Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNotice PLANNER 2/14/2007 ~ " '~~ ': .. ." . ~~ " " . Date Received: ,.dYk:/- 1 20cf ~i! . I Original submittaL . . . ~ob-. I. Karen laFleur, being first duly sworn, do hereby depose and say as follmJvs: :', ~ '; 11 . " " II . . . . - j . 1. I state that I am a Program T echnician fo~ the Planning Division ohhe " Development Services Department, City of Springfield, Oregon. II . ~ AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE STATE OF OREGON) J ss. ) County of Lime '2. I state that in my capacity as, Program Technician, I prepared and caused to be , mailed copies of DRC-2.00b-oOO'l3 t-f~ Q:\ ~ ~ ~ ~"-';;~i~- (See attachment "A") on 2.f \ <..(. , 2007 addressed to' (see. "-"l . ,II . Attachment B"), by causing said letters to be placed in a u.~. maiLbox with postage fully prepaid thereon. ;, . .r , 4<~&<<~ KA~E~ LaFLEUR ____ " STATE OFOREGON; County of lane. " . . . . J.d~' ., Ilf ." ,2~07: Personally appe~re~ th~ 'above named Karen LaFleur; . Program T~niciim, who~acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be their voluntary ace Before me: " f-'--~-'='-~'''''''...:-a.:-..:.......~-=-<;~:~;: =:'~ ... .' . OFFICIAL SEAL ,~ . . (', BRENDA JONES. '. 'j. ( ....., NOTARY PUBLIC . OREGON . j , .' COMMISSION NO 379218 j .~:: MYCO~~~12NEXPIRESMAY27,20081 .,- ~ -:..."... -~~":".,;.>o ~.- :~_____-.:$. ~ , ' hdldPU~ .My COrT:mission{JxPir~s: "1 ~n:Ntfl () 'r'." r. . .....' ,1 . .' . il , . .~~ ' " , .-'" " ..::..~ . .., ; 1. .'"t'. ,,_, ,r. ~'. j.. , . --;. ,~ ~-'~.J t .., .' ,.' ,,-,.~,,- - ',;L,: '~... . . , "". .,.4 . , 1 1_ ,_, .'" ',l. , , -' ----- I m~l .-+0 : I '~Tl YV1 jJ 4. Sa.. I (lY:tcZ. b03S- F<r~~ll ~ .5 f c0~ '7' 7-4 r'6 '1'. c' . . f' " " .-' .... ~j , - ,. ';.\ I , , ' . ..'1' ',' .' Notice of Decision - Site Plan Review Project Name: Larkin-Naselroad Townhouses Case Number: DRC 2006-00093' Project Address: 327 S. 420' Street " " Assessors Map and Tax Lot Number(s): 17-02-32-33 Tax Lot 1701 .." .' - . "'. -.', Zoning: Medium Density Residential(MDR)' Metro Plan Designation: MDR _' ,~ or,' -.., , ,. 4_ _ . _. Applicable' Refinement Plan: " .' R~finement Plan Designation: MDR Density: 18 du 0'; 0.9 acres = 20,~u/acre .. Application SubmittedDatEi:" December 22, 2006 .. .' . '..': ,,' t ..' _. .!" Decision Issued Date: February 14,2007 . , .. Recommendation: Approval with Conditions' >-.,'" Appeal Deadline Date: March I: 2007 - ~' ~ '-.;. , - i~ .;1 ..', "-,; SP~~NQFIELD ,.. 11,.,_', :~.. . , ~r Ii .r 'I' "" '. ,', . AS,sociated AppliCations: PRE 2006-00089. ZON 2006-00006 , I'lli"'" ......~""'~.v....CI1;y OF:SRRINGF:lELO'OEVEtOPMENT REVIEW TEAM''''-'''~'"'''''' ...u. 'w. ,,,,' :;/,;t8~}:?(;.?~Z~,y,Mti:Willt_~;;.;~';,,_~L_.L/A,:__~~,,_>L,~~,,~_"~_...' .'." -'.-, ",,,,,,-,,',--- :"."",,-, ".,,-'-,':'''''00 ,______>,_;t\t~_".~"._,_,,__?~~k;;~,,~;~_8r:.'*fi~~'~~~;~'ij~r:~8t. I POSITION I Planner II I Tr~nsportation Planning Engineer. I Public Works Engineering I Public Works Engineering I Deputy Fire Marshall '1- C~,mmunity'Services'Manager ....;, .' 'APPllCAN;1}OWNE.R'i!~r;;~+,;;\!,~ .';:::f!i7~' Greg Larkin __, ' " 6035 Fernhlll Loop ,';', Springfield. OR 97478 ',' ': f. L' ; " '.. ',.ro,. . -. Siu{Plan' Review' .;' , REVIEW OF Land Use Planning Transportation Utilities & EasementS. Sanitary & Storm Sewer I Fire.and Life Safety I. Building NAME } Linda Pauly I Gary,McKenney Eric Walter Mat[ Stouder i I Gilbert Gordon 1 r;>av~ Puen~ ':~ ' ,il,' PHONE 726-4608 ': 726-4585 736-.1 034 736-1035 1 I 726-2293 I 1726-3668 '1 ," . ,', .. A~i'LlCANr:S'REPRESENTA TlVE~~~~::-,j':i:i":'''7.):;'t;i..~T'''of~'''''; ..:ff'...., ".,_~,', ,., '....,...._......, ._...,~.'^_",.'_.. .",_...,-... .. ,..........,..,',..,w ,_......"~......._-",_'...._....~Jt;,d_~"-_.M,.;l","'....._...._..,.,,, ", ..,. ..,,_,,~"-"._,_'L'~. '5'h"" Artemia Paz 86950 Cedar Flat Springfield, OR 97478" ", ">. .,:. .. '... '," ,. .. DRC2006.00093 ".' '.- . " . .~: ~ ....' , ,~, 'f-. ;,', I" I,.. - 1~" '.'1" i1 ii t~.. . , i: , ' NATURE OF APPLICATION: The applicant submitted a Type II Site Plan Review Application to the City of Springfield requesting tentative approval to construct a IS-unit townhouse project. Total building square footage is 9,072 square feet. . Total impervious area is 6,944 square feet. DECISION: Tentative Site Plan' Approval, with conditions, ~s of the date of this letter, This is ~ limited land use decision made according to city code and state statute, Unless appealed. the decision is finaL Please read this document carefully, The standards of the Springfield Development Code (SDC) applicable to each criterion of Site Plan Approval are listed herein and are satisfied by the submitted plans and notes unless specifically noted with findings and conditions necessary for compliance, Final Site Plans must be iri conform~nce wirh the tentative site alan as conditioned. Buildina olans and site develoDment must conform to the Final Site Plan, OTHER USES THAT MAY BE AUTHORIZED BY THE DECISION: None, The proposed usejs permitted as a special use in accordance with Springfield Development Code (SDC) 16,020. Final Site Plan and Building Pla~s ;"ust conform to this decision, 'REVIEW PROCESS: This applica;ion isrevie"';ed ~nder Type II proc~dures listed in SDC 3.0BO and the site plan criteria of approval 31.060, This application was accepted as complete upon submittal.' . . '.' , December 22, 2006. This decision is issued on the 54th day of the 120 days mandated by the state. ^. '.' SITE I~FORMA TION: The development, site is located on the east side of South 420d Street just south of the intersection with Bluebelle Way. The subject propertY abuts Medium Density Residential (MDR) zoning to the north and south. MDR zoned land .is located west of South 420d Street. The. . subject. property abuts Low Density Residential (LDR) zoning to the east. The subject property is currently developed with'two homes, Site.topography is relatively flat and is vegetated with grass and . ~ i'" three trees. .,. .' . " 'I . )"' :.... Site Plan Review DRC2006-00093 2 ~. . ..} , 1': " .,:' ,:- , ~ . " V'(RITTEN COMMENTS: Applications for Limited Land Use Decisions require the notification of, propeny owners/occupants within "I 00, feet of the subject property allowing for a 14aay'co,rriment period on theapplication (SDC 3.080 and 14.030). The applicant and partiessubmittingwrit'ten " comments during the notiCe period have appeal rights and are mailed a copy of this'C!ecision for,. ", 'consideration, In accordance with SDC 3,080 ~nd 14.030; notice was sent to owner'/occup~nts"within' 300 feet of the subject site on December 27, 2006., ' No written comments were received.'! ..,' '" .1" '.' ,- . . .';" . 0> j' .:' ',~; , - .-" o ,'->,..... :" , .. CRITERIA OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL: The Director shall approve, 'or approve with , ,con'ditions, a Type II Site, Plan Review Applicat(on upon determining that ,criteria (I) through (5) of tilis Section have been satisfied. If co['ditions cannot be attached t~ satisfy thee criteria; the, Directo,r shaU deny the applicati,on:' " ' ' " ,:".' ',,", r ('_'t;;O... ~'...,; I' (I;) '"Tne.z~ning,;s consistent with the Metro Plan diagram, ~nd/or the applicable Refil}ement Plan diagram, Plan District map,: and Conceptual Development Plan. ' ." I' . . ~~ il' . " ",-, . , ],. I has been met because the MDR zoning is consistent, With the Metro Plan diagram, . 1 . . ~ .' ,~ ! ..' ..' ~., " .' \ ",' "";1 Firidin,g:, Criterion "", ...','.-. ,,' .,.: :l-. .: . ~ .;';.. :1, - ~ ". . : Sit~ Plan Review . . I,' ' 'i. . , " .. " ,; ~; DRCl006-00093 .. -".' , <, ~ . . .. . 3 . , ':1 '.- T .t.. .J .~ ',. . .. ",. ..... ' (2) Capacity requirements af public impravements, including but not limited to water and electricity; sanitary sewer and storm water management facilities; and streets an,d 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 or a utility provider shall determine capacity issues. , I (3) The proposed development shall comply with all applicable public and private design, and construction standards contained in this Code and other applicable regulations. Criterion 2 and 3 require the proposed development to be 'provided with public and private improvemen'ts which are be designed'in conformance with all applicable Development Code , requirements and the Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual. Finding: The Public Works Director's representatives have reviewed the proposed site plan. City staffs review comments have been incorporated in findings and conditions contained herein, The site plan application as submitted comp'lies with the code standards listed under'each sub-element unless otherwise noted with specific findings and conclusions. The eleme~ts, sub-elements and code standards ofCritefion 2 and Criterion 3 include but are not limited to: Public and Privaie Improvements in'accordance with SDC 31 and 32 . Public Street and Related Improvements - SDC 32:020-32.090' ' , . ' Sanitary Sewer, Improvements - SDC 32..1 00 ,0 S,torm Water Management and QualityC SDC 32,11 Oand SDC 31.240 . Utilities - SDC 32,120 (I) and (2): . Fire and Life Safety Improyements - SDC 32,120(3) . Public and Private Easements - SDC 32,120( I) and (5) Conformance with standards of SDC Article 3 I" Site Plan Review, and Articl" 16, Residential Zoning Districts" ',',,:' ' ", . Permitted Uses -,SDC 16:020 ., Lot Size a~d Setback Standards - SDC ,16,030 o Height Standards -, SDC 16,060 . Off-Street Parking' Standards - SDCI6,070 (2) a~d SDC 31,170-230 ' '0 ' Fence Standards- SDC 16.090 ' .. , " ,',' " , , , . ',Special Use Standards for Multi~unit Development - SDC 16.1'10 o Landscaping Standards - SDC 31.130"150,' ' ,. Screening and Lighting - SDC 31.160 .. . "Parking Standards - SD~ 3.1-170 - 230 ' . . - '. " " ~. '.'. , .. - .' '. ,,' . ~, , , App'icab.'e Overlay Dist~icts and Refinement Plan Require~ents ,', Public and Private Improvements in Accordance with SOC.31 and 32 PUBLIC STREETStiRANSPORTATlON FACILITIES AND IMPAGS- SDC 32.020 , ' '.' " Finding: '.The proposed development will take access' from South 420' Street.: South 420' Street is ' "designated a minor arterial street in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The 'current roadway is' , paved approximately 32 feet wide 'and provides two ,12-foot wide travel lanes with paved shoulders. A," city improvement, project scheduled ,for construction in 2007 will improv~ the street to f~1I urban '. ,.,- . Sh:e Plan Review ~ , DRC2006'00093 ,4 't.; . " standards with two lighting, Finding: Based on HE Land U,se Code 220 (Apartment), development of the site with 18 dwelling units as proposed would generate 123 additional ~ehicle trips per day and II PM peak-hour vehicle trips onto South 420d Street. In addition, 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 wal~ing and 1,8 percent are by transit bus, These trips may have thei~ origins or destinations at a variety,of land uses, including this site, Pedestrian and bicycle trips create the need for . sidewalks. pedestria.n crossing signals, crossWalks, bicycle parking and bicycle lanes, , ' 12-fo~t wide travel lanes, six-foot bicycle lanes, curb; gutter, sidewalk~ and street - - .. .. \ .. Fil)ding: The South 42od,Street Capital Improvement Project (CIP) is scheduled f~r construction in ,2007. Please contact Jeff Paschall at the Public Works Engineering 726-1674 hr information regarding coordination.of public'impro~e~ents and site. development. ' ., " , ' Firiding:, Th~ City' Transpo~tion Planning Engineer has determined that theexisting and programmed , '''' ,', ' " " transportation facilities would be adequate to accommodate'the anticipated new vehicular trips ass?eiated ,with the proposed. development, ': " ' .." . 1'. ~,' .., . " . Finding: The propos'ea publi'.: sidewalk along the South 420d Street frontage does not match the City's South42od Street Capital Improvement Project (P20457). A curbside sidewalk is shown in the Site Plan. ' Th~ CitY's proje,c,t includes setback sidewalks, planter,~trip and st~ee~ trees, " I, - , , ' _,. - _ ~.. . . ' . Ccmdition I: 'Inthe Final Site Plan/the sidewalk location'shall tie 'consistent with the City's South 420d , Street Capital Improvement Project (P20457). All applicable plan sheets shall be revised to reflect the' co~rect location:of public improvements. Please contact Jeff Paschall at the Public W.orks Engineering 726-1674 for information regarding coordination of public improvements and site development., , . .., '~,. '. . "" ; ~ Finding: Street trees will be provided with the South 42~dStreet improvement project. Trees will be , ., ' , planted in a planter strip between curb and s;de~lk, The applicant's plans do not show the planter , strip and street trees. Please note that this landscaping must be maintained '(including irrigation) by the ,abutting property owner. The four' proposed maple,trees shown on sheet IA will be too Close to the , Gity stre.et trees. ':. " ." ", ':' "",', : ',,: .',' '. ,". ..' ., 1i Cc;mdition 2: The, planter strip anp street trees shall be shown in the Final Site Plan as. existing and the applicant's landscaping plan shall be amended to respond to the locations, the (new) existing street trees, Please contact Jeff Paschall atthe Public Works Engineering 726-1674 fO,r information regarding coprdination of public improvements and site development. "',:" .. , ' .. . j" ., i.' ~. ACCESS AND CURB CUTS- SDC 32:080 See Criterion 4, " ", '. ..' '". " ", .~- . " ,',SANiTARYSEWERc:.SDC32:100, . ',' "-"" ,,' ",'.' . . " .. , , Section 32. I 00 of the SDC requires' that sanitary sewers be installed to ServE; each new development , . a~? to connect developmen~ to existing mains. Installation of sanitary sewersmust'provid~ sufficient ':.;.:....~...w.-'. ~~access,formaintenanceactivities. :~.." ": '.','" - . ", ',~ .....;" ".,'-', i!',., . . _. /. .! ,... l _, . " . , ~ < , ' , .,' , .'.' ' .' Finding: The applicant has proposed to connect to the existing 8-inch waste"';'ater'line located Within , the 420d St. right-of-way near the west end of the property. ' The applicant must obtain a City , " encroachment permit to connect to sanitary sewer. ' " ' .. , , " . '. .. c.- .;. Sit'e Plan Review . " , , ' . - ',' -~ <' -'~-' -, ': ':~' DRC2006'00093 5, .' " ~~; i! Pursuant to Chapter 3.03.4,A of the City's Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual and Section 4.4 of Portland's Stormwater Management Manual, solid waste storage areas must be covered and hydraulicaliy isolated from potential stormwater runoff, and directed to the sanitary sewer system. Finding: The applicant's plans do not provide sufficient detail to demonstrate comportment with . Section 4.4 of Portland's Stormwater Management Manual.. Condition 3: In the Final Site Plan, the applicant shall provide sufficient detail to demonstrate that all existing and proposed recycle/refuse areas must be covered and hydraulically isolated.from potential stormwater runoff, and directed to the sanitary sewer system,' , , SroRMWATER MANAGEMENT - SDC 32.//0 . ' Finding: "Under Federal regulation of the Clean Water Act (CW A), 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 Storm Sewer .System (MS4) permit, Aprovision of this permit -requires the City demonstrate ,efforts to reduce the pollution in urban stormwater to the Maximu'11 Extent Practicable (MEP). ' Finding: Federal and Oreg~n Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) ~ule~: require the City's MS4 plan address six "Minimum Control Measures,", Minimum Control MeasureS, "Post-Construction Stormwater Management for New Developm5'nt and Redevelopment," applies to the proposed' development, Minimum Control Measure 5 requires the City of Springfield to qevelop, implement and enforce a program to ensure the reduction of pollutants in stormwater runoff to the MEP, ,The City must also develop and implement strategies that include a combination of structural or non~structural Best Management Practices (BMPs) appropriated for the community, . . .' .. . Finding: Minimum Control Measure 5, requires the City of Springfield to use an ordinance or other, regulatory mechanism to address post construction runoff from new and re-development projects to the extent allowable under State law. Regulatory mechanisms uS,ed by the City include the Springfield Development Code (SDC), the City's Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual (EDSPM) and the future Stormwater Facilities Master Plan (SFMP). ' . ," , . -. '..."., ". , As required in Section 3-1.050 (5) of the SOC, "a development'shall be requiredto employ drainage management practices approved by the Public Works Director and consistent with Metro Plan policies ,and the Engineering Design Standards,cmd Prqcedure~ M?nual."" ' ' Section 3:02 of the ,City's EOSPM states the Pubic Wo~ks Oe"partment will accept, asini:erim design standards for stormwater quality, water quality facilities designed pursuant to the policies and procedures of either the City of Portlan'd (BES) or Unified Sewerage Agency (USA), also know as the " Clean Water Services (CWS). ' , , ' ,', , ~ i,' Section 3,03.3,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 ,to achieve at least a 70 perc~nt reduction in the total suspended solids in the runoff generated by that . " development. Additionally, Section 3.03.4.E of the manual requires, a mi'nimum of SOpercent of the n"on~ , building rooftop impervious area on a site shall be treated for stormwater quality ip>pr9vement.using , vegetative,methods. ' ',..,,', ': " ,', '" '.. "', ' " . ' _' Site Plan Review DRC2006.00093 6 -h " , Fil)ding: The applicant's plans propose to direct stormwater runoff from the site in,fo a series of area dr~ins, pipes, and ,vegetative 'l'{ater quality swales, Stormwater, is proposed to be dischargedi'into the existing IS" pipe located within the,'42od St, right-of-way near the west end offlrope'jtr, Finding: Routine maintenance of stormwater management facil,ities is required to ensure functionality' and continued compliance,with Citystandards, ' Condition 4~ Prior to Final Site Plan approval, the applicant shall provide an operations and mainte~ance document to the City which inCludes provisions to ensure the long-term maintenance: ' operation and functionality of the proposed stormwater management swales. The document shall designate maintenance respohsibilityfor. operating and maintaining the system, The document shall be distributed to all present and future' property owners and tenants of the site, The contact person for' , this condition is Eric Walter at Public Works" Eng,ineering 736-1034. ' Ii '. . ' . _,'. _. it C9ndition 5: To ensure a fully functioning water quality system and meet objectives of Springfield's 1'154' permit, the Springfield Development Code and the EDSPM, the' proposed p~ivate vegetative water , quality swales shall be fully vegetated prior to issuance of occupancy, Alternatively, if this c6ndition , , ,cannot"be met, the applical)t shall provide and maintain additional interim erosion control/~ter quality measures acceptable to the Public'Works Department that will suffice until such time as the- swale vegetation becomes fully established, " '.' .', ',' . ., " , UTILITIES AND EASEMENTS' WATER"" ,,' , " , " . , ,. - . ,. . Finding: The development will receive water service available from Springfield Utility Boar',d (SUB), To provide service to the subject property, a waterline must be constructed across South 420d Street. This will need to bedol)e prior to the City's reconstruction project for South 42"" Street. ,All water systems must be'designed in accordance with SUB standards, Please contact Rebecca Templin P,E, a't SUB , Water Department, (726-2396) for detailed information on materials and construction standards, costs ' and ~ construction schedule, and'backflow requirements; please refer to her letter dated December 29, 2006,' " ' , ' "'. , Finding: The existing fire hydi-ant, distance of 570 feet as shown on Plan Sheet C I of 4-Site Grading/Paving Pla~';exceeds the 400 foot maximum distance from the farthest point on Building D per'" ' 2004 Springfield Fire Code 508.5.1,;' '. " " f ., ..,,' >,.' . ' , . Findin'g:' Buildings'C and D are approximately 5,040 squ,ar.e feet. Assuming TypeV-B const;ruction' : , (light weight wood), the requi~ed fire flow per SFC Table .B I 05.1 is 2000 gallons per minute: Per Table." " C r 05,1 this will require two fire hydrants to be installed." ". - ,'.. .. ",.; ,:,,:.;' . -. ", '. '. . 1." . . ...., "'._.1' . , 1 ., " . .', Fi'nding': The developer has,tWociptions. , .' ", : ....: .1" .' ., . .. '.. _' ,:' . t..: . ,Option A: 'Provide residential sprinkler systems for Buildings' B, C and D meeting the requirements of the fire code and the National Fire Protectio~ Association standard NFPA I 3R, . Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems in Residential Occupancies up,to and inCluding .. ,Four Stories in Height. This would allow the use of the single existing fire hydrant by reducing "" ,water flow requirements to 1500 gallons per minute and extending the fire hydrant distance. . " 'from the farthest point on a building to 600 feet per 2004 SFC 508.5.1, exception 2:1 This option . .. eliminates the need to put in two fire hydrants. ' , ,;", . " '",. " " .' Option B: Install two hydrants on site with a maximum dista:nce appr';ximately 450 feet apart ' .. .... ,providing a minimum 1500 gallons per minute, If this option is chosen, 3-feet of Clearance shall ' ,'be maintail)ed around the circumference of each hydrant per SFC 508.5.5, ., ~}' '~, . ;. ;-:. ~.: ~ ,,~: i ;.. . " r Siut Pial) Re'vje~ . ' -.r.-,' " DRC2006-00093 ' '7 "p Condition 6: In the Final Si'te Plan, the applicant shall ,indicate a proposed method for providing water supply pursuant to 2004 SFC 508.5.1, exception 2 or SFC 508,5,5. Please contact Gilbert R, Gordon Deputy Fire Marshal at Springfield Fire and Life Safety 726-2293 for additional information, ' ELECTRICITY , ' " Finding: SDC 32.120(2) states, "Wherever, possible, utility lines shall be placed underground," , ' - Finding: Underground electric service will be provided by SUB, There is electrical power available at pole #77004 located on the east side of South 420' Street, ,Tony Talbot at SUB Electric (726-2395) is thecontact person, SUB has requested public utility easements (PUEs) to serve this development. These,easements are the minimum 'necessary to extend elect'ric service to the propei-ty. The easem'ents proposed by the applicant are satisfactory. ' SDC 32,120 (5) states: An applicant proposing a development shall make arrangements with the City and each utility 'provider for the dedicatiol) of utility easements necessary to fully, service, the development.' ' , , . . , Condition 7: Prior to Final Site Plan approval. the applicant shall record the proposed. utility, easements to provide electriC service to the proposed development: ' Public PUE location ' Utility" Easement width 7 feet ' Along the south property line as shown. 7 feet Along the west property line as shown, Copies of the ( raft eas,ements shall be submitted to the City for review by the, City Surveyor p,:ior to recording. ", " < . . Conclusion: -As conditioned in this decision, the proposed public and private improvements are in , accordance with SDC Article 32. " , " Conformance with standards of SDC Article 16, Residential Zoning Districts, and, SDC Article 31, Site Plan Review . Permitted Uses- SDC 16.020 " . Lot Size and Setback Standards - SDC. 16:030 . Height Standards - SDC 16.060' , . . ' Off-Street Parking Standards - SDC ,16,070 (2) and SDC 31.170-230 .. Fence Standards -: SDC 16.090" ;', .' ,: , ., Special Use Standards for Residential care facilities in LDR _ SDC16.100 (2)' . 'Landscaping Standards - SDC 31.130-150., ' ' . " Screening and Lighting':'" SDC 31,160 'i. .'. .' ,- . ;. "" ~'l ~, , ", ";" ~ '. do.' LOT COVERAGE . " , ' '., . ' SDC 16.040 (I) states: uThe maximum coverage of the lot by all, covered structures in all residential districts shall not exceed 45' percent." " . . Finding: The proposed buildings will cover 23.8 percent of the site,area. The still;dard of SDC 16.040 ' , . ,(I) has been met. " " , ' :'1, Site Plan Review , DRC2006-00093' . , , ' 8, . ' " , ," HEIGHT STANDARDS ",' SDC 16,060 (I) establishes a 35 feet maximum height.for'buildings in the MDRDistrict. . ' W Finding: The proposed buildings are 22'~10" tall. The proposed h,eight is in accordance wi~h' SDC 16;960 (I) . ,'" ' FENCE STANDARDS /6,090 and VISION CLEARANCE STANDARDS 32,070 SDC 31.090 (I )(a) requires sight obscuring fences within the front yard setback to be a maximum height of 3 feet and non-sight obscuringJences to be a maximum height of 4 feet. Within vision clearance are.as for driveways:the fence height must not obscure'vision above 1,5 feet. ~' . . . ,Finding: A (i-foot "';ooden fence.is proposed along the north, east'and south property lines, The 'fence' does not extend'into the 'front setback, thus vision clearance is not obstructed, ' :. , . " . " LANDScApING AND PLANTING STANDARDS " " sD'c 3,1,140, (I ) requires all requirecl setback areas and any addition~1 planting areas ';'S specified in the' zoning district to be landscaped to the standards of SDC 31.140 (2). " " , ,S[)C 31. 140 (2) states that the minimum planting acceptable per 1000 square feet of r~qui~ed planting , an~a shall be shall be at least (2) trees not less than 2 inches in caliper and 6 feet in height (e,g, " ,'copiferous evergreens) at time of planting and (10) shrubs, five gallons or larger, These stan,dards are . , 'applied to all required setback areas and any additional planting areas as specified in the appropriate zoning 'district"and' parking lot planting areas required in this Article, The Code requires at least 65 percent of each required planting area shall.be covered with living plant materials within five years of the date of installation. , ' ' " , i '" Fi~ding: The applica~tislandscape plan does not provide living plant materials in the required planted setbacks in, accordance with SDC 3 I. 140 (2), Instead, large areas of bark mulch are proposed, " " . .' , . . - . , " , " , SD.CI6.11 0 (4)(f) I. stat~s: A'mini,mum of 15 percent ~f the site shail be landscaped with ~ mix ofvegetative ground cover; shrubbery and trees. Bark mulch, rocks and si,!,ilar or-plant : material may be used to compliment the groundcover requirement, but ~~all not be " cdnsidered a sole substitute for the, vegetative cover requirement. :.. - - ". -; ,~ '._ ',' ;' .' ,;'. ",.,.. "'" -' I'" ',~', . '.. t ., , SDC 16,/ /0 (4)'(f) 5. states: Ai, landscaping shall'be irrigated with aper.:nane!)t irrigation . , system unless a licensed 'Iandscape architect submits written verification that the proposed 'plant materials do not require irrigation. ' " ' ',' ' " ll' .. ,_, ".' _~ '. . '1 '. . . ,'. , . ' '",'. ,. ' .-' Fih.ding: .The applicant's landscape plan does not provide landscaping, living plant material an9 irrigation ,:\.,., ".,. . . required by the Multi-unitDesignStandards SDC 16,110 (4)(f) ,I.,and SDC 16,1.1 0 (4)(f) 5",,' ~. -' . . .,'. .' . . . . : -" . .' , . -', " . '. ~ -, . . . "'. _' ~'_ ~~" . .",',' r . . . . . _~ Fi!)ding: The propos~d P~nderosa: pines in the narrow planters acljacent to the com~on op'Cn space . 'courtyard are'too large and wide a species for the planter size and space and will block the adjacent ' ....~~,.,sidewalks:..,:,-; l:.,;:,:,~!"\,.'", . " '~. , '.r: :, . '_ ", .,.. .,'" I Cc;>ndition8: In the Final Site Plan,;the applicant shall submit a professionally designed landscape plan , which provides for landscaping in accordance with SDC 31.140 (2), SDC 16,110 (4)(f) I. and SDC 16.110 . (4)(f) 5.' In addition ~o the pro~osed landscaping, the plan shall provide:',' ' , " : ' ',;. ", ,'. - ".' , " , " ,. .' " ~ \' '1< .,',', - ." ....., . . ".-<Sji~ Pla'n Review' . ;'.'. DRC2006~00093' 1 . '.~,. -', .'... , '.: : 9, ',', , ,'-. ",,' '." _ ~t.' , . " . "'.: '. a 5-foot planted side yard setback on the north side of the property planted in accordance with SDC 31.140 (2), . a 5-foot planted side yard setback between Unit D and the south property line planted in accordance with SDC 31,140 (2), . a 10-foot planted front yard setback between Unit A ~'nd the west property line planted in accordance wi'th SDC 31.140 (2). . a 10-foot planted rear yard setback between Unit D and ,he east property line planted in accordance with SDC 31.140 (2). . A minimum of 15 percent of the site shall be landscaped with a mix of vegetative ground cover, shrubbery and trees, . At least.65 percent of each required planting area shall be covered with living plant materials within five years of the date of installation,' '. .' ,The proposed Ponderosa pinesin the common opens space shall be replaced with a high'canopy shaae tree or other tree which' will not obliterate the common open space and block the ' sidewalk. . All plants shall be shown in the plan at mature sizes [SDC 31,050 (4)], . The planting legend specifications list shall show plant quantities and planting size [SDC 31.050 (4)], ,', .' See also Condition 9 below: Parking Lot Landscaping. PLEASE NOTE: SUB requires 15 feet of clearance to trees under and adjacent to the existing., '. overhead electric lines along South 42"d Street, ' ' '.. . MULTI-UNIT DESIGN STANDARDS - SDC: /6,/10(4) . SDC 16.110 (4)(c)2 requires a 25-foot buffer area between the multi-unit development and LDR property lines. ' , 'Finding: The east property line abuts an LDR zo~ing district, thus a 25-footbuffer area is required along the east property line, , SDC 16,110 (4)(c)2 c, states: Building encroachments into the buffer are allowed, provided n'o' building may encroach more than 10 feet into the 25-foot buffer. Buildings shall not,exceed one story or 2 I fee~ within the buffer. ' " ". ' , Finding: The north unit of Unit D,encroaclies 1'-6" into the 25-foot buffer. 21'within the buffer. The criteria of SDC 16,110 (4)(c)2 c. and (3) are met,., i3~ildingheight is I~ss than '., Finding: The pro'posal meets the Multi-unit Design Transition and Compatibility standards, ;",' .,,'. .i., " " . p Finding: The proposal meets th", Multi-unitDesign Storage standards; .. e. ...'., -"-' Finding: 9072 gfax Oc2S = 2,256 sq, 'ft. of common open spac: is required [SDC 16.11 o (4)(e)2. al ' ~ " I' i~. '.' .... SDC 16.110 (4)(e)2. b. states: Common open space areas provided to comply with this standard' shall be at least 500 square feet with 'no horizontal dimension less than 15 fElet.; , .-. . Finding: The applicant's site 'plan designates an area,labeled as "Common Open Space': immeaiately, adjacent to,the dwelling units.' The common open space includes a paved courtyard surrounded by , planting:sidewalks located on either side' of water quality swale,. and a small lawn area. ..' . ";. Site Plan Review DRC2006.00093 10 . '. -~ . .'. '. , '. , , , , I, . ' . , , ' \ .~: . . . , . Finding: The applicant's site plan designates common open space areas which will provide children's play l , . " space for active recreation. The criterion of SDC 16.110 (4)(e)2.d, is met Finding: The proposal meets the Multi-unit Design Common Open Space and Private Open Space Standards. ' . ' Finding: The applicant's landscape plan does not provide the required lahdscaping and plant material. See condition 8 above, ' SDC !6:110 (4)(h)3, states: There shall be one planter island for every 8 parki,:,g spaces. Planter islands shall be a minimum of 6 feet in width, exclusive of curb, the full length of a' parking space containing one shade tree (a minimum 2 inches caliper) and vegetative ground coyer. Trees shall be specimens capable of attaining 3S feet or more in height at maturity. Landscape areas shall be evenly'distributed throughout the perimeter of interior parking' areas, where'practicable. .., ' ,~- ' .. ' Finding: The applicant's landscape plan does not provide parking lot planter islands in accordance with SDC 16.110 (4)(h)3, The plans provide more shade trees along the south property line than are required by the Code, Condition 9: lri"the Final Site Plan the landscape plan shall be revised,to include a miriimum ofthree planter islands which are a minimum of 6'feet in width, exclusive of curb, the full length of a parking space ,containing one shade'tree (a minimum 2 inches caliper) and vegetative ground cover, ;frees shaJrbe . specimens capable of attaining 35 feet or more in height at maturity. The proposed planter islands : .adjacent to the c,ommon open space courtyard and the planter islands at the east end of the p~rklng lot may be re-sized to meet this ~ondition. Proposed trees in the islands 'mustbe,completely specified by , species/variety ,to, demonstrate conformance with this condition, ", , ,'1, .' . ., , -' . '. -.. ' . ~ , . , '. . SDC 16,110 (4)(h)6, states: All parking stalls fronting a sidewalk, or'planted ar,ea shall be, ..' provided with a secure wheel bumper not less than 6 inches'inheight and set backfrom the front a minimum of 2 feet to allow for vehicle encroachment. Wheel bumpers, is"used, shall . ' " ' - I , be a minimum of 6 feet in length. As an option, the sidewalk or planter may be widened two . feer beyond the minimulTl dimension required to allo,:" for vehicle encroacl1ment;' . .~~. '. '..... '" . '~:':,:',....L., .~. ',. .... ::'. ,.,'. " ..','~ :'. '.- 'Fi,nding: .~heapplicant's site plan 'proposes six.foot wide sidewalks where parking stalls fr6rinhe , sidewalks, ' " ' ,,':' ".', .:. .:::', .' " . 'l""" " ' 'Finding: The Buiiding Officialtrepresentative reviewed the plans and found that the pr6p6sed ADA. ' 'ramp at the accessible parking spaces does not meet Code. The ramp extends into the parking aisle:, ' , . ' ~. . . " -' " ' ' " '", .' . '," , , .' . . . ., . '" . .' - ~.. ,. - . .' . , Condition standards,.' 10: In the Fin<\I.Si~e Plan provide accessible routes'and parking in accordan,ce with ADA . " .:: ~ . ...' ~ ' ", ' l . . ',' ... : .., ~ .' . .." ~, '" .. . ",. ' , . " _', ." . - ~ .' "t, , , SDC 16,11 0 (4)(h)~, states: All parking, maneuvering and loading areas abutting a property line , , o~ right-of-way sl)all provide perimeter lot landscaping. A minimumS-foot wide planting , " . strip shall be planted with shade trees a minimum 2 inches in caliper and a low level (e.g. 30- 40 inches) evergreen hedge.' .. ' " :-. --.-.,; " '.- . -"', ','. ..', ';...' ,:1 '. ..... ,'. , , , ',." , , . ~ . ;;" _ 1(, . Site Plan Review' " ' . 'DRC2006.00093 ,.//, .:, '".' '.'--:.- ;'" v'.'" ,) " :'",' Finding: Alow:level evergreen hedge is required along the parking spaces which ab~t the south property line. The applicant's site plan does not provide an evergreen hedge. Bark is proposed, ,No , decorative wall is provided as an alternative [SDC 16.110 (4)(h)9], Condition II: In the Final Site Plan the landscape plan shall be amended to provide a'low-level evergreen hedge (30-40 inches tall) beneath the trees along the parking spaces which abut the south property line [SDC 16.110 (4)(h)8], Conclusion: As conditioned. the tentative site plan satisfies the Multi-unit Design Standards. Conclusion: As conditioned. the tentative site plan'satisfies SDC Article 31 and SDC-Article 16, The applicable sub-elements of Criteria 2 and 3 are met" Overlay Oistrias and AppliCable Refinement Plan Requirements Finding: TheDrinking Water Protection Overlay District Time of Travel Zone boundaries are shown in the applicant's plans on sheet A I, The northwest portion of the subject property is within the Zone of Contribution; but outside the 20-year TOTZ. Finding: There are no applicable overlay 'distriCts or'refinement plan requirements.:' , (4) Parking areas and ingress-egress points have been designed to: facilitote vehicular traffic, bicycle and pedestrian safety to ovoid congestion; provide co'nnectivity within the development oreo and to odjocent residential areas, transit stoPs, neighborhood activity centers, and commercial, 'industrial and public'areas; minimize curb cuts on arterial and collector streets as specified in this Code or other applicable regulations and comply with the OOOT access management standards for state highways. ' > . ,', ACCESS AND DRIVEWA Y STANDARDS - SDC 32.080 FIRE AND LIFE SAFETY ACCESS - Springfield Fire Code Finding: ' Installation of driyewayson a street increases the ,number .of traffic conflict points, The,,' , greater number of conflict pqints inc~eases the probability of traffic crashes. SDC 32.080( I) (a) stipulates' that each parcel is entitled to an aI?proved access to a public street.. ' . .: " . .-. .' ,& .-.-.' Finding: Current access to the site is via a 12-foot wide driv~way onto South 42" Street located near.' -' , , the northern site boundary., The applicant proposes to close this access and construct a new 24-foot _' ,~ wide driveway at the soudiern site bounda!/,. , ' " ' " Finding:' Springfield Fire Code requires Premise's Identification that is plainly visible,and legible from the .. 42nd Street frontage of the property [SFC 505,1].: ' , ' " >', . ::;.. Condition 12: Prior to iss~ance of occupancy; each approved address; as assigned by the Building Official, shall be clearly identified with permanent signage placed in a position that is plainly visible and ' .. .. , , legible from the 42nd Street frontage of the property. Address numbers shall contrast from their " background, and shall be Arabic numerals or alphabet letters. Numbers shall be a minimum of 4 inches inheight'with a,minimum stroke width.of .5 inch in accordance with,SFC505.1: Premises'ldentification::,>, ~-'-,+ ~ . ,". Conclusion: As conditioned, the ingress-egress points will facilitate traffic and pedestrian safety; avoid congestion and minimize curb cuts on public streets as specified in SDC Articles 31 and 32. applicable, zoning and or overlay district Articles, and applicable refinement plans.," ' . > Site Plan Review DRCl006-00093, 12 ',' - ' . ~ ' (5) Physical features, including, but not limited to significant clusters of trees and shrubs, watercourses shown on the ,Water Quality Limited Wotercourse Map and thei~ ass.ociated riparion areas, wetlands, rock outcroppings and historic features have been evaluated and , protected as specified in this Code or other applicable regulations. ' Thi, Natural Resources Study, the National Wetlands Inventory, the Springfield Wetland Inventory Map, th~ Water Quality Limited Waterways Map, applicable refinement plans, the Wellhead Protection .overlay District Map and the list of Historic Landmark Sit':'s have been consulted., Finding: There are no features which require protection, Conclusion: The tentative site plan satisfies this criterion. ' . '.. ,', ' , , . ~ CONCLUSION: The proposed Site Plan. as submitted and conditioned, is in conformance with the applicable Criteria 1,5 of SDC 31.060, ' , ". , -,.- . CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: ..' ~ ;" Condition I: In the' Final Sit~ Plan', the'sidewalk location shall be consistent with the City's,South 42,d Street Capital Improvement Project (P20457). All applicable plan sheets shall be revised to reflect the' correct loc:ation of public improvenients, Please contact Jeff Paschall at the Puhlic vVorks ~ngineering ,726:1674 for information regarding coordination of public improvements and site development. , :~ .' ,.' _ ,.. . ; . . '.. '.. .. " -." , r ' . . < : , Condition 2: Tlieplanter strip and street trees shall be shown in the Final Site Plan as exi~ting and the "applicant's landscaping plan shall be amended to respond to die locations the (new) existing street trees. 'Please contact Jeff Paschall at the Public Works Engineering'726-1674 for information regarding :, "co?rdinati:>n of public improvements and site'development; " ' " .,' , '.;" ,~ . . '" '.. '-, C<?ridition 6: - In the Final Site Plan', the applicant shall indicate a proposed method for providing water , supply pursuant to 2004 SFC 508,5,1, exception 2 or SFC 508.5.5. Please contact Gilbert R. Gordon Qeputy Fire. Marshal,at Springfield Fire and Life safety 726-2293 for addi,tional information" , ' " ,-' ,'" ..... "." ~. - t.. ,"", S;t~ Pldn Review.' . 1: '" " DRC2006-00093 13 " -'., '," ...~, . - , ',' "~ ~ . . ~ ~', . ..' Condition 7: Prior to FinaL Site Plan approval, the applicant'shall record the proposed utility , easements to provide electric service to the proposed development Public PUE. location Utility E.asement width' 7 feet Along the south I'roperty line as shown. 7 feet Along the west property line as shown,' Copies of the ( raft easements shall be submitted to the City for review by the City Surveyor prior to recording, ' Condition 8: In the Final Site Plan, the applicant sh~1I submit a'professionally designed landscape plan' which provides for landscaping in accordance with SDC 31,140 (2), SDC 16,110 (4)(1) I, and SDC 16,110 (4)(1) 5. In addition to the proposed landscaping, the plan shall provide: ',' '. a 5-foot planted side yard setback on the north side of the property planted in accordance with SDC31.140(2). , . . . a 5-foot planted side yard setback between Unit D and. the south property line planted in , accordance with SDC 31,140 (2), . . a I O-foot planted front yard setback between Unit A and the west property line planted in , accordance with SDC 3 1.140(2). ' ", .. ,', a I O-foot planted rear yard setbac~ betWeen l!.nit D and the east property line planted in accordance with SDC 31, J 40 (2), . A minimum of 15 percent of the site shall be landscaped with a mix of vegetative ground cover, shrubbery and trees. . At least 65 percent of each require,d pla,nting,area shall be covered with living plant materials within five years of the date of installation", , , . . The proposed Ponderosa pines in the common opens sp;lCe'shall be replaced with a high canopy shade tree or other tree which wHl not obliterate the common open space and block the. ' sidewalk. ' ' ,; All plants shall be shown in the plan at mature sizes [SDC 31.050,(4)]. .' , The planting legend specifications list shall s~ow plant quantities and planting size [SDC 31,050 - (4)]. ,- ' ' See also Conditi~n' 9 below: Parking Lot Lanascaping, ' .-\' -..' -- - '. .~ ,.:. '. ". .. ,... '. " ,. PLEASE NOTE:' SUB requ,ires '15 feet of clearance to trees under a~dadjacent to the existing ~. , overhead electric lines along South 420d Street. ' ',' ~- '.- . '",.. . 'Condition 9: In the Final Site Plan the landscape'plan ~hall be revised to include a minimum of three . planter islands which are,a' minimum of 6 feet in width, exclusive of curb, the full length of a 'parking space;, , containing one shade tree (a minimum 2 inches caliper) and vegetative ground cover. 'frees shall be ;.'.~';' . specimens capable of attaining 35 feet or more in height at maturity, The proposed 'planter islands '. , , adjacent to the 'common open space courtyard and the planter islands at the east end of the parking lot may be re-sized to meet this condition, Proposed trees in the islands must be completely specified by sPecies/variety todemonstrate conformance with this conditio,n. '" '.. : ;.'" '" . .', ' . '. Condition 10: 'In the Final Site Plan, provide accessible routes and parking in accordance with ADA' standards, , ' '" , . Site Plan Review . 'DRCl006-00093 14 ".1, .' Condition II: 'In the Final Site Plan the, landscape plan shall be amended to provide a low-I,!"vel evergreen hedge (30-40 inches tall) ,beneath the trees along the parking spaces which' abut the south property line [SDC I,~.) 10 (4)(h)8]. . I " . Conditi~n 12: Prior to issuance' of occupan~y, each approved address: as assigned by the Building, Official, shall be, clearly identified with permanent signage placed in a position that is plainly visible and, legiblefrom the 42nd Street frontage of the property, Addres~ numbers shall contr~st from their ' background, and shall be Arabic numerals or alphabet letters, Numbers shall be a mi,nimumof 4 inches in ~eightwith a minimum stroke width of .5 inch in accordance with SFC 505,1: Premises Id~ntification, WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE BY THE APPLICANT TO OBTAIN FINAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL? " FINAL SITE PLAN: A Final Site Plan Application, the Final Site Plan Fee, five copies of a Final Site PI~n and any additional required plans, documents or information are required to be'submitted to the PI~,nning Division within 90 days of the date of this letter, ' ',__ " , " . This decision is based on the submitted Tentative Site Plan. The Final Site Plan must show conformity' wi~h the Tentative Site Plan, compliance with SDC Article 31 Criteria ,of Approval 1-5, ana the corditions of approval. The Final Site Plan shall become null and void if construction has noi begun within two years ofFinal Site Plan approval, Le, the signing of a Development Agreement. A single one- year extension may be granted by the Director upon receipt of a written request by the applicant , including an explanation of the delay. Work under progress shall not be subject to I?evelopment Approval expiration, ' DEYELOPMENTAGREEMENT: In order to complete the review process, a Development 'Agreement is,required'toensure 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 th'e property owner prior to the issuance of a building permit. A Building Pe'rmit shall be issued' by the Building Official only after the Development Agreement has been signed by the applicant and the Director, No building or structure shall be occupied until all improvements are, . made in accordance 'with this Article, except as specified in Section 31.110, Security and Ass,urances, Upon satisfactory'completion of site development, as determined by a Final Site Inspection (prior 'to the, fin~1 building inspection), the City shall authorize the provision of public facilities and seryicesand is~ue a '.. . Ce,rtificateof O~cupa'ncy." )~ ," ..' , ' ' :'- '.. N9TE~: '," '. '. ,,: : " ' , " ,', , '<;", t. An enc'roachrrient permit and a Land Drainage and Alteration Permit may be required for this ." ", " deYeloPl11ent. . The applicant shall nOt commence any construction activities on the site without , ',; '. ,a,n approved ~a~d Drainage and Alteration Permit approved by City Public Works Department. . Signs are regulated by the Springfield Municipal Code Article 9, Chapter 7. The number and placement of signs must be coordinated with the Community Services Division (726-3664). The' ,locations' of signs shown in a site plan does not constitute approval from the Community : Seryices Drvision.,. Aseparate sign permit is required, ' ; , '" , ..,; " " Additional Information: The application, all documents,'and evidence relied upo~ by the,applicant, and the applicable criteria of approval are available for free inspection and copies are available at a cost 'of $0.75 for the 'first page and $0.50 for each additional page at the DeyelopmentServices Department, 22S Fifth Street, ,Springfield; Oregon. .: , , .. " , .1'.; ,... ,. . ~: " . . .: I ~ ., \~. . . : Site Plan Review,. .~ "':' , " , , ,,' " -:: ~ ,', /5 '.' ..' 'DRCl006-00093 . 'i'. .' j' .' ~ .' ,.,. -.. ..' ,:' '" . . ~~ ,~ c' , - - ~ " -I ,.-. Appeals: If you wish to appe,,;1 this Tentative Site Plan Approval, a Type II Limited Land Use decision, your application must comply with SDC Article IS, APPEALS, 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. Ttie'fee will be returned to the appellant if the Planning Commission approves the appeal application. In accordance with SDC 15.020 which provides for a 15 day appeal period, the appeal period for this decision expires'at 5:00. p.m. on ,March I, 2007. ' Questions: Please contact Linda Pauly at 'the City of Springfield Urban Planning Division if you have questions regarding this process, Prepared by: Linda Pauly , Planner II, 726-4608 .- ;"' ,-,., ", ".' ." \- ~ ';;.. .. ",' ','" '.1 , " " Site Plan Review . . , ." ~.-. . . ';, .< .' ~ '. DRC2006-00093 ' '. .; ',' , " ...', 'j' or ...- , .' , - ~,.. .: .' /6 ... .:: " :," f. ., .,. .~ . .; 'i, .; , "1 ". ':.' .,... j, 1~ '- , ,~ "" CITY OF SPRINGFIELD 'DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT" , 225 5th ST " SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 _;.,"..... - _~,...~~... I, ,M, ,I, .", I "' 'Greg Larkin 6035 Fernhill Loop Springfield, 'OR, 97478 ".} ',' ....".".. ,I, ," ..'~lll " CITY OF SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT 225 5th ST SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 L\"....".,-'-_~...... ....". "." _,,OJ, ..,;",.., ,o...,,,,.,j,,, ,", Arternio Paz 86950 Cedar Flat Springfield, OR 97478 ", "B ~) r ";',' ,-, " ., )" J!! !~ I~II. Jr ',. " . 'I 'I' , 1'1 '~ 1:, f l~ 'I! ,I I', , ' il , ;~ ~! "'.". , , , i " , 11. ,', ." i "",ii "."