HomeMy WebLinkAboutRecommendation Sheet PLANNER 12/30/2010
PRE10-00008
Development Issues Meeting - American Medical Concepts Inc. I McMac LLC
Proposed Office I Headquarters Building Within Liberty Professional Center
International Way at Corporate Way (Map 17-03-15-40, TL 3500)
.
.
Q.1 The approved Master Plan for Liberty Professional Center is based upon the premise that Lot #3
would be the initial phase of development. This development has not occurred, and it appears
likely that this project on Lot #4 will be the first to be developed. This presents a couple of
questions related to phasing:
a) The Master Plan shows two driveway entrances for Lot #4, one within the common easement
at the west side of Lot #5, and one at the easement at the southeast corner of Lot #2. We
propose to utilize the access at Lot #2, and to postpone the development of the shared
driveway at the west side of Lot #5 until the adjoining Lot #3 and #5 properties are developed
and there is a need created. Please confirm that this would be acceptable.
b) The Master Plan indicates two options for extending water to Lot #3, via a public easement
across the west side of Lot #4 or else via a looped water line extending through the driveway
easement at the west side of Lot #5. We propose to omit this water line at this time, since
Lot #3 is not currently posed for development. Please confirm that this would be acceptable.
A: The proposed driveway at the southeast corner of Lot 2 will be subject to a supplemental traffic
analysis as indicated on the Final Master Plan diagram. Installation of a full-turns driveway will be
predicated on ensuring sufficient sightline and safe turning distances are maintained from the
nearby Symantec driveway on the south side of International Way, the International Way EmX
transit station, and the Corporate Way intersection. In the event the driveway location is viable,
written authorization by the adjacent property owner (Lane Memorial Blood Bank) will be required
with the site plan application.
SUB Water to comment on proposed water line installation. Staff would support either option,
provided this first phase of development does not preclude or inhibit completion of required water
line connections when adjoining sites develop. Pre-installation of water line sleeves or capped
pipes may be required to facilitate future completion of water line looping.
Q.2 Springfield Development Code Section 21.070 (3) states "There shall be planted setbacks from
property lines of 20 feet in front, street-side and through-lot rear yards where adjacent to local
streets, and.30 feet where adjacent to arterial or collector streets".
We are showing a 30 ft. setback along the front yard facing International Way, and 20 fL
setbacks at each side yard. The rear yard is not adjacent to any local street, and we therefore
are showing only a 10 ft. wide setback at the rear. Please confirm that this is acceptable.
A: The proposed rear yard setback of 10 feet meets the requirements of the Campus Industrial District
and is acceptable.
Please refer to the current (2007 as amended) Springfield Development Code for this application.
The applicable Code citation is Section 3.2-420(4)(c).
Q.3 The Oregon Structural Specialties Code Section 1108.3.1.1 allows an exception to the
requirement for an elevator in a building of fewer than three stories when the upper level does
not exceed 3000 sq. ft. The attached sketches depict a second floor plan with an occupied area
of approximately 2400 sq. ft., excluding stairway and mechanical areas. Please confirm that
there is no requirement for an elevator with the proposed configuration.
A: Building Division to respond.
Data Received. .1-' (3Q 60/6
Planner: AL 7'7-~
Q.4
The Master Plan states !t exterior wall materials shall be ! resistant.
prefer to use cedar siding. Would cedar siding be permitted by the City?
apply for a variance?
The Owner would
Would we need to
A: Cedar siding should be compatible with the Master Plan design guidelines for the Liberty
Professional Center and the City's Development Code, and therefore wouldn't require a variance.
The proposed building elevations depict a "Northwest" architectural style with timber and
stone/masonry accents, which is acceptable in the Campus Industrial District. Enhanced fire
protection measures may be advisable due to slightly elevated fire risk with cedar siding versus
concrete or Hardi-plank fascia. Fire Marshal's office to comment.
Q.5 The site plan configuration, driveway locations, and utility connections are nearly identical to
the approved Master Plan. We are hopeful that the Site Review process can be accelerated
because of this. Please provide an anticipated timeline for Site Review, as it would apply to this
specific project
A: The site plan review would be subject to a pre-submittal (completeness) review, which is scheduled
about 5-7 business days after an application is received. The applicant receives a checklist of
completion and "heads-up" comments at the pre-submittal meeting, and can submit the full
application anytime within the subsequent 180 days. Upon submittal of the Type II site plan review
application, there is a minimum two week public notification period, after which a Development
Review Committee (DRC) meeting is scheduled. Staff is mandated a 120 day timeline for
processing complete Type II applications, but the City's objective is to issue a decision within 60-75
days. This timeline can be compressed somewhat provided the submittal is complete, staff and
agency comments are received within a reasonable timeframe, and there are no post-submittal
revisions made by the applicant. Staff advises that a 40 day decision timeline would be achievable
under this scenario. After the decision is issued, the applicant has 90 days to comply with the
conditions of approval and submit the Final Site Plan. Upon approval of the Final Site Plan, staff
prepares a Development Agreement for signature by the applicant after which time building permits
can be issued.
Date Received: /0;/,1<'/0
Planner: AL