Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPacket, Pre PLANNER 12/8/2010 r' . -REC IVED PRE-SUBMITTAL DISTRIBUTION LIST: DEe - 8 :2010 By:.J1<E p~ I O+-to\p~ Date Distributed: / ~ -I f -{ 0 / Dave Puent - Building / Gilbert GordonlMelissa Fechtel- Fire v Michael Liebler - Traffic V Matt Stouder- Public Works/Engineering Chris Moorhead, Surveying Planner \ ~J...t > . . City of Springfield Development Services Department 225 Fifth Street Springfield, OR 97477 541~726-3753 Phone 541-726-3689 Fax S:;I~~~L;ij . ~ OREGON Pre-Submittal Meeting Case Number Assigned: PRE10-00009 Date Submitted: 12/07/2010 Project Name: Project Description: Pre-Submittal meeting for a Site Plan Review for a mixed nse development: CC retail/restaurant multi-tenant building and a MD multi-nnit housing complex Application Type: Job Address: Assessor's & Tax Lot #: Pre-Submittal Site Plan Tentative 5175 MAIN ST 1702333206200 1702333206300 ''''~'''l;7;~,~'%'''':t.",?_':,"~.l;~''::;~~1%;"I''_.,,~';'v;::;~~'2t',;:~_~'''$~t'~~~f;!;;""':<!".,~~i1N~~~"""":'>':'-to::'<l!~:,,,,{;':--:rH"1't;i;t~P,'tJ.t"',):~M"!;;',,';"',,-"'i:_"_,'~,,~,,,.... .,--;r1;l!'r;.11.:'r;"'~-KYi':'::~'#.!:;'\'S:~;:J:I;;::>[Jro;':r~.,"',-i",';:,1 DISCLAIMER: Applications will not be exempt from Development Code or procedural amendments that may occur between the time afthe Pre-Submittal Meeting and Submittal of the Application for Development Review. Please contact our office at 541-726-3753 with any questions or concerns. A Planner will be assigned tbe following business day and will contact you to confirm the meeting date and time. C:\temp\PL-ALL-PRESUB-F {36909746-6596-420B-8E4D-7 A706F3360AB}.rpt 12/8/2010 . . Pre-Submittal Meeting Development Services Department Room 616 PRE-SUBMITTAL MEETING DATE: Tuesday, December 21,2010 1. PRE-SUBMITIAL MTG #PRE10-00009 (Site Tentative) 080 ENTERPRISES, LLC Assessor's Map: 17-02-33-32 TL 6200, 6300 Address: 5175 & 5195 Main Street Existing Use: Residential The applicant submitted plans to construct a rriixed-use development CC retail/restaurant multi-tenant building and a MD multi-unit housing complex. Meeting Date/Time: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 10:00 - 11:00 a.m. DSD 616 Planner: Steve Hopkins . . :City of Springfield Development Services Department 225 Fifth Street Springfield, OR 97477 Site Plan Review A licant Name: Nick Bo les Phone: 54\. 954.0217 OBO Ente rises LLC Fax: Address: 1390 Grosbeak Court, Redmond, Ore on 97756 . .,.',;;",.~ 'W', "0',' " A Iicant's Re .. Kristen Ta lor Phone: 541-687-1010 ex 15 TBG Architects & Plariners/Inc Fax: 541-687-0625 Address: 132 East Broadwa , Suite 200, Eu ene, Ore on 97401 Owner: Same as A licant information above Phone: Com an Address: Fax: '>. .~, c.._ ""-'.:"'" ,. ASSESSOR'S MAP NO: 17-02-33-32 TAX LOT NO S : 6300 & 6200 5175 & 5195 Main Street (Tax Lot 630 29,185 & (Tax Lot 6200) 37,026 Acres 0 S uare Feet ~ Pro osed Name of Pro"ect: U.."'- ,,,,.,,.-: > ~", ~.' t.- - -,,'F"" e, -,- Description of Pro osal: If you are filling in this form by handl please attach your. proposal description to this application. Mixed-use development: Community Commercial retail/restaurant multi-tenant building development and a Medium Densi multi Ie-urnt housin co lex. sf -. . . . - - Date: Si ns: c; Reviewed b Case No.: A Iication Fee: $ .3 3%~ (jJ Date: Technical F~ Reviewed b - TOTAL FEES: $ :"i:"5.ry:':1S:i:i&~~:''J'8"-tJ'12&t~1:~,,,,w::'''et;:.;:j~qr"~~~:m~Fa.~'~'m;: '~':1ltl':!t-i:.i.'":.,-,ifc1r::F;:Qi,tt~:.;;;;~~~:!;;:'~A~~:;..Z::if0,"?:;~tt::)'k"':'L!r::t>:;~~;7".;r'''~it:",.~ Revised 11/19/09 1 of 11 Owner Signatures.:.' [. · , "J.., I:: .>' "c,\ ,_ :. '.:: .:: This application forri1'iS used fqr:both the required' pre-submittal' meeting and subsequent complete application 5t1bmittal.Ownersignatures are required at both stages in the'application process. . ,:' ...... . .. . .' ~ . :-', . .- An application:irvi~h'o~~theOwne~ls original signature wiUn'otbe accepted. '. . '. . ;:.i.:' . . - ' '~\,'.-:: i - ,. . l" ': -;. '. -, ! Pre-Subinitt~1 '.,i,',,;,' ': ;, . " -~:, >: ;;r!:[J'~:i!;::;;~;::;:~'.1_;; :;T:;; ,'" _'" .~:. '.i>~;'~ . i" The u~der~igned'iclckhqwledges that the information in t~iS<ipp!lcation is correct and accurate:fO:r:sc~eduling,ofthe Pre- Submittal Meeting, If the applicant is not the owner, tihe'ii,wner 'hereby grants permission for theapplican\:.~o~ct in his/her behalf. I{we do'heijilwacknowledge thatI/we are legally responslbl~'fo't allLstatutory timelinestiQrq!""" n,irequests and requirem\!n~ c~nveye~ .\:~iimy'.r~:presentati";e. Owner: '" ,...., :;';1' 'Date:! ';; -." . ~- ~ t f ~ sUbmittal:,,:,,:;",'BU!!:iJm:]!i!IH,'!~it:':l"i . ,. ,. g' ; i ,..: ~lr\::; ",;':,' . . I repre~ntlttliSje'ppl~tiQn tqoei~qmpfet~fo~'subl11ittat to ttle.Clty; COnSIs,tent _with the completeness check , 'perl"ormed ~n;iffis!appfiCation:aFth~:Pre-SUbmittafMeerlj,g, I:affum the' iriformatioriil~nbfiei:Hiy the 'City as : 'n~es~~ry ;_fpr-p~~~~!;i~g,;tl,1~)!3PPI.ic~tion is';provided ~rejntqr the- intorl1la,tion, wilf~ptL!J~: provi~ed if not otherwise contaiQ7.~. ~i~~!.Il1~'~le.,~__~!?rn.!tt~,I!':_~~l:I; the Ci~ m,ay. ~i~ ~rof~~in9 th~_ a~pl,i~tio~ ,:~,i~"h:~~e ,in(9~rmatjt?n a.s. submitt~d; !.Jhl,$;-;:statement ~rv!'3 as writt;~n notice pursuant torthe reqUlfemen~-,of:O~ 22?l78 pertaining to a Owner: ,comPleteiaj~~;~ni:;","/ir ':,:; . ',' . .' "f" 'i"'~:!HI:',""i : "d A 'i!i1;%'" :,Dat~:\ .' At'i1icJ~ . ,0:' s~~t1~Jt1i~;I" " ' ' ~lll!i: I [ !:. ::~ l! ~.~!lr ~ . c','}, .tHE i , I " '., ., ,'" " .";" ..sJ ~~'-':;,~H; -~F~,:J '.",', i ~, ~, , PRE.SUBMITJAb~RE0i(1) " ,,' I ,",j1,'I, ',[ ;', , DE:O:, a~ebl~ ':'; :",':0.::, .'.;......:.,.I.!t..,.,:..;.,..,....:I,.1".',' :,:::; n-f-- ,,;.< pilll""l" ;!m "i' iJ P !l;J.i1:; ',"T. '. ,t.:-1 .,.,. t',.", .. <~,~ i l ;!~ 'r~1h :iL.'~ ',;., <n ,1 c, ~. j;.;f ,.i'i , ~,' , l' ": ~ : i . ~ .. j I'~ itl.t . p;~ , . .r..,;'\: " ' U' 1,;,: Revised 1/19/09, :1':'. "'r Ii' '1 j.' i 2 'of 11 . Site Plan Review Submittal Requirements Checklist NOTE: . ALL of the following items MUST be submitted for BOTH Pre-Submittal and Submittal. . If you feel an item on the list below does not apply to your specific application, please state the reason why and attach the explanation to this form. . ~ Application Fee - refer to the Development Code Fee Schedule for the appropriate fee calculation formula. A copy of the fee schedule is available at the Development Services Department. . Any applicable application, technology, and postage fees are collected at the pre-submittal and submittal stages. . ~ Site Plan Review Application Form ~ Narrative explaining the purpose of the proposed development, the existing use of the property, and any additional information that may have a bearing in determining the action to be taken. The narrative should also include the proposed number of employees and future expansion plans, if known. ~ Copy of the Deed ~ Copy of a Preliminary Title Report issued within the past 30 days documenting ownership and listing all encumbrances. ~ Copy of the Site Plan Reduced to 8'h"x 11", which will be mailed as part of the required neighboring property notification packet. ~ Right-of-Way Approach Permit Application provided where the property has frontage on an Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) facility. ~ Three (3) Copies of the Stormwater Management System Study with Completed Stormwater Scoping Sheet Attached - The plan, supporting calculations and. documentation must be consistent with the Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual. ~ Three (3) Copies of the Traffic Impact Study prepared by a Traffic Engineer in accordance with SDC 4.2-105 AA. Traffic Impact Studies (TIS) allow the City to analyze and evaluate the traffic impacts and mitigation of a development on the City's transportation system. In general, a TIS must explain how the traffic from a given development affects the transportation system in terms of safety, traffic operations, access and mobility, and immediate and adjoining street systems. A TIS must also address, if needed, City, metro plan and state land use and transportation policies and objectives. ~ Seven (7) Copies of the Following Plan Sets for Pre-Submittal OR Eighteen (18) Copies of the Following Plan Sets for Submittal ~ All of the following plans must include the scale appropriate to the area involved and sufficient to show detail of the plan and' related data, north arrow, and date of preparation. ~ All plan sets must be folded to 8V2" by 11" and bound bytlR{~~MAI. REC'O a. Site Assessment of Existing Conditions DEe. 7 lOm ~ Prepared by an Oregon licensed Landscape Architect or Engineer Revised 11/19/09 4 of 11 . . [8J Vicinity Map [8J The name, location and dimensions of all existing site features including buildings, curb cuts, trees and impervious surface areas, clearly indicating what is remaining and what is being removed. For existing structures to remain, also indicate present use, size, setbacks from property lines, and distance between buildings. o The name, location, dimensions, direction of flow and top of bank of all watercourses and required riparian setback that are shown on the Water Quality Limited Watercourse Map on file in the Development Services Department (NI A) o The 100-year floodplain and f100dway boundaries on the site, as specified in the latest adopted FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps or FEMA approved Letter of Map Amendment or Letter of Map Revision (NI A) o The Time of Travel Zones, as specified in SDC 3.3-200 and delineated on the Wellhead Protection Areas Map on file in the Developmen"t Services Department (NI A) [8J Physical features including, but not limited to trees 5" in diameter or greater when measured 4 V2 feet above the ground, significant clusters of trees and shrubs, riparian areas, wetlands and rock outcroppings (The only physical features are 9 trees 5" dbh or greater) [8J Soil types and water table information as mapped and specified in the Soils Survey of Lane County. A Geotechnical Report prepared by an Engineer must be submitted concurrently if the Soils Survey indicates the proposed development area has unstable soils and/or a high water table b. Site Plan [8J Prepared by an Oregon licensed Architect, Landscape Architect, or Engineer [8J Proposed buildings: location, dimensions, size (gross floor area applicable to the parking requirement for the proposed use(s)), setbacks from property lines, and distance between buildings [8J Location and height of existing or proposed fences, walls, outdoor equipment, storage, trash receptacles, and signs [8J Location, dimensions, and number of typical, compact and disabled parking spaces; including aisles, wheel bumpers, directional signs, and striping " [8J Dimensions of the development area, as well as area and percentage of the site proposed for buildings, structures, parking and vehicular areas, sidewalks, patios, and other imperviOUS surfaces o Observance of solar access requirements as specified in the applicable zoning district (NIA) [8J On-site loading areas and vehicular and pedestrian circulation [8J Access to streets, alleys, and properties to be served, including the location and dimensions of existing and proposed curb cuts and curb cuts proposed to be closed [8J Location, type, and number of bicycle parking spaces o Location" of existing and proposed transit facilities (NI A directly adjacent to the subject sites) " PRE-SUBMITTAL REC'D [8J Area and dimensions of all property to be conveyed, dedicated, or res~rved ~9,~ common open spaces, recreational areas, and other similar public a1fJ"seniiJpU~lic uses Revised 11/19/09 5 of 11 .. o Phased Development Plan - where applicable, the Site Plan application must include a phasing plan indicating any proposed phases for development, including the boundaries and sequencing of each phase. Phasing must progress in a sequence promoting street connectivity between the various phases of the development and accommodating other required public improvements, including but not limited to, sanitary sewer, stormwater management, water, and electricity. The applicant must indicate which phases apply to the Site Plan application being submitted. c. Improvement and Public Utilities Plan i:8J Prepared by an Oregon licensed Civil Engineer i:8J Location and width of all existing and proposed easements (There are no proposed easements) i:8J Location, widths (of paving and right-of-way), and names of all existing and proposed streets, alleys, dedications or other right-of-ways within or adjacent to the proposed development, including ownership and maintenance status, if applicable. i:8J Location and type of existing and proposed street lighting i:8J Location of existing and required traffic control devices, fire hydrants, power poles, transformers, neighborhood mailbox units, and similar public facilities i:8J Location, width, and construction material of all existing and proposed sidewalks, sidewalk ramps, pedestrian access ways, and trails i:8J Location and size of existing and proposed utilities on and adjacent to the site including sanitary sewer mains, stormwater 'management systems, water mains, power, gas, telephone, and cable TV. Indicate the proposed connection points d. Grading, Paving, & Stormwater Management Plan i:8J Prepared by an Oregon licensed Civil Engineer i:8J Planting plan prepared by an Oregon licensed Landscape Architect where plants are proposed as part of the stormwater management system i:8J Roof drainage patterns and discharge locations i:8J Pervious and impervious area drainage patterns i:8J The size and location of stormwater management systems components, including but riot limited to: drain lines, catch basins, dry wells and/or detention ponds; stormwater quality measures; 'and natural drainageways to be retained o Existing and proposed spot elevations and contours lines drawn at 1 foot intervals (for land with a slope over 10 percent, the contour lines may be apRE~~JHI~lrnViJll~~(I'fLA) i:8J Amount of proposed cut and fill . ' IllAl KU"; U DEe 7 2010 e. Landscape Plan i:8J Drawn by a Landscape Architect i:8J Location and dimensions of landscaping and open space areas to include calculation of landscape coverage (Reference Architectural Site Plan, Sheet Al) i:8J Screening in accordance with SDC 4.4-110 o Written description, including specifications, of the permanent irrigation system (The permanent irrigation system will be proposed at the time of building permit application submittal) Revised 11/19/09 6 of 11 . . I:8J Location and type of street trees I:8J List in chart form the proposed types of landscape materials (trees, shrubs, ground cover). Include in the chart genus, species, common name, quantity, size, spacing, and method of planting (Exact locations, sizes and species of trees and plants will proposed at the time of building permit application submittal) f. Architectural Plans I:8J Exterior elevations of all buildings and structures proposed for the development site, including height (Exterior elevations of the commercial buildings will be submitted before building permit application submittal once tenants for the commercial buildings are identified) I:8J Conceptual floor plans (Conceptual floor plans of the commercial buildings will be submitted before building permit application submittal once tenants for the commercial buildings are identified) g. On-Site Lighting Plan I:8J Location, orientation, and maximum height of exterior light fixtures, both free standing and attached (Exterior building and site lighting will be submitted at the time of building permit application submittal. This submittal only includes the parking lot lighting.) I:8J Type and extent of shielding, including cut-off angles, and type of illumination, wattage, and luminous area I:8J Photometric test report for each light source I:8J Additional Materials That May be Required IT IS THE APPLICANT'S RESPONSIBILITY TO DETERMINE IF ADDITIONAL STANDARDS/APPLICATIONS APPLY TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. THE APPLICANT SHOULD CONSIDER UTILIZING PRE-DEVELOPMENT MEETINGS AS DISCUSSED IN SDC 5.1-120: I:8J o I:8J o I:8J o I:8J Revised 11/19/09 Where a multi-family development is proposed, any additional materials to demonstrate compliance with SDC 3.2-240 Riparian Area Protection Report for properties located within 150 feet of the top of bank of any Water' Quality Limited Watercourses (WQLW) or within 100 feet of the top of bank of any direct tributaries of WQLW (N/ A) A Geotechnical Report prepared by an engineer must b.e submitted concurrently if there are unstable soils and/or a high water table present (A Geotechnical Report is submitted even though there are not hazardous conditions) Where the development area is within an overlay district, address the additional standards of the overlay district (N/ A) If five or more trees are proposed to be removed, a Tree Felling Permit as specified in SDC 5.19-100 (\IJ\~~ ~ 'StA1VU1~ FCIL- 01W PlAN r1iA11f;W WtJ1AnVe,,) A wetland delineation approved by the Oregon Division of State Lands must be submitted concurrently where there is a wetland on the property (N/ A) Any required federal or state permit must be submitted concurrently or evidence the permit application has been submitted for review (ODCVkf,li911~;pf~W~.!.C' Approach Permit) 1\... -JtJiJlvlU iAL ~i. D DEe 7 2010 7 of 11 . . [J Where any grading, filling or excavating is proposed with the development, a Land and Drainage Alteration permit must be submitted prior to development o Where applicable, any Discretionary Use or Variance as specified in SDC 5.9-100 and 5.21-100 (N/A) o An Annexation application, as specified in SDC 5.7-100, where a development is proposed outside of the city limits but within the City's urban service area and can be served by sanitary sewer (NI A) PRE-SUBMIITAt RECiO DEe 7 2010 Revised 11/19/09 8 of 11 spr _map . . PRE10-00009 Pre-Sub Mtg (Site Tent) 17-02-33-32 TL 6200,6300 5175 & 5195 Main Street Page 1 of 1 MAIN ST MAIN ST ..J Q. I- III ... III III "" ,I-: III , , 'Q " " Z 'N . III '0' ',I III ".. N A PRE.SUBMltTAL REC'D DEe, 7 2010 http://spifs020/mapguide2009/mapviewerphp/printablepage.php?SESSION=0994824a-?000-1 000... 12/8/2010 'U co f- t~ii'~r:; l~Hi ~ 1;~ ~ t ~ /'f'r"" ! , " \. " 0 ~~,L ~~~ gLvL6~O :::>N\~dS D 133l:1lSNIVW!i6L!i'ilS"lL5" M31^3<1 NVld 31/S z ::m S3SI<ld<l31N3 080 ~ lN3V\1d0l3^3m~ 133~lS NIVV\I "if PUZ~dSLS ~ ~H~ ,- I ! 'j <C i , 'I' i i !:!.: ! I "" . I Ii; Iii I'd 'I I I ! ,dl!' IlljlUil! II il II' i!I,'llld ,I,.I!, 'I !i g h 1lllilli1 i!11! IlI!jllllli ~ II' I! jllllll llll! I!l!;\l 'I' I! ~ I! II !llh!! 11m 11!!!li !!Illl lJ..: ol .. .. ~ .' z ! !!! ! !~I ~ ~~! ! ~i !~ ~~ ! ~u !n~ii' @ I! . I; Ii!~ ~ I i I I I III I II III I, , I 1IIIIUll S II 'II! II" !~ I I! !!! ! II Il!lll 1111 II Iii I!UII ~ Ii ~ ! !1! 1! !!!!I! !I I!! q!!l d 1~!!l11!1I1!! !ll !!Il'!l! - !' ~ I ! l III i' '!! ! !~ i' ~ I i I a I' g, ~ Ii il i , I Il,pt Hn ILq j! I I I I I ! I I I I ! ! I , o II I I II I Z~'[]'~'II L.U "",',- . . S3 ,~' ::\ ," : ~ ' I . ! I II I ! Ii! I I i hi I i -r.Il-@ Iii \ f H ~~ ~. ~H H~~ Hi' . "i II II)! Ill! ~ II 'iI <i::'<'!. ~i!.~;l i1....i1 t: ~~li~~~ 8 g ~~~ i!!!-.. ...1Il! ~ ! "',," !" > !! Z ' 0' I ' ;:: II I I ,iI. I " , :S ,~ I! ,Ill' I ~ ' , ::J 1111 !, 'I~l~ !I '" I ~ I ! Iii !i! ~ lllllln whim III' > . " - N " < . .'.....l ::::,::~ ::,-<:'v'I :-:-',;::j _,..--1 .". W -':1. :::'-:'~ -. '-:-:':<>i!l to ,Z - "j:: ::}:* ....< :.-z :\J~ i "'. ~ ! to I ~i II ~ 1:1 Ii ~ ~~ t!~..., :> "... ... :c i32 ~~.,.~ .". .. ~ ,I i e- ,,-,! 15 , I'I ~f;l I ~ ~ ~ Ll._J! ~, -, Cl U ~...J:_. c::) ~C) ---ll ('..1 ~ f=: l:- '5';. ~,:.:; u -~ w t;A Cl . f","~..J ex.::: 0.., ,(~ --,...~'.... ..-.-....,-,-- . . TBG ~f1~~ ~~~ "'~l/ ~~~':t-~,: December 7, 2010 Mr. Steve Hopkins City of Springfield - Development Services Planning Division 225 5th Street Springfield, Oregon 97477 ARCHITECTS & PlANNERS/INC '. 132 East Broadway $uite200 Eugene, Oregon 97401 541-687.1010 541-687-0625 Fax RE: 51st_52nd & Main Street Redevelopment Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application (200913/1.3) Project Address: Assessor's Map & Tax Lot: Applicant: 5175 and 5195 Main Street E-mail Address: 17-02-33-32 Tax Lots 6200 and 6300 OBO Enterprises, LLC Nick Boyles 541-954-0217 1390 Grosbeak Court Redmond, Oregon 97756 q ualityapartments@q.com Daytime Phone: Mailing Address: E-mail Address: TBG Architects & Planners/lnc Kristen Taylor 541-687-1010 132 East Broadway, Suite 200 Eugene, Oregon 97401 ktaylor@tbg-arch.com PRE.SUBMITTAl REC'O DEe. 7 2010 Applicant's Representative: Daytime Phone: Mailing Address: NARRATIVE -"- _.-._~.." _J In accordance with the Site Plan Review submittal requirements, this written statement describes the proposed development and demonstrates that the proposal complies with the criteria under SDC 5.17-100. The proposal is subject to the Type II application review process per SDC 5.17-11 O(B}. I. Land Use Request The present request is for approval of a mixed-use development including an approximate 3,000-square-foot multi-tenant commercial building and an approximate 2,500-square-foot drive-through restaurant building with associated site infrastructure, parking and landscaping located on the northern portion of the site along Main Street. There are two multiple-family residential buildings proposed on the southern portion of the site adjacent to the neighboring Low-Density Residential (LDR) zoned properties. Building One is a two-story building with 11 units facing South 52nd Street. This larger Building One has three multiple-unit structures connected together with a covered outdoor stair and corridor system. The two structures located along the internal drive aisle facing South 52nd Street have ground John E. lawless, AlA Principal James F. Alberson Ill, AlA Principal Darrell L Smith, N0\RB, fAIA Principal . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7,2010 Page 2 of 32 structures located along the internal drive aisle facing South 52nd Street have ground floor garages and second floor one-bedroom residential flats. The third structure located adjacent to the LDR property to the south and facing South 52nd Street has two floors of two-bedroom residential flats. Building Two is a two-story building with 4 townhouse units tucked in the back southwest corner of the site facing Building One. Tenants have not yet been identified for the commercial buildings. Therefore, conservative assumptions of possible tenant uses have been presented for the purposes of the Site Plan Review process. It is likely that the commercial tenant uses will be use categories such as retail sales, personal services and eating and drinking establishments. Generally, tenants will not be identified until after the core and shell construction of the buildings. Additional details regarding this proposal are provided on the Site Plan Review drawings, the remainder of this written statement, and other materials attached herein. Design Intent: The 51"-52od & Main Street Redevelopment project represents an effort to raise the standard of typical commercial and medium-density residential development in the East Main Street area. . to enhance the quality of local commercial and medium-density residential development; . to reduce the blighted appearance of large expanses of parking along Main Street; and . to ensure compatibility between the Main Street commercial corridor and the surrounding low-density residential neighborhood. . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7,2010 Page 3 of 32 The proposed uses are consistent with the Springfield Development Code (SDC), the East Main Refinement Plan (1988) and the Eugene-Springfield Metro Plan (2004 Update). The subject properties are within the Community Commercial (CC) zoning district, and are designated as Commercial with a Mixed-Use Area Overlay on the Eugene-Springfield Metro Plan, Plan Diagram. The parcels are located on the Mixed- Use Area #3 in the East Main Refinement Plan, Plan Diagram. Per SDC 3.2-310, retail sales, personal services and eating and drinking establishments are allowed in the Community Commercial zoning district. Per the East Main Refinement Plan (Mixed-Use Element, Area #3, page 11) Medium- and High-Density Residential uses are allowed under the Community Commercial zoning district. Therefore, a mix of commercial and multiple-family residential uses are allowed on the parcels subject to Site Plan Review approval. Additionally, consistent with the applicability of the Site Plan Review process and the Springfield Development Code, the project addresses anticipated post-development changes in stormwater patterns to maintain the integrity of the City's watercourses by preserving water quality. Similarly, the site and building .design and orientation minimize any possible adverse effects on surrounding property owners and the general public. This application also addresses traffic impacts in the supplemental Traffic I mpact Study. The project was designed with the understanding that its long-term viability as an active mixed-use development depends on the economic and ecological health of the local community. To this end, the 51"-52,d & Main Street Redevelopment proposal attempts to balance economic concerns with careful attention to neighborhood compatibility and land stewardship. This request for Site Plan Review is proposed under the general approval criteria. As demonstrated in Section IV below, the subject request meets all applicable code criteria and should be approved as proposed. . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7, 2010 Page 4 of 32 Design Team: Owner and Applicant: OBO Enterprises, LLC 1390 Grosbeak Court Redmond, Oregon 97756 (541) 954-0217 Contact: Nick Boyles q ualityapartments@q.com Applicant's Representative and Architect: TBG Architects & Planners/l nc 132 East Broadway, Suite 200 Eugene, Oregon 97401 (541) 687-1010' Fax (541) 687-0625 Contact: Kristen Taylor ktaylor@tbg-arch.com . Civil and Transportation Engineers and Surveyor: Branch Engineering, Inc. 310 North 5th Street Springfield, Oregon 97477 (541) 746-0637 . Fax (541) 746-0389 Engineer: Contact: Damien Gilbert, PE damien@branchengineering.com Surveyor: Contact: Renee Clough, PE, PLS renee@branchengineering.com Landscape Architect: Schirmer + Associates, LLC 375 West 4th Street, Suite 201 Eugene, Oregon 97401 (541) 686.4540' Fax (541) 686.4577 Contact: Carol Schirmer caro I@schirmerassociates.com . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 6,2010 Page 5 of 32 II. Site Description A. Location and Site Context This Site Plan Review Presubmittal request applies to Tax Lots 6200 and 6300 of Lane County Assessor's Map 17-02-33-32. Tax Lot 6200 is about 0.85 acres (37,026 square feet). Tax Lot 6300 is about 0.67 acres (29,185 square feet). The total OBO Enterprises LLC development site is approximately 1.52 acres (66,211 square feet) in size. The development site as described will be referred to in this application as the subject site. The subject site is located within the Springfield City limits and Urban Growth Boundary on the south side of Mai n Street between South 51" Place and South 52nd Street. Main Street is classified as a principal arterial. South 51" Place and South 52nd Street are classified as local streets. The OBO Enterprises LLC properties are zoned Community Commercial (CC). Currently, Tax Lot 6300 is developed with a single-family residence with access from 520d Street. Tax Lot 6200 was developed with a single-family residence with access from Main Street, which burned down a couple of years ago. The properties located on both sides of Main Street in the area of the subject site are zoned CC developed with a mix of commercial uses such as auto-oriented uses and eating and drinking establishment uses. The properties located to the south of the subject site are zoned Low-Density Residential (LOR) and developed with single-family residences. The properties located to the west of the subject site are zoned CC; the CC property located directly adjacent to Tax Lot 6200 is currently.developed with a single family residence and the properties across 51" Place are developed with an auto-oriented use. The properties located to the east of the subject site are zoned CC and developed with a single-family residences. The development site is serviced via Lane Transit District (L TO) Route 11 (Thurston). There is a bus stop within a half a block of the subject site on either side of Main Street for eastbound and westbound transit riders. The route is serviced every 10 to 15 minutes throughout the day. Reference the Traffic Impact Study, Appendix C, for the L TO route schedule. . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7,2010 Page 6 of 32 B. Existing Conditions and Site Access The subject parcels are relatively flat with street right-of-way frontage along Main Street, South Sl" Place and South S20d Street. Currently, South 51" Place is unimproved to the City's public street standards. Main Street and South 520d Street are improved public streets with sidewalks. South 520d Street only has a sidewalk on the on the east side of the street. As stated above, Tax Lot 6300 is currently developed with a single-family residence with access from South 520d Street. Tax Lot 6200 was developed with a single-family residence that burned down a couple of years ago with access from Main Street. The proposed redevelopment relocates these existing two driveways and adds a new full access driveway on South 51" Place. These three proposed driveways provide safe access to and from the site and are consistent with the Springfield Development Code as outlined below. The applicant has filed a Right-of-Way Approach Permit with the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) for the proposed limited right-in and right-out shared access from Main Street in the general location of the existing driveway. Please reference the attached copy of the pending ODOT Right-of-Way Approach Permit application. There are 10 existing trees on the site, of which 9 have a diameter breast height of 5" or greater. Except for one 4" cedar tree located at the southwest corner of the site, all existing trees on the site are proposed for removal to construct the new buildings, site infrastructure and required on-site stormwater infiltration and detention system. III. Land Use History As stated above, the subject site is located within the Springfield City Limits and Urban Growth Boundary. The subject properties are zoned Community Commercial (CC) on the Springfield Zoning Map and designated as Commercial with a Mixed-Use Overlay on the Eugene-Springfield Metro Plan, Plan Diagram. The parcels are located in the Mixed-Use Area #3 on the East Main Refinement Plan, Plan Diagram. Per SDC 3.2-310, retail sales, personal services and eating and drinking establishments are allowed in the Community Commercial zoning district. Per the East Main Refinement Plan (Mixed-Use Element, Area #3, page 11) Medium- and High-Density Residential uses are allowed under the Community Commercial zoning district. Therefore, a mix of community commercial and multiple-family residential uses are allowed on the parcels subject to Site Plan Review approval. . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7,2010 Page 7 of 32 IV. Approval Criteria '- Site Plan Review Supporting Facts and Findings This section is organized by the applicable approval criteria per Article X.II. Applicable Site Design Review approval criteria are outlined in bold below, followed by proposed findings in normal text. Additional applicable zoning code criteria needing to be addressed as part of the Site Design Review approval criteria are identified in bold italics. A. The zoning is consistent with the Metro Plan diagram, and/or the applicable Refinement Plan diagram, Plan District map, and Conceptual Development Plan. Findings: Per the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan, Plan Diagram, the subject property falls within the Urban Growth Boundary and the Metro Plan Boundary. The subject site is clearly designated Commercial with a Mixed-Use Area Overlay on the Metro Plan Diagram, which is consistent with site's current Community Commercial (CC) zoning district. The subject site falls within the adopted East Main Refinement Plan area. The parcels are located in the Mixed-Use Area #3 on the East Main Refinement Plan, Plan Diagram. Per the East Main Refinement Plan (Mixed-Use Element, Area #3, page 11) Medium- and High-Density Residential uses are allowed under the CC zoning district. Therefore, the zoning is consistent with the refinement plan. The proposed uses are consistent with the Springfield Development Code (SDC), East Main Refinement Plan and the Eugene-Springfield Metro Plan. Per SDC 3.2- 310; retail sales, personal services and eating and drinking establishments are allowed in the Community Commercial zoning district. Per the East Main Refinement Plan (Mixed-Use Element, Area #3, page 11) Medium- and High- Density Residential uses are allowed under the Community Commercial zoning district. Therefore, a mix of community commercial and multiple-family residential uses are allowed on the parcels subject to Site Plan Review approval. Therefore, the zoning and proposed development is consistent with this criterion. B. Capacity requirements of public and private facilities, including but not limited to, water and electricity; sanitary sewer and stormwater management facilities; and streets and traffic safety controls shall not be exceeded and the public improvements shall be available to serve the site at the 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. Findings: The ap'plicant is proposing to construct two single-story commercial buildings and two two-story multiple-family residential buildings on CC zoned land with adequate public and private facilities. Reference the attached civil . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7, 2010 Page 8 of 32 engineering drawings for details on existing and proposed facilities. Per SDC 4.3- 125, all private utilities on the proposed development site will be placed underground whenever possible. The public improvements proposed as part of this development include half-street improvements along the. frontage of South 51" Place, including roughly 18'-0" of new asphalt, curb and gutter, sidewalk, a street light, street trees and the proposed driveway approach. Additionally, the proposed driveway approaches on Main Street and South 52nd Street will be replaced and will meet current ADA standards. All public improvements will be constructed per City standards under a Public Improvements Permit (PIP). The proposal has adequate water service available from an existing 6" public water main located in South 51" Place adjacent to the subject site's western property line. An existing 6" public water main is also located in South 52nd Street with adequate water service. This main is located on the far side of the right of way. There is an existing fire hydrant located in the public right-of-way on Main Street to the north of the subject site at the intersection of South 52nd Street and Main Street. All of the proposed buildings (commercial, residential and trash enclosures) will be sprinklered. Due to the fact that all of the proposed buildings are located at least 600'-0" from the. existing fire hydrant there are no additional private fire hydrants proposed in this development. The existing fire hydrant has an adequate flow rate to serve the site. There are existing overhead electric lines running east-west adjacent to the site's northern property line, which provide adequate capacity to serve the proposed development. There are two existing public sanitary sewer stubs (4" stubs) located adjacent to the subject site's western and eastern property line conveying sewage from the site to the 8" public sanitary sewer lines located in South 51" Place and South 52nd Street. The existing public sanitary sewer has adequate capacity to serve the development's needs. There is an existing 4 '/2" gas line located in Main Street. There are existing 1" gas lines located in South 51" Place and South 52nd Street, which provide adequate capacity to serve the proposed development if gas is used. The existing homes were likely connected to gas. These existing services will be disconnected. There is an existing 48" storm pipe located along the south side of Main Street. An existing 12" storm main is located in South 52nd Street and an existing 12" storm line is located South 51" Place. As part of the P.I.P., the South 51" Place existing roadside ditch will be removed and a new 12"storm line will be installed with a stub out to provide service to the subject property and to convey the upstream flows. A new storm lateral is proposed to connect into the existing 12" . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7, 2010 Page 9 of 32 storm line in South 52nd Street as well. No connection is proposed to the 48" storm line located in Main Street at this time. In addition, as noted above, the owner proposes to make public sidewalk improvements along the property's frontage on South 51" Place as required Due to City Staff identified storm system requirements, the proposed development includes on-site retention to the fullest extent possible. Special emphasis is placed on infiltrating the stormwater and limiting the flow rate to the existing public storm system. See the attached Stormwater Management System Plan for more information. The existing public street and traffic safety control systems will not be exceeded with the addition of the proposed development and are available to serve the site at the time of development. Reference the attached TIS, October 13 2010, for details, which is adopted and incorporated herein. In addition, as noted above, the pending ODOT Right-of-Way Approach Permit for the limited access driveway on Main Street is attached for reference. A geotechnical analysis was prepared for building construction. Please reference the attached Geotechnical Investigation, dated July 19, 2010. As demonstrated above as well as in the drawings and referenced attachments, capacity requirements of public and private facilities, including but not limited to, water and electricity; sanitary sewer and stormwater management facilities; and streets and traffic safety controls have not been exceeded and the public improvements are available to serve the site at the time of development. Therefore, the proposed development is consistent with this criterion. C. The. proposed development shall comply with all applicable public and private design and construction standards contained in this Code and other applicable regulations. Due to the subject parcels' Multi-Use Area designation in the East Main Refinement Plan, SDC 4.7-210 Residential Uses in Commercial Districts and per City Staff direction, the northern portion of the site complies with the applicable CC Base Zone Development Standards and the southern portion of the site complies with the applicable MDR Base Zone Development Standards and SDC 3.2-240 Multi-Unit Design Standards. Reference the attached Site Plan for the CC and MDR area boundaries. There are standards within the MDR Base Zone Development Standards and Multi-Unit Design Standards that do not apply due to the fact that the proposal is for a mixed-use development on a CC zoned site. As required, this written statement addresses the provisions in the Springfield Development Code that are applicable to the proposed mixed-use development on CC zoned parcels as outlined below. Reference the attached Site Plan for details. . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7,2010 Page 10 of 32 SDC 3.2-200 MDR Base Zone Development Standards: Findings: Per the East Main Refinement Plan (Mixed-Use Element, Area #3, page 11) Medium- and High-Density Residential uses are allowed under the CC zoning district. Therefore, a mix of community commercial and multiple-family dwelling uses are allowed on the CC zoned parcels within this area subject to Site Plan Reviewapproval. SDC 3.2-205 Establishment of Residential Zoning Districts and SDC 3.2-215 Standard Lots/Parcels and Maximum Lot/Parcel Coverage are not applicable because the base zone of the subject parcels is Cc. There are two multiple-family residential buildings proposed on the southern portion of the site.. Building One is a two-story building with 11 units facing South 52,d Street. This larger Building One has three multiple-unit structures connected together with a covered outdoor stair and corridor system. The two structures located along the internal drive aisle facing South 52,d Street have ground floor garages and second floor one-bedroom residential flats. The third structure located adjacent to the LDR property to the south and facing South 52,d Street has two floors of two-bedroom residential flats. Building Two is a two-story building with 4 townhouse units tucked in the back southwest corner of the site facing Building One. The design intent of the residential portion of the site is to create a quiet residential community within the proposed mixed-use development located along the busy Main Street corridor by facing the main entrances to all of the units towards a shared internal outdoor stair and corridor system. This outdoor central area between the residential structures provides opportunity for 'Iandscaping, a shared common area and increased natural daylighting and ventilation into the units. The residential portion of the development complies with the applicable MDR Base Zone Development Standards as follows: . SDC 3.2-215: The minimum building front yard setback for the MDR portion of the development is 10'-0" minimum. Building One is setback a minimum of 12'-0" from the street frontage on South 52,d Street, which exceeds the required front yard setback. The residential portion of the development does not have a street side yard. . SDC 3.2-215: The interior and rear yard building setbacks are 5'-0" and 10'-0" minimum respectively. Along the rear southern property line adjacent to the adjacent LDR zoned property, the multiple-unit buildings are setback a minimum of 12'-0", which exceeds the required 10'-0" rear yard setback. Along the interior western property line adjacent to the adjacent CC zoned property, the multiple-unit buildings are setback a minimum of 10'-0", which exceeds the required 5'-0" setback. . SDC 3.2-215: The front yard setback for garages is a minimum 18'-0" measured along the driveway from the property line fronting the street to the far wall of the garage where the face of structure is perpendicular to the street. . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7, 2010 Page 11 of 32 The proposed garage entrances and driveways face the interior of the site with residential units located above the garages on the second level. Therefore, although the garages are perpendicular to South 520d Street, the garages are incorporated into the design of the larger multiple-family residential building (Building One) and do not appear to be garages from the street facing fa<;ade (South 520d Street). However, the far wall of the garage where the face of the structure is perpendicular to South 520d Street is setback 18'-0" in compliance with the required minimum. Reference the Site Plan for details. . SDC 3.2-215: The height of the proposed multiple-unit residential buildings is no greater than about 26'-0" (at the ridge of the highest hip roof), which is less than the required 35'-0" maximum. Reference the attached Exterior Elevations drawings for details. . SDC 3.2-225 Base Solar Development Standards: These criteria are not applicable to the proposed development because' the subject parcels are zoned CC and located on the north side of the adjacent LOR zoned properties. SDC 3.2-240 Multi-Unit Desif!n Standards: Findings: As noted above, there are standards within SDC 3.2-240 Mufti-Unit Design Standards that do not apply to the proposed residential portion of the development due to the mixed-use nature of the development proposal located on a CC zoned site. The residential portion of the development complies with the Multi-Unit Design Standards as follows: SDC 3.2-240(B) Purpose: The two two-story multiple-unit residential buildings with private patios or balconies are compatible with the adjacent single-family residential development to the south and provide an appropriate transition between this single-family residential neighborhood and the commercial development along Main Street to the north. The MDR portion of the proposed mixed-use development promotes higher residential density inside the urban growth boundary along the Main Street commercial corridor and adjacent to low- density residential neighborhoods. The proposed medium-density residential housing will use existing infrastructure and improve the efficiency of public services and facilities. SDC 3.2-240(C) Review: This written statement and other supplementary information describes the proposed multi-unit development and demonstrates that the proposal complies with the Site Plan Review criteria under the Spri ngfield Development Code (Section 5.17-100), which is subject to the Type II application review process. . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7, 2010 Page 12 of 32 SDC 3.2-240(D) Design Standards, the residential portion of the development complies with the Design Standards as follows: . SDC 3.2-240(D)(1)(a) Building Orientation: The outdoor covered stair and corridor system is the primary entrance to Building One, the larger multiple- unit residential building, which faces South 520d Street. Building One's primary outdoor entrance directly connects to South 520d Street, to the exterior front doors of all of the residential units in both Building One and Two as well as to the pedestrian walkway system throughout the site. The street facing outdoor entrance for Building One will be enhanced by. decorative signage and pedestrian amenities such as a masonry seating walls and a trellis archway. Therefore, this criterion is met. . . SDC 3.2-240(D)(1)(b) Building Orientation: The front street facing fa<;ade of Building One is located about 12'-0" (outdoor staircase) to 18'-0" (far wall of ground floor garage) from the front property line on South 520d Street, which is within the maximum 25 feet requirement. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(1)(c) Building Orientation: Off-street parking and vehicular circulation is not placed between the residential structures and the street facing fa<;ade on South 520d Street. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(1)(d) Building Orientation: There are no wetlands identified on the subject properties and the properties are relatively flat, therefore, this criterion is not applicable. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(2)(a) Building Form: The proposed two-story residential structures have continuous horizontal distances between about 83'-0" to about 111 '-0", which are less than the maximum 160'-0" (measured from end wall to end wall) allowed. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(2)(b) Building Form: With the exception of a couple of minor building elements outlined below, the proposed two-story residential buildings (Building One and Two) have hip roofs with a roof pitch that is about 5 to 15 which meets the minimum 3 to 12 pitch requirement. Reference the attached Exterior Elevations for details. Adjustment: The front and back porch awnings on Building Two's townhouse units are shed roof forms and Building One's outdoor stair and corridor system is covered, respectively, by a shed and flat roof form in order to provide more appropriate and improved design and construction details for these elements. The proposed adjustment to these building roof forms are discussed below under SDC 3.2-250 Multi-Unit Design Standards Variances. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(2)(c) Building Form: The front facades of both Building One (facing South 520d Street) and Building Two (facing Building One) contain the minimum required 15 percent windows and doors. All proposed windows and doors on Building One and Two have 4-inch trim to provide shadowing as required. Therefore, this criterion is met. . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7, 2010 Page 13 of 32 . SDC 3.2-240(D)(2)(d) Building Form: The ground floor garages in Building One are attached to living units above on the second floor but the garages are not accessed from the street (front setback), so this criterion is not applicable. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(2)(e), (f), (g) and (h) Building Form: All of the exterior elevations of Buildings One and Two incorporate design features including offsets, projections, balconies, covered porches, or similar elements to preclude large expansions of uninterrupted building surfaces. Along the vertical face of all of the residential structures, there are a minimum of 2 recesses (minimum depth of 3'-0"), extensions {minimum depth of 2'-0" (with two exceptions) and minimum length of 4'-0") and/or offsets or breaks in roof elevation (2'-0" or greater in height), which occur at a minimum of every 30 feet, and on each floor. Reference the attached Exterior Elevations for details. Adjustment: Discussed below under SDC 3.2-250 Multi-Unit Design Standards Variances, the minimum depth of the proposed extensions on the east and west exterior elevations of Building Two (townhouse units) are proposed to be adjusted from the required minimum 2'-0" depth to 1 '-8" depth (allowed maximum 20 percent adjustment of the requirement). . SDC 3.2-240(D)(3)(a) Transition and Compatibility between Multi-unit and LDR Development: The adjacent single-family residence located on the same side of South 520d Street and same block is located within 75'-0" south of Building One within the multi-unit residential portion of the subject development site. The front fa<;ade of this single-family residence is located about 16'-0" from the front property line. Building One is setback about 12'- 0" from the front property line, which is within the permitted 5'-0" of the setback provided by this nearest single-family residence. Therefore, this criterion is met. Reference the attached Exterior Elevations for details. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(3)(b)(i) Transition and Compatibility between Multi-unit and LDR Development: There is no vehicular circulation (i.e., driveways, drive lanes, maneuvering areas, and private streets) proposed within the buffer area between the multi-unit residential development and the LDR zoned property to the south. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(3)(b)(ii) Transition and Compatibility between Multi-unit and LDR Development: A site obscuring 6'-0" high cedar fence and landscaping are proposed along the subject property lines that abut a LDR zoned property to the south. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(3)(b)(iii) Transition and Compatibility between Multi-unit and LDR Development: There are no primary entrances to the multi-unit residential buildings that face an abutting LDR zoned property. Buildings One and Two do not exceed 21 '-0" in height within the buffer area, and they comply with all other applicable setbacks and transition area standards as discussed elsewhere in the narrative. Adjustment: The minimum 15'-0" buffer area (with the allowed 10'-0" building encroachment into the 25'-0" buffer area) between portions of the multi-unit residential buildings (ground floor porch roofs, second floor . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7, 2010 Page 14 of 32 balconies and building extensions) and the abutting the LDR zoned property line is proposed to be adjusted to 12'-0" and 13'-0" (allowed maximum 20 percent adjustment of the requirement). In addition, the heights of the primary roof (per code definition) for Buildings One and Two are proposed to be adjusted from the maximum 21 '-0" within the buffer to 21 '-8" height as discussed below under SDC 3.2-250 Mufti-Unit Design Standards Variances. Reference the attached Site Plan and Exterior Elevations for details. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(3)(b)(iv) Transition and Compatibility between Multi-unit and LDR Development: The proposed active recreation area is located outside of the 25'-0" buffer area in the center of the multi-unit residential buildings. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(3)(b)(v) Transition and Compatibility between Multi-unit and LDR Development: There is no proposed parking lot lighting located within the residential portion of the development. The exterior building and path lights will be proposed at the time of the building permit application submittal in compliance with the 12'-0" maximum height limitation and shielded so that light does not allow direct illumination onto adjacent LDR property or into dwelling units. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(3)(b)(vi) Transition and Compatibility between Multi-unit and LDR Development: Mechanical equipment will be screened from view (i.e., as viewed from adjacent properties and street), and will be buffered so that noise does not typically exceed 45 to 50 decibels as measured at the LDR property line. The Mechanical equipment will be proposed at the time of the building permit application submittal in compliance with this and all other applicable standards. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(3)(b)(vii) Transition and Compatibility between Multi-unit and LDR Development: The proposed residential portion of the development does not propose rooftop equipment. All mechanical and electrical equipment will be located within the residential building structures. Mechanical and electrical equipment will be proposed at the time of the building permit application submittal in compliance with this and all other applicable standards. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(3)(c) Transition and Compatibility between Multi-unit and LDR Development: The proposed buildings, and portions of buildings abutting the LDR zoned property lines outside of the buffer area do not exceed a building height greater than 1 foot for each foot distance from the LDR property line up to about 26'-0", which is less than the required maximum 35'-0" building height. Reference the Exterior Elevations for details. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(4)(a) Storage: Adequate, accessible and secure storage space is proposed for each dwelling unit in private garages (each approximately 250 square feet). The garages are located on the ground floor of Building One, adjoining all dwelling units in Building One and Two via the outdoor covered stair and corridor system. Therefore, this criterion is met. Reference the Site Plan, Sheet A 1, and Conceptual Floor Plans, Sheet A2, for details. . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7, 2010 Page 15 of 32 . SDC 3.2-240(D)(4)(b) Storage: The proposed residential portion of the development provides an enclosed trash area attached to the west end of Building One that is screened from view by placement of a masonry wall, about 6'-0" in height, and obscuring landscaping around all exposed sides of the wall except where breaks are provided for doors. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(4)(c) Storage: There are no trash receptacles proposed in any front yard setback, or within 25'-0" of property lines abutting LDR zoned properties. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(4)(d) Storage: Ground-mounted equipment, including exterior transformers, utility pads, cable television and telephone boxes and similar utility services, will be placed underground, where practicable. When placed above ground, the equipment will be placed to minimize visual impact; or screened with a wall or landscaping as required by code. Ground- mounted equipment will be proposed at the time of the building permit application submittal in compliance with this and all. other applicable standards. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(5)(a) Open Space: The proposed medium-density residential portion of the mixed-use development permanently reserves approximately 30 percent of the gross site area (limited only to the residential portion of the site area totaling about 25,820 square feet) as open space, which exceeds the required minimum 15 percent. The total required open space is the sum of setbacks, common open space, and private open space. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(5)(a)(;) Open Space: The proposed residential portion of the mixed-use development is not proposed in mixed-use buildings, therefore, the exemption to these standards does not apply. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(5)(a)(;;) and (;;;) Open Space: The proposed density for the multi-unit residential portion of the site is about 27 units per acre (limited only to the residential portion of the site area totaling about 25,820 square feet or 0.59 acres), which is less than 30 units per gross acre so the development complies with the other applicable code sections specified below. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(S)(b)(;) and (ii) Common Open Space: The proposed common open space has no dimension less than 15'-0" in width. The proposed total residential floor area (excluding garages) is about 16,964 square feet. Therefore, the required minimum common open space is 2,832 sq uare feet. 0.25 x 16,964 square feet = 4,241 square feet 4,241 square feet - 1,320 square feet private open space (SDC 3.2- 240(D)(5)(c)(iii)) = 2,921 square feet The proposed common open space for the multi-unit portion of the development is 2,921 square feet, which exceeds this required 2,832 square feet minimum. Therefore, these criteria are met. o SDC 3.2-240(D)(5)(b)(;v) and (v) Common Open Space: The proposed common open space has no dimension less than 15'-0" in width. A natural play area composed of basalt stepping and climbing stones and covered . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7, 2010 Page 16 of 32 benches are proposed in the center of the residential buildings, which exceeds the required minimum 250 square feet area of active recreation area. The natural play area is not proposed in any required setback or transition area. Therefore, these criteria are met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(5)(b)(vi) Common Open Space: Fifty percent of the required common open space area is landscaping, which is consistent with the requirement. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(5)(b)(vii) Common Open Space: The proposal does not include indoor or covered recreational space, therefore, this criterion is not applicable. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(5)(b)(viii) Common Open Space: The exception to the common open space. standard does not apply to the proposed project because the development is slightly outside the 1/4 mile distance (measured walking distance) to a public park. However, within only 0.4 miles, there are two public active recreation areas (Bluebell Park and Riverbend Elementary School) easily accessible by the tenants via a direct, improved, permanent, public, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)-accessible, lighted, maintained pedestrian sidewalk between the site and the parks. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(5)(b)(ix) Common Open Space: The proposed common open space areas will be built at the time of the construction of the residential portion of the mixed-use development. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(5)(b)(x) Common Open Space: The common open space areas are proposed outside of the required yards or transition areas. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(5)(c)(i) Private Open Space: All of the proposed multi- family units have private open spaces, which are directly accessible from the dwelling unit through a doorway. The ground floor units have a covered front entry and a back patio. The second floor units have a covered front entry and balcony. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(5)(c)(i) Private Open Space: The 7 proposed ground floor dwelling units (3 flats and 4 townhouses) provide 120 square feet of patio area, which exceeds the minimum of 96 square feet of private open space. The proposed minimum dimension for all of the ground floor patios is 10'-0", which is more than the required 6'-0". Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(6)(a) Landscaping, Fences and Walls: About 30 percent of the residential portion of the site (25,820 square feet total) is landscaped with a mix of vegetative ground cover, shrubbery and trees per City standards, which is more than the required 15 percent minimum. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(6)(b) Landscaping, Fences and Walls: Although optional, the proposed development will provide a planter strip along South 52,d Street, a local street. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(6)(c) Landscaping, Fences and Walls: As part of this development, street trees selected from the City Street Tree List are proposed to be planted in the public landscape strip along the property's frontage on South 51st Place and South 52nd Street as required per the City's Engineering . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7, 2010 Page17 of 32 Design Standards and Procedures Manual and. Springfield Municipal Code. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(6)(d) Landscaping, Fences and Walls: The proposed development does not propose fences in front yards and along any frontage used to comply with the building orientation standard. There are pedestrian amenities and signage proposed within the front yard setback in front of Building One in order to enhance the entrance to the residential buildings. The amenities include two 20" high seating walls and a 7'-0" high trellis archway. The fences proposed in other yards comply with the fence standards specified in Section 4.4-115, and the vision clearance standards specified in Section 4.2-130 as noted below. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(6)(e) Landscaping, Fences and Walls: All landscaping will be irrigated with a permanent irrigation system unless the project's licensed landscape architect submits written verification that the proposed plant materials do not require irrigation. The irrigation system will be provided at the time of building permit application submittal in compliance with code standards. The property owner will maintain all landscaping. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(7)(a), (c) and (d) Pedestrian Circulation: The proposed development provides continuous internal walkways throughout the site connecting the residential and commercial portions of the development and all tenant primary entrances to South 51" Place, South 52"d Street and Main Street public right-of-ways. The continuous on-site walkway system also connects all buildings and tenant primary entrances on the site to the parking areas, bicycle parking, garages, common areas, and existing (Main Street) and proposed (South 51" Place) abutting public sidewalks. Therefore, these criteria are met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(7)(b) Pedestrian Circula.tion: The proposed residential portion of the on-site pedestrian walkways are separated by a minimum of 5'- 0" from the dwelling units, measured from the sidewalk edge closest to any dwelling unit. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(7)(e) Pedestrian Circulation: The proposed on-site pedestrian walkways are proposed to be a combination of concrete, asphalt or masonry pavers, at least 5'-0" wide. Reference the Site Plan for details. The proposed asphalt emergency vehicle access (east-west drive aisle) is a minimum of 22'-0" wide, which exceeds the required 20'-0" width. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(7)(f) and (g) Pedestrian Circulation: Where the proposed on-site pedestrian walkways cross a vehicular circulation area or parking aisle, they are clearly marked with elevation changes, or striping. There are no proposed internal walkways that are parallel to a vehicular circulation area. Where the proposed on-site pedestrian walkways abut a vehicular circulation area the sidewalk is raised or separated from the vehicular circulation by a raised curb, landscaping or other physical barrier. In the locations that a raised sidewalk is proposed, the ends of the raised portions have curb ramps. The proposed on-site pedestrian walkways and ramps comply with Americans . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7, 2010 Page 18 of 32 with Disabilities (ADA) requirements. Therefore, these criteria are met. Reference the Site Plan for details. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(7)(h) Pedestrian Circulation: The proposed on-site pedestrian walkways will be lighted to a minimum of 2 foot-candles. The exterior site and building lighting plan and details will be submitted at the time of building permit application submittal. in compliance with the code standards: Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(B)(a) Parking: The proposed residential vehicle parking is placed in individual unit garages and on the west side of Building One. There is no parking proposed along the South 52nd Street frontage in front of the multi-unit residential buildings. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(B)(b) Parking: Proposed parking lot lighting is provided for safety purposes, and focused/shielded to avoid glare on adjacent properties and dwelling units as specified in Section 4~5-1 00 below. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(B)(c) Parking: There are 23 vehicle parking spaces required for the proposed residential portion of the mixed-use development. Fifteen of those vehicle parking spaces are located in individual unit garages. As noted above, the remaining 8 vehicle parking spaces are located directly west of Building One. There is a planter island located on each side of the row of 8 spaces, which meets this criterion. Adjustment: As discussed below under the SDC 3.2-250 Mufti-Unit Design Standards Variances, the width of the landscape island located at the eastern end of the residential parking aisle is proposed to be adjusted from the required 6'-0" width to 4'-0", exclusive of the curb. These parking lot planter islands will contain 1 shade tree (a minimum 2 inches (dbh) in caliper at planting) and vegetative ground cover. A detailed planting plan with exact locations, sizes and species will be provided at the time of building permit application submittal in compliance with all applicable code standards. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(B)(d) Parking: The proposed residential buildings do not have any ground floor living area windows that front the parking area. Therefore, this criterion is not applicable. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(B)(e) Parking: The proposed residential parking aisle is connected to all primary building entrances on the site by means of the continuous on-site pedestrian walkway system. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(B)(f) Parking: All proposed walkways or planters located adjacent to parking stalls on the site have been widened by 2'-0" beyond the minimum dimension required to allow for vehicle encroachment. The walkways and planters are protected by a curb not less than 6 inches in height per code standards. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(B)(g) Parking: The proposed residential portion of the mixed-use development is not located on the corner of the parcels. Therefore, this criterion is not applicable. City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7, 2010 Page 1 9 of 32 . . . SDC 3.2-240(D)(8)(h) and (j) Parking: The proposed residential parking and maneuvering areas that abut South S1st Place and 52'd Street have perimeter landscaping. The proposed perimeter landscape island is about 8'-6" wide along South S1st Place and about 20'-0" wide along S2'd Street provide, which exceeds the required 5'-0" wide. The perimeter planting strips will be planted with shade trees, a minimum 2 inches (dbh) in caliper, and a low level (e.g., 30 to 40 inches) evergreen hedge. A detailed planting plan with exact sizes and species will be provided at the time of building permit application submittal in compliance with all applicable code standards. The parking area landscaping on the entire site is designed to reduce storm water runoff (e.g., through infiltration swales and other measures), as practicable. Reference the attached civil engineering and landscape architecture drawings for details. Therefore, these criteria are met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(8)(k) Parking: The proposed bicycle parking for the residential portion of the development is provided within the individual dwelling unit garages located on the first floor of Building One as allowed under SDC 4.6-150(6). Therefore; this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(9)(a) Vehicle Circulation: The on-site drive aisle and driveway system for the proposed mixed-use development connects with Main Street, South 51st Place and 52'd Street. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(9)(b) Vehicle Circulation: The proposed mixed-use development with commercial and residential uses on two parcels share the 3 proposed driveways, which minimize cross turning movements on adjacent streets. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(9)(c) Vehicle Circulation: The proposal residential portion of the development site is about 0.59 acres (about 25, 820 square feet), which is less than 8 acres. Therefore, this criterion is not applicable. . SDC 3.2-240(D)(9)(d) Vehicle Circulation: The proposed parcels do not abut an alley so this criterion is not applicable. SDC 3.2-250 Multi-Unit DesiJ{n Standards Variances: SDC 3.2-250(A) Description: Adjustments of up to 20 percent to the Multi-Unit Design Standards listed in Section 3.2-240 under Building Form; Transition and Compatibility Between Multi-unit and LOR Development; and Parking are proposed below. Finding: Consistent with this criterion the following adjustments are proposed: Building Form Adjustment: There are two alternate. roof forms proposed on minor building elements: the front and back porch awnings on Building Two's townhouse units are shed roof forms and Building One's outdoor stair and the corridor system is covered, respectively, by a shed and flat roof form,. . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7, 2010 Page 20 of 32 Building Form Adjustment: The minimum depth of the proposed extensions on the east and west exterior elevations of Building Two (townhouse units) are proposed to be adjusted from the required minimum 2'-0" depth to 1'-8" depth (allowed maximum 20 percent adjustment of the requirement). Transition and Compatibility between Multi-unit and LDR Development Adjustment: The minimum 15'-0" buffer area (with the allowed 10'-0" building encroachment into the 25'-0" buffer area) between portions of the multi-unit residential buildings (ground floor porch roofs, second floor balconies and building extensions) and the abutting the LDR zoned property line is proposed to be adjusted to 12'-0" and 13'-0" (allowed maximum 20 percent adjustment of the requirement). In addition, the heights of the primary roof (per code definition) for Buildings One and Two are proposed to be adjusted from the maximum 21'- 0" building height within the buffer to a maximum 21 '-8" building height. Parking Adjustment: The width of the landscape island located at the eastern end of the residential parking aisle is proposed to be adjusted from the required 6'-0" width to 4'-0", exclusive of the curb. . SDC 3.2-250(B) General Criterion: The proposed adjustments are necessary due to requirement that the CC zoned subject parcels be developed as a mixed-use development per the East Main Refinement Plan without clear and objective development standards, which preclude full compliance of the Multi-Unit Design Standards. Therefore, this criterion is met. . SDC 3.2-250(D)(1) and (2) Building Form: The adjustments to the roof forms proposed on the minor building elements and the adjustment to the proposed extensions on the east and west exterior elevations of Building Two (townhouse units) from the required minimum 2'-0" depth to 1'-8" provide equivalent neighborhood compatibility by providing similar building mass and architecture while allowing for contrasting building form. The adjacent structures within 300 feet have shed and flat roofs on building elements like porches, storage structures, etc. similar to what is proposed. . SDC 3.2-250(F) Transition and Compatibility Between Multi-unit and Low Density Residential Development: The proposed development requests adjustments to the buffer area between portions of the multi-unit residential buildings (ground floor porch roofs, second floor balconies and building extensions) and the abutting the LDR zoned property line from the required 15'-0" minimum (with the allowed 10'-0" building.encroachment into the 25'- 0" buffer area) to 12'-0" and 13'-0" (allowed maximum 20 percent adjustment of the requirement); and the adjustment to the heights of the primary roof (per code definition) for Buildings One and Two from the maximum 21 '-0" building height within the buffer to a 21 '-8" height. These proposed adjustments result in minor changes that do not alter the intent of the code and continue to provide a compatible transition between multi-unit dwellings and the neighboring LOR properties by a reduction in noise and/or light that . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7, 2010 Page 21 of 32 would otherwise impact adjacent LDR areas; stepping down building height; providing roof lines that compliment adjacent uses; and similar elements that effectively accomplish the intent of the standard. . SDC 3.2-2500) Parking: The adjustment to the width of the landscape island located at the eastern end of the residential parking aisle is proposed to be adjusted from the required 6'-0" width to 4'-0", exclusive of the curb. This proposed adjustment does not impact the ability to meet the applicable landscaping and screening standards. There are no existing trees in the area of this proposed landscape island. SDC 3.2-300 CC Base Zone Development Standards: Findings: The tenants for the proposed multi-tenant commercial buildings have not yet been identified. However, all uses will be consistent with the allowed use categories listed under the CC base zone per SDC 3.2-315 at the time of tenant infill building permit submittal. Specifically, the commercial portion of the development complies with the CC Base Zone Development Standards as follows: . SDC 3.2-315: The lot standards required under SDC 3.2-315 do not apply for three reasons. First, the subject site was created prior to 1982. Second, the minimum lot size and frontage standard of SDC 3.2-315 is a standard imposed for the creation of new lots or parcels. The proposed development does not include partitioning or subdividing the subject property. Third, this standard is not a design or construction standard, and therefore not applicable. o SDC 3.2-315: There is no specific maximum lot coverage for CC zoned parcels. As noted above, the MDR base zone lot coverage is not applicable because the proposed development is a mixed-use project proposed on CC zoned properties. There are no other standards or sections in the code that limit the lot coverage. . SDC 3.2-315: the minimum building front yard setback in the CC zone is 10'- 0" and parking and driveway front yard setbacks are 5'-0". The buildings, parking and driveways either meet or exceed the required front yard setbacks along Main Street, South 51" Place and South 52nd Street. Therefore, these criteria are met. Reference the Site Plan for details. . SDC 3.2-315: The residential portion of the mixed-use development is located adjacent to the interior and rear yards of the subject parcels so buildings, parking, driveway and storage are setback in compliance with the applicable MDR and Multi-Unit standards as discussed above. . . SDC 3.2-315: As noted above, the multi-unit residential buildings in the mixed-use development meet the building heights per the applicable MDR and Multi-Unit standards. The commercial buildings do not have a building height requirement. . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7, 2010 Page 22 of 32 SDC 4.2-100 throu~h SDC 4.6-150 and 4.7-210 Development Standards: SDC 4.2-105 Public Streets: Findings: There are no public streets proposed with this development. Therefore, the criteria under this section are not applicable. Main and South 520d Streets are built to city standards with an adequate width for the designated street classification. The public improvements proposed as part of this development include half-street improvements along the frontage of South 51" Place, including roughly 18'-0" of new asphalt, curb and gutter, sidewalk, a street light, street trees and the proposed driveway approach. Additionally, the proposed driveway approaches on Main Street and South 520d Street will be replaced and will meet current ADA standards. All public improvements will be constructed per City standards under a Public Improvements Permit (PIP). SDC 4.2-110 Private Streets: Findings: There are no private internal streets proposed with this development. As outlined above and in the attached TIS, adequate access is already provided through the adjacent street network and the proposed internal on-site circulation of the development. Therefore, the criteria under this section are not applicable. SDC 4.2-115 Block Length: Findings: There are no public or private internal streets proposed with this development. As outlined above and in the attached TIS, adequate access is already provided through the adjacent street network and the proposed internal. on-site circulation of the development. Therefore, the criteria under this section are not applicable. The applicant proposes on-site drive aisles that connect to Main Street, South 51" Place and South 520d Street. Limiting access to a right-in and right-out only driveway on Main Street allows safe ingress and egress to and from the development from this principal arterial. SDC 4.2-120 Site Access and Driveways: Findings: The subject sites have street right-of-way frontage along Main Street, South 51" Place and South 520d Street. Currently, South 51" Place is unimproved to the City's public street standards. Main Street and South 520d Street are improved public streets with sidewalks. South 52"d Street has a sidewalk on the east side of the street. These sidewalks and the on-site pedestrian walkway system provide pedestrian connectivity to the public right-of-ways and adjacent and nearby residential, commercial and industrial areas. . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7, 2010 Page 23 of 32 As noted above, the public improvements proposed as part of this development include half-street improvements along the frontage of South 51st Place, including roughly 18'-0" of new asphalt, curb and gutter, sidewalk, a street light, street trees and the proposed driveway approach. Additionally, the proposed driveway approaches on Main Street and South 52,d Street will be replaced and will meet current ADA standards. The proposed shared driveway approach on South 52,d Street is located approximately 88'-0" from the Main Street intersection (measured to the start of the South 52,d Street intersection radius curve). The proposed driveway approach on South 51st Place is located approximately 94'-0" from the Main Street intersection (measured to the start of the South 51" Place intersection radius curve). The proposed driveway approach on Main Street is located approximately 132'-0" from the South 51" Place intersection and 118'-0" from the South 52,d Street intersection (both measured to the start of the Main Street intersection radius curve). All public improvements will be constructed per City standards under a Public Improvements Permit (PIP). Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with the criteria under this section. - ! As outlined above and in the attached TIS, the existing public street and traffic safety control systems will not be exceeded with the addition of the proposed development and are available to serve the site at the time of development. Reference the attached TIS, October 13 2010, for details, which is adopted and incorporated herein. In addition, as noted above, the pending ODOT Right-of-. Way Approach Permit for the limited access driveway on Main Street is attached for reference. SDC 4.2-125 Intersections: Findings: As stated above there are no public or private streets proposed in this development, therefore, there are no street intersections proposed. All proposed on-site drive aisle and driveway intersections are at right angles to the intersecting streets, Main Street, South 51st Place and South 52,d Street. The offsets for the proposed access points to the nearest existing public street intersections comply with City requirements. Therefore, the criteria under this section are met. SDC 4.2-130 Vision Clearance: Findings: In accordance with the vision clearance standards, the two corners of the proposed development at the intersections of Mai n Street and South 51 st Place, and Main Street and South 52,d Street provide adequate sight distance for the approach traffic. Reference the attached Site Plan for details. Considering these findings and the site plans submitted herewith, the proposed project is consistent with the criteria under this section. . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7, 2010 Page 24 of 32 SDC 4.2-135 Sidewalks: Findings: There is only one public sidewalk proposed as part of this development, which will be constructed per the City's Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual, the Public Works Standard Construction Specifications and Springfield Municipal Code. The proposed public sidewalk and planter strip will be located wholly within the public right-of-way. The sidewalk is proposed to be 5'-6" wide with a curb and gutter. There is also an approximate 6'-5" landscape bed proposed between the public sidewalk and the subject western property line, which exceeds the minimum 4'-6" width requirement per SDC 4.2-135. Therefore, the criteria under this section are met. The existing public sidewalk and bike lanes on Main Street provide access to adjacent and nearby residential, commercial and industrial areas. The site plan shows on-site circulation for pedestrians, bicycles and vehicles as required by the Springfield Development Code. The proposed continuous on-site pedestrian walkway system connects the primary building entrances of each commercial and residential building, to the existing public right-of-way on Main Street, South 51" Place and South 52nd Street, and to the adjacent residential and commercial properties. On-site pedestrian and bicycle access is provided between the buildings and parking areas on the site by clearly marked either striped or raised paved walkways. SDC 4.2-140 Street Trees: Findings: As part of this development, street trees selected from the City Street Tree List are proposed to be planted in the public landscape strip along the property's frontage on South 51" Place and South 52nd Street as required per the City's Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual and Springfield Municipal Code. There are two existing street trees proposed for removal as part of this development. The existing 28" cedar street tree located at the intersection of 52"d Street and Main Street is proposed for removal because it is located within the vision clearance area. In addition, the commercial building proposed on this corner will significantly impact the existing tree's critical root lone. The existing 3" cedar street tree located at the southwest corner of the Tax Lot 6200 011 South 51" Place is proposed for removal because as noted above, a new public sidewalk is proposed in this location. New street trees will be planted to replace these existing trees per the Street Tree Replacement Standards. The new street tree replacing the existing street tree at the intersection of South 52"d Street and Main Street will be planted farther south on South 52nd Street outside of the vision clearance area. Therefore, the criteria under this section are met. . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7,2010 Page 25 of 32 SDC 4.2-145 Street Lighting: Findings: As noted above, there is one street light proposed as. part of the public improvements on South 51" Place. Reference the attached civil drawings for details. All public improvements will be constructed per the City's Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual, the Public Works Standard Construction Specifications and Springfield Municipal Code under a Public Improvements Permit (PIP). Therefore, the criteria under this section are met. SDC 4.2-150 Bikeways, 4.2-155 Pedestrian Trails and 4.2-160 Accessways: Findings: There are no public bikeways, pedestrian trails or accessways proposed as part of this development. Therefore, the criteria under these sections are not applicable. As noted above, Main Street is classified as a principal arterial and currently developed to City principal arterial standards including existing on-street bike lanes. The development of the subject site includes the provision of on-site pedestrian facilities that connect to Main Street, South 51" Place and South 52,d Street and the existing bike lanes. SDC 4.3-105 Sanitary Sewers: Findings: As noted above, there are two existing public sanitary sewer stubs (4" stubs) located adjacent to the subject site's western and eastern property line conveying sewage from the site to the 8" public sanitary sewer lines located in South 51" Place and South 52,d Street. The existing public sanitary sewer has adequate capacity to serve the development's needs. Therefore, the criteria under this section are met. SDC 4.3-110 Stormwater Management: Findings: There is an existing 48" storm pipe located along the south side of Main Street. An existing 12" storm main is located in South 52,d Street and an existing 12" storm line is located South 51" Place. As part of the PIP, the South 51" Place existing roadside ditch will be removed and a new 12"storm line will be installed with a stub out to provide service to the subject property and to convey the upstream flows. A new storm lateral is proposed to connect into the existing 12" storm line in South 52,d Street as well. No connection is proposed to the 48" storm line located in Main Street at this time. In addition, as noted above, the owner proposes to make public sidewalk improvements along the property's frontage on South 51" Place as required Due to City Staff identified storm system requirements, the proposed development includes on-site retention to the fullest extent possible. Special emphasis is placed on infiltrating the stormwater and limiting the flow rate to the existing public storm system. See the attached Stormwater Management System Plan for more information. Therefore, the criteria under this section are met. . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7, 2010 Page 26 of 32 SDC 4.3-115 Water Quality Protection: Findings: The site is not identified on the Water Quality Limited Watercourses (WQLW) Map, therefore, there are no identified watercourses or riparian areas located on the site subject to specific water quality protection. As noted above, the proposed development includes on-site retention to the fullest extent possible. Special emphasis is placed on infiltrating the stormwater and limiting the flow rate to the existing public storm system. See the attached Stormwater Management System Plan for more information. Therefore, the criteria under this section are met. SDC 4.3-120 Utility Provider Coordination: Findings: All utility providers will be responsible for coordinating utility installations with the City as required. The applicant will be responsible for the design, installation and cost of the utility lines and facilities to the satisfaction of the utility provider consistent with the criteria under this section. SDC 4.3-125 Underground Placement of Utilities: Findings: All utilities are proposed to be constructed underground in accordance with policies of the City of Springfield, SUB, Qwest or other applicable utility providers. See civil engineering drawings for proposed utility layout. Considering these findings and the drawings submitted herewith, the criteria under this section are met. SDC 4.3-130 Water Service and Fire Protection: Findings: The proposal has adequate water service available from an existing 6" public water main located in South 51" Place adjacent to the subject site's western property line. An existing 6" public water main is also located in South 52nd Street with adequate water service. This main is located on the far side of the right of way. There is an existing fire hydrant located in the public right-of-way on Main Street to the north of the subject site at the intersection of South 52nd Street and Main Street. All of the proposed buildings (commercial, residential and trash enclosures) will be sprinklered. Due to the fact that all of the proposed buildings are located at least 600'-0" from the existing fire hydrant there are no additional private fire hydrants proposed in this development. The existing fire hydrant has an adequate flow rate to serve the site. Therefore, the criteria under this section are met. City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7, 2010 Page 27 of 32 . . SDC 4.3-135 Major Electrical Power Transmission Lines: Findings: As noted above, there are existing overhead electric lines running east- west adjacent to the site's northern property Ii ne, which provide adeq uate capacity to serve the proposed development. Major electrical power transmission lines are not proposed in this development. Therefore, the criteria under these sections are not applicable. SDC 4.3-140 Public Easements Findings: Public easements are not proposed in this development. Therefore, the criteria under these sections are not applicable. SDC 4.3-145 Wireless Telecommunications Systems Facilities: Findings: There are no wireless telecommunication system facilities proposed in this development. Therefore, the criteria under these sections are not applicable. SDC 4.4-105 Landscaping: Findings: The landscape architecture drawings show landscaping which meets or exceeds the CC zone and parking lot landscape requirements for the commercial portion of the development site per SDC 4.4-105. Per SDC 4.4-105(F)(2), the proposed development includes a minimum of 5 percent landscaping in the interior of the parking lot because there are 24 parking spaces located between the street side of a building and Main Street, and are visible from any street. The MDR portion of the site either meets or exceeds the landscape requirements for the residential portion of the development site per SDC 4.3.2-240 and SDC 4.4- 105. As noted on the landscape architecture drawings, landscaping will be provided in all required setback areas and installed per the applicable code standards. , ~ As noted above, all landscaping will be irrigated with a permanent irrigation system unless the project's licensed landscape architect submits written verification that the proposed plant materials do not require irrigation. The exact sizes, species and locations of plantings as well as the irrigation system will be provided at the time of building permit application submittal in compliance with code standards. These findings and the attached landscape architecture planting plan, schedules and details, demonstrate that the landscaping requirements have been met. SDC 4.4-110 Screening: Findings: Adjacent to the LDR properties to the south, cedar fence screening is provided because a commercial district and multi-family buildings abut a . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7, 2010 Page 28 of 32 residential district in accordance with SDC 4.4-11 O(A)(l) and (6) and SDC 4.4- 110(B)(3). The proposed outdoor trash receptacles are screened with masonry 6'-0" partial height walls per SDC 4.4-11 0(B)(3)(c). Reference the architecture and landscape architecture drawings for details. Therefore, the criteria under this section are met. SDC 4.4-115 fences: Findings: As noted above, there is a screening fence proposed along the property lines that abut the adjacent to the LDR zoned properties as well as the CC zoned property (Tax Lot 6203) to the south. Per Table 4.4-1, the base height of this proposed fence shall be 6'-0". The fence details shall be proposed at the time of building permit application submittal consistent with the requirements outlined under SDC 4.4-115. Therefore, the criteria under this section are met. SDC 4.5-100 On-Site Lighting Standards: Findings: Exact outdoor building lighting will be proposed at the time of building permit application submittal in accordance with the On-Site Lighting Standards. All proposed site lighting will be installed in compliance with the requirements of this code section and the applicable Multi-Unit Design Standards as outlined above. The proposed site lighting is the minimum illumination necessary for the on-site parking and loading areas. All proposed exterior site and building light fixtures will be shielded 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. Parking lot light fixtures are proposed to be a maximum height of 20'-0", which is less than the required maximum 25'-0" per SDC 4.5-11 O(B)(l). There are no parking lot light fixtures proposed within 50'-0" of the residential zoning district to the south. These findings, the Site Plan and attached proposed Parking Lot Light Fixture Specifications demonstrate that these criteria are met. SDC 4.6~105 through 4.6-125 Vehicle Parking: Findings: Vehicle and bicycle parking calculations for the CGmmercial buildings are based on assumptions of a possible tenant mix. Per the assumed commercial tenant uses and .15 multi-family units, a minimum of 58 off-street parking spaces are required per Table 4.6-2 (see vehicle parking calculations on Sheet Al). The applicant is proposing to provide 15 individual garages for each unit as part of the total parking count. The applicant proposes a parking lot design in compliance with SDC 4.6-115; all standard stall widths are 9'-0" wide and 18'-0" in length including a 2'-0" bumper overhang over landscaping beds and walkways (reference drawings for specific locations). The compact spaces are either 8'-0" wide and 18'-0" in length or 8'-6" wide and 16'-0" in length including a 2'-0" bumper overhang over landscaping beds and walkways. The dimensions and proposed striping of the parking spaces and drive aisles meet the parking area City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7,2010 Page 29 of 32 . . standards per SDC 4.6-115-120. These findings, together with the architecture and civil engineering drawings, demonstrate that these standards have been met. SDC 4.6-130 through 4.6-135 Loading Areas: Findings: There is one proposed delivery and loading area provided in addition to the required parking spaces that is located on-site outside of the required setbacks. The total proposed on-site loading area is 500 square feet square for the approximately 27,175 square feet of total commercial building area, which meets the minimum loading area for the site per SDC 4.6-135(C). The loading area is 10'-0" wide and about 50'-0" long (excluding pedestrian walkway), which meefthe required minimum dimensions (10'-0" wide by 25'-0" long). Therefore, these criteria are met. . SDC 4.6-140 through 4.6-150 Bicycle Parking: Findings: The proposed bicycle parking spaces, location and facility design complies with SDC 4.4-145-150. As noted above, vehicle 'and bicycle parking calculations are based on assumptions of a possible commercial tenant mix. Based on those assumptions, the commercial short-term and long-term bicycle parking spaces provided exceed the number required (reference Sheet A 1 for bicycle parking calculations). The 6 unsheltered short-term bicycle parking spaces are located along the on-site pedestrian walkway system with ramps that connect to Main Street, South 51st Place and South 52nd Street. The proposed racks are hitching posts or staple racks. The long-term bicycle parking spaces for the commercial buildings will be located inside building tenant spaces in a secure location, which will be proposed in compliance with SDC 4.4-145-150 at the time of individual tenant infill building permit application submittals. The long- term bicycle parking spaces for the 15 residential units will be located inside each individual unit's garage. Therefore, these criteria are met. SDC 4.7-210 Residential Uses in Commercial Districts: Findings: The proposed subject parcels are located in the Mixed-Use Area #3 on the East Main Refinement Plan, Plan Diagram. Per the East Main Refinement Plan (Mixed-Use Element, Area #3, page 11) Medium- and High-Density Residential uses are allowed under the Community Commercial zoning district. Consistent with this criterion, the proposed multiple-family residential portion of the mixed- use development site meets the applicable MDR Base Zone Development Standards and Multi-Unit Design Standards contained in this code because the refinement plan does not specify development standards for this area. As demonstrated on the Site Plan Review drawings, the remainder of this written statement, and other materials attached herein, this criterion has been met. . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7, 2010 Page 30 of 32 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 ODOT access management standards for State highways. Findings: The orientation of the buildings, parking and ingress-egress points serve to maximize efficiency for access, on-site circulation and function while minimizing impact to the adjacent properties. The site plan is organized so that the more intensive commercial uses and associated parking are located along Mai n Street and the residential portion of the site is located adjacent to the LDR zoned properties to the south of the subject properties. The driveway on Main Street is a limited right-in and right-out access point primarily serving the commercial buildings located along the principal arterial. The proposed residential buildings are located between the LDR properties to the south and the main east-west drive aisle running through the mixed-use development site with access from South 51" Place and South 52,d Street. The proposed raised crosswalk located towards the center of the site that crosses this main drive aisle provides safe on-site pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular circulation between the residential and commercial portions of the development. As noted above, the site plan shows on-site circulation for pedestrians, bicycles and vehicles as required by the Springfield Development Code. The proposed continuous on-site pedestrian walkway system connects the primary building entrances cif all commercial and residential buildings to the existing public sidewalk on Main Street, South 51" Place and South 52,d Street, and to the adjacent residential and commercial. properties. The existing public sidewalk and bike lanes on Main Street provide access to adjacent and nearby residential, commercial and industrial areas as well as Bluebell Park, Riverbend Elementary School and other neighborhood activity centers. Safe pedestrian and bicycle circulation is provided between the buildings and parking areas throughout the site by clearly marked striped or raised paved walkways. The subject parcels are serviced via Lane Transit District (LTD) Route 11 (Thurston). There is a bus stop within a half a block of the subject site on either side of Main Street for eastbound and westbound transit riders. The route is serviced every 10 to 15 minutes throughout the day. Reference the Traffic Impact Study, Appendix C, for the L TD route schedule. As noted above, the existing public street and traffic safety control systems will not be exceeded with the addition of the proposed development and are available to serve the site at the time of development. Reference the attached TIS, dated October 13, 2010, for details: In addition, there is only one driveway proposed City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7, 2010 Page 31 of 32 . . on the principal arterial, Main Street, which is shared between the two subject properties. The pending ODOT Right-of-Way Approach Permit for the limited access driveway on Main Street is attached for reference. Parking areas and ingress-egress points have been designed to safely facilitate vehicular traffic, bicycle and pedestrian circulation and avoid congestion as well as provide connectivity within the development area and to adjacent residential and commercial areas. Therefore, the criteria under this section are met. 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. The subject site is flat. With the exception of 10 existing trees and the existing house on Tax Lot 6300, the site does not have any other notable landscaping like significant clusters of trees and shrubs. Additionally, the site does not have any watercourses and associated riparian areas, wetlands, rock outcroppings, open spaces or areas of historic and/or archaeological significance as specified in Section 3.3-900 or ORS 97.740-760, 358.905-955 and 390.235-240. Per the Soils Survey of Lane County Oregon, the site is (119) salem-urban land complex. This soil has a highwater table depth of >6'. Based on the results of the geotechnical investigation, no geologic or geographical hazards were identified on the site that would prohibit the construction of the proposed development. Reference the attached Geotechnical Investigation, dated July 19, 2010, details. Furthermore, the site is located within a shaded FEMA Zone X flood hazard zone (an area determined to be outside of the 500-year flood plain). Reference the attached FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map Number 41039Cl162 F. Therefore, the site will not be a significant risk to public health and safety in terms of stormwater control or flood hazard. As the site is flat and is located outside the SOD-year flood zone, slope failure and soil erosion are not concerns associated with this site. The site does not have physical features as outlined above that require protection as specified in the Springfield Development Code or in State or Federal law, therefore, the criteria under this section are met.. . . City of Springfield Site Plan Review Presubmittal Application December 7,2010 Page 32 of 32 v. Conclusion Based on the information and findings contained in this written statement, associated attachments and drawings, the proposed Site Plan Review meets the criteria of approval contained in the Springfield Development Code. Therefore, the applicant requests that the Director approve the proposal as presented. Both the applicant and the applicant's representative are available for questions as necessary. If you have any questions about the above application, please do not hesitate to contact Kristen Taylor at TBG Architects & Planners/lnc (687-1010). Sincerely, Kriste or, CSBA Project Manager cc: Nick Boyles, OBO Enterprises, LLC Damien Gilbert, Branch Engineering, Inc. Carol Schirmer, Schirmer + Associates, LLC Z:\PROJ\200913 080 51st-52nd & Main\Corresp\Agency\Site plan Review\Presubmittal\200913-Site Plan Review Presubmittal.doc . . . .. Department of Transportation ODOT District 5 . 644 'A' Street Springfield, OR 97477 (541) 744-8080 Fax: (541) 726-2509 John.DOWNING@odotstate.or.us File Code: PMT 4-07 . ' . September 16, 2010 Damien Gilbert Branch Engineering, Inc 310 5th Street Springfield, OR 97477 Subject: Supplemental Documentation Required (Checklist) to Continue Processing of Application for State Highway Approach Highway Number 015, (McKenzie), at Mile Point 5.72 Application Number 10859 Dear Damien Gilbert: The Oregon Department of Transportation has completed an initial review of your Application for State Highway Approach, and has determined that supplemental documentation is required in order to properly evaluate your application, The Department may require supplemental documentation before an application is deemed complete. (OAR 734-051-0070(6)1. The supplemental documentation required for the Department to continue processing your application is identified and defined below. o Detailed information on the type of development, including the number and square footage of buildings and units with a complete description of the proposed land uses of the property(s) to be served by the approach (es). Vicinity map{s) showing: o Location on state highway by milepost, engineer's station, or other landmarks; o Existing highway plan and access management controls; o Existing land uses and zoning; o Existing ingress or egress easements; o Adjoining lots showing the development footprint and all approaches, and any other approaches onto any existing, planned, and proposed abutting roads and streets abutting the site to show at least twice the applicable o 1 If you would like a complete copy of the Chapter 734 Division 51 Rule, you may obtain them by either visiting our websile at hllo://www.oreqon.qov/ODOT/HWY/ACCESSMGT/lechnicalbullelins.shlml or by contacting ODOT's Rules Coordinator at (503) 986-3171. PRE.SUBMiTIAL REC'D DEe 7 2010 ., . Supplemental Documentation Required to tnue proce~ing of ~Plication' for State Highway Approach Additional Documentation Required Highway Number 015, (McKenzie), at Mile Point 5.72 Application Number 10859. Thursday, September 16, 2010 Page 2 . . spacing standard on both sides of the roadway along any roadway available for ingress and egress from the property; and -0 Structures and other features (e.g., traffic signals, drainage ditches and pipes, streams, ponds, lakes or railroads). o A preliminary drainage plan of the site showing impacts to the hiQhway right-of- way. o A drainage study prepared by an Oregon Registered Professional Engineer. o Map(s) showing existing and proposed, if known, utility locations before and after development in and along the highway. o Site plan to scale, including: o Existing and proposed approach(es) from the property to the highway as well as to other existing, planned and proposed streets and roads; o Existing, planned and proposed utilities, if known, including in and along the highway; o Right of Way survey and land donation (if applicable); o Identification of protected resource areas such as wetland, timber, or archeological sites, and any identified location or mitigation; o Identification of proposed traffic mitigation measures; D Existing and proposed buildings; o Existing and proposed property lines; o On-site traffic flow pattern; o Parking, including number and arrangement of all spaces including disabled; o Drive through windows/gas pumps; o Existing, planned or proposed transit facilities, such as turnouts; o Sight clearance including landscaping; o Existing, planned and proposed sidewalks on site or on the highway right of way; o North arrow on drawings. and o . Pedestrian and bicycle accomodations o Grant o Indenture. [gJ Transportation Impact Study (see Attachment regarding the Technical Memorandum Review) o An Access Management Plan as a mitigation measure (see Attachment ) o Hazardous material collection and/or treatment system report. o Other All of the above supplemental documentation must be submitted to our office by November 15, 2010 unless you and the Department agree to a time extension before November 15, 2010. Please note that this application will expire if the supplemental documentation or an extension is' not received by November 15, 2010. Unless a time extension is agreed to, ~ubf!1ittal of any infonnation aft,~d,~W')?f!exp,&t\9r will be processed as a new application. .. ~UlJ,Vi-. :cd. 1(..1,; u [ DEe 7 Z010 . '- . . Supplemental Documentation Required to c.nue Processing of Application . for State Highway Approach Additional Documentation Required Highway Number015, (McKenzie), at Mile Point 5.72 Application Number 10859. Thursday, September 16, 2010 Page 3 Please contact John Downing, Permit Specialist at (541) 744-8080 if questions arise in the process of providing the supplemental documentation. c: John Downing, Permit Specialist David Knitowski, Regional Access Management Engineer PRE.S11B~4iIT" ,'J\I D~C'D ..., tt I /"1,-. H",.... DEe '7 ZOiO '1r . . Oregon Department of Transportation Application for State Highway Approach , . FOR OFFICE USE ONLY ... Permit S~ecialist Permit Type: New Change of Use Tem~oraryRestricted Modification of Existing: 0 Yes 0 No Deviation: 0 Yes .'O:No . NOTES: . Hwy #: Milepoint: Station: . CHAMPS ID #: Required Information The ap~licant must submit the following information with the Application for State Highway Approach. ODOT will notify the applicant if additional information is required. . All attachments required by answers on the application form, including applicant signature. . If the applicant is not the owner of the property to be served by the approach, then the property owner must authorize the ap~licant as a designated agel'll The applicant must have the property owner complete the Authorization of Designated Agent block on this form OR submit a signed letter .from the property owner authorizing the applicantas the designated agent. . Site plan and vicinity map approved or currently being reviewed by the local govemment . . A Land Use Compatibility Statement (LUCS) for a State Highway Approach (page 4 of this application) must be complet.ed by the local government . A copy of the current County tax lot map for the property served by the approach. Map must highlight ail property that would be served by the approach and list all owner name(s) on adjacent properties. Make a note on map if ownership of adjacent property is same as subject property. Identify the location of the proposed ap~roach on ma~. . A co~y of the recorded easement(s), if the subject ~ro~erty has an existing easement(s) for access to the pro~erty. . A copy of any existing state or local government approach permits for tM property. In addition to the above submittals, the applicant may be required to place stakes or markings near the highway shoulder at the proposed approach location. . Definitions for commonly used terms are in the attached brochure. The brochure is also available on the ODOT website located at: http://www.oreaon.Qov/ODOT!HWY/ACCESSMGT/ r''''R.OOI''' Stomp I ADDlicant Information Last Name: Gilbert I First Name: Damien -1 Company: Branch Engineering, Ine Street Address: 310 5th Street City: Springfield I State: OR Zip Code: 97477 r County: Lane Mailing Address: 31 0 5th Street City: Springfield I State: OR Zip Code: 97477 I County: Lane Phone Number: 541-746-0637 FAX Number: Cell Phone Number: E-mail Address: damien@branchengineering.com Is applicant working as an Agent of the Owner? YES:~ NO:D If YES, the owner must complete the Authorization of Designated Agent section below, OR ATTACH a letter from the owner authorizing applicant to act as his/her agent . ADProach Location Highway Name - May be a statewide highway name such as Pacific Highway. or a local name like East Main Street. Route Number - The posted highway number, e.g. 1-5 or US-84 Highway Name: McKenzie Hwy Route Number: 15 C tpflt8l'le-, '."', . Dun .:[..,,""!l~)t,i,r~.:r,; .. Mile Point: 5,72 Side of Highway: North 0 South ~ East 0 B<l", \J~lJj ~'n 11:I"'~t, { ~-... t..l West '. . Is the highway in a national forest area?: Yes 0 No ~ DEe 7 2010 - ,. \~ I}'" o 0, '.:/ r ,. -' 734-2680 (8/08) Page 1 of 4 ~(Q) " AuthoriZ<ition of Oesi I Nick Boyles Damien Gilbert my agent in the matter of this highway approach permit application. Owner Signature: (printed name of property owner) authorize (printed name of applicant) to represent me as Applieant:Si nature" NOTIFICATiON TO APPLICANT: The ODOT District Office will contact you when your application has been reviewed. If additional documents are required to continue the application process you witt l>e notified, When all of the necessary documents have been received, the application witt be deemed complete. If your completed application is approved, preliminary construction specifications will be issued. A performance bond and liability insurance will be required before any construction work can begin on the highway right of way. For the complete rules regarding approach permitting, see OAR Chapter 734 Division 51. The Applicant declares, certifies, and affirms under penalty of applicable state or federal laws that all information provided on this form and attachments are true and complete to the best of hislher knowledge. ! Printed Name: Damien Gilbert :~ddition-aIApproaeh Information Application is a request for (check all that apply) o New Approach - There is no existing permitted or grandfathered approach road at the location requested in this application o Temporary Approach - The approach requested will be removed after a specified period of time IEl Existing Approach - This application affects, or may affect, an existing approach o Restricted Use Approach - The approach requested is fo~ emergency services, government, utility access or similar specific uses with limited traffic Vehicle'Ti,Jrning Movements Tum movements requested (check all that apply) All movements: IEl QE Right In: 0 Right Out 0 Left In: 0 Left Out: 0 'Pro e "Owner Information (If different than applicant) Last Name: OBO Enterprises LLC Street Address: 1528 Ferry St #11 City: Eugene Mailing Address: 1528 Ferry St #11 City: Eugene , Phone Number First Name: State: OR Zip Code: 97401 County: Lane State: OR Zip Code: 97401 FAX Number County: Lane i Cell Phone Number 541-954-0217 I E-mail Addness: Are there additional owners of the subject property? YES: 0 NO:~ If YES, ATTACH the same contact information as above for each of the co-owners on a separate sheet of paper. PropertY,lnformation (attach additional pagels) if space is insufficient) Subject property address(es):#5175 & #5195 Main Street City: Springfield Zip Code: 97477 I County: Lane Township(s) 17S I Range(s) 02W Section(s) 33 I Tax lot(s) 06200 & 06300 Current zoning: CC Proposed zoning:CC In the boxes below, describe the existing and proposed land use(s) on the property, including .sqU';lreJootage Qf,<\"r~ge. Existing: Proposed: \'r{C"\)\3i)iV:i l lti.!. I~;;;\" U residential, Area 1.50 Ac . multi-family, fast food, Area 1.50 Ac DEe. 'I 2010 734-2680 (8/08) Page 2 of 4 . Site Plan & Vicinity 'Map,;Requirements Local governmentsite.plail .' . . - .' ,'. ';". .~. " '.-.:' -'. ;'. ;;'~ .~:~:: ;":i::.' !,j~!~~~~~@f~:~.~;:~:;:/ :.:::: ".7):+~~i~:;~;~ir~.{i?~;//'- ":' Has the local government approved a site plan or is the local government currently reviewing a plan for the proposed land use? DYes (If yes, attach a copy of the plans being reviewed by the local government) ~ No Submit drawing(s) no larger than 11" x 17" in size. Site plan(s) shall include all applicable information listed below: Property location and property lines, including: . North arrow . Show all lots or parcels that are part of the property or development with their corresponding tax lot numbers identified '. . Distance from the property lines to the center of the proposed approach Using solid lines, show: . Proposed approaches with requested width and turning movements shown . Proposed & existing buildings and structures to be retained . Proposed use of existing buildings and structures to be retained . Other proposed equipment or facilities and their proposed use . Proposed access or "cross-over" easements with neighboring properties . Nearest approaches on both sides of the highway within 500' of the proposed approach center-line Using dashed lines, show: . Existing approaches with width and turning movements shown . Place an "X" on approaches to be removed . Existing buildings and structures to be removed . Existing equipment or facilities to be removed . Other existing facilities to be removed . Existing access or "cross-over" easements with neighboring properties Show proposed on-site circulation, including: . Travel lanes with travel directions indicated . Travel lane widths . Parking spaces or parking areas . Access locations to the parking spaces or areas. Pr- Sl;"~ c.~.. '1<1:;- il''>iiVI;' i 'Ii.;! r;:';:C'D II t.w f'l.., DEe 7 2010 Show nearest landmark or cross street: . Provide nearest cross street name . Distance from the requested approach location to the nearest cross street . All public streets that abut the property(s) 734-2680 (B/08) Page 3 of 4 ,:iflF"UA',I::KC<.;CIVCUl:lYUI' , Jr Oregon Department of Transportation CHAW 10 # land Use Compatibility Statement (lUCS) What is a LUeS? A Land Use Compatibirrty Statement (LUCS) is the form OOOT uses to ensure that Highway Approach Permits are consistent with local land use requirements. Why is a LUes Required? OOOT Coordination Rules, OAR 731-015, identify Highway Approach Permits as permits thet affect land use. State law requires OOOT activtties that affect land use, to be consistent wtth acknowledged local comprehensive plans... When is a Lues Required? An ODOT LUCS must be submitted wtth every OOOT Highway Approach Permtt Application. How to Complete the LUCS: The applicant completes Section 1. Section 2 must be completed by the local jurisdiction. The applicant then submits the completed LUCS to OOOT as part of the Highway Approach Permtt Application, ~ECTlON1: Applicant & Sitelnfoimation Print applicant name: Damien Gilbert Applicant signature: Property oWner name: OBO Enterprises LLC Subject property address: #5175 & #5195 Main Street, Springfield, OR Site description: esidentiallots, the house is removed from #5175, the house remains on #5195 but will be tom down for new development )escn1Je the proposed activity, use, or development, including type and volume of traffic tt will generate. nulti-family use, fast food drive through restaurant rownship(s) Range(s) Section(s) Tax lot(s) 78 02W 33 06200,06300 SECTION 2 must be filled out by a Local Planning Official ;ECTlON 2: Detennination of Compliance with Local Land Use Requirements 'he subject property is: 'Rlnside 0 Outside Ctty Umtts lfi. Inside 0 Outside UGB ':urrent Comprehensive Plan designation: ~\; ^ <! d LJbe Current zoning: C 6n~I" vn;.f.j ((. iYI('fl~/(' 1"" \ ; a Comprehensive Plan or zoning amendment proposed? YES 0 NO t;& 'YES, list the proposed plan designation: proposed zoning: )oes the activity, use, or development require land use review to determine compliance with land use regulations? YES fX( NO 0 , NO, tt means that no local land use review is needed. Skip to Local Planning Officiallnfonnation below. 'YES, what is the status of the land use application: 0 Approved 0 Denied 0 Under review ~ Not yet received Ust file number(s): Is the decision final: YES 0 NO 0 Comments: ,ocal Plannin Official Information (Re uined : urisdiction' (' , j. -1-" "'" . (;, \ rl \ () J I ('VI I t: '"-- 'rint planning official's name and title: C-'... + \) '.-' -eVe rC, k~n ':? I ?Itl,'ne:,- 2- 7 - lailing Address: Z Z _c,- -.f ,J l-I 'fl, 'tty. '. -S ',n"0e\cl ",' ' :=> 'hone: 5)\ 1- 72, Co' -~0 Lj e Zip Code: Cj l -4 I Fax: ~ 5.. \. 7z&:.- :mail: S D JS.I 'Ianning Official's Signature: c'S - o';C1 - C ~' '') A 0DO/'\ 101nO\ n___ ... _.f:. A C'< ""0 -' "" w_ t<1 (L~ C'< C)..., o z co a:: " o..~ ~.wz ~~~ ,0 ~:ta ~5i~ ,$SI ~~~~ e z .o:'i c '" . 8 . . . " " , , 8 " . '~ . ~ i . ~ . n n "" z ~ "'";:: - i' , R if . ~ ~ . " ~ , -- 'id~' 1"'_.- AI ~.......... - ..~........, ~ ~ ------p;:;..~...~.;=.----- . ~ mm t~rtZ:OHcM'tm .~~ ti3:; .~ 8" ~"3 ,83 ~:ici~~ ,.. . , ~ i- '" . ~ .. ~ ,...: - g U) ~ " . . .~ ,- ~ > " , -"..~:.::.- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 6 ,n .~ ~ ~ ~ . o ~ ~ ~ i Q"\ <;== ~ ~~ I')~ " ~ .1 ( ,j .. .' .tH ~.~g . 1 . ._J.& - _.___.- ........- AlNO NOI1\;lXVl ONV lN3V\1SS3SSV ClO.:J ~=+ L'lo ~ m Ll c:M't :ES 'oJ-- > "<(~ ~ ~ .....-l ~~ , . . .. ~ ~!! ~ ~n ~ ~ ~ o ~ . '\'olio' l ..8 g 'j ho . 0 , ~ g o ~ " 1SIS 8; ,\!is ~--~."'.- ~;; .. . . " C'< ""0 ,..,;;1 ""G: C'<C> O~ a:: 1'-0.. UJ -I -~ Jt= ClmS-L - j . , , 8' g. d ~ " " " . o . :i; Ii! ?o: ~ \2 :I: - . , < o '. :;L" ..... .. - ~ c..-----~-~-~__~i , ~\f1d .is IS' ....."'. ..." ....,. , j I!:! ll! ;; ~21 ... 1li:l fD f... " " >. I.~ ~!~ I ::l jig ~ ~ ~ ~l ~ . ~ 0 8 I , ~ ~ ~ ~ I n n -. ., I ~ \ ~ 8 '\8 I " ~ :. .l.3!llUS----,...-___'IHOI; , - --L ",-,- '11-- -;'~- I''',,; ~ ,j,;,~',')_. it\! ~,-~..=I1J"~" "'i;l',''',,' -~'l';;i(!~ ~f:H U1~t" ( ~\l. '~~~"'~'lil:l ~fu.,. i\~\,.r L) DEe 7 2010 . . f 31J' 130- Wi UI <( .;...jl I eLl I L " I": ~ I ~ " I~ )' . I~ r tnl 1i1)1 .30' ~"- } 60' ~ tt o ~ . . IA.Y l'V\ A ~ 1') [;TII; \l- \1-0<..-"3'302.- HIGHWAY 1&5.78 I 6200 ~ ~ " OBO Enteirises I f 8'1 .4-?-f- I 0'0' 6203 ~ ,Harold &;. i., I o . ~ ~ m paullne "" . c::. . Mesberg ~ ,'<i go.co' f. 86'''-44';. ~ .........4.4."'.. /df".Te' \0 6201 t ~~ Vidalia Ort z \ & Nereo Bur g /J',. :t" S ~ p202 ~ 185.7":' S89044'C I x~ I ~~ 10::: :~ . f ~~I ,~ 't s: 8... 4<J'E. '53.41' e Ron & Robin Spencer (\j q '0'2-33,.-31.\- IjO ~' ot<qC\ 1 1'>0' ~ I 17A,41' 6300 0.69 AC. OBO Enterprises ~. . ~ ~>-: ~~ SEE MAP 17 02 33 34 . " ':;""1 R!:C'D .~. . J'.(1. ~ , , ;~,.. ,-"'I-.-'~Ill~f.,,, ;j",. .':, DEe 7 2010 - --------- -'llI.JI...Il..lr,1.J1.J \."",...,.)1/\-.) . - - ~ ;;;- NOll V'J17ddV' llW~3d llIoo'.3Q!..Ia:JQ~n.lIqoUU.l!l'.IUUI. '" '" ][ '" ;, '" AI;IM3AJ~0 1000 UQZ-Dulcn.! ..: " "' " " ~ IO~M nO'~JO 'IllD{llH l.CIIO-DtL(lt9) '" Vi 'NO/ldIHOS30 ~ ~1I .. '" C> , OI91JIIS LULO Uo'aJO'PID,j7tq.IdH '" Ie C> . C'..j.., 'an 18 JllI~lgm:mO:J Ltl P:l.I:l8 t{UY Ole u ~O 'a73J.:IfJNJ~dS 811Yro IIIa'[llS ~pltaD '" C> 10 '" h Z 133~lS NIV'W fl6 t fl ~ flL t fl ~ ~ ~ ... ue; I;; "- " ~~ a~ ltJ '" J77 'S3SJ~d~31N3 080 'oUI '2upaaujlIull l[;)UB.IH ~ ~ " 1).9 :NOlldll:l::lS30 NOIS1A3l:l 1]1'10 <l '" :z: Q:::l::t SNOISI^3~ '37111 103rO~d U 11..:2:: CI) " 1 ~ i I I lIt ~ II '( j/ I~ !I I~ !111 Z ~ ~ ' ~ : I :~ . . ~,. ,'v <<'.' '. . d _ .. 1 f--M g-' - 1-11- I -~7g:===='~ ..... ---~.~ _______... 11 "r 1J..t ~= -@--MM"Er 1S "GI===-==~__=.LS_ __PU29__MM ~L6>------= _ _ ____ .' I Il---i~11 i - -D ,,1- - -'--~ - - - ~ - _:::- -=-=--71,,~ --=-= "- it 1S "Zl---==---_---= . I I'? I11!\J-Jr-- -~.-:.~....,.Ii'r~' '. ----:> -~ ) I I I I 'g~..i- ~ -dHO -. - ...:.:':,:. ~- ~ -dHo-- J I I I II . HO-;,,," cY';;o0 Og G6 '.3"f~!Oo.OON I '. '1/ .,,\ :'J . D '" "'" (1- 1-'-. .~ ",,' o-""-k'/~ '. .' 61 II '- ~.. j;~:: IV~ I I J'.l~>%." I'~ I I ok I':' "'.", !;k ~ I ' 2 ~ ~ I ~Ir - I III' ..~ I- -M ..1>/>'- - -I --l- '. .'~ I I '-' I~Q I ;!:o ~ 11::>.'" II ~ - II';;; .III " "f II' ) I. ~I. <~J.ij [ i I ,..: "''''-$ .. I 7;J! I I :W- I I I II )'!I III.'~. iV I II!, S':; . ,.,~ - I~ I I : II 1- '--- -- - "-- ~ __ _ iJ~-.../,I--jt /~\.. .... ...... ... II.u I : 111 ( ~"'lu'~)- ~:: ~ \ ~ 11:1'. ~\~~~~~ : . I. t';t;j t .. d 56,,-[3lu 6 1.11 ~' ~ II--- CO"''''<ci /:11 ~ - I" m !I ~ rl1t~ T : ./1 Cr.l I I 1 ~~i:;'. ---J i I I I'~IJE I.'~ I I I .-J I i I ?s I 1 II~' 1""1~1 ~ : If:" ,~~ II~<~ . ~, . I I . T ;" I ~I~ [ I ~ I '----I~ ~ I ~ I ,It is J I I /I~. .n I I II ., I . "'- I ,c, //[. IIID Iii ~ /~" I . ~ I : ;" 91'ZQI M..lf,IO.OOS '6 .' N' I I I "'II {}~61'_ ..f' '" I I ~I 101 ~-~ I II L : 19;1lLL'M~~~8 /O'l~l>g I ,'O"fjy. i..: ~ -M ..9-/'- - ~[ijU ~ - f~~~':::'~~~-~~~,;: 'J' 7_ -7d- -1ST9~O'96V~~ - -- I'll tT~~L/ ,. .., i I: J. r Ii !~- " n _-",S,- n-~ n-__~--"JO_-_'=__c,,-_<:_____ I : i " ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ z ~ ~ ~,~ ~ ~ ~ 9 ~ ~ ~ 2 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ k ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 8 ~ ~ ~ $ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 29- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ < ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ d ffi o ~ 6 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~< ~ - ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ < ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ u ~ ~ u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ u ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~~~~~ riIa Cl Q I1J VI 1fI ttJ III I1J I1J li} III VI ~ VI VI 1Il ltJ VI VI lI) l1J VI III U} -4 ~ ~ B B B B B B 5 5 B B B B B 5 B B B B B B B B ~ I::l ~ ~ g ~ iE;z m ~ ~ trJ w UI ~ Z ::!: is ~;:j !:! ~ & ::. ::r:t: g: ~ ~ ~ flJ ~ G tf e :z ~ ~ ti in l:il ltj ~ ~ CI 0 Cl (:) CI (:) ~~~~~~~ liJ lIJ 1Il III III I1l tI'j ~BBBBBB 1/ I I I I II , " 00 + I m," B 00 ~ 8 @@ ~ ~ ! ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ t; 1': I I I I I I I I I i I ) )~~';"~::-9 nrl " /..... Et // ~/ /r:l' ~/ /;J.- // // // // // // .y' lu ~~ "intt: q" ':9 ~ 1, ~ "', 0, <"'...- ~ 4 ,,' '" I (!)..' :.. ,-:::cj " .:. i=:,:;:'::': \ V)~- . ....80... 00 ~ ~ M"/f,IO.OOS lu B:;"-' ;"u ,"-' , i3 o ",,-,, o -.. ,. '" :Jj '--0 {Bj" .----------- r'~'-----.:.~ . ~""",,'Lw -......, ~ u~...u ------------... -.J-.:t- ~ ~~........ ..... (Q -.l u.:: ------- "'0 ~ ~ 1 ~I II ~ a '" a' t<) OJ c: -;s in " .= 0- X W ~ ~ ~ ~ " u ~ . . ~ ~ 0 ~ iiJ ..-; ::? ,"-' o o -.. ,. '" :Jj 2< <"', ...- ",,06' , ...- co~ , <"'...- ~ I 901 --' Ei~ :=;:0 ]"I,IO.OON. "- '" <Ii '" 'J.w a ,0 o '" 2Lw ~ ~(.) ~ "'~ v, "'-0 ~ ~ o Olu ~u ;,.,~ C> o '" "' ... C> o l;j ~ o ~ ~ ~ I ::: I 1:! ~ ~ ~ s,,"";,., DtIII. lOOlOl.li<rn I ITl C) ITl Z o . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . s;: z: o U1 " )> " m )> ~ )> OJ C ;= g z: G) " o ~ Z'! 20 -j -"",,;;u U1 ~ .. 1I1 O<.nOO OOC ~OO- BFUlUlAl ...,_11110 )>z:~""< r(j")Ui~n\ IIC-j)>::! ~)>-" -jc'Fii Ul;;UUl .........)>-0-0 ~Z)>)> :-::::h1Zl Ul__Z 1I0~G) 00"0 II II ~ ~ OJ <.n"''''o-Fii QJW<.n .\>. UlU1Ul~in -o-U-o-.l )>)>)>0'" """mUl rnrnrnUlO UlUlUl D u )> :::D A Z C) UlG)" C:"'Ej Zi\~" -jf;ii,;O OmUl~ ~"1I0 ,)> " IIZl )> 20 Zl G) z: II G) --j )> CO C I )> --j o z (J) <.n'.\>.- QJW<.n UlUlUl ",," )>)>f; ""m [R[RUl :')z ~ B ~~g~;g ~~!a o ~ a . g ----" ~ - ~ , ~~ I<l:o;~g 8li>,1O 1O....a1~ ~ " '" () , 02 ~~ 1 P L A ~Ul~ S T C E -.[] ;::G)o W ~ )>2 Q --j0 (LOCAL STREET) zoO -< ~ T I I -- -- [8. '7':- . . . , . , .. . . . a., , , " · r""~ ~ . ;::. I . ~ f: [) ~. rn~ L' ~ . ~'!( ~n ~ n , II 0 01 Z 0. I n 0, I'l U -I C )> I 0 (J) - en. -/ I'l CJ 01 n 0 U '""'1 I '" )> = = Z m 0, Il '" I 24',0" I I -, )>, -1~UJ )>'-JUJ fT1 OUJ !::NUJ a -1c.,::D mlNuj N' 001;;:: ON)> )-0 TYP UON . . r"....~. . . ..... . . Mil " .... (J)"""""" .~ , , .. .. '1.-' f , .. , " , of ..I II. '" C)t"".,.."'''' . , . , ,,=. " .. .. .. .. .. "l.plf. · If fr" "'" .....b 3 7 L ' , s! ~ OJ ...... E Ul ~ ~ '..r--' o :f . .. ;;:: .. .. :r . . . . .~I~ Im"-- . . . I · · · . . . . . . . . . . '" -4_ . of / · .. . . . l-- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I · · · . . . . . ,. . . :j'" . . . . . . . ::::~. L .. . t .. : .l \ '.' (j) -n T\:J f .. ~~~ .'. G)!:(o .. rn:r~ . e Ul . . ~ ~;;:: . . U;~~I...[ :r-j OJ ",r cZ: . OOrn I ~ 0 ;:: ,.. ' c ~ <;;! L --1 F' UlZl,; I' l.... '\ Ul~::! . . ) -l t ".. ..::r r Q)> ... ~G'- " 2G'-0!" -Q" 24'-0" " .. IlN .c "t. L ." · .. ~ OJ C '7 rn - )> ... U)~ I ff' 7U L -i......U1 ,. . · f~ 0 -- - )> '-J UJ o ... '7 r-~- xbGJ 1',,+ 5: f".f 1 rN(f) \: -: 1-. -: -: ~-- - ~ b ~ ."" ", L.... L <..NI . . . ..' -- - 0 01 ;;:: . . . t . r-- .,. 0 N )> , ,. -nN "" '\J · .. ~ OJ .. ...... I -t = ..;,.,-, ,- .., Vle} .,,:' I.' . · · . 8 ~ I i -- - ~~_~,~-' ;:: ~:~"""NI L I . , J, . 1~' · · tMll\I - .... . m " . .. . . . .. , . , . . · .. .. ~ ~tt-=:'"" - - ..., ................~ ~~. '. ...... ;24'-0" .",.,........:;O:ot:1.~I(... / "'-'. ..~- -. ~- r'b j ~~..~ ~ ~ Pf.L~rl ~ ~~ ~g 5 2 ~ 8i ~E = ~oo-<~ l(";r'9 ''':..:.: ("') ;:: d 5:'" -jOJ Ult3 e5 o s: . ~ c. ~ . . . L." . . ... , 4. . .. . 4 \4 , , '.' . . L." fbtf ' :r-jOJ"',--1: ~ aOrn I r 5i'~~ L I - r 11- -- L-;l.Il -.- . ~ . , . t 'C ..., t ~ ... t f ..", " ~g( CJ e5 o ;;:: t . , , ..;" I ::;;:ns;' )>13- 7'Ul~ UlCJ , :[ij UJO -0 r;:jz o U[Tl ru' )>-1 zc )> 51 st & 52nd 080 ENTERPRISES MAIN LLC 5175 & 5195 MAIN STREET SPRINGFIELD, OREGON 97478 (f) ,- ~ ...... "'"': 4 . . , .. , .. , ":" .',. .. · .' x'---"- · .. . , " . . , , . . . , " . , . . . 4 , . . f .. . , " , . . . , , . . 4 . " " . ~ ~ . . t . . f , , . . ;..,' . . . . . .. '~""""" V" CLiJ~CL.O ~~":-:- (. . . ~'<-.'\ '.'~ , - ~ .. '" '. 1 ::::'~ ::j ., - . . . . .. = . . . . .. F\ . . . .. b! .. ~ . . . . L .. ~ :::: ~ ::1 ~ . . ~ ~~ '. .. ,.... I:::: f. ~~ ........~/A~...) ....../~...~ II il11m II III]: II' ~ll~~V' .-:-::: , .. . , L I G'-O" o l"(]~ <.n~.!.; O)>:r oc Ul~i3 "zec -1G) :r · . 1 : " ) TYP ~ "- I 1/ po . . . . . . ... . ,...... . ~ ;s,) I '" .\>. ,- q r>- ~ . v . -.J . , . ~ ~ :;::: rn 0 , < rn ~ Q! - J1 I ...;.. _I- ...J J' ~4 , ~ . . . . . . .' 1 . . . . . . . '1 . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . r<-) I /:' .; =,.-.....,.'"~. . . .. . .. .. . .. ..~. r ... , · " .. . · · ~ · -...... . . . ........... w OJ o)>c~ 8~~~ Ul 20, " G> '" . . . N D s T R )>n< ~~~ ~~ . 20 n rn E E T (LOCAL STREET) STREET . :s: - <.D ~ )> z . UJ --1 ::;0 III III Si _IZ<J -'z n " )> , ~)> 2'Q s::~ )0' , o ~ A: ^,g III Z N III I ~. -< '--.../ " " ,,;. 01 OJ> i .po ~ ): ~ ----'1 ( in -= l z;fOJ: DlJ!g !I'~W"", Z rrl . 1M....., o;;;:ofj fao . DOi'.!.~~lJ8.ITI-V}v1GJ Ol..p.D./>.IO,.,a; oZ , ~-=o gg g~ ~o....... Pr -; ". . City of Springfield - Site Plan Review Presubrnittal ArjpliGltion 51 "-52,d & Main Street Redevelopment December 7. 2010 EXHIBIT A Parking Lot Lighting Fixture Specification & Photometric Test Report PRE-SUBMITTAL REC'D DEe. 7 2010 . . rM.nl"-.."lU L\J I L..I"-"'I 1 I 1 I" 1 ,,",I ,'- /flj'i./THDN/A L~HT/NG' - fEATURES & SPECIFICATIONS INTENDED USE _ Ideal far parking areas. street lighting. walkways and car locs. CONSTRUCTION - Rugged, die-cast. soh carner aluminum housing with O.lt nominal wall ltIickness.Die-castdoorframehasmpact-resistenr. tempered,glasslensthatisfullygasketad with one-piece rubularsilicone, FINISH _ Standard finish is dark bronze (ODBl polyester powder finish. with other architec- turalcolorsavailablB. OmCAL SVSTEM -Anodized, lluminum hydroformed reflectors: IES full cutoff distributions R2\asymmetric), R3 (asymmetric), M [forward throw} lnd R5S (squarel are interchangeable. High-performance anodized, segmented aluminum reflectors IES full cutoff distributions SA2 (asymmetric). SA3 {asymmetric} afld SR4SC (forward throw. sharp cutoff). Segmented reflec- tors attach with tool-less fasteners and are rotatable and interchangeable. ELEC'TRICAL SYSTEM - Sallast High reactance. high power factor for 10-150W. Constant wattage autotransformer for 175-4QOW. Metal halide 150W and below are standard with pulse--startignitortechnology; super CWA pulse-start ballast require dfor200W,32rfoNand 350W ISCWA option). Ballast is copper-wound and 100% factory-tested. Super CWA pulse start ballasts, 88% efficient and EISA compliant, are required for 151-400W {must order SCWAoption)lorUS shipments only. Notavailable: 115M SCWA. CSA, NOM or INTL required for probe start shipments outside the US. Socket Porcelain, horizontally oriented medium base socket for 10-15DM. Mogul base socket for 175M and above, and 70-400S, with copper alloy. nickel-p lated screw shell and center contact UL listed 150QW, 600V. USTlNG _ UL Listed (stafldardl, CSA Certified {see Options!. UL listed for2S"C ambient and wet\ocations.IP65rated ifl accordance with standard IEC 529. Specifications subject to change without notice. "". '--.. Catalog Number Notes Type ~@ Soft Square lighting Specifications EPA: 1.2 ft.' 'Weight 35.91bs {16.2S kg} Length: 17-1/2" (44.5 cm} Width: 17 -1/2" 14..0 em} Depth: 7-1/S' I1S.1 cml *Weight as configured in example below. q I- 4"-1 (102cm) KAD MH: 70W-400W HPS: 70W-400W 20' to 35' Mounting ]' 7-1/S' 11.J:1 I 17-1/2" (44.5 cm) ORDERiNG INFORMATION For shortest lead times, configure product using standard options (shown in bold). Example: KAD 400M R3 TB SCWA SPD04lPI I~ illnstJl" (blank} Magnetic 04 tr arm ballast 03 6" arm CWI Constant wattage 09 9" ann isolated 12 lZ'arm Super CWA pulse DAD12P Degree arm start (pole}" ballast DAD12WB Degree arm NOTE:Forshipments (wallj12 to U.S. territories, WBA Decorative wall. SCWAmustbe bracket12,13 specified to comply KMA Mast arm witi1 EISA. external fitter KTMB Twin mounting bar KAD ~ 'KAD' ~~ 120 20S' 240' 277 347 4S0' jTB8~ 23050HZIO g Mill.! lli9.l1 b.afu!.g oressure 70Ml,2,3 m.wIi1 100M' 70s' 150M' 100S 175M' 1505' 200M' 2505 '250M I 4005 j20M" Ceramic 4 . metal 350M halide 400M' 50MHC 70MHC 100MHC 150MHC Mounting llu SPD_ Square pole RPD_ Round pole WBO_ Wall bracket WWD_ Wood pole or wall Distribution Hvrirofnrmed reflectors R2 IES type 1\ asymmetric' . R3 IE5 typalllasymmetric'; R4 IE5 type IV forward throw' R5S IES type V square SRomRntRd reflectors SR2 IES type 1\ asymmetric' SR3 IES type III asymmetric' SR4SC iES type IY forward throw .8 Optional multi-tap ballast (120,208, 240. 211V;in Canada: 120,Z77.347Vl, Optional five-tap ballast (l20,20a. 240, rn,480IJJ. 10 Consult factory for available wattages. 11 9~ arm is required when tv.o or more luminaires are oriented on 03900 drillingpattern, 12 Ships separately. 13 Available with SPD04 and SPOn9. 14 Must specify voltage, N/A with TB. 15 Only available with SR2, SR3, &: SR4SC optics. 16 Max allowable wattage lamp included. 11 May be ordered as an accessory, 18 Seewww.lithonia.comJarcholorsfor additional color options, 19 Must be specified. 20 MustuseRP009 ~ LPI Lamp included W Less lamp Finish11 Iblankf Dark bronze DWH Whita DBL Black DMB Medium bronze DNA Natural aluminum 8. NIGHTTIME fRIENDlY ConsistentwiltlLEEO~ ga5l, & Green B1olles"'I;l"Jleria Iorllght~utiM:Jdur;lion NOTES: 1 NotavailablewithSCWA. 2 Not 8vailable with.18DV. 3 Not available withiBV. 4 Mustbe ordered with SCWA, 5 Reduced jacket E028 re~uir9d for SRZ, SR3 and SR4SCoptics. 6 House-side shield available, 7 Must specify CWI for usein Caoaaa. I Options Three@900 Four@90' T20-390" TZO-490" T25-390" T25-4901O T35-3901O T35-490" n....I_.... Al-370 _~:!f.!gg (f) SCWA Shinoed installed in fixture SF Single fuse 120, 277, 347Y" OF Double fuse 20S, 240, 4BO" PO Power tray'S PER NEMA twist-lock recep- tacle only (no photocontrol) Guartz restrike system1a GRS time delaylO.18 Terminal wiring blocklS House-side shield t CSA Certified Available for MH probe start shipping outside the U.S. Shinned seDsratelvll PEl NEMA twist-lock PE 1120, 2OS, 240YJ PE3 NEMA twist-lock PE (347V) PEl NEMA twist-lock PE 14S0YJ PE7 NEMA twist-lock PE (my) SC Shortening cap for PER option YG Yandal guard WG Wire guard URS URSTD WTB HS CSA iNTL Accessories Ordaru se~aral1l catalog numher. Numberoflixrures Tenon MountinlJ Slipfitter Tenon 0.0. One Two@180~ 2-3/S' TZO-190 TZO-2S0 2-7/S" T25-190 TZ5-2S0 4" T35-190 T35-2BO KAOYG Yandal guard KAOWG Wire guard Two@900 TZO-29020 TZ5-29020 T35-290" Three@1200 TZO-320" T25-320 T35-320 Sheet #: KAD.M-S ,D 250M P ARRKINGooLOTeLI~ FIXTU REP'PHOTOMv~RIE'TEST~"RE-PORi~ ~ I.lrHDNIAI.IDHTIND. ~cl.lifyB:rands., [:ghr~g KAD 250M R3 (PROBE) - OUTDOOR PHOTOMETRIC REPORT KAD 250M R3 (PROBE) AREA LUMINAIRE, 250W MH, R3 REFLECTOR, FULL CUTOFF MEETS THE 'NIGHTTIME FRIENDLY' CRITERIA M250/U ONE 250-WATT CLEAR BT-28 METAL HALIDE, HORIZONTAL POSITION. LAMP OUTPUT: 1 LAMP(S), RATED LUMENS/LAMP: 19500 INPUT WATTAGE: 297 LUMINOUS OPENING: RECTANGLE (L: 1.20FT, W: 1.20FT) , CATALOG #: LUMINA IRE: LAMP CAT #: LAMP: EFFICIENCY: TER CAT AGORY: TER VALUE: MAX CD: . CUTOFF CLASS: ROADWAY cLASS: 7.~OO 5.000 4.200 3,500 <'400 1.200 COla 1.200 <'400 3,500 4,SOQ &.000' 7.200 IllI -O'H I!!I - 90' H' 67% AREA ft SITE LIGHT - TYPE II 26 7,119.0 AT HORIZONTAL: 65'. VERTICAL: 67.5' FULL CUTOFF" SHORT, TYPE II ~,',,"'..' Pfffrl~ N1GHTTlME FRIfNDiY Product Page Specific'ation Sheet Polar Candela Distribution 1~_:i'.17Q~ 1?lJ:I l5€P +~ lsofootcandle Plot 5 4 3 2 1 Q, 1 2. .3.4 5 5 133' 5 120' 4 110' 3 .-,---._~.-..,..--~........, ./ ~'\\ // ~ '\" fA/ ". ..\ \. /: . . ~ '.. "\ \,. , . . .. . , . !. .. ' .. " " . '. .. &. '. ,\' 10'J'l " . 90' 1 !ro' o 70' 1 60' 2 3 5{lO 4 V.A,d):1 10:1- ~ 30:1 4(p c~ -180'H . -Maxed: 6S'H 5 '6e . IiIi 20 fc d 1 fe ~1ount height: 10ft . 10 fe Il!l 0.5 fe Total LLF: 1 II 5 fe f!iJ 0.1 fe . 50't, Max Candela Distance in units of mount height ..: Max Cd ValUe .---....-.-.-.------... "---"-'" ; LUMENS PER ZONE i ZONE LUMENS % TOTAL ZONE LUMENS % TOTAL ---------------.-----....-.---.----- 0-10 201.1 1.5% 90-100 0 0% 10-20 621.3 4_8% 100-110 0 0% 20-30 1,151.8 8.8% 110-120 0 0% 30-40 2,036.4 15.6% 120-130 0 0% 40-50 2,644.9 20.2% 130-140 0 0% ;ZONAL LUMEN SUMMARY ZONE LUMENS % LAMP % LUMINAIRE -------..---- 0-30 1,974.2 10.1% 15.1% 0-40 4,010.6 20.6% 30.7% 0-60 9,216.0 47.3% 70.5% 60-90 3,854.5 19.8% 29.5% 0-90 13,070.5 67% 100% ^<D 250M R3 (PROBE) - Outdoor Photometric Re. -/. ... . N 50-60 2,560.5 60-70 2,375.2 70-80 1,422.4 80-90 56.9 19.6% 140-150 18.2% 150-160 10.9% 160-170 0.4% 170.180 http://www.visual-3d.CO_ISlphotometric Viewerl de fuuJ t.as px?id=... o o o o 0% 0% 0% 0% 90-180 0 0% 0% 0-180 13,070.5 67% 100% - -~...,~~.",..__...""....-.."...._,.-"~-,.~_...-."-".'.'-~ ,. EFFICIENCY TOTAL: 67% . _, ..~!o_., """. ..~..._...:.. ,,,..,::;-;... If,: " C~;:'=P..' .,. ~;.>. . . " )', \, ~ -' ~ C: f 5 " .I' Id S' P'.R' PI" I" · Ity 0 . piing! Ie - Ite an eVlew rest! J!TlIlta App ;catlon 51"-52"' & Main Street Redevelopment December 7, 2010 EXHIBIT B FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map Number 41 039C1162 F PRE-SUBMITTAL REeD ! DEe- 7 2010 I. I . . ~ ~. . . . A -, ~ NO"''''"''.... ,HOWN ON "'" ....ll~ LOO>". ""'HIN 10"H'H~17'O"'IU""."WIS'I""OlOWN"""'O""'. "N~'l ...", '" , CITY OF SPI'JNGI'lEl..D .l.l39l L- " ~ . LEGEND G ~.~:~==T!. ,...... ,............-.....- ----- - ...... --....-......... =T-'.i!"::'::':: .......~.....--_.... --.---- _.-- --- ,..... ........-..........- -~..._--- .""'.. -...--.....- ----- "wow"""",,,,,,.,," ~ ~~:''''''''~~-q;~~ D ':=::------- &'Sl IZ] m ~ - -- <-.........-----..-...... .~ ...-.......-- _...~..- ...... -....- ----- -..... -..... - . -'---~ <-- '''''"'''- --- .- - -- -.... .........,,-- -",- @----@ IEL"" ~, '--"--- -_.......,.. ~~~~F~~~~ -,-,---.._-_....... ",,,,~,_.,._~ t___.___.._.___. _"n___'___ ----~._--- ____.__u"__n ,-"",--- ~_:::....-:..,=.:::::::.,~_:_i...-;:',._:..... Z'"-e=:.:z;?::.~~..::.:.:E -"--~-_.'''-'-'..-- -----.--.- _.___.h~'__ =;::"E.-E~::;--:':"~':::; .-----...---- -...-.---- ""'..- ......-..,..........- ","""'"'''OO' _Fl""'''''"''''"'''..''........ _..._..........h__......~_ _.._._-~-_._.. -----.------ ,,-.---.------ "'~----_._- .. -"'""""'''''':'"'''"'''''... N.nmIW.MmINS~R.IlitE"o;RAII FIRM FLDCDIMSURANCElI.I.TEMAP ~~~.:!.T5._....,,_ 1,- ,111."""",,- II ="~~ '1"-.... --= " 1'1 MAI'HUI!UA ~IDllC1l&2 f EHICl1VEDAIt: IU~E 2,1939 . ,.' . . ..- . ~ .