Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNotice PLANNER 10/2/2006 , -.,' ~ " -.../, AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE STATE OF OREGON) ) 55. County of lane ) I, Karen laFleur, being first duly sworn, do hereby depose and say. as follows: 1. I state that I am a Program Technician for the Planning Division of the Development Services Department, City of Springfield, Oregon. 2. I state ttiat in my capacity as, Program Technician, I prepared and caused to be mailed copies of~C.~-oQ:)~g N~~ ~ - ~~-e....<~<1 H<( (See attachment "An) on LDlz..' .2006 addressed to (see ' Sc.u.e..... Attachment Bn), by'causing said letters to be placed in a u.s. mail box with postage fully prepaid thereon. ~a.Aw- ~ ~RE~, LaFLEUR , STATE OF OREGON, County of Lane {}hfiA 2-, . 2006. Personally appeared the above named Karen laFleur, Program Technician, who acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be their voluntary act Before me: ' ~ My Commission Expires: ~ 'J7 ~ r ----- _...~.._~~ 1- _u_,.. . oFFICiALSeAi.- -' ': i .' BRENDA JONES j \; NOTARY PUBLIC . OREGON I j '... COMMISSION NO, 379218 I j MY COMMISSION EXPIRES MAY 27. 2008 I ,l____::~ -,-_ ~~-~-.::-,-:',_ - - '- ~ ---~ Dato i';sceived: /~~/;>a7( Planner: AL r- TYPE II TREE FELLING PERMIT STAFF REPORT & DECISION Case Number: DRC2006-00068 Project Name: Embassy Suites 3530 Gateway Street Tree Felling Permit Nature of Application: The applicant is requesting to perform tree felling necessary to prepare a site for construction of a new eight-story hotel building with underground parking garage,' Approval would result in eight regulated trees and four street trees being removed, Project Location: 3530 Gateway Street, in Springfield (Assessor's Map 17-03-15-33, TL# J 500 & 1600) Zoning: Community Commercial (CC) Metro Plan Designation: CC Application Date: September I, 2006 Decision Date: October 2, 2006 Appeal Deadline: October 17,2006 Associated Applications: PRE2006-00055; DRC2006-00062; DRC2006-00069 APPLICANT'S DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TEAM . Denotes regulated tree proposed for removal Owner! Applicant: Civil Engineer: Bill Clark' Gateway Hospitality LLC 2037 NW Lance Way Corvallis OR 97330 , Troy Plum PE' Pac- West Engineering 1530 Ninth Avenue SE , Albany OR 97322 Landscape Architect: Charles Mangum & Associates Landscape,Architecture 5] 44 36th A venue SE Salem OR 9730]' CITY OF SPRINGFIELD'S DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TEAM I POSITION. I Proiect Manager I Transportation Planning Engineer I Public Works Civil Engineer I Public Works Civil Engineer I Deputy Fire Marshal I Community Services Manager I REVIEW OF Planning I Transportation Utilities Sanitary & Storm Sewer Fire and Life Safety I Building NAME PHONE Andy Limbird 726-3784 Gary McKenney 726-4585 I Jeff Paschall I 736-1674 I Jeff Paschall 1736-1674 I Gilbert Gordon 726-2293 I Dave Puent , I 726-3668 Date Received:~h fo~t Planner: AL -, Site Information: , The applicant has made concurrent application for tentative site plan approval to construct an 'eight-story, 161 room hotel building with surface and underground parking. The total building floor area (above-ground) is approximately 145,000 ft' on the 2.83 acre project site (DRC2006- 00062). In accordance with SDC 38.010(2), the 'applicant is proposing to remove eight trees greater than 5-inches diameter at breast height that conflict with proposed site grading, parking lot and driveway construction, and building footprint. Four existing street'trees along the Gateway Street frontage of the property are proposed to be replaced in accordance the tentative site landscaping plan, The four subject street trees (all Chanticleer pear) are less than 5-inches in diameter, but are included in this tree felling permit. The applicant is proposing to plant approximately 84 replacement trees as part of the site plan and public street frontage landscaping requirements, . DECISION: 'APPROVED. This decision constitutes an approved Tree Felling Permit granting approval to remove the 12 trees requested by the applicant as of the date of this decision. The standards of the Springfield Development Code applicable to each criterion of Tree Felling Approval 'are listed herein and are satisfied by the submitted plans unless specifically noted with. findings and conditions necessary for compliance. 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. ' ' DTm::~ U~.t:S AUTHOlUZED ~y HIE DECISION: None, Future development will be III accordance with the provisions of the Springfield Development Code for Site Plan, Review and all applicable local, state and federal regulations. ' REVIEW PROCESS: This application is reviewed under Type II procedures listed in Springfield Development Code Section 3.080 ~nd Tree Felling standards of SDC 38.040. Procedural Finding: Staff reviewed the plans detailing proposed tree felling (2 Sheets - Landscape Plan and Tree Removal Plan by Charles Mangum & Associates Landscape Architecture, Sheets,LLl & L1.2 dated 3/2/2006); tentative site and landscaping plans (28 Sheets - Pac-West Engineering, Sheets CV-l, GN-I, EX-I, ER-l, SP-I, UT-I & UT-2, GR-I & GR-2 and DT-I & DT-2 dated 9/112006; OJ Architecture, Sheets A200-A209 & A300-A303 dated 6/23/2006; Lighting Group Northwest unnumbered sheet dated 5/8/2006; and Charles Mangum & Associates Landscape Architecture Sheets Ll.1 & L1.2, dated 3/2/2006) and supporting information, City staff s review comments have been reduced to findings and conditions only as necessary for compliance with the Tree Felling Criteria of SDC 38.040. Procedural Finding: Applications for Limited Land ,Use Decisions require the notification of property owners/occupants within 300 feet of the subject property allowing for a 14 day comment period on the application (SDC Sections 3.080 and 14.030). The applicant and parties submitting written comments during the notice period have appeal rights and are mailed a copy of this decision for consideration (see Written Comment~ below and Anneals at the end of this decision), ' Written Comments: Limited Land Use Decisions require the notification of property owners/occupants within 300 feet of the proposed development, allowing for a 14-day comment period prior to the staff decision. Notification waS sent to adjacent property owners/occupants on September 6: 2006. No written responses were received. ClUTERIA FOR APPROVAL: Ref. Article 38.040 ofthe Springfield Development Code: The Director in consultation with the Public Works Director and Fire Chief shall approve, approve with conditions or deny the request based on the following standards. In order to receive approval for a Tree Felling Permit, the applicant must satisfy each of the applicable standards. . In!? / " , ' . ' Date Received:~/Ja1b , 'Planner: AL b f' (1) Whether the conditions of the trees with respect to disease, hazardous or unsafe conditions, danger of falling, proximit)' to existing structures or proposed construction, or in'terference "ith utiliry services or pedestrian or vehicular traffic,safery; warrants ~he proposed felling. 'Applicant Submittal: No,., Staff Response: , Finding 1.1: There are ~itotal of 12 trees proposed forremoval. Eight trees are located internal to the site and are in direct conflict' with proposed parki.Ii.g, driving aisle and building footprint areas. Additionally, four existing street trees along the- frontage of the development site are proposed for replac~ment in accordance with the tentative 'site landscaping plan, The four street trees are les,s than 5-inches in diameter, but are included in this tree felling permit as they comprise part of the public street improvements for the site, The four street trees (Chanticleer pear) were part of the street frontage landscaping ,associated with the former hotel ,site, but have not been' well-maintained, Therefore, replacement of the ~treet trees is warranted, ' , Finding 1.2: The trees to be removed from inside, the property include.7 regulated coniferous trees (pine and Douglas-fIr) and one deciduous tree (unknown species) that are greater than 5 inches diaineterat breast height (SDC 38.015), The area subject to 'tree felling will be graded for construction of parking factlities, driving aisles, site landscaping and the proposed hotd buildings, Trenching and excavation for extenskm of utility lines to service the development also will occur at various locations within the site, ," Finding .1.3: The applicant has made application for tentative site p'lan approyal to ~onstruct ,an ~ight- story hotel building comprising a total of 010145,000 square feet with underground parking garage and 'surface parking lot within the 2,83 acre project site (DRC2006-00062), . . ' Finding 1.4: The proposed devdopment plan is not conducive to retaining existing trees due to their , location within areas identifIed for pa;king lot, driveway, and building con~truction, ',..,' - Finding 1.5: The proposed tree removal plan does' not accurately depict the Ibcation of the eight trees within the development site that are proposed 'tor removal., Replacement of the four existing street trees also will be completed with the approved site landscaping plan, A revised tree removal plan must be prepared prior to, tree felling, .' Condition of Approval:, I. The applic'ant shall prepare and submit a revised .tree removal. plan that i~entifies the location and species of the I ~ trees (8 site trees and 4 street trees ) to be removed from th.e development site. Conclusion I: As conditioned herein, the above fIndings support the conclusion thaUhe locations of the tre~s, with respect to proposed construction, warrant their removal." ' " :, . , , ' . (2) Whether the proposed felling is consistent with State standards, Metro Plari policies and Ciry ordinances and provisions affecting the environmental quality of the' area, including but not limited tO"the protection of nearby trees and windbreaks; wildlife; erosion, soil retention and stabiliry;. volume of surface runoff and water qualiry of streams; scenic qualiry; and geological sites~ ApplicantSubmittal: N/A " ):~. ..... r.,': Date. nec~ived: '/01-;1.;'<106 Planner:' AL ;7, , '. " .. Staff Response'; , Finding 2,1; Forestry practices in the State ,of Oregon are governed by the State Forest Practices Act. State forestry regulations are not applicable in this case because; ,1) the limited number of regulated trees ,removed; 2) the trees are betng removed 'for planned development not timber harvest purposes; and 3) sufficient re-planting can be accomplished in accordance with the conditions of this permit and site plan review procedures, ' Finding 2,2; The Springfield Development Code (SDC) is the primary implementing ordinance for , environmental protection.policiescontained in the Eugene:Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plali), SDC Article 38 - Tree Felling Standards and SDC Article 31 - Site Plan Review generally implement environmental protection policies of the Metro Plan during development review on the subject , '~~ ' ' " ' 'Finding 2,3; The trees to be removed from the subject site include eight regulated pine, Douglas"fir and dectduous trees of varying sizes and ages (5 to 18 inches in diameter). Four deciduous street trees (3 tnches in diameter) also are to be removed from the eastern boundary of the development area, Finding 2.4; The trees existing on the subject site are planted ,omamental species within a former hotel parking lot. As such; the trees proposed for removal are not part of a natunil or scenic area, nor do they' comprise part cif a larger contiguous stand of trees: Finding 2,5; The applicant has applied for tentative site plan approval to construct an eight~storyhotel building with parking and landscaping on the subject site, The appliCant ,will be planting approximately 84 landscaptng and street trees in accordance with site plan review procedures and the submitted tentative site plan. Erosion control will be requtred during tree removal and site grading under a required Land and Drainage Alteration Pernlit. ' Finding 2.6; The majority of the area surrounding the ,subject site is developed with single- and multi-' story commercial buildings, The areas inimediatelysurrounding the site are' zoned Community Commercial(CC).. ' Ftnding 2,7; F,emoval ofthe existing trees'scattered across'the subject site will have no appreciable effect' on tbe surrounding physical and visual environment because; , a) Planted ornamental trees on surrounding properties will be" unaffected by the proposed tree felling; . b)' The coniferous and deciduous trees to be removed are not part ora contiguous natural stand of trees; 'and ' c) Planting of deciduous and .coniferous replacement trees at approximately a seven to one ratio is proposed with the site laI,ldscapingplans. Conclusion 2; Springfield Development Code (SDC) Article 38 - Tree Felling Standards, and Article 31 - Site Plan Review, generally implement environmental protection policies of the Metro Plan and have been applied herein and during development review, As conditioned under this permit and the associated applications, the proposal is consistent \vith applicable policies and provisions of State law, the Metro Plan and the Springfield pevelopment Code for protection of envtronmental quality. (3) Whether it is necessary to remove trees in order to construct proposed improvements in accordance with an approved development plan. Applicant Submjtt~l; Y,e~, , : !J;,;te Received: /;/l-/dtJrJ6 f'll~nner: AL " " Staff Response: Finding'3,l: The applicant has made concurrent application for tehtative sitqilan approval to construct an eighHtory hotel building comprising a total of oio]45,000 square feet, wtth intenlal driveways, underground parking garage, ,and surface parking lot on the 2.83 acre project site.(DRC2006-00062). . , -. . . . ." Finding 3,2: The locations of the existing trees are within areas proposed for,p<lfking lot, driveway and building construction, ' < ' , ' Finding 3,3,: ',The tree removal plan shows only seven trees to be removed from the site (four street trees and three site trees). However, the site contains a total of 12 trees, The tree removal plan is to be revised to show the five additiomiltrees (four coniferous and one deciduous) that are proposed for removal (see' Condition 1 above). ' ' Condition of Ap'proval: 2. No tree felling shall occur prior to approval of the Final Site Plan, unless a land and drainage alteration permit (LDAP) is approved and issued for the development site, ' , , Conclusion 3: As. detailed on reviewed site assessment and landscaping plans and as previously conditioned, the existtng trees are located in the, area where driveway, building footprint and parking areas are located, Therefore, it is necessary to remove the subject trees in order to: construct proposed improvements. ' (4) In the event that no Plot Plan has been approved by..the City, felling of trees shall be permitted on a limited basis consistent with the preservation of the site's future development potential as prescribed 'in the' Metro Plan and City development regnlations, and consistent with the following criteria: . (a)" wooded areas associated with natural drainageways'and ;"ater areas shall be r~tained to preserve riparian habitat and to minimize erosion; (b) wooded areas that will likely provide attractive on-site views, to occupants of fnture developments shall be retained; . (c), wooded areas,along ridge Jines and hilltops shall be retained for their scenic and wildlife ' value; . ,. .. (d) wooded areas' along property lines shall be retained to serve~s huffers from adjacent properties; . (e) trees shall be retained in sufficiently large areas and dense stands so as to ensure against windthrow; and ' (f) . large-scale clear-cuts of developable areas shall be avoided to retain the wooded character of future building sites, and so preserve, housing and design options for future ,City residents. ' Applicant Submittal: N/A II: '.... , . ,,', Date Heceived: Planner: AL . IQ/~/~t' I " '" " Staff Response: Finding4,\: The above standard applies where no plot (site) plans have been approved. As noted above, the apphcant has made concurrent application for tentative sitcplan approval (DRC2006-00062)" Finding 4,2: The subject property is a former hotel parktng lot and does not contain a natural, contiguous wooded area, ' Conclusion 4: The above findings of fact demonstrate that Criterion of Approval 4 does not apply because the applicant has applied for a tentative site plan, and nO naturally-occurring or contiguous wooded areas exist on the site, (5) Whether the' applicant's proposed replanting of new trees or vegetation is an adequate , substitute for the trees to be felled. Applicant Submittal: Yes, see Landscape Plan Sheet #L!,l Staff Response: Finding 5,1: The 'trees proposed for removal are twelve planted ornamental species (seven pine and Douglas-fir; one unknown deciduous, and four Chanticleer pear) of varying sizes and ages, Eight of the trees are located internalt~ the site and four are street trees along the Gateway Street frontage, Finding 5,2: ' The developer has included a landscape plan with the site review packet which shows approximately 84 trees of various species and sizes to be planted in association with the development of . this site. At least 71 trees are proposed for planting within the site landscaping; and 13 along the Game ' Farm Road East and Gateway Street frontages in accordance with the tentative site,plan submitted under Site Plan Review (DRC2006-00062), ' Finding 5,3:. The replacementtrees will be minimum 2" caliper trees in accordance withSDC Articles 31 and 32, and will be selected from the approved list of trees or as' proposed by a licensed landscape' architect and approved by the City of Springfield during final site plan approval procedures, , ' Conclusion 5: The trees proposed on the associated site plan review landscape plans are an adequate substitute for the trees to be felled because the number of trees provided (at least 84), type (as selected by a landscape architect), and location (in maintained ,planted areas and along the street frontages) will exceed the canopy cover and IOJ;gevity expected of the eight regulated trees and four street trees proposed for removal. 6) Whether slash left on the property poses significant fire hazard or liahility to the City. Applicant Submittal: No. Staff Response: , Finding 6,1: Removal of slash reduces fire hazards arid prevents the, mixing of organic materials with engineered fill and other materials that will be placed on the site during construction. ' 'Conclusion 6: The applicant has proposed to remove the trees and slash from the property by backhoe and truck during tree felling and prior to construction or site grading. The applicant has indicated the trees will be taken to a wood recycling facility. As proposed, this standard has been met. ' , '. D!'ItEliReceivect. PI<;ll1ner: AL foh- / Joob I I .~ (7) Whether the felling is consistent "ith the guidelines set forth in the Field Guide to Oregon Forestry Practices Rule published by the State of Oregon, Departm~nt of Forestry, as, they apply'tothe northwest Oregon region., ' Applicant Submittal: N/A Staff Response: > , Finding 7,1: Forestry'practices in the State of Oregon are govemed by the State Forest Practices Act. The Field Guide to Oregon Forestry Practices Rule provid~s safety and other guidelines for compliance with the State Forest Practices Act during logging operations, Th", guidelilies are standards in the industry and are generally followed during all operations performed by liceI)sed and bonded logging contractors, , ' finding 7,2: The proposed tree felling, removal and re-plariting proposed as part of this permit do not rise to State forestry regulations because: I) the limited number of regulated trees to be removed; 2) the trees are being removed for planned development not timber harvest purposes; and 3)1'sufficient re-planting can be accomplished in accordance with the conditions of this pemlit and site plan review procedures. Conclusion 7: The subject site is 'within Springfield's city limits. The proposed tree felling, removal and re-planting are regulated by the applicable provisions of the Springfield Development Code, State forestry guidelines for safe operations will be followed as applicable to the limited felltng of trees approved under this permit'. ' '(8) , Whether transportation of equipment to and equipment arid trees' frdm the site can be accomplished "ithout a major disturbance to nearby residents. Applicant Submittal: Yes, i Staff Response: , ' Finding 8. 1: Tree felling traffic will use the adjacent public streets (Game Farm Road East and Gate.way Street) to access the site during regular business hours, " ' Finding: 8,2: The surrounding properties are zoned Community Commercial. ,The subject site directly abuts an arterial road (GatewayStreet) that experiences large volumes of automobile and truck traffic, arid the northbound 1-5 freewayonramp, . .' '. , Conclusion 8: The traffic generated by the'tree felling activity will be no more intrusive than ~ther hea\~ , vehicle traffic normally associated with existing commercial development;. therefore, the, proposed work will not constitute a major disturbance, " CONCLUSION AND DECISION: Conditions of Approval: I, The aPIllicant ,shall prepare and submit a revised tree removal plan that identifies the location and .species of the 12 trees (8 site trees and 4 street trees) to be removed from the development stte. 0 2. No tree felling shall occur prior to approval of the Final Site Plan, unless a land and drainage alteration permit (LDAP) is approved and issued for the ,jevelopment site. . ,. . . i. .~. Date> Received:_/;I~"6 Planner: AL ; -, As condttioned herein, the above findings and conclusions demonstrate that the proposal meets the standards 'of SDC 38,040 for Tree Felling Permit ApprovaL The applicant must re-submit the, tree removal plan With the revisions required in accordance with Condition I above, This written decision, Site Assessment of Existing Conditions Plan, tentative Landscape Plan (re-planting plan) and revised tree' removal plan constitute the Tree Felling Permit. ' The following general construction practices apply when tree felling is initiated on site: '. Notification shall be provided to the City at least 5 days prior to commencement of the tree felling operation. Please contact Andy ~imbtrd at 726-3784 or alimbirdliilci,snrinefield,or.us, . All felling activities, including ingress 'and egress for the logging operations, shall include erosion control measures in conformance with the City's Engineering Design Standards and Practices . Manual. . All felling and removal activities shall be performed in a manner which avoids site soil coinpaction in areas of existing or future landscape planting. . Any soil and debris tracked into the street by vehicles and equipment leaving the site shall be cleaned up with shovels in a tinlely manner and not washed into the storni drain system [SDC ' 38,040(2)].' ' , ' '." ADDITIONAL INFORl\1A TION The application and documents relied upon by the applicant, and'the applicable criteria of approval are available for a free inspection at the Development Services Department, 225 Fifth, Street, Springfield, Oregon, Copies of the documents 'will be made for $0.75 for ,the first page and $0,50 for each additional page. APPEAL If you wish to appeillthe decision of approval, you must do so by 5:00 PM on October 17, 2006, Your appeal must be submitted in accordance with the Springfield Development Code, Article 15, APPEALS. ' Note: Appeals must be submitted on a City form and a fee of $250.00 must be paid to the City at the time of submittaL The fee will be retumed to the appellant if the Planning Commission approves the appeal application, If you have any questions regarding these matters, please call (541) 726-3784 or send an email to: alimbirdliil,ci.snrin Qfiel. rl.or,us, PREPARED BY , , Date Received: 'o/,,/:kJr;t{.' Planner: AL ' ~, ' ':-: ! .~- ......". , SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 ,. ... .' .,,_ I . ~ ~ CITY OF SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT 225 5th ST SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 1 i, l..L. '~ lid",. ~ I ! I I , , J' , 1 1, . ~ ' ~ r ""..,_.'''.."".,'....._..~,.,.. "'~"" ..,.,,~,,'"" "-,. ",," ,,", "" '" _..'",'.'" j .' CITY OF SPRINGFIELD '.1", DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT 225 5th ST ' , SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 ...J..... .... ..-...- Bill Clark Gateway Hospitality LLC 2037 NW Lance Way' Corvallis, 'OR 97330, Jl..,.. ,I..'A.., .., .... _ L.", ., "". ._~ ..Ai,' Troy Plum PE Pac-West Engineering 1530 Ninth Avenue SE Albany, OR 97322 Charles Mangum & Asso. 5144 36th AVenue SE Salem, OR 97301 Landscape Arch. , CITY OF SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT 225 5th ST SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 Game Farm Neighbors Bonnie Ullmann 3350 Oriole Street Springfield, OR 97477 i, . "' j:,. , , . "".! , Date Received: /~, V.,?oo~_ Planner: AL