Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNotice PLANNER 1/31/2008 ., ... '.,' . ' AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE ~ STATE OF OREGON) )ss. 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 that in my capacity as, Program Tec~nician, I prepared and {:aused to be . mailed copies ofD~C.200t-~&.3 ),]&:tiu.t.I), ~ - .A-m. ~J4.,d.. ~ (See attachment "A") on / /?,/ .2008 addressed to (see ~. U4 Attachment B"), by causing said . letters to be placed in a U.S. mail box with postage fully prepaid thereon. '--J<tlftM1~ ,V ~ ~rkN LaFLEu~jr STATE OF OREGON, County of Lane . ~4 I J IJ ,111/ 3/ , 2008. Personally appeared the above named Karen LaFleur, ~nician, who acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be their voluntary act Before me: . OFFICIAL SEAL DEVETTE KELLY .' NOTARY PUBLIC. OREGON . COMMISSION NO. 420351 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES AUG. 15.2011 J ~JiLJ:JJ~ u V ? /;S// I / " My Commission Expires: Date Received: /j;~"q . Planner: AL . City of Springfield Development Services Department 225 Fifth Street Springfield, OR 97477 SITE PLAN REVIEW Staff Report & Decision Project Name: Enterprise Rent-A-Car Project Proposal: Construct a 2,100 sf building and paved exterior storage of rental cars, along with associated site development Case Number: DRC2007-00083 Project Location: 4396 Main Street 17-02-32-31, TL 100 Zoning: Community Commercial (CC) Overlay District(s): N/A Applicable Refinement Plan: East Main Refinement Plan Designation: Mixed-Use Commercial (MUC) Metro Plan Designation: Mixed-Use Overlay Pre-Submittal Meeting Date: November 6, 2007 Application Submittal Date: December 21, 2007 DRC Meeting Date: January 22, 2008 Decision Issued Date: January 31, 2008 Recommendation: Approval with Conditions - J /1/JI>d!' I . Date Received: Appeal Deadline Date: February 15, 2008 Planner: AL Associated Applications: ZON2007-00009 (Zone Change), PRE2007-00075 DEVELOPMENT~'"REVIEW:COMMI-gEE P9SITIO~ ~EVIEYV OF I P[anner II Land Use P/anninQ I TrCjl]sP9rtalion Pla/minQ E[1Qi?eer Tr,ijJ:\sPO(lalion I Public Works EnQlneer in TralninQ Uiihtles. ~aJ1i!ary & Storm Sewer I Dep~;y Fire Marshal fir~ ~'ld Life SafelY I E?QlneerinQ Technician ~UB Electric Utilities I Clvi EJlQlne~r SUB Water Utilities I permii Specialist ODOT tAPPLIC"ANT'S'DEVEI.:OP.MENT~REV~iJ!'tTEAM' _-.~. Applicant pplicant's Representative Kelly O'Brien Mike Kaiser Northwest Construction Services Poage Engineering P.O. Box 231087 P.O. Box 2527 TiQard, OR 97281 EUQene, OR 97402 .- ~~~EMar/<arian Gary McKenney Jesse Jones Gilbert Gordon Tony Talbot R~be~Yfl Templin Mfke Wilbur PJiONE '~6-4611 726-4585 736-1036 726-22, 'I 72Q-2~ ' 72~-23~ 744-8080 Case No. DRC2007 -00083 - .~-,~ Owner Joseph Tokatly, Member TTT Ranch, LLC P.O. Box 2121 Jasper, OR 97438 1 of 13 - ~ ~ DECISION This staff report and decision grants approval with conditions to the subject application, as of the date of this decision. The standards of the Springfield Development Code (SDC) applicable to each criterion of approval are listed herein and are satisfied by the submitted plans and notes (see Appendix A) unless specifically noted in this decision with findings and conditions necessary for compliance. The Final Site Plan, including the landscape plan, as well as building plans, site development, and the installation of public and private improvements, must conform to the approved site plan or as conditioned herein. Any changes to the approved site plan must be approved through the Site Plan Modification application process. This is a limited land use decision made according to city code and state statu1es. Unless appealed, the decision is final. Please read this document in its entirety. USES AUTHORIZED BY THIS DECISION The proposed use of this site for au1omotive and truck rentals is permitted subject to special locational and/or siting standards listed in SDC 4.7-115 in accordance with SDC 3.2-310. No other uses are authorized by this decision. REVIEW PROCESS This application has been reviewed under the procedures listed in SDC 5.1-130, Type II Applications, and SDC 5.17-100, Site Plan Review. This application was accepted as complete on December 21, 2007, and this decision is issued on the 41 sl day of the 120 days permitted per ORS 227.178. COMMENTS RECEIVED Applications for Type II limited land use decisions require notification of property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the subject property and any applicable neighborhood association, allowing for a 14- day comment period on the application per SDC 5.1-130. The property owner, applicant, if different, and parties submitting written comments during the comment period have appeal rights and are mailed a copy of this decision for consideration. In accordance with SDC 5.1-130, notice was mailed to the property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the subject property on December 31, 2007. The following written comments were received during the comment period: An email received on January 2, 2008 from Randy and Judy Allen at 229 Smith Loop expressed support for this application and appreciation for new investment in the community. The complete transcript of the email is made a part of this decision by reference and is available for review at the Development Services Department. SITE INFORMATION The subject property is a .61 acre (26,426 square feet), reversed L-shaped lot at the northwest comer of Main Street and 44th Street and is located inside the City limits. The property is relatively flat, and soils are mapped as Salem-Urban Land Complex-119 and Oxley-Urban Land Complex-101. Currently, the property contains a residence, carport, and auto repair shop, all of which are proposed to be removed. There are two existing driveways, one on Main Street and one on 44th Street, both of which are proposed to remain. In addition, there are three trees along the north property line, two of which are proposed to remain and one along the east property line that is proposed to be removed. Property in the vicinity of the site is zoned Medium Density Residential, Community Commercial, and LighllMedium Industrial. The site itself, as well as property immediately to the south, west, and east, is zoned Community Commercial while property abutting the site to the north and northwest is zoned Medium Density Residential. SITE PLAN REVIEW - CRITERIA SDC 5.17-125 states that an application shall be approved or approved with conditions upon determination that the criteria listed in SDC 5.17-125 A. through E. have been satisfied and that if conditions cannot be attached to satisfy the approval criteria, the application shall be denied. [late; Received:, J ~, /Jeo,r Case No. DRC2007-OOO83 Planner: A!- f { 2 of 13 - ~ Criterion 1/SDC 5.17-125A.\ The zoning is consistent with the Metro Plan diagram, and/or the applicable Refinement Plan Diagram, Plan District Map, a~d Conceptual Development Plan. :: . Finding: The subject ,pr6perty is zoned' Community Commercial liand ,is designated Mixed-Use Commercial by the Metro Plan diagram and the East Main Refinement Plan: There are no applicable Plan District maps or Conceptual Development Plans for this property,l and no change to the zoning designation or boundaries is proposed.' I~ ' I!' ii Criterion 2/SDC 5.17-125 B.t I! Capacity requirements of public and private facilities, including but 'not limited t6 water and electricity; sanitary sewer and storm water management facilities; and streets and traffic sJfety 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 f~gulations. The Public Works Director or a utility provider shall determine capacity issues. Ii , Finding: The Development Review Committee (DRC), including represent~tives from the City's Development Services Department, Public Works Department, and Fire and Life Safety Department, as well as the Springfield Utility Board (SUB)"and Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) reviewed the application, and their comments have been incorporated into the findings and!lconditi,ons below. Finding: Criterion 2 contains two categories of development standards with sub-sections. The application as submitted complies with any applicable sub-sections of the development standards unless otherwise noted with specific findings 'and conditions. The development standards relating to Criterion 2 include but are not limited to the infrastructure standards discussed'in SDC 4.1-100,4.2- 100, and 4.3-100: . I: Conclusion: This application satisfies Criterion l' (SDC 5:17"125 A). 4.2-100 Infrastructure Standards- Transportation 4.2-105 Public Streets 4.2-110 Private Streets 4.2-115 Block Length 4.2-120 Site Access and Driveways 4.2-125 Intersections 4.2-130 Vision Clearance 4.2-135 Sidewalks 4.2-140 Street Trees 4.2-145 Street Li9rting .4.2-150 Bikeways .; 4.2-155 Pedestrian Trails 4.2-160 Accessways ,I 4.3-100 Infrastructure Standards-" Utilities ' 4.3-105 Sanitary Sewers 4.3-110 Stormwater Management 4.3-115 Water Quality Protection II 4.3-120 Utility Provider Coordination 4.3-125 Underground Placement of Utilities 4.3-130 Water Service and Fire Protection 4.3-135 Major Electrical Power Transmis~'ion Lines 4.3-140 Public Easements ,~ I . . 4.3-145 Wireless Telecommunications Systems Facilities ~~ Public Streets . I. Finding: Abutting the subject property to the east is 44th Street, a 30-foot asphalt-paved two-lane local street within a 50"foot right-of-way. . The street is improved to urban stand~rds wi'th curb, gutter, sidewalks, and street lighting, and average daily traffic along this section of 44t~1 Street. is estimated to be fewer than 1,000 vehicle trips per day. '. . . I Finding: Abutting the subject property to the south is Main Street, a 65-foot a~phalt-paved four-lane major arterial street within an 80-foot right-of-way. The street is improved to urb4n standards with curb, gutter, sidewalks, on-streei. bicyc,le lanes, and street lighting, which SUPPOI1S multi-modal travel. Case No. DRC2007-00083 DatEl Received:~/Jod.r 3 of 13 Planner: AL ~ . Average daily traffic along this section of Main Street'is estimated to be approximately'23,000 vehicle trips per day. . Finding: Based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Land Use Code 942 (Automobile Care Center) full development of the site with a vehicle rental facility would generate 90 afternoon peak-hour vehicle trips onto the surrounding street system. In addition, assumed development may generate pedestrian and. bicycle trips. According to the, LCOG household survey from 1994, 12.6% of household trips are made by bicycle or walking and 1.8% are made via public transit. These trips may have their origins or destinations at a variety of land uses, including the subject property. Pedestrian and bicycle trips create the need for sidewalks, pedestrian crossing signals, crosswalks, bicycle parking, and bicycle lanes. Finding: Existi'ng facilities are adequate to meet the requirements of SDC 4.2- i 05. street Trees Finding: Street trees are a required public improvement, and as such, must be completed prior to development approval as per SDC 5.12c145.C. , ; Finding: The Exception listed in SDC 4.2-140 states that in' order to meet street tree requirements, where there is no planter strip and street trees cannot be planted within the public right-of-way, trees shall be planted in the required front yard or street side yard setback of private property as specified in the applicable zoning district. Finding: There is one existing street tree on the east property line of the site that is proposed to be removed. There are neither other existing street trees on the subject property nor street trees in the right-of-way adjacent to the property. The applicant has proposed installing eight red sunset maple street trees within the front yard and street side yard setbacks fronting Main Street and 44th, Street in conformance with the EDSPM. Finding: SDC 4.2-140 A. states that new street trees shall be at least two inches in calipe'r and shall be selected from the City Street Tree List and installed as specified in the City's Engineering' Design Standards and Procedures Manual (EDSPM). Finding: There are existing overhead power lines along the site's frontage on 44'h Street. Red sunset maple trees do not appear on the City Street Tree List in the EDSPM for planter strips with overhead power lines. Therefore, an alternative type of street tree must be planted on 44th Street. '" Condition 1: Prior to occupancy, at least eight street trees of at least two inches in caliper shall be planted in the site's front yard and street side yard setbacks fronting Main Street and-44'h Street. New street trees shall be selected from the List of Acceptable Street Trees listed in the EDSPM, and the new street trees shall be installed as specified in the EDSPM and shall conform to any easement stipulations for public utility easements (PUE). All tree nursery tags identifying the type of street tree shall remain on the street trees until Final Site Inspection approval. Since the street trees are on private property, maintenance shall be performed by the property owner. .. Finding: As conditioned above, this application meeets the requirements of SDC 4.2-140. Storm water Manaaement . Finding:SDC 4.3-110 B. states that development approval shall only be granted where the Public Works Director has determined that adequate public andlor private stormwater management' systems provisions, consistent with the EDSPM, have been made. Finding: SDC 4.3-110 D. states that run-off from a development shall be directed to an approved stormwater management system with sufficient capacity to accept the discharge. . . 0' 'f~lhDl1.t pate! Recelve.- f Case No. DRC2007-00083 . '.' p\~mner: AL .4 of 13 . - ~ , Finding: SDC 4.3-110 E. states that new developments are required to employ drainage management practices that minimize the amount and rate of surface run-off into receiving streams and that promote water quality. .... ' Finding: EDSPM 3.02 states that the Public Works Department will accept, as interim design standards for stormwater quality, water quality facilities designed pursuant;;' to the policies and procedures of either the City of Portland Bureau of Environmental Services (BES) or the Clean Water Services (CWS). Finding: The applicant has proposed managing stormwater run-off from the site via a vegetate bioswale.along the northwest property line prior to discharge into the public stormwater system at the eastern edge of the site. However, the planting plan is inconsistent with the City of Portland's Stormwater Management Manual. :: Condition 2: Prior to Final Site Plan approval, the applicant shall provide a planting plan for the vegetative swale prepared by a licensed landscape architect in conformance with City of Portland BES standards for water quality features. Finding: The vegetation proposed for use in the vegetative swale will serve as the primary pollutant removal mechanism for' the stormwater runoff and will remove suspended solids and pollutants through the processes of sedimentation and filtration. Satisfactory pollutant removal wiU occur only when the vegetation has been fully established. Condition 3: Prior to occupancy, the proposed vegetative swale shall be fully vegetated with all plant species established to ensure a fully functioning water quality system. Alternatively, the applicant shall' provide and maintain additional interim erosion control I water quality measures acceptable to the Public Works Department that will suffice until such time as the vegetative!! swale becomes fully established. ' Finding: As conditioned above, this application meets the requirements of SDC 4.3-110. Underaround Placement of Utilities Finding: SDC 4.3-125 states that wherever possible, all utility lines shall be placed underground. - I Condition 4: Prior to occupancy, all utility lines shall be installed underground. Finding: As conditioned above, this application meets the requirements of SDC 11.3-125. " , Water Service and Fire Protection Finding: SDC 4.3-130 states that each development area shall be provided with ,a water system having sufficiently sized mains and lesser lines to furnish an adequate water supply to the development and that fire hydrants and mains shall be installed by the developer as required by the Fire Marshall and the utility provider. . Finding: SUB advises that the subject property receives water service via a 3/4" lateral from a six-inch water main located in the right-of-way to the east of the subject property and if larger service is required for this development that 44th street will need to be cut to access the water main. In addition, SUB advises that backflow prevention devices will be required for water service to this'! development. . Condition 5: Prior to occupancy, all new water facilities and modifications shall be installed in conformance with SUB Water Division standards. :: . Finding: As conditioned above, this application meets the requirements of SDC4.3-130. Date Received: / ;J~ " Planner: Al ~ ~ _ Case No. DRC2007-00083 ',~' I' '\' 50113 ~. - Public Easements Finding: SDC 4.3-140 A. states that the applicant shall make arrangements with the City and each utility provider for the dedication of utility easements necessary to fully service the development or land beyond the development area. This policy dictates that the minimum width for Public Utility Easements . (PUE) adjacent to street rights-of-way, as well as all other PUEs, shall be seven feet, unless otherwise specified. Finding: There is an existing five-foot PUE along the 44th Street frontage of the property and existing PUE and slope easements along part of the Main Street frontage of the property. Condition 6: Prior to Final Site Plan approval, the applicant shall record a seven-foot wide PUE along both the frontage of Main Street and 44th Street and document the PUEs on the Final Site Plan. Finding: As conditioned above, this application meets the requirements of SDC 4.3-140 A. Conclusion: This application satisfies Criterion 2 (SDC 5.17-125 B.) as conditioned herein. Criterion 31SDC 5.17-125 C.\ The proposed development shall comply with all applicable public and private design and construction standards contained in this Code and other applicable regulations. Finding: Criterion 3 contains four categories of development standards and requirements. As such, the application must comply with the development standards of SDC Chapter 4 not addressed by Criterion 3, as well as the development standards for the applicable zoning district. In addition, the application must comply with the requirements of any applicable overlay district andlor refinement plan. The application as submitted complies with the applicable development standards and requirements unless otherwise noted with specific findings and conditions. The development standards and . requirements relating to Criterion 3 include but are not limited to the following: Chapter 4 - Development Standards 4.4-100 Landscaping, Screening, & Fence Standards 4.5-100 On-Site Lighting Standards 4.6-100 Vehicle Parking, Loading, & Bicycle Parking Standards 4.7-100 Specific Development Standards for Certain Uses 4.8-100 TemDOrary Uses Applicable Overlay District No overlay districts apply to the subject property 3.2-300 Commercial Zoning DistriCts 3.2-310 Schedule of Use Categories 3.2-315 Base Zone Development Standards Applicable Refinement Plan East Main Refinement Plan LandscaDina. Screenino & Fence Standards Finding: The application narrative indicates that the final site plan will include a landscape plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect in conformance with the standards of the SDC to replace a preliminary landscaping proposed on the site plan. However, the preliminary landscaping proposed on the site plan does not account for the SDC 4.4-105 F. requirements relating to parking lot planting areas. In addition, this preliminary plan indicates that lawn andlor ground cover might be substituted for the required trees or shrubs in the landscaped setbacks except where street trees are required. Finding: SDC 4.4-105 H. states that landscaped setbacks abutting required screening on the same property may be exempted from planting requirements if the area is not visible from any public right-of- . way or adjacent property. However, the East Main Refinement Plan Environmental Design Policy #2 requires the inclusion of visual' and acoustic design features in all development fronting on arterial Case No. DRC2007-00083 . Date F\eCelved:~/~K 6 of 13 Planner: AL ~ streets or where more intensive uses abut less intensive uses. Commercial Element Policy #4 requires providing buffering between commercial and residential uses. Environmental Design Finding #2 directs jurisdictions to protect and retain natural vegetation in the design and c,onstruction of urban developments and to use landscaping to enhance such natural features of a site. Finding: Given the direction of the East Main Refinement Plan policies, the visibility of the corner site from right-of-ways and adjacent properties, and the existing use of adjacent pro'perties as residences, landscaped setbacks should not be exempted from the tree and shrubbery requirements of SDC 4.4- 105 E.1. and E.2. Condition 7: Prior to Final Site Plan approval, the applicant shall submit a landscape plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect that conforms to the SDC and substantively contorms to this approved site plan and as conditioned herein. As such, the landscape plan shall conform to the street tree requirements, landscaped building setback requirements, and the parking lot planting requirements for parking and driveway setbacks, as well as the interior of the parking lot, including the area dedicated for outdoor storage of motor vehicles. In addition, the notation regarding exempting landscaped setbacks from planting requirements shall be removed from the site plan and landscaping plan. Finding: SDC 4.4-105 G. states that all new required planting areas shall be provided with a permanent underground irrigation system unless where planted with native species. Finding: The application narrative indicates that the final site plan will include plans and specifications for a fully automatic irrigation system. . , Condition 8: Prior to Fin~1 Site Plan approval, the landscape plan shall include specifications for either a permanent underground irrigation system or the planting of native species ih all required planting areas. I' Finding: As conditioned above, this application meets the requirements of SDC 4.4-105. On-Site Liahtina Standards Finding: SDC 4.5-115 A. states that on-site lighting shall be the minimum illumination necessary for a given application and that all exteriqr light fixtures shall be shielded or recessed so that direct glare and reflection are contained within the boundaries of the property and directed downward and away from abutting properties and public rights-of-way. Finding: The application indicates that three wall-mounted and five pole-mounted lights will be installed on the site and that the on-site lighting will comply with the standards of the SDC. However, cut sheets, including photometric test information, were not included with the application submittal. Condition 9: Prior to Final Site Plan approval, the applicant shall submit cut sheets, including photometric test information, for thewall-mounted and pole-mounted light fixtures proposed for the site. Finding: SDC 4.5-110 B. states that the height of a free-standing exterior light fixture shall not exceed 25 feet or the height of the principal permitted structure, whichever is. less. . Finding: The application proposes a principle permitted structure of 16 feet 4 inches. Three of the proposed new exterior light fixtures exceed the height of the principal permitted structure. Condition 10: Prior to Final Site Plan approval, free standing exterior light Jfixtures shall either be reduced to the height of the principal permitted structure or a statement shall be' submitted justifying an increase in the height standard and demonstrating that the proposed taller fixtures are the minimum necessary to achieve the desired result in conformance with.SDC 4.5-110 B. 2. I, Finding: As conditioned above, this application meets the requirements of SDC,'4.5-110. , Case No. DRC2007-00083 ". Ii Date Received:#",p Planner: AL 7 of 13 ~ Vehicle Parkina. Loadina. & Bicvcle Parkina Standards Finding: SDC 4.6-120 C. states that alj parking stalls fronting a landscaped area shall be provided with a linear curb not less than six inches in height to be set back from the front of the stall a minimum of two. feet to allow for vehicle encroachment. As an exception, the landscaped area may be widened two feet beyond the minimum dimension required to allow for vehicle encroachment. In such instances, a curb not less than six inches in height shall protect the widened planter area. Finding: The application indicates that a curb protects the landscaped setbacks from vehicle encroachment from the vehicle storage areas along the west and north property lines. However, the curb is not set back from the front of the stalls a minimum of two feet. Condition 11: Prior to Final Site Plan approval, the landscaped areas and curbs along the vehicle storage areas along the west and north property lines shall be adjusted to conform to SDC 4.6-120 C. Finding: As conditioned above, this application meets the requirements of SDC 4.6-120 C. SDecific Deve/oDment Standards for Certain Uses Finding: SDC 3.2-310 states that automotive and truck rental uses are permitted in Community Commercial zoning districts subject to speciallocational andlor siting standards as specified in ~.7-115, Finding: SDC 4.7-115 states that vehicle rental office buildings shall have non-metallic roofing. Finding: The application indicates that painted cap flashing will be used along the building roofline. Condition 12: Prior to Final Site Plan approval, roofing shall comply with SDC 4.7-115. Finding: As conditioned above, this application meets the requirements of SDC 4.7-115. Conclusion: This application satisfies Criterion 3 (SDC 5.17-125 C.) as conditioned herein. Criterion 4 /SDC 5.17-125 D.\ Parking areas and ingress-egress points have been designed to: facilitate vehicular traffic, bicycle and pedestrian safety to avoid congestion; provide connectivity within the development area and to adjacent residential areas, transit stops, neighborhood activity centers, and commercial, industrial and publiC areas; minimize driveways on arterial and collector streets as specified in this Code or other applicable regulations and comply with the DOOr access management standards for State highways. Finding: The DRC, including representatives from the City's Public Works Department, reviewed the application, and their comments have been incorporated into the. findings and conditions below. Finding: Installation of driveways on a street increases the number of traffic conflict points. The greater number of conflict points increases the probability of traffic crashes. Therefore, SDC 4.2-120 A.1. states that all developed parcels shall have an approved access to a public street or alley along the frontage of the property, a private street that connects to the public street system, or a public street by an irrevocable joint uselaccess easement serving the subject property. . Finding: SDC 4.2-120 C. states that driveways shall be designed to allow safe and efficient vehicular ingress and egress as specified in Tables 4.2-2 through 4.2-5, the City's EDSPM, and the Public Works Standard Construction Specifications. According to Table 4.2-2, commercial uses must cO(1form to two- way driveway minimums and maximums of 24 feet and 35 feet, respectively. In addition, Table 4.2-4 states that the minimum distance between a commercial driveway on a local street and the nearest intersection curb return on the same side of the street shall be 75 feet. Finding: The application indicates that existing access to the subject property is via a 24-foot wide asphalt-paved driveway onto 44th Street near the north property line and a 28-foot wide asphalt-paved driveway onto Main Street, a State highway, near the center of the south property line. The applicant Case No. DRC2007-00083 Delt€! Received:~/ ;}IIO! 8 of 13 PI?nner: AL ~ ~ has proposed keeping both access points. In addition, the site assessment of existing conditions fails to depict a third driveway that exists onto 44'h Street, southeast of the existing commercial building, approximately 20 feet north of Main Street. !, Condition 13: Prior to occupancy, the applicant shall remove the southern-most driveway along 44th Street (not depicted on the site assessment), replacing it with curb, gutter, and sidewalk in conformance with the EDSPM and Springfield's Standard Construction Specifications. " Finding: As conditioned above, this application meets the requirements of SDC 4.2-120 A.1. and SDC 4.2-120 C. Finding: SDC 4.2-120 A.2. states that driveway access to designated State highways is subject to the requirements of the Oregon Department of Transportation'(ODOT) Highway Division: . I " Finding: The applicant has applied for an ODOT access permit for the driveway on Main Street but has not received approval yet. . Condition 14: Prior to occupancy, the applicant shall provide a copy of an approved ODOT access permit for the Main Street access. ,. Finding: As conditioned above, this application meets the requirements of SDC 4.2-120 A.2. , Finding: SDC 4.2-130 A. states that all corner parcels shall maintain a clear area at each access to a public street and on each corner of property at the intersection of two streets in order to provide adequate sight distance for approaching traffic. Finding: .SDC 4.2-130 B. states that no screen or other physical obstruction is permitted between two and a half feet and eight feet above the established height of the curb in the triangular area. SDC 4.2- 130 C. states that the triangular area for driveways is ten feet along each property line and twenty-five feet for intersections. Condition 15: Vision clearance areas shall be maintained at each access to a public street and on the . . corner of the property as per SDC 4.2-130. Finding: As conditioned above, this application meets the requirements of SDC 4.2-130. " Conclusion: This application satisfies .Criterion 4 (SDC 5.17-125 D.) as conditioned herein. Criterion 5/SDC 5.17-125 E.~ Physical features, including, but not limited to: steep slopes with unstable soil or geologic conditions; areas with susceptibility of flooding; significant clusters of trees and shrubs; watercourses shown on the WQLW Map and their associated riparian areas; wetlands; rock outcroppings; open spaces; and areas of historic and/or archaeological significance, as may be specified in Section 3.3-900 or ORS 97.740- 760, 358.905-955 and 390.235-240, shall be protected as specified in this Code or in State or Federal law. Finding: The Metro Plan .and any applicable refinement plans, Water Quality Limited Watercourses Map, State Designated Wetlands Map, Hydric Soils Map, Natural Resources Map, Wellhead Protection Zone Map, FEMA Maps, Willamalane Park and Recreation Comprehensive Plan! and the list of Historic Landmark sites have been consulted, and there are no features needing to be protected or preserved on the subject property. Finding: If any historic or archaeological artifacts are discovered during construction, ORS 97.740- 760, 358.905-955, and ORS 390.235-240 may apply. If any human remains 'are discovered during construction, it is a Class C felony to proceed under ORS 97.745. Conclusion: This application satisfies Criterion 5 (SDC 5.12-125 E.). Date Received: 0j-Hn..r Planner: AL Case No. DRC2007-00083 9 0113 ~ .~ \ SUMMARY OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL NOTE: . This summary' of the conditions of approval is provided as a courlesy to the applicant. The applicant should, however, carefully read the decision in its entirety to understand the basis for each condition. .In addition, as stated earlier, the applicant must comply with the entire decision, and the Final Site Plan, including the landscape plan, as well as building plans, site development, and the installation of public and private' improvements, must conform to the approved site plan or as conditioned herein. 1. Prior to occupancy, at least eight street trees of at least two inches in caliper shall be' planted in the site's front yard and street side yard setbacks fronting Main Street and 44th. Street. New street trees shall be selected from the List of Acceptable' Street Trees listed in the EDSPM, and the new street trees shall be installed as specified in the EDSPM and shall conform to any easement stipulations for public utility easements (PUE). All tree nursery tags identifying the type of street tree shall remain on the street trees until Final Site Inspection approval. Since the street trees are on private property, maintenance shall be performed by the property owner. 2.' Prior to Final Site Plan approval, the applicant shall provide a planting plan for the vegetative swale wepared by a licensed landscape architect in conformance with City at" Portland BES standards for water quality features. 3. Prior to occupancy, the proposed vegetative swale shall be fully vegetated with all plant species established to ensure a fully functioning water quality system. Alternatively, the applicant shall provide and maintain additional interim erosion cantrall water quality measures acceptable to the Public Works Department that will suffice until such time as the vegetative swale becomes fully established. 4. Prior to occupancy, all utility lines shall be installed underground. 5. Prior to occupancy, all new water facilities and modifications shall be installed in conformance with SUB Water Division standards. 6. Prior to Final Site Plan 'approval, the applicant shall record a seven-foot wide PUE along both the frontage of Main Street and 44'h Street and document the PUEs on the Final Site Plan. 7. Prior to Final Site Plan approval, the applicant shall submit a landscape plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect that conforms to the SDC and substantively conforms to this approved site plan and as conditioned herein. As such, the landscape plan shall conform to the street tree requirements, landscaped building setback requirements, and the parking lot planting requirements for parking and driveway setbacks, as well as the interior of the parking lot, including the area dedicated for outdoor storage of motor vehicles. In addition, the notation regarding exempting landscaped setbacks from planting requirements shall be removed from the site plan and landscaping plan. 8. Prior to Final Site Plan approval, the landscape plan shall include specifications for either a permanent underground. irrigation system or the planting of native species in all required planting areas. 9. Prior to Final Site Plan approval, the applicant shall submit cut sheets,. including photometric test information, for the wall-mounted and pole-mounted light fixtures proposed for the site. 10. Prior to Final Site Plan approval, free standing exterior light fixtures shall either be reduced to the height of the principal permitted structure or a statement shall be submitted justifying an increase in the height standard and demonstrating that the proposed taller fixtures are the minimum necessary to achieve the desired result in conformance with SDC 4.5-110 B. 2. D..'. ate. Received: I !!J/~Y Case No. DRC2007-0008~ -4.:. , 10 of 13 pli'!nner: AL ~. ~ 11. Prior to Final Site Plan approval, the landscaped areas and curbs alo~'g the vehicle storage areas along the west and north property lines shall be adjusted to confom)to SDC 4.6-120 C. 12: Prior to Final Sit~ Plan approval, roofing shall comply with SDC 4.7-115. 'li 13. Prior to occupancy, the applicant shall remove the southern-most drivei.vay along 44th Street (not depicted on the site assessment), replacing it with curb, gutter, and sidewalk in conformance with the EDSPM and Springfield's Standard Construction Specifications. . . 14. Prior to occupancy, the applicant shall provide a copy of an approved ODOT access permit for the Main Street access. 15. Vision clearance areas shall be maintained at each access to a PUblic.stfeet and on.the corner of the property as per SDC 4.2-130. CONCLUSION The application, as submitted and conditioned herein, complies with the five criteria listed in SDC 5.17- 125 A. through E. The site plan approved as submitted and conditioned herein may not be substantively changed. Any changes to the approved site plan must be approved through the Site Plan Modification application process in accordance with SDC5.17-145. WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE? Final Site Plan :1 SDC 5.17-135 A. states that within 90 days of an affirm'ative site plan review decision, a complete Final Site Plan shall be submitted to the Development Services Department. Therefore, the applicant has until 5:00pm on April 30, 2008 to meet the SDC standards and the conditions ;,of approval contained herein and to submit a Final Site Plan application. Please refer to the Final Site Iillan application packet available at the Development Services Department for more detailed information' on the Final Site Plan application submittal requirements and review process. Please note that the Final Site Plan, including the landscape plan, as well as building plans, site development, and the installation of public and private improvements, must cohtorm to the approved site plan or as conditioned herein. Therefore, the applicant may, at hislher own risk, submit construction or building plans. However, all concurrent submittals are subject to revision for compliance with the final site plan. A Development Agreement will not be "issued until all plans submitted by the applicant have been revised. Conflicting plans cause delays. Develooment Aoreement SDC 5.17-140 states that to complete the Site Plan Review process, a Development Agreement shall be prepared by the Director to be signed by the applicant. The purpose of the Delvelopment Agreement is to ensure that the terms and conditions of Site Plan Review approval are understood and binding upon both the applicant and the City. '; , The Development Agreement and Final Site Plan approval are valid for two years from' the date the Development Agreement is signed. If construction does not begin within this timeline, both the Final Site Plan and the Development Agreement shall become null and void. Howevet, one extension, not to exceed one year may be granted by the Director upon receipt of a written request by the applicant, including an explanation of the delay. Please note that building permits will not be issued until the Development Agre~ment is signed by the applicant. Furthermore, no building or structure shall be occupied until all improvements are made as specified in 5.17-100. . . . Date Received:-fd~h..oJ" Case No. DRC2007-00083 Planner: AL Ii 110113 , .~ Final Site Insoection SDC 5.17-140 D. states'that upon completion of site developnient, the City shall conduct a Final Site Inspection. Please call the Planner to schedule the Final. Site Inspection. Upon satisfactory Final Site Inspection, final building inspections may occur, public facilities and services may be provided, and a Certificate of Occupancy can be issued. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The application, all documents, and supporting evidence are available for free inspection (copies are available for a fee) at the Development Services Department. APPEAL , This decision is considered a Director's Type II decision and as such, may be appealed to the Planning Commission. SDC 5.3-115 states that only the property owner, applicant, if different, and those persons who submitted written comments within the 14-day comment period have standing to appeal this decision. SDC 5.3-115 also states that an appeal application in accordance with 5.3-100 shall be filed with the Development Services Department within 15 calendar days of the Director's decision (the date of this decision). In accordance with this policy and the Oregon Rules of Civil Procedures, Rule 10(c), the appeal period for this decision expires at 5:00pm on February 15, 2008. QUESTIONS Please call Molly Markarian in the Development Services Department Planning Division at 726-4611 or email heratmmarkarian@cLspringfield.or.usif you have any questions. PREPARED BY Molly Markarian Planner II Urban Planning Section , ,......~,'\. - ~ \,: . d' /3)/~d Date Receive .-(-:-, Planner: AL . 12 of 13 Case No. DRC2007 -00083 .- . .. APPENDIX A - II ""J!.>il<<Nt> 1:..::....:.. --.-- ! I .......--.......... -.--- ._~i(....+.. "--.~:': - ~. if:~~ :....,.. . . ! -- ,::...~..-.... ~~- ...JOel """1i'- ::.:::....... ,,,,,',,.-.-=', . lM 19-"BJ /.:dh;;l:l.~ _ .'.._~_.._,... .-'1 > 1 I! I:t ~ 1.2 ~,. '-1 . ! I,J; ,!I I ;11 Il ~.. !~ "'~~i !d~ llOf ~ ~li - = . ".. -, Iii ~;~ I!~ ~!d!! j ~! iiq !il I. 11'!~ I f l!!'i! ~!:; ~~l . ~ j .!' ! l P I l~!i n 'l! ' ~l 3 ! !! I ~ -"-I ;~.!;.,~ '0 IIIIl I r"Ctt" ~~t,,~ !~, Ii"' ~ !,' . IS ,<717. <3 _! .~, I l~~~: ,; , I ,,~ : !:!; ....~ --=" ~~ ~!~ S (l115l. i~ I ~... >~~ '.c 1! ~- .,... ,~,. 0"," ,.n \ q' ,1,-. ,....., " 3 II ~ ! '!-~""" F" .. - -r~~\;;;l+ ",' ~:;;--j 111!ll ! ~'~~:~13~-~..1F-. I~ , ~~~ ~ I';: i r -.t - ~ - " . - iDe I:U ~ d!~.. i \ ".\-' .:... '- ~ s =: ~~ =-- -1 G -.:, ~ ~ ; . . I - , - - - . ',W';" . - - j- -~ ---- - -- -- - ~ -' ! 7:f~i " I -"..........~-' ~I..""....:l ;/~ /' ~~i----~-...~...'" .............-----7~--~-1 - -- -- I _. - - ~ ;.-..-.'c....~. +01 . ~ II 1;. ~ J ! ~ R~-'g '11 I/~' !! )1\ -' ~~ v~;~~- il "1 ~gl ... U~r::. ~!' '1) i . ,i Il! ~il ~ , .....,:" "~== ! ,-----~;!f---Ht~. Iii ..:. . Z..D!i. .. ~ .,.,,-,~~,...:o.:. ',,_,_" .,~.,~ s' .,:: :; ::: ::~ ~ 1 t, 'j ,11 8!l lL.lLIILJL! ! ~ I 3,,' ',. gJ. I"" i '," I ll.."qp, ' -4: U !11uL.......L..J . ! I ~* ~-P" ~ ~ ii; ,12 ~lLJU LULl ~ /.i ~l~""" ~I '/ I 1 i .'i 1 ).L.JU III lJ) ~ f"----/ ;// ---:---,- t ~ ,,_- -: ,,' ;; .t~ - I .~, l I .~ !i \": I ~:~i /n II IIII )!!i i' I~: i!fII . IL1LJ III II! il ;1 j;;: 1% ii~l<it LIL..lLJ III !I I ;, II :~! Qo l~, I ';. il. f-...-... :1, t-...."-"-"-" G' \""" I , It Ii I fIT 111 i ! I-~I'-...'-..."-"-"i:j~ . ./ I . il .. }~-fl08~ ~1 .: t. [~,..-~~/iL18~J ;! 'I. ... of ..... /1' ''"'"'' .<, . I~~ -"", '7 \ . - .....-....... --, i 'I d f , 1 Ii !i! , i ;: !! :i 5. J ~~ i~~ a~ . A ; . !i~. t I L~i !i,!~ ~~~ ~~ 9~: , <' '" ~if,! " ~ :ftj.! >, ~;l "s;, c ~Jb ~ ll~ l'1'1f ., t{ .R:~ .'" -I,i" . t- ", ~,.. ..- ~ -:~~ ~ ' ..,';! '.1 . I''': .Il;;, 'II ~,~.. .:lU 'i 1[.:; (0.. .1 -,. IU o - o t!. . N'o'ld::ill!; to ~(I)I- ~ . ___n_ ,~O,~ti.l~ : ~...~ lSNoWilll:6ti (;v:) V 1~31J 3SI<J&131N3 , , ;) ~ ''- - !< ~ .l \, ,-- m. ~ i E,. rl__.J,.'"Il!l t ~ ~' ~,: (~/ 'T=r, 1'1 1, erJ ! . .i Case No. DRC2007 ;00083 :,........a -I+~'" -/'r." -~ :r-r-F'llvVi Date i"teceived: Planner: AL 0~~J' . il - . a U) ;~ ! " ~. 2 :l ~ ~~~ -~ 130113 .' 1~:i,,;~~W~;- , .~ '..r: ;:~:'" . c::" "",,:,~''1~J,7''''''''7J!1:;r,-..:-;~._ "'lV"111:-",'_~""ril UI"\oI'.II,;;~'IJ'.-;'\:;"': .. -:.,( .~;:,;:""" 'OEVELoPMENT'SERVIc"ES:DEP,4.RTMEN', '. I' 225 5th ST ' "" SPRINGFIELD, OR 91~,./ ....... , : - j 1 ',' . , ~ } , _.' _" Ok_. ,,_...._,,-.... Randy and Judy Allen 229, Smith Loop Springfield, OR 97478 .~; ,....'..-."' j 1 '. j . I 'i', CITY OF SPRINGFIELD . DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT 225 5th ST SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 . " , . Kelly O'Brien Northwest Construction Services PO Box 231087 Tigard, OR 97281. ~",.-"""- ........... -."'l , I . . CITY OF SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT 225 5th ST SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 " '~..,.I ..' ",,_. ",,,. ."':..... .1.1..1. ~. . "'. Mike Kaiser Poage Engineering PO Box 2527 Eugene, OR 97402 Date f'{eceived: 0/~f' Planner: AL ,..111 ... "1.01,, "II..,.... 'it ...,1 I. . (< ". CITY OF SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT 225 5th ST . SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 . .... w,.. ...._"_. "..". ... . ~,- ". .-.,.-............ Joseph Tokatly, Member TTT Ranch, LLC PO Box 2121 Jasper, OR 97438 M(lcA-~ ,< B "