
Page 5 of 16'
Stomlwater Manallement and Oualitv
Finding 15:' SDC 32.110(2) requires thattlie Approval Authority shall grant' development
approval only where adeqliate public and/or private stonnwater management systems provisions
have been made as determined by the Public Works .Director, consistent with the EDSPM.
Finding 16: SDC 32.110(4) requires that runoff from a development shall.be directed to an
approved stormwater management system with sufficient capacity to accept the discharge.
Finding 17: SDC 32.110(5) requires new developme~ts to employ drainage man'agement
practices that minimize the amount and rate of surface water runoff into receiving streams, and
that promote water qualiiy. '
Finding, 18: To comply with Sections 32.110(4) & (5), stormwater runoff from the rooftop of the '
building will be directed into the existing stomiwater systems located in 4'" Street and Pioneer
Parkway East" while runoff from the secure cOUl1yard area will be directed into a vegetated
filtration basin.
Finding 19: The applicant proposes connection oftwo.rocif drainage pipes to the existing 12-inch
public stonn sewer system 'in Pioneer Parkway East: Because Pioneer Parkway East is under
state jurisdiction, cOllilec(ion to the existing public system within this roa~ right-of-way will
require a facilities pemlit from ODOT.
Finding 20: Under Federal regulation of the Clean Water Act (CWA), Endangered Species Act
(ESA), and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), the City of Springfield is .
required to obtain, and has applied for, a Municipal' Separate Stoml Sewer System (MS4) penn it.
A provision of this pemlitrequires the City to demonstrate efforts to reduce the pollution in urban
storm water to the Maximum Extent Practicable (MEP).
Finding 21: Federal and Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) rules require the
City's MS4 plan to address six "Minimum Control Measures". Minimum Control Measure 5,
"Post_Construction Stonnwater Management for.New Development and Redevelopment'.', applies
to the proposed 'development.
Finding 22: Minimum Control Measure 5 requires the City of Springfield to develop, implement
ann enforce a_pro!,'Tam to ensure the reduction of pollutants in stormwater runoff to the MEP.
The City aiso must develop and implement strategies that include a combination of structural or
non,structural, Best Management Practices (BMPs) appropriate for the comniunity.
Finding 23: Minimum Control Measure 5 requires the City of Springfield to use an ordinance or
other regulatory mechanism to andress post-construction runoff, from new and re,development
projects to the' extent allowable under State law. Regulatory mechanisms used by the City.
include the SDC, the City's Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual and the
future Stomlwater Facilities Master Plan (SFMP).
Finding 24: As required in SDC 31.050(5), "a development shall be required to employ drainage
management practices approved by the Public Works Director and consistent with Metro Plan
policies and the Engineering Design Standards and P,;ocedures Manuaf'.
Finding 25: Section 3.02of the City's EDSPM states the Public Works Department will accept,
as, interim design standards for stomlwater quality, water quality facilities designed pursuant to
Dat"d~eceived:7/u.I}II(J(,
Planner: AL . ' I,
Page 6 of 16
the policies and procedures of either the City of Portland (BES), or the Clean Water Services
(CWS).
Finding 26: Section 3.03.:i.B of the City's EDSPM states all public and private development and
redevelopment projects shall employ a system of one or more post-developed BMPs that in
combination are designed ito achieve at least a 70 percent reduction in the total suspended solids
,in the runoff generated by that development. Section 3.03.4.E of,the manual requires that a
minimum of 50 percent of the non-building rooftop impervious area on a site shall be treated for
stOlID water quality improv,ement using vegetative methods. '
. .'
Finding 27: To meet th~ requirements of the City's MS4 pernlit, the SDC, and the City's
EDSPM, the 'applicant has propos~dinstalling one small vegetated filtration basin to treat
storm water runoff from the sally port/secure courtyard area. A small perforated pipe will convey'
runoff from the .filtration basin to the existing 15-inch storm line in 41h Street. However, a seed
mix for the vegetated filtration basin has not been specified'in the tentative site plan.
Condition 5: Prior to approval of the construction' plan drawings, the applicant shall obtain
approval from OOOT to construct storm sewer laterals in Pioneer Parkway East as shown on the'
plan drawings, or shall relocate the stonn sewer lines outside ofODOT right-of-way. .
Condition 6: Prior to approval of the Final Site Plan, .the project landscape ~r~hitect shall
provide an appropriate s~ed mix that is satisfactory to the City's Public WorKs Engineering
Department for the vegetated filtration basin located within the secure courtyard.
Conclusion: As conditioned herein, the ,tentative- site plan satisfies this sub-element of the
. criterion.
Streets and Traffic Safety Controls
Finding 28: Existing streets abutting the prop~sed development site are constructed to City
standards. No changes to the intersections or lane confih'1lrations of the abutting streets are
proposed with the tentative site plan.
Finding 29: , The submitted Task'l and Task 2 Traffic Impact Studies prepared by Access
.Engineering have demonsirated that nearby streets and intersections would operate at acceptable
levels of service with the addition of traffic' anticipated fronl the,proposed development.
Finding 30:.. Vehicular access to the proposed development would be via' existing downtown'
streets, including entrance/egress driveways along A Street and 41h Streei. A police vehiCle
entrance is proposed from' 41h Str~et into a secure courtyard that provides access to the future jail
sally port and deliverYar~a. Egress froin the secure courtyard is via a gate and driveway onto A
Street. A second police vehicle access driveway is proposed near the, mid-block point on the west
'side of 41h Street. Access and egress for the second driveway wou~d be from A Street.
Finding 31: Abutting the subject site, Pioneer Parkway East is a three lane arterial street under
the jurisdiction of the Oregon Department of Transportation (OOOT). This street is developed to
.. urban standards and contains two one, way (northbound) travel lanes with ,a parking lane on the
east ~ide of the road abutting the proposed development'arca; however, parking adjacent to the
development site is prohibited by curb, painting and signage. There are no changes to the access
, or lane configuration prop.osed with the tentative site plan. OOOT has indicated previously they
do not have concerns about closure of the mid-block alley egress onto Pioneer Parkway East that
is proposed with the second phase of construction on the site.
-Date Received:
Planner: AL
1/J;6/ JdfJI
1/
Page 7 of 16
,-
Finding 32: Abutting the subject site,. A Street is classified as an east-west collector street with a
single travell~ne and an'on-street parallel parking lane in each direction. This street is developed
to urban standards and no changes to the configuration or 'status of A Street are proposed with the
tentative site plan. ' "
Finding 33: Abutting the subjeci site, B Street is classified as an east,west collector street with a
single travel lane and an on,street parallel parking lane in each direction. This street i~ developed
to urban standards and no changes to the configuration or status of B Street are proposed with the
tentative site plan. .
Fi~ding 34: Abutting the subject site, 4lh Street is developed to urban standards. Fourth Street is
classified as a local street with a single travel Ian" and an on-street parallel parking lane in each
direction. Although'the configuration of 4'h Street is 'not proposed to change with the tentative
site plan, additional parking and driveway entrances are proposed on' the west side to serve the'
proposed'jail and polipe/courts building. : Driveway spacing and vision clearance areas will be
maintained in accordance with acceptable transportation engineering standards for downtown
streets. '
Conclusion: As proposed, the tentative site plan satisfies this sub-element of the criterion.
(3) The proposed development shail comply with all applicable public and private design and
construction standards contained in this Code and other applicable regulations. ,
Finding 35: Criterion3 contains three different el~n;ents with sub-elements. and applicable code
standards. The site plan application as submitted complies with the code standards listed under
each sub-element unless otherwise noted with specific findings and conclusions. The elements;'
sub,elements and code standards of Criterion 3 include bur are not limited to:
3a. Public and Priva'te Improvements in accordance with SDC 31 and 32
. Pulilic Street and Related Improvements (32.020-32.090)
. Fire and Life Safety Improvements (32.120(3))
. Public and Private Easements (32.120(1) and (5))
3b. Conformance with standards of SDC 31, Site Plan Review, and SDC 23 Public Land'
and Open,Space Zoning District ' ' .
., Discretionary Uses (23.020)
. Lot Coverage Standards (23.040)
., Setback-Standards (23.050)
. Height Standards(23.0~0)
. Off,Street Parking Standards (23.070 and 31.170.-230)
. Fence Standards (23.090)
. Landscaping Standards (31.130-150)
. Screening, and Lighting Standards (31.160)
,3c. Overlay Disjri~t~ and Applicable Refinement Plan Requirements
, . Downtown Refinement Plan
~
. Date ~eceived:..:..1/.z//~(J6
Planner: AL . n '
Page 8 0[.16
3a. .. Public and Private Improvements in Accordance with SDC 31 and 32
Public Street and Related Improvements (32.020,32.090)
Finding 36: There are no changes to the public street system proposedwi'th the tentative site plan
that would significantly affect nearby intersectious,- the availability, .of,ou-street parking, or
pedestrian access.
Finding 37: The tentative site plan drawings do not depict existingor proposed street lighting.
There is a mix of existing street lighting types and fixtures on the abutting streets. All lighting
fixtures have been recently upgraded to meet City standards.' However, the streetlight pole
spacing is not uniform and does not provide consistent lighting as the streetlight poles. are a
mixture of City.owned wood and. steel poles, and fixtures mounted on SUB power poles. The
, project designers should meet with the City Traffic Engineer to discuss how best to integrate
exterior lighting needs of the Justice Center with the'existing street lighting systems. .'
Finding 38: In addition to vehicular trips, assumed development may generate pedestrian and
bicycle trips. According,to the "Household" survey done by LCOG' in 1994, 12.6 percent of
household trips are made by bicycle or walking and 1.8 percent are by'transit bus. These trips
may have their origins or destinations at a variety of land uses, including this site. Pedestrian and
bicycle trips create the need for sidewalks, pedestrial) crossing signals, crosswalks, bicycle
parking and bicycle lanes.
Findi'ng 39' , Pedestrian access would be provided by existing sidewalks along the public street
frontages. Pedestrian trips to the site would be expected to originate from the abutting public
streets, especially A Street, Pioneer Parkway East and 4'hStreet as these provide direct connection
to public parking areas in'the downtown core and nearby. transit stops, including the Springfield
Transit Station. .
Finding 40: The tentative site plan portrays the proposed police/courts building and attached jail
constructed atop the existing mid~block alley west of 4'h Street between A Street and B Street.
11le alley is lacated withirithe building envelope for the adjoining jail facility, which is scheduled
far canstruction with the secand phase .of the develapment. A vacatian or alteratian .of use for the
alley and relocation .of existing utilities will be required priarta construction of the building(s). ,
This actian,has been initiated under Planning Case LRP2006-00019, and is scheduled ta be
presented ta the CltyCai.ii)cil at a Public Hearing an July 1.7,2006:
.. .'
. Finding 41: :' DemolitiOll .of the existing palice, caurts and cammercial lease .building and.
canstructian .of the new Justice Center will result in the remaval .of approximately 30 existing
street and site landscaping trees., Five trees are propased ta be,retained alangthe southwestern
edge .af.the site (a portian of the Pianeer Parkway East frontage). Of the trees ta be removed,
approximately 25 are considered qualifying trees (ie. greater than 5" diameter) in accardance with
SDC 38.015. . The. propased landscaping plans .show installation .of 25 street trees evenly
> distributed around the perimeter .of the site ta campeusate far the remaved trees. The proposed
, construction will occupy the entire downtown block upon campletion, which precludes an
opportunity to install'landscaping trees internal to the site.
Finding 42: In accordance with SDC 38.015, a tree fellingpernlit will be required for removal of
approximately 25 qualifying (ie. at least 5" diameter) street and site landscaping trees.
,Finding 43: There is an existing Lane Elections ballot drop box located neanhe alley driveway
egress onto 4'h Street. This feature will require relocation prior to construction occurring on the
"
Date Received:
Planner: AL
l /;'6 !~p'
. / ' I
Page 9 of 16
site. Lane Elections has advised the ballot drop box will be used for the November, 2006 election
and probably not required again u?til elections in March, 2008.
Condition 7: The Final Site Plans,submitted.for the project shall portray street lighting locations
and fixtures acceptable to the City Traffic Engineer
C~ndition 8: Prior to approval of the Final Site Plan, a vacation or alter~tion of use for the mid, ,
. block alley west of 4th Street b"etween A Street and B Street shall be approved.'
Condition 9: Prior. to initiation of tree cutting, a tree felling permit shafl be approved for
qualifying ~treet and site landscaping trees proposed for removal.
Condition 10: Prior to .initiation of constructlon on .the north h?lf of the block, the Lane
Ejections ballot drop box shall be relocated to a suitable location.
< Conclusion: . As conditioned herein, the tentative site plan satisfies this sub-element of the
criterion.
Fire and Life Safety hnprovements (32.120(3))
Access
Finding 44: Access to the development site is provided by the existing public 'street system
surrounding the subject city block. Springfield Fire and Life Safety advise that access is
satisfactory for fire apparatus and the existing public streets will support an 80,000 lb. imposed
load." ' . '
Water Supply
Finding 45: The tentative site plan shows a new 8-inchwater line along the west'side of 4th Street
, . . .
to serve the proposed development. Additionally, there are two existing fire hydrants that are
available to serve the proposed development. One hydrant is located at the southwest comer of
the subject block, and a second is located to the east across 4th Street at the southwest COrner of
the adjacent block. The existing fire 'hydrants meet minimum spacing requirements of the
Springfield Fire Code Tab'le 105.1.
'~
, Finding 46: . Springfield ,Fire and Life Safety advise that the minimum water supply shall'be
, 2,250 gallons per minute based on a total building floor area of approximately 112,776 ft' (jail,
police and courts buildings 'combined). Construction is proposed as Type l"B with automatic
sprinkler protection in accordance with Springfield Fire Code Table B105.1 'and 'Section BI05.2
Exception. . .
, .
" Conclusion: As proposed, the fire access and water supply meet SDC 32.120(3).
,Public and Private Easements (32.120(1) and (5))
"
Finding 47: Utilities will be' extended underground' to serve the proposed development.
Exiending and connecting public utility facilities at property lines impr()ves efficiency and service
to individual sites.
Finding 48: Street side utility easements may be necessary to protect public infrastructure and
serve the subject site with requested utilities. The facilities currently requested are standard
Date ~eceived:' -,/a, /;}t;Of,
Planner: AL -;=(-'
Page 10 of 16
commercial services with connections to ,existing 'lines on'the perimeter of the site. Wherever
i -.
required, Public Utility.Easements (PUEs) will be provided to accommodate necessal)' utility
services or services will beplaced inside existing public easements and rights-of-way.
Finding 49: There are existing electrical, telecommunication and telephone lines within the mid-
block alley west of 4'h Street between A Street and B Street As previously conditioned (above),
the existing' utilities will require relocation to accommodate the proposed developnlent. The
applicant will coordinate removal and/or relocation of underground lines with the affected utility
: providers, including SUB Eiectric, Comcast and Qwest. City sewer lines will be removed and
relocated in conjunction with the proposed site development, but do not 'require coordination'with
outside agencies. The proposed construction phasing will retain existing above,ground and.
underground utilities within the mid,block alley until construction begins on 'the jail facility in
lat~ 2008 or early 2009. Interim easements or licenses 'will be required to accommodate the
existing utilities upori vacation of the alley, and prior to construction,occurringwithiri the affected'
area.
Finding 50: . Existing easements, if ~ny, within the proposed development area will require
vacation prior to developnient occurring within or atop the affected area.
Condition 11: Prio~ to or,coricurrent with recording of the alley vacation initiated by Planning
Action LRP2006-000 19, temporal)' easements or licenses shall be provided for existing utilities
,located within the alley including, but not limited to, sanital)' and storm sewer, cable television,
. telephone and telecommunications, and electricity. . '
Condition 12: Prior to or concurrent with recording of the alley vacation, temporal)' easements
or licenses sh~ll be provided across the eastern and western ends of the alley, allowing for
continued public use of th~ egress driveways from the parking lots and access to the Lane
Elections ballot drop box until construction is initiated on the north half of the block. Access to
the Best Little Printhouse shall be provided for the duration Of their occupancy.
.Conclusion' 'As ~onditioned' herein, the tentative site plan satisfies this sub-element of the
criterion.
3b.
:Conformance with Standards of SDC 31, Site Plan Review, and Article 23, Public Land and
Open Space Zoning
Discretionary Use (23.020(2)) .
"
Page II of 16
, ,
-'< ,.
F'inding 54: The landscape plan proposes 30 street . trees around the perimeter of the site,
including five existing trees to be retained, along the southwestern edge of the site adjacent to
Pioneer Parkway East. 'Street trees will be spaced and planted in accordance with provisions of
the SDC and EDSPM. Vision clearance triangles will be maintained for street intersections and
driveway entrances.
Finding 55: The tentative plan proposes street tree placement that is more evenly distributed than ,
the current planting pattern that has a cluster of trees along the A Street frontage of the. block and.
very few trees on 4th Street. Additionally, street trees are' proposed to be installed along the entire
B Street frontage that currently contains four separate driveway entrances.
Finding 56: The submitted tentative landscape plan provides an overview of the site landscaping
requirements, irrigation specifications and proposed pla~tings meeting the standards of SDC
31.130- I 50 and the Downtown R~finel1lent Plan. A final planting plan containing species
planting lists, quantities and specifications has 110t been provided. The applicant has stated on the
tentative plan that a final,planting plan and an irrigation plan will be submitted by the project
Landscape Architect,for st~ff review plior to installation.
Conclusion: As proposed, th~, tentative site plan meets the requirements of the SDC for street
. trees and site landscaping,:..
Screening and Lighting Standards (23.090, 3 ~ .160)
Finding 57: There are no vegetative screening requirements for the development and, none are
proposed. A solid masonry wall and security gate is proposed along the 4'h Street frontage of the
courtyard acc'essing the 'delivery and sally 'port entrance for the future jail. '
.. ..
'Finding 58: The'applicailt has stated in the' tentative site plan that building lighting will be
,downca~t and/or directed away from residential areas located approximately 200 feet to the north.'
Finding 59: Pedestrian,s(;ale bollard lighting has been proposed adjacent to the main entrance
doors for the jail. and police/courts building, and at driveway entrances onto 4'h Street and A
Street. As previously conditioned, the bollard lights will be connected to the building electrical
system:,.
. .
Finding 60: The tentative site lighting plan does not. show the location, height or style of lighting
fixtures proposed for the building fac;ade on the perimeter of the jail and police/courtsbuildings.
'ln accordance with SDC',3J.J60(3)(c), "exterior lighting shall be shielded or recessed so that
direct glare and reflection are contained within the boundaries of the property, and shall be
directed downward and away from abutting properties..." ,
Condition 13: The Final Site: Plan shall provide details:on the location a~d design of exierior
lighting ,fixtures ,to ensure conformance with the Code, Among other measures, appropriate
lighting fixture placemel1t, low-wattage bulbs and low,angle cutoff mechanisms shall be
employed to ensure lighting glare and spillover does not affect adjacent properties.
Conclusion: As conditioned herein, the tentative site plan, satisfies this sub,element of the
criterion.
Dat€J ~eceived'
Planner: AL '
'7 /J./p/~t
I
Page 12 of 16
3c. Overlay Districts and Applicable Refinement Plan Requirements
Finding 61': 'Th~ subject development site lies within the Downfall R~fillel11enf Plall' area and is
consistent with public/government development requirements, of the adopted Refinement Plan.
Finding 62:, TIle subject site is located outside of the Time of Travel Zones for the Springfield
Drinking Water Protection' Overlay District. '
Condusion: As prop?sed,'the tentative site plan satisfies this sub,element of the criterion.
4) . Parking areas and ing~ess-egress points have been designed to: facilitate vehicular traffic,
.' bicycle and pedestrian" safety to avoid congestion; provide . connectivity within the
developmcnt area a,nd t~ adjacent residential areas, transit stops, neighborhood activity
centers, and commercial, industri.al and public areas; minimize curb cuts, on arterial and
collector streets as specified in Articles 31, 32, the appropriate zoning and/or zoning overlay
district Article and any applicable refinement plan; and comply with the ODOT access
management standardsJor state highways. .
Finding 63: There is no nlinimum parking requirement for the site in accordance with the
Downtown Exception Area of the SDC. There will be on-street parking available for public and
visitor use along A Street, 4th Street and B' Street. Parking also is available in the municipal
parking lot on the northside.ofB Street.
Finding 64: The ,tentative site plan shows the proposed locations of required bi~yde parking
. spaces in accordance with SDC 31.220. The proposed development would generate a total
bicyde parking requirement of 17 short term and.9 long ierm spaces (@1/3000 ft' for the
police/courts building, and @1/20 beds for the jail). The proposed bicyde parkilig location for
the jail is covered by an,extension of the building roofline, and can be.considered 100% long term
parking. . - '
, Finding 65: The driveways serving the secure sally port courtyard and the internal police vehide
access on 4th Street will be used exdusively by authorized vehides, and will contribute minimal
traffic to the surrounding street system. There are no significant transportation issues related to
the placement, or anticipated use of these driveways.
.. .,
Finding 69: The proposed site plan will dose four'existing driveway entrances on B Street with
the first phase of developrnent. An alley egress onto Pioneer Parkway East will be dosed with
the second phase of development. The east alley egress onto 4th Street will be 'retained as a police
. vehicle access driveway. :
Finding 67: The proposed first, phase will construct the new police and courts building on the
north half of the block currently developed with parking lots. An. existing east,west mid-block
alley will be vacated pursuant to Planning Action LRP2006,00019. However, the alley driving
. surface will remain open for the duration of-Phase I construction to maintain access to the rear of
. the police and courts building and commercial lease sp.ace. As conditioned previously, existing
utilities will be retained during the period of Phase I construction. The existing police and court
buildings will be demolished to construct the jail during the second phase of the project.
Condusion;'As propo'sed.and conditioned previously under Criterion #2, the tentative site plan
satisfies. this criterion. '
"
, . "/2/. I tJ06
Date; ~eceived:~1 :&
Planne.r:Al
Page 13 of \6
"
(5) Physical features, including but not liI~ited to, significant clusters' of trees and shrubs,
watercourses shown on the Water Quality Limited Watercourse Map and their associated
riparian areas, wetIands,:rock outcrop pings and historic featurcs have been evaluated and
protected as specified in this Code or other applicabie regulations,.
Finding 68: The Natural Resources Study, the National Wetlands Inventory, the Springfield
'Wetland Inventory Map, Wellhead Protection Overlay and the list of Historic Landmark Sites
have been consulted. There are no significant natural features on this site, as it has been
previously developed' with a public street, police/courts and commercial lease building, alley,
parking lot, and landscaping.
Finding.69: Stormwater from the subject site outfalls to the Willamette River.' The Willamette
,River is list~d with the State of Oregon as a "water quality limited" stream fornumerous chemical
, and physical constituents, including temperature. . ' . . .
Finding 70: Springfield's drinking water aquifer is an identified and delineated Goal 5 natural
resource subject to protection in accordance with SDC Article 17: However, the subject site is
located outside the TOTZ of Springfield drinking water wellheads.
Finding 71: The development, as p~oposed and previously conditioned herein, p~ovidesstorm
and ground water quality protection in accordance with SDC Article 17 and receiving streams
have been protected in accordance with SDC32.11 O.
Finding 72: The proposed development is designed and 'located and ha'sbeen conditioned'in a
manner that has stonnwater runoff controls imd"stotmwater quality measures for protection of
ground; surface and:drinking water.
Conclusion: As proposed 'and conditioned previously under Criterion #2, the tentative site plan
satisfies this criterion. . , '
CONCLUSION: The Tentative Site Plan, as submitted and conditioned, complies with Criteria 1-5
, . of SDC 31.060.
WHAT. NEEDS TO BE DONE BY THE APPLICANT TO OBTAIN FINAL SITE PLAN
APPROVAL?
Five copies of a Final Site'Plan and any additional required plans, docurn.entsor infonnation' are required
to be submitted to the Planning Division within 90 days ofthe'date' of this letter. In accordance with SDC
31.080-100, the Final Site Plan shall comply with.,the requirements of the SDC and' the condi.tions
imposed by the Director in this decision. The Final Site Plan otherwise shall ,be in substantial confonnity
with the tentative plan reviewed. ,Portions of the proposal approved as subniitted during tentative review
cannot be substantively changed during final site plan approval. Approved Final Site Plans (inchiding
Landscape Phins) shall not be sub~tantively changed'duringBuildingPermit Review without an approved
Site Plan Decision Modification.' '
,
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Condition' I: Prior to' approval of the Final Site pian, the underground. routing ofrelocated electrical,'
telephone, television and other telecommunication lines shall be depicted on the site plan to the extent
practicable. Final routing of underground utilities will be determined at time of building construction.
. Date Received: ~/U/~1J6'
Planner: AL
Page 14 of 16
'.
. ):
Condition 2: Prior to approval o( the Final Site Plan, the lighted bollards shall be relocated outside the'
street rights-of-way or provision shall be made for providing metered electrical service from the adjacent
buildings. .
Condition 3: Prior to approval. of the Final Site Plan, the appiicant shall revise the plans to provide for
scwer service laterals to replace the existing sewer service connections for tax lots 2700, 2800 and 2900.
Condition 4: Prior to approval qf the construction plan drawings, the applicant shall 'obtain approval
from ODOT to construct a new public sanitary sewer, line in Pioneer Parkway East as shown on the plan
drawings.
Condition 5: Prior to approval <:if the construction plan drawings, the applicant shall obtain approval
from ODOr to construct stoml sewer laterals in Pioneer Parkway East as shown on the plan drawings, or
shall relocate the stoml sewer lines outside ofODOT right,of-way. '
Condition 6: Prior to approval of the Final Site Plan, the project landscape architect shall, provide an
appropriate seed mix. that is satisfactory to the City's Public Works Engineering Department fo, the'
vegetated f\ltration bas\n located within the secure courtyard.' , . .'
Condition 7: The Final Site Plans submitted for.the project shall portray street'lighting locations and
fixtures'acceptable to the City Traffic Engineer. . , .
ConditionS: Prior to approval. of the Final Site Plan, a vacation or alteration of use for the mid,block
alley west of 4th Street between A Street and B Street shall be approved.
Condition9: Prior to initiation of tree cutting, a tree felling pemlit shall be approved for qualifying street
. . - .
and site landscaping trees proposed for removal.
Condition 10: Prior to' initiation of construct'ion on the north half of the block, the Lane EI"ctions ballot.
drop box shall be relocated to a suitable location.
Condition 11: Prior to or concurrent with recording of the alley vacation initiated by Planning Action
LRP2006-000 19, temporary easements or licenses shall be provided for existing utilities located within
the alley including, but not limited to, sanitary and storm sewer, cable television, telephone and
telecommu~ications, and electricity. '
. .
Condition 12: Prior to or concurr~nt with recording of the alley vacation, tempo~ry easements.or
licenses shall be provided across the eastern and western ends of the alley, allowing for continued public
use of the eb'fess driveways from the parking lots and access to the Lane Elections ballot drop box until
construction is initiated on the north half of the block; Access to the Best Little Printhouse shall be
provided for the duration of their occupancy.
Condition 13:' The Final Site Plan shall provide details on the location and design of exterior lighting
fixtures to ensure conformance with the Code. Among other measures, appropriate lighting fixture
,placement, low-wattage bulbs and low,angle cutOff Mechanisms shall be employed to ensure. lighting
giare and spillover does notaffect adjacent properties.' '
~IGNS: Sib'1lS are regulated by the Springfield City Code, Article 9, Chapter 7. The number and
placement of Sib'1lS must be coordinated with the Community Services Division. The locations of signs do
not constitute approval from the Community Services Division. A separate sign pernlit is required.
Please contact David Bowlsby (726-1029) for further information.
Date, Received: ij2~/~1J6
Planner: AL, .
Page 15 of 16
. .~ '
" '
PERMITS: The applicani may submit 'construction or building plans to other City departments for
review prior to final site plan approval in accordance with SDC 31.080 at their own risk. All concurrent
submittals are subject to revision for compliance with the Final Site. Plan.
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 available
for a fee at the Developmeni Services Department, ~25 FifthStred, Springfield, Oregon.
APPEAL: This Type II Tentati\'e Site Plan decision is considered a decision of the Director and as such
may be appealed to the Planning Coni.mission. The appeal may be filed with the Development Services'
Department by an affected party. , Your appeal must be in accordance with SDC, Article 15, Appeals.
. An Appeals application must be submitted with a fee of $250.00. The fee will be returned to the
applicant if the Planning Commission approves the appeal application.
In accordance with SDC 15.020 which provides for a IS-day appeal period and Oregon Rules of Civil
"Procedures, Rule lO(c) for service of notice by mail, the appeal period for this decision expires at 5:00
PM onAugust 9, 2006.,
QUESTIONS:' Please call Andy' Limbird in the Planning Division of the Development Services
Department at (541) 726-3784 or e,mail alimbirdiiil,ci.sorin\!field.oLus if you have any questions regarding
~~., . ,
;;;;2l~
~ Limbird , '
. Planner II
)
Dato r'tecei\ied:
Planner: AL
1/7-,j)POt
I I
Page 16 of 16
.
~
, '... ....'.)J59'",
".' ,'." "I~/
." ,.;~....:.
.....
~Y"
{'<>ro."~ ~
ck-c ' ,', ~ Ls-."
, . u . - ~ ~^ .ra
ciki7R...- to (> f; PI
~+~. ~
..
. ....17
LOi(l...t <V'n~'"
~s~~.~ c..o~
~*e-Y
\,'
Co"(l'~ 4,,--".J~J
.&C.i.!l""- ,j.- c.Df'i1
&f IJ&..:J., CJ...iL-':t
, '5-~+k
..
" ~
, G",^,+ ~ ~..\
~u ' !i1~,
,.:" . n~J
.. , ~,r :i;.J'r;"
, ~' , ol L..tt... ,&:'.;i,17:)
10 t""
-ID ~L:/
:'t
f
Date Received: ~/ ~/ ;U(l6'
, Planner: AL
.~_...
f'
i
I
)
j
I,
I
, .
I
LIt..'-':~_L~__ .
.~.
r
i
I
!
,
,
i
1__ --
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
DEVEU )NT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
, 225 5th ST '
SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477
,.......".............~......---~............................,--..........,,~_.,-_..........._-~...................................-..,_..._. ....
Mr. Bruce Berg
448 "D" Street
SpriOgfield, OR 97477
.J
. ;r:..ur-~=;.=-""
.~~
.' CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
225 5th 8T
SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477
--=---=--. ~___--=-o.:"
Carl 'Sherwood
Robertson Sherwood Architects
132 E Broadway, Ste 540
Eugene, OR 97401
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
225 5th ST
SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477
- ~---
Matt Keenan
'KPFF Consulting Engineers
132 East Broadway, Ste 532 '
Eugene, OR 97401'
- .,.-..,._.~._.------~~-_._--'- '---.------ .-.------.--
f'''- --
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
.225 5th ST'
, SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477
. G . .-\ \'
a.~ d<zi'~~\i-
c..,.,...-,I,,,*,, .-~.:":;\ ~~-
'~-_~~:'_'
.~~"":T AC.H'MENT B
-,
, ,.
Chief Jerry'Smith ,
Springfield police Department
r
I,
.1
-,
-
~~_._~
-:-.
~fj
~
~
ce.' CCl~ fhapft