Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNotice PLANNER 3/29/2011 . . , Notice of Decision - Site Plan Review Project Name: Bayberry Commons Project Proposal: Assisted Living and Alzheimer's Care Facility Case Number: DRC2005-00065 Project Location: 2255 Laura Street, 17-03-27-11 TL 1100 Zoning: Medium Density Residential (MDR) Refinement Plan and Designation: Gateway .MDR Metro Plan Designation: MDR Pre-Submittal Meeting Date: August 23, 2005 Application Submitted Date: September 23, 2005 Decision Issued Date: December 19,2005 Recommendation: Approval with Conditions Appeal Deadline Date: January 3, 2006 Associated Applications: PRE2005-00054, SUB2004-00041 (Property Line Adjustment), DRC 2005- 00066 (Tree Felling) ~'flW\~l;l1?li:,j1?;i~;i;iiI!;ftffi.Glm;0F,JSPRINGFIEEO;OEVEfOpMENJ;j!R:eVIEWl;IiEAMj;;r~!lI;_.'flS~;;I1fA!V ~311*IiqffiL"Jt"~,,. ,,,,,If"iE0?.J,,..;.t~'"'~~~~~'-~'_~" ',~"_~_'~'"_""""""",_',_"""",,,',,"..,,,,",.."......"....,.,.,,,,,,..,....&,,-"_... M.. ... ...~..",*'."..... ,'" ."",,,",,=019.,, .., .,_'.....L":.r"}(-M!~.,.,.\.,'L,, POSITION REVIEW OF NAME PHONE Planner II Land Use Planning Linda Pauly 726-4608 Transportation Planning Engineer Transportation Gary McKenney 726-4585 Public Works Engineering Utilities & Easements Steve Barnes 736-1036 Public Works Engineering Sanitary & Storm Sewer Matt Stouder 736-103S Deputy Fire Marshall . Fire and Life Safety Gilbert Gordon 726-2293 Community Services Manager Building Dave Puent 726-3668 Bayberry Commons LLC 30 E. Broadway # 160 Eugene, OR 9740 I Attn: Dennis Gorboden Tony Koach Architect 230 I N.W Thurman Street, Suite K Portland OR 97210 NATURE OF APPLICATION: The applicant submitted a Type II Site Plan Review Application to the City of Springfield requesting tentative approval to construct a two story congregate care facility with 48 Date Received: Site Plan Review DRQ005-00065 MAR 2 9 2011 Original submittal . . assisted living units/beds and 13 Alzheimer's care units/beds. Total building square footage is 47,00 I square feet. Total impervious area is 72, 109 square feet. DECISION: Tentative Site Plan Approval, with conditions, as of the date of this letter. This is a limited land use decision made according to city code and state statute. Unless appealed, the decision is final. Please read this document carefully. The standards of the Springfield Development Code (SDC) applicable to each criterion of Site Plan Approval are listed herein and are satisfied by the submitted plans and notes unless specifically noted with findings and conditions necessary for compliance. Final Site Plans must be in conformance with the tentative site plan as conditioned. Building plans and site development must conform to the Final Site Plan. OTHER USES THAT MAY BE AUTHORIZED BY THE DECISION: None. The proposed use (Group Care Facility) is permitted as a special use in accordance with Springfield Development Code (SDC) 16.020 (9). Final Site Plan, Building Plans must conform to this decision. REVIEW PROCESS: This application is reviewed under Type II procedures listed in SDC 3.080 and the site plan criteria of approval 31.060. This application was accepted as complete upon submittal, March I, 2005. This decision is issued on the 55th day of the 120 days mandated by the state. SITE INFORMATION: The development site is located on the east side of Laura Street in Springfield, near the i,ntersection with Lindale Drive. The land is zoned Medium Density Residential (MDR). The property abuts Medium Density Residential (MDR) zoning to the north and south. Medium and High Density residential zoning districts are located west across Laura Street, (north and south of Lindale Drive). The site abuts Pioneer Parkway along the east property line. The applicant owns TL 1100 to the north. The development site is subject to a land use decision for Property Line Adjustment (SUB2004-00041) currently being processed by the City. Tentative plan approval was granted on October 19, 2005 to relocate the line between TL 1100 and 1000. The existing size of the subject property is 96,603 sq. ft. (2.21 acres). After the adjustment is recorded, TL 1100 will be I 12,924 sq. ft. (2.59 acres). The Final Survey has not been submitted or recorded at the date of this decision. The subject property is currently developed with a residence. Site topography is relatively flat and is vegetated with grass and trees. Existing residence at 2255 Laura Street Date Received: MAR 2. 9 2011 Original submittal Site Plan Review DRC2005~0065 2 . . Site from Laura Street WRITTEN COMMENTS: Applications for Limited Land Use Decisions require the notification of property owners/occupants within 100 feet of the subject property allowing for a 14 day comment period on the application (SDC 3.080 and 14.030). The applicant and parties submitting written comments during the notice period have appeal rights and are mailed a copy of this decision for consideration. In accordance with SDC 3.080 and 14.030, 'notice was sent to owner/occupants within 100 feet of the subject site on September 29, 2005. No written comments were received. CRITERIA OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL: The Director shall approve, or approve with conditions, a Type II Site Plan Review Application upon determining that criteria (I) through (5) of this Section have been satisfied. If conditions cannot be attached to satisfy the criteria, the Director shall deny the application. (I) The zoning is consistent with the Metro Plan diagram, and/or the applicable Refinement Plan diagram, Plan District map, and Conceptual Development Plan. Finding: Criterion I has been met because the MDR zoning is consistent with the,Metro Plan diagram and the Gateway Refrnement Plan diagram. (2) Capacity requirements of public improvements, 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 applicab", regulations. The Public Works Director or a utility provider shall determine capacity issues. (3) The proposed development shall comply with all applicable public and private design and construction standards contained in this Code and. other applicable regulations. Criterion 2 and 3 require the proposed development to be provided with public and private improvements which are be designed in conformance with all applicable Development Code requirements and the Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual. Finding: The Public Works Director's representatives have reviewed the proposed site plan. City staffs review comments have been incorporated in findings and conditions contained herein. The site Date Received: Site Plan Review DRQ005-00065 MAIUL 9 2011 Original submittal .. . plan application as submitted complies with the code standards listed under each sub-element unless otherwise noted with specific findings and conclusions. The elements, sub-elements and code standards of Criterion 2 and Criterion 3 include but are not limited to: Public and Private Improvements in accordance with SDC 3 I and 32 . Public Street and Related Improvements - SDC 32.020-32.090 . Sanitary Sewer Improvements - SDC 32.100 . Storm Water Management and Quality - SDC 32.110 and SDC 31.240 . Utilities - SDC 32.120 (I) and (2) . Fire and Life Safety Improvements - SDC 32. 120(3) . Public and Private Easements - SDC 32.120( I) and (5) Conformance with standards of SDC Article 3 I. Site Plan Review, and Article 16, Residential Zoning Districts , . Permitted Uses - SDC 16.020 . Lot Size and Setback Standards - SDC 16.030 . Height Standards - SDC 16.060 . Off-Street Parking Standards - SDC 16.070 (2) and SDC 31.170-230 . Fence Standards - SDC 16.090 . Special Use Standards for Residential care facilities in LDR - SDC 16.100 (2) . Landscaping Standards - SDC 31.130-150 . Screening and Lighting - SDC 31.160 . Parking Standards - SDC 31.170 - 230 Applicable Overlay Districts and Refinement Plan Requirements . . Gateway Refinement Plan Public and Private Improvements in Accordance with SDC 31 and 32 PUBLIC STREETSrrRANSPORTATlON FACILITIES AND IMPAaS - SDC 32.020 Finding: The proposed development will take access from Laura Street, a paved unimproved Lane County Road. Laura Street is designated as a Major Collector in TransPlan. The existing street abutting the development site is a two-lane asphalt roadway within a 70-foot wide right-of-way, with roadside drainage ditches and no sidewalks. Average daily traffic volume on Laura Street is approximately 3,500 vehicle trips. Date Received: MAR 2.9 2011 View narth an Laura Sueet at Undale Ave. (development site on right) Original Submittal Site PIon Review DRCl005-00065 4 . . Finding: SDC 32.020 (3) specifies that Collector streets shall have a minimum right of way of 70 feet: "Except where otherwise indicated in the TransPlan or on a separately approved future street plan, or where necessary to achieve right of way and street alignment, street right of way and roadway widths shall be as specified in Table 32-1:" Type of SUeet Collector Minimum Ri~ht of WqylMinimum Curb to Curb 70 feetl36 feet SDC 32.020 (I O)(a) states: "Whenever an existing street of inadequate width is abutting or within a development area requiring Development Approval, additional right of way shall be required." Finding: Occupation and use of the developed site will generate new vehicle trips on the surrounding street system. These trips contribute to the need for transportation facilities that provide the site with safe and efficient multi-mc:>dal access. Based on ITE Land Use Code 2S2 (Congregate Care Facility) and studies of assisted living facilities performed by The American Seniors Housing Association (ASHA), trip generation is estimated to be as follows: . Average Weekday = 61 units x 2.15 trips per unit = 131 trips . PM Peak Hour = 61 units x 0.17 trips per unit = 10 trips Finding: According to the "Household" survey done by LCOG in 1994, 12.6 percent of household trips are made by bicycle or walking and 1.8 percent are by transit bus. These trips may have their origin or destination at a variety of land uses, including this use. Pedestrian and bicycle trips contribute to the need for sidewalks, pedestrian crossing signals, crosswalks, bicycle parking and bicycle lanes. SDC 32.020 (I O)(b) states: "Whenever a proposed land division or development will increase traffic on the City street system and that development has any unimproved street frontage abutting a fully improved street, that street frontage shall be fully improved to City specifications," Finding: Since the proposed development will increase traffic on the City street system, and the development has frontage abutting on Laura Street, an unimproved street, Laura Street shall be fully improved to City specifications. The applicant proposes to dedicate street right-of-way along the property frontage to a distance of 35 feet from the centerline of Laura Street as shown on Plan Sheet CAO, and to reconstruct and widen the street on the east side to match the width (24 feet from centerline) and alignment of the fully-improved section to the north. The applicant will need to submit Public Improvement plans (PIP) for these improvements which are in accordance with the Final Site Plan . and all applicable conditions of approval in this decision. The public improvements must be constructed per the approved PIP or bonded prior to issuance of building occupancy. Finding: The proposed street improvement is limited to the frontage of Tax Lot 1100, thus after construction there will be a gap of unimproved street approximately 110 feet long between the new improvement and the improved section of Laura Street north of the subject property. Tax Lot 1000 is also owned by Bayberry Commons LLC, but the lot is not being developed at this time. To provide Dedestrian connectivity for residents and employees of Bavberry Commons with the services and transit connections located to the north. the City stron21y recommends that the applicant add the Tax Lot 1000 Laura Street fronta2e to the Public Improvement project. This would reduce design and project mobilization costs, and eliminate a second Public Improvement Plan review by the City, thus expediting the future development ofTax Lot 1000. Date Received: . MAR 2 9 2011 Site Plan Review DRQ005~0065 Original Submittal . . Finding: As conditioned, the City Transportation Planning Engineer has determined that the planned off-site roadway improvements will be sufficient to accommodate the anticipated new vehicular trips associated with the proposed development. View south on Laura Street and west to Undale Apartments Finding: Lane Transit bus service is provided by the # 12 Gateway Route. Bus stops serving the proposed development site are located: . On the north side of Lindale Drive at Pheasant Street (westbound), and . On the south side of Harlow Road at Game Farm Road (eastbound). SIDEWALK AND PLANTER STRIP STANDARDS- SDC 32.040 SDC 32.04Q (3) states: Planter strips shall be at least 4.5 feet in width. Finding: The cross section on Plan Sheet C.40 proposes a 5-foot sidewalk and a 4-foot wide planter strip. The proposed right-of-way is sufficient to provide a 5.5-foot planter strip. The additional width of planter is preferred by the City in order to prevent damage to sidewalks and to better accommodate street growth. Finding: The curb details on Sheet C.50 are for construction of curbside sidewalks. Condition I: In the Final Site Plan, a planter strip with a width of 5.5 feet, exclusive of curb, shall be provided. The curb details on Sheet C.50 shall be amended to show the required planter strip between curb and sidewalk. STREET TREES- SDC 32.050 City Engineering Design Standards *(EDSPM Chapter 6.02.4 requires street trees to be located no closer than 20 feet from a street light. Finding: The applicant's plans propose to place street trees closer than 20 feet from street lights. Condition 2: In the Final Site Plan, the spacing of proposed street trees shall be adjusted such that trees are placed 20 feet or more from street lights. Trees shall be a minimum of 5 feet from driveways. Date Received: MAR 2.9 2011 Site Plan Review DR0005-00065 6 Original Submittal . . STREET UGHTS- SDC 32.060 SDC 32.060 (I) states: Street lighting shall be included with all new developments or redevelopment. Existing street lights shall be upgraded to current lighting standards as determined by the Public Works Director. The developer shall be responsible for lighting installation costs. Finding: To provide for safe pedestrian and vehicular access, street lighting is needed that will adequately illuminate the street and sidewalk areas adjacent to the development site. The city's street lighting standards, which are based on the Illuminating Engineering Society (IES), American National Standard Practice for Roadway Lighting RP-S, specify the lighting type and required luminance levels for street and pedestrian areas. In low and' medium density residential districts these standards specify high pressure sodium type street light fixtures. On a 4S-foot wide collector, such as Laura Street, the table below shows the required horizontal illuminance, street light type and spacing needed to achieve this lighting level. Street, Width, Classification Required Illuminance Type - Spacing Laura Street, 4S', collector 0.6 footcandles Type: ISO-watt high pressure sodium. Spacing: 190 feet (poles on same side) Finding: The development site has approximately3S0 feet offrontage on Laura Street. Existing lighting within this frontage consists of two 90-watt low-pressure sodium street lights on the west side of the street. One light is located at the southern site boundary and the other at the northwest corner of Laura Street and Lindale Drive, a distance of approximately 350 feet. These street lights do not provide the quality or quantity of illumination necessary to meet adopted city standards for safe and efficient traffic movements. Based the length of site street frontage, installation of at least one ISO-watt, high pressure sodium street light (with associated pole and luminaire arm) on the development frontage is required to meet the illuminance standard. Staff reviewed the existing circumstances and determined that replacement of the two 90-watt low pressure sodium street light fixtures with I SO-watt high pressure sodium fixtures is a lower cost and more efficient alternative to providing an additional street light. Condition 3: In the Public Improvement Plans, the applicant, shall include notes and specifications for the replacement of the two existing 90-watt low pressure sodium street light fixtures on the west side of Laura Street, opposite the development site, with ISO-watt high pressure sodium street light fixtures. ACCESS AND CURB CUTS - SDC 32.0S0 See Criterion 4. SANITARY SEWER - SDC 32.100 Finding: The applicant proposes to connect the new building to'the existing public sewer system in Laura Street via an S-inch lateral which extends to the property. Finding: A vehicular loading zone is shown on plan sheet C2.0. Drainage is not directed to the sanitary sewer. A trash enclosure is shown on plan sheet C2.0, adjacent to the proposed loading zone. These areas are not proposed to be connected to the sanitary sewer. The City requires drainage from the first 3 feet of paved areas around loading zones and material transfer areas to be isolated from site stormwater runoff and directed to the sanitary sewer system, in Date Received: Site Plan Review DRQ005~0065 MAR 2,,9 2011 7 n..:._i"'l"lIl ~llhmittal . . accordance with the Engineering Design Standards and Proce.dures Manual (EDSPM) Chapter 3.03.4.A and the City's accepted interim design standards at Section 4.6 of City of Portland Stormwater Management Manual. Section 3.03.4.A of the City's EDSPM and Section 4.4 of Portland's Stormwater Management Manual require the trash enclosure to be covered, and drained to the sanitary sewer system to prevent contamination of stormwater runoff. Condition 4: In the Final Site Plan, the loading zone area shall be designed to meet requirements in Section 4.6 of the City of Portland's Stormwater Management Manual and Section 2.02 of the Springfield Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual. Specifically, the applicant shall clearly indicate on the plan set how the first three feet of the proposed loading zone area will drain to the private sanitary sewer system, and show that stormwater runoff will not enter the sanitary sewer system. Condition 5: In the Final Site Plan, the trash enclosure shall be designed to meet requirements of Section 4.4 of the City of Portlond's Stormwater Management Manual, referenced in Section 3.03.4.A of the Springfield Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual. Specifically, the trash enclosure shall be covered, and shall be drained in isolation from stormwater runoff, and plumbed to the sanitary sewer system. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT - SDC 32.//0 Finding: The applicant has proposed a series of stormwater pipes, eatch basins, area drains and vegetative water quality swales to control stormwater runoff, consistent with SDC 32.110 (5). Stormwater runoff from the site ultimately discharges into the public drainage system, located in Laura Street. Finding: SDC 31.050 (6) (a) of the SDC requires roof drainage patterns and discharge locations to be shown in the grading, paving, and stormwater management plan. The applicant's plans do not provide this information. Condition 6: In the Final Site Plan, the applicant shall show the locations of the roof drainage discharge systems as required in SDC 31.050 (6)(a). Roof drainage shall be incorporated into the overall drainage conveyance system of the site. Finding: Stormwater discharge from the site enters into a series of catch basins, vegetative water quality swales; private drainage pipes and ultimately into the existing 24-inch public stormwater pipe in Laura Street. The public pipe drains south before ultimately discharging into Channel No 6. Channel No 6 eventually drains into the Willamette River, a Water Quality Limited Watercourse (WQLW). Finding: Under Federal regulation of the Clean Water Act (CWA), Endangered Species Act (ESA), and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), the City of Springfield is required to obtain, . and has applied for, a Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit. A provision of this permit requires the City demonstrate efforts to reduce the pollution in urban stormwater to the Maximum Extent Practicable (MEP). Finding: Federal and Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) rules require the City's MS4 plan address six "Minimum Control Measures." Minimum Control Measure 5, "Post-Construction Stormwater Management for New Development and Redevelopment," applies to the proposed development. Minimum Control Measure 5 requires the City of Springfield to develop, implement and enforce a program to ensure the reduction of pollutants in stormwater runoff to the MEP. The City Date Received: .J Site Plan Review DRG005-00065 MAR 2 9 2011 .8 Original Submittai . . must also develop and implement strategies that include a combination of structural or non-structural Best Management Practices (BMPs) appropriated for the community. Finding: Minimum Control Measure 5 requires the City of Springfield to use an ordinance or other regulatory mechanism to address post construction runoff from new and re-development projects to the extent allowable under State law. Regulatory mechanisms used by the City include the'Springfield Development Code (SDC), the City's Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual (EDSPM) and the future Stormwater Facilities Master Plan (SFMP). Finding: As required in Section 31.050 (5) of the SDC, "a development shall be required to employ drainage management practices approved by the Public Works Director and consistent with Metro Plan policies and the Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual." Finding: Section 3.02 of the City's EDSPM states the Pubic Works Department will accept, as interim design standards for storl'l1water quality, water quality facilities designed pursuant to the policies and procedures of either the City of Portland (BES) or Unified Sewerage Agency (USA), also know as the Clean Water Services (CWS). Finding: Section 3.03.3.B of the City's EDSPM states all public and private development and redevelopment projects shall employ a system of one or more post-developed BMPs that in combination are designed to achieve at least a 70' percent reduction in the total suspended solids in the runoff generated by that development. Additionally, Section 3.03.4.E of the manual requires a minimum of 50 percent of the non-building rooftop impervious area on a site shall be treated for stormwater quality improvement using vegetative methods. Finding: To meet the requirements of the City's MS4 permit, the Springfield Development Code, and the City's EDSPM, the applicant has proposed a system of vegetative water quality swales to collect and treat stormwater, prior to discharge into the public system. The swales have been designed pursuant to the City of Portland's (BES) Stormwater Management Manual. The required setback from centerline of swale to property lines is 5 feet, and 10 feet from building foundations. The applicant has shown some swales that encroach 'into these setbacks. Finding: The vegetation proposed for use in the water quality swales will serve as the primary pollutant removal mechanism for the stormwater runoff, and will remove suspended solids and pollutants through the process of sedimentation and filtration. Satisfactory pollutant removal will occur only when vegetation has been fully established. The water quality swales which receive drainage from the vehicular areas must meet the Portland BES Manual standards or equivalent for vegetation. The proposed planting of the parking lot swales does not meet the vegetation requirement for a vegetated swale. Stormwater Management Manual Page 2-67: Required Landscaping: Vegetated Swale (Adopted July I, 1999; revised September I, 2004). The "facility area" is equivalent to the area of the swale, including bottom and side slopes, as calculated from form SIM. Minimum plant material quantities per 100 sauare feet of facility area are as follows: I - Evergreen or deciduous tree (planted around the perimeter of the swale): Evergreen trees: Minimum height 6 feet Deciduous trees: Minimum caliper: I Y, inches at 6 inches above base. 4 - Large shrubs/small trees: 3'&allon containers or equivalent. 6 - Shrubs/large grass-like plants: I-gallon containers or equivalent Date Received: Site Plan Review DRG005-00065 MAR 2,9 2011 9 Original submittal . . Ground cover plants: I per 12 inches on center, triangular spacing, for the ground cover planting area only, unless seed or sod is specified. M.inimum container: 4-inch pot. At least 50 percent of the facility shall be planted with grasses or grass-like plants. Condition 7: In the Final Site Plan, the applicant shall provide dimensioning on the plans which indicates that the proposed water quality swales shall be located such that swale centerlines are at least 5 feet from property lines and 10 feet from building foundations." All swales and drainage features shall be located outside of public utility easements. Condition 8: The vegetated swales which receive drainage from the vehicular areas must meet the Portland BES Manual standards or equivalent for vegetation. Minimum plant material quantities per 100 square feet of facility area are as follows: I - Evergreen or deciduous tree (planted around the perimeter of the swale): Evergreen trees: Minimum height 6 feet . Deciduous trees:'Minimum caliper: I Y, inches at 6 inches above base. 4 - Large shrubs/small trees: 3-gallon containers or equivalent. 6 - Shrubs/large grass-like plants: I-gallon containers or equivalent Ground cover plants: I per 12 inches on center, triangular spacing, for the ground cover planting area only, unless seed or sod is specified. Minimum container: 4.-inch pot. At least 50 percent of the facility shall be planted with grasses or grass-like plants. Condition 9: To ensure a fully functioning water quality system and meet objectives of Springfield's MS4 permit, the SDC and the EDSPM, the vegetative water quality swale plantings shall be fully planted and established prior to City issuance of a Final Occupancy Permit. Alternatively, if this condition cannot be met, the applicant shall provide and maintain additional interim erosion control/water quality measures acceptable to the Public Works Department that will suffice until such time when the swale vegetation becomes fully established. UTIUTIES AND EASEMENTS Finding: The development will receive water service available from Springfield Utility Board (SUB). All water systems must be designed in accordance with SUB standards. SUB will require full metering of the proposed fire service line and onsite hydrants. Please contact Bart McKee of Sub Water Department, (726-2396) for detailed information on materials and construction standards, costs and a construction schedule, and backfiow requirements, please refer to his hitter dated October 21, 2005. Backfiow prevention devices are required for this development. Please contact Chuck Davis at 726- 2396. The 2" domestic service backfiow device will need to be a reduced pressure device rather than a double check valve. Finding: SDC 32.120(2) states, "Wherever possible, utility lines shall be placed underground." Finding: Underground service will be provided by SUB. There is electrical power available from overhead lines along the east property line. Ed Head of SUB Electric (744-3707) is the contact person. SUB proposes to locate a transformer north of the proposed trash enclosure northeast of the loading zone. SUB has requested public utility easements (PUEs) to serve this development. These easements are the minimum necessary to extend electric service to the.property. A diagram is attached to this report at Attachment I. SDC 32.120 (5) states: An applicant proposing a development shall make arrangements with the City arid each utility provider for the dedication of utility easements necessary to fully service the development. Date Received: Site Plan Review DR0005-00065 MAR Z 9 2011 10 Original Submittal . . Condition 10: Prior to Final Site Plan approval, the applicant shall record the following public utility easements to provide electric service to the proposed development: PUE width PUE location I 0 feet north of the proposed trash enclosure northeast of the loading zone, 10 feet adjacent to south edge of driveway, extending north to north property line I 0 feet Centered on SUB existing power pole #9 I 121, approximately 304 feet north of the southeast property corner thence running west to the 10-foot PUE described above. Copies of the draft easements shall be submitted to the City for review by the City Surveyor prior to recording. Conclusion: As conditioned in this decision, the proposed public improvements are in accordance with SDC Article 32. Conformance with standards of SDC Article 16, Residential Zoning Districts, and SDC Article 31, Site Plan Review . Permitted Uses - SDC 16.020 . Lot Size and Setback Standards - SDC 16.030 . Height Standards - SDC 16.060 . Off-Street Parking Standards - SDC 16.070(2) and SDC 31.170-230 . Fence Standards - SDC 16.090 . Special Use Standards for Residential care facilities in LDR - SDC 16.100 (2) . Landscaping Standards - SDC 31.130-1 SO . Screening and Lighting - SDC 31.160 SPECIAL USE STANDARDS AND SETBACKS Congregate care facilities are a special use in MDR zoning districts, subject to the following applicable Special Use standards. SDC 16.100 (7)(a): These facilities shall have a front yard setback of 15 feet and side and rear yard setbacks of 20 feet. The planted setbacks for parking lots and driveways may be reduced to 5 feet when the Director determines that adequate buffering has been provided. ' SDC 16.100 (7)(b): A minimum of 25 percent of the lot shall be of planted material. SDC 16.100 (7)(c): No parking shall be permitted in the front yard setback. Required parking shall be screened from public view. Finding: The applicant's plans do not meet the side yard setback requirements of SDC 16.100 (7)(a) because the required 20-foot south side yard setback is not landscaped in accordance with SDC 31.140. The south setback is designated as a 20' fire lane, paved with grasscrete material. Since the fire lane must be kept clear for emergency access, the required tree and shrub planting cannot be placed in the most of the area between the building and the property line. No screening fence or wall is proposed. Thus, the site plan thus does not provide any buffering between the facility and the abutting residences to the south. The Special Use Standard of SDC I 6. I 00 (7)(a) is not met. SDC 16.090 (a) states: Fences shall not exceed the height standards listed below and shall be located as follows: Date Received: Site Plan Review DRG005-<J0065 MAR 2, 9 2011 /I Original Submittal . . I. Six feet provided the fence is located behind the front yard setback and outside of the vision clearance area. 2. Three feet in the front yard setback if a sight-obscuring fence is used. Condition II: In the Final Site Plan. a 20-foot landscaped side yard in accordance with SDC 16.100 (7)(a) and planted in accordance with SDC 31.140 shall be provided along the south property line. 7, I 00 sq. ft. of landscaped area is required for this setback (20' x 355') and shall include a minimum of (15) 2" caliper/6' evergreen trees and (71) S gallon shrubs. The majority of the required trees shall be of species which will mature to achieve a minimum height of 35 feet to serve a buffering function. Since no buffering is provided along the emergency access area, the applicant shall provide a solid wood or, masonry screening fence or wall for the length of the access. The constructed screen shall be 6 feet high, except the screen height shall be reduced to 3 feet within the IS-foot front yard setback. At least three of the required trees shall be placed in the planter areas between the building and the constructed screen to provide a buffering function. In the portion of the setback where no constructed screen will be placed, the planting plan shall be amended to effectively create a continuous evergreen sight- obscuring screen to achieve a mature height of at least 6 feet. Finding: The applicant's plans do not meet the front setback requirements of SDC 16.100 (7)(c). A parking lot encroaches into the IS-foot front yard setback. The parking lot is not fully screened from public view. The Special Use Standards of SDC 16.100 (7)(a) and (c) are not met. Condition 12: In the Final Site Plan, no parking shall be placed in the front yard setback, in accordance with SDC I~.IOO (7)(c). The landscape strip in front ofthe parking lot shall be increased to 15 feet wide. The planting shall be amended to include a portion of evergreen shrubs with a mature height of 4 feet or more to effectively screen parked cars from the Laura Street right-of-way. Reduce plant height to 2.5 feet maximum at vision clearance triangles. Finding: The applicant's plans do not meet the side yard setback requirements of SDC 16.100 (7)(a) because the required 20-foot north side Yard setback is not landscaped in accordance with SDC 31.140. The north setback is proposed to be planted in grass only. No buffering is provided between the 12- space parking lot and driveway and the adjacent residential property. SDC 16.110 (4)(h)8. states: All parking, maneuvering and loading areas abutting a property line or right-of-way shall provide perimeter lot landscaping. A minimum 5 foot wide planting strip shall be planted with shade trees a minimum 2 inches in caliper at the time of planting and a low level evergreen hedge. SDC 16.110 (4)(h)9. states: Decorative walls may be used in place of the hedge in subsection 8, and shall be placed no closer than 4 feet from the property line. Condition 13: In the Final Site Plan, a 20-foot landscaped side yard in accordance with SDC 16.100 (7)(a) and planted in accordance with SDC 31.140 shall be provided along the north property line. 7, I 00 sq. ft. of landscaped area is required for this setback (20' x 355') and shall include a minimum of (15) 2" caliper/6' evergreen trees and (71) 5 gallon shrubs. The majority ofthe required trees shall be of species which will mature to achieve a minimum height of 35 feet to serve a buffering function. The planted setback for the driveway may be reduced to 5 feet wide if adequate buffering is provided, in the form of a 6 foot solid wood fence or masonry wall and/or a continuous evergreen sight-obscuring screen to achieve a mature height of at least 6 feet. The screen height shall be reduced to 2.5 feet within the vision clearance area for the driveway, and 3' within the front yard setback. If the setback Date Received: Site Plan Review DRCl005-00065 MAR 2 9 2011 /2 Original Submittal -....._~~ . . reduction option is chose, required planting shall be provided in accordance with SDC 31.140. No wall may be constructed within existing or proposed public utility easements. Finding: The applicant's plans do not meet the rear yard setback requirements of SDC 16.100 (7)(a) because the required 20-foot rear yard setback is not landscaped in accordance with SDC 31.140. Landscape plan sheet LI shows existing plants in the required setback, which has frontage on Pioneer Parkway. A portion of these existing plants are dead and need to be removed. New landscaping is proposed adjacent to the building, but no landscaping is proposed in the setback. The appearance of this setback is not attractive from'Pioneer Parkway. Condition 14: In the Final Site Plan, a 20-foot landscaped rear yard in accordance with SDC 16.100 (7)(a) and planted in accordance with SDC 31.140 shall be provided along the east property line. Healthy existing plants may be retained and counted towards the planting requirement, but must be labeled and identified by name and size in the landscape plan to demonstrate that SDC 31.140 is met. All dead plants must be r"placed. The irrigation plans shall be amended to provide the required irrigation in this setback.' , Please see additional landscape requirements on page 9, water quality swale planting. BICYCLE PARKING Finding: Bicycle parking is noted on sheet C.20 but is not sufficiently detailed for review. Condition 15: In the Final Site Plan, include specifications and/or detail illustrating a bicycle rack which meets the requirements of SDC 31.210. Provide a note or dimensions on sheet C.20 to place bicycle parking with a 5' minimum access aisle beside the parking and building wall or structure and)' x 6' space per bicycle. The required bicycle parking is long-term and thus shall be provided with shelter from precipitation. MULTI-UNIT DESIGN STANDARDS - STORAGE SDC 16.110 (4)(d)2. requires screening of trash receptacles with a gated enclosure, with obscuring landscaping, planted at minimum size of 24 inches in height at planting, around all exposed sides of the wall or fence, except at gates. The applicant's plans do not provide sufficient detail for the trash enclosure. Condition 16: In the Final Site Plan, provide details for a solid, gated and covered trash enclosure with sight-obscuring landscaping, planted at minimum size of 24 inches in height at planting, around all . exposed sides of the wall or fence, except at gates. Condition 17: In the Final Site Plan, provide a note to require screening of all ground-mounted equipment with walls or landscaping. Plants must be large enough to cover 50% in 2 years, 100% in 4 years, in accordance with SDC 16.110 (4)(d)4. MULTI-UNIT DESIGN STANDARDS - PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION SDC 16.110 (4)(g)2. states: Internal sidewalks shall be separated a minimum of 5 feet from dwellings, measured from the sidewalk edge closest to any dwelling unit. SDC 16.110 (4)(g)S. states: Surface treatment of requires internal sidewalks internal sidewalks shall be concrete, asphalt, or masonry pavers, at least 5 feet wide. Date Received: MAR 2 9 2011 Site Plan Review DRCl005-00065 /3 original Submittal . . Finding: The applicant's plans show sidewalks less than 5 feet wide. Sidewalks are less than 5 feet from the buildings in two locations (south side and northwest corner). ' Condition 18: In the Final Site Plan, provide notes or dimensions which require 5' foot width for all internal sidewalks, in accordance with SDC 16.110 (4)(g)5. All internal sidewalks shall be located 5 feet or more from buildings. SDC 16.110 (4)(g)8. states: All on-site internal sidewalks shall be lighted to a minimum of 2 footcandles. Finding: The lighting photometries in sheet E 1.2 do not provide values for lighting of the internal sidewalk between the north parking lot and the building. Condition 19: In the Final Site Plan, provide lighting for the internal sidewalk between the north parking lot and the building. ' MULTI-UNIT DESIGN STANDARDS - PARKING SDC 16.110 (4)(h)3. states: There shall be one planter island for every 8 parking spaces. Planter islands shall be a minimum of 6 feet in width, exclusive of curb, and the full length of the parking stall containing one shade tree (a minimum of 2 inches in caliper at planting) and vegetative ground cover. Trees shall be specimens capable of attaining 35 feet or more in height at maturity and shall not produce excessive fruit, nuts, or sap. Water quality features may be incorporated into planters. Landscape areas shall be evenly distributed throughout the perimeter of interior parking areas where practicable. Condition 20: In the Final Site Plan, provide 5 planter islands for the 35 parking spaces, in accordance with SDC 16.1 10 (4)(h)3. Planter islands shall be a minimum of 6 feet in width, exclusive of curb, and the full length of the parking stall containing one shade tree (a minimum of 2 inches in caliper at planting) and vegetative ground cover. SDC 16.110 (4)(h)4. requires a minimum 6-foot wide planter area to separate and visually screen parking from living area windows, planted with ground cover, shrubs (minimum of 24" in height at time of planting) and trees (mini~um of 2" caliper at planting). Condition 21: In the Final Site Plan, maintain a minimum 6-foot wide planter area to separate and visually screen parking from living area windows. SDC 16.110 (4)(h)6. requires secure wheel bumpers not less than 6 inches in height and 6 feet in length, set back 2 feet from the front of the parking stall OR the planter may be widened 2 feet beyond the minimum dimension required to allow for vehicle encroachment. When no bumpers are installed, planters must be protected with' 6 inch curbs.' , Finding: The applicant's plans do not provide the required wheel bumpers between front parking spaces and the landscaped setback and between the north parking spaces and the sidewalk. Condition 22: In the Final Site Plan, provide wheel bumpers between front parking spaces and the landscaped setback and between the north parking spaces and the sidewalk in accordance with SDC 16.110 (4)(h)6. Wheel bumpers shall be 6 inches in height and 6 feet in length, set back 2 feet from the front of the parking stall OR the abutting landscape area may be widened 2 feet beyond the minimum dimension required to allow for vehicle encroachment. Date Received: Site Plan Review DRQ005-00065 . MAR 2 9 2011 /4 Original Submiltal__ -~-- . .- MULTI-UNIT DESIGN STANDARDS - VEHICULAR CIRCULATION See Criterion 4. SDC31.160 (I)(b) and (d) require screening for outdoor mechanical devices and for trash receptacles. " ACCESSIBLE PARKING SDC 31.170 (8)(a) states: Parking" spaces for disabled people and accessible passenger loading zones that serve a particular building shall be located on the shortest possible circulation route to an entrance of the building. Finding: The proposed accessible parking is not located on the shortest possible circulation route to the entrance of the building. Condition 23: In the Final Site Plan, the accessible parking shall be located on the shortest possible circulation route to the entrance of the building. Accessible spaces shall be 9' x 18' with a 6' aisle. FIRE AND UFE SAFETY ACCESS Finding: The Site Plan was reviewed by the Fire Marshall's representative. Fire access to the proposed development is not satisfactory. The fire access on the north side does not provide a turnaround in accordance with SPF Appendix D I 03.1. Condition 24: In the Final Site Plan, provide a revised design which provides a fire apparatus turnaround n accordance with SPF Appendix D I 03.1. or provide an alternative which meets Fire Code requirements. For additional information please contact Melissa Fechtel at Springfield Fire and Life Safety (541) 726-3661. Conclusion: As conditioned, the tentative site plan satisfies SDC Article 31 and SDC Article 16. The applicable sub-elements of Criteria :2 and 3 are met. Overlay Districts and Applicable Re(lnement Plan Requirements Finding: There are no applicable overlay districts or refinement plan requirements. (4) 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 curb cuts on arterial and collector streets as specified in this Code or other applicable regulations and comply with the OOOT access management standards for state highways. ACCESS AND DRIVEWAY STANDARDS - SDC 32.080 Finding: Installation of driveways on a street increases the number of traffic conflict points. The greater number of conflict points increases the probability of traffic crashes. Effective ways to reduce the probability of traffic crashes include: reducing the number of driveways, increasing distances between intersections and driveways, and establishing adequate vision clearance where driveways intersect streets. Each of these techniques permits a longer, less cluttered sight distance for the motorist, reduces the number and difficulty of decisions drivers must make, and contributes to increased traffic safety. Date Received: Site Plan Review DR0005-00065 MAR 2.9 2011 /5 Origin]; Subrnitt<lL._ . . SDC 32.080 (3)(b) states: Driveways shall be ,designed to allow safe and efficient vehicular ingress and egress in accordance with Tables stated in the Code; and Driveway widths and throat depths may be varied if no other reasonable alternative exists to accommodate on- site development needs and traffic safety is not impaired. SDC 16.11 0(4)(i)2. states: On-site driveways and private streets shall be stubbed to abutting MDR/HDR properties, at locations determined during the Site Plan Review process to' facilitate development of shared driveways. SDC 32.080( I) (a) stipulates that each parcel is entitled to "an approved access to a public street." SDC 32.080 Table 32-1 specifies that two-way driveways serving Multi-Family (multi-unit) residential developments shall be a minimum of 24 feet wide. SDC 32.080 Table 32-1 specifies that two-way developments be a minimum of 24 feet wide. Driveway Driveway Width I-Way Width 2-Way Minimum Minimum 16' 24' driveways to Multi-Family (multi-unit) residential Driveway Width 2-Way Maximum 35' Finding: The applicant proposes site access via two driveways onto the east side of Laura Street . A 24-foot wide primary access located 80 feet south of Lindale Drive, and . A 20-foot wide service access located 70 feet north of Lindale Drive. Finding: Tax Lot 1000, which abuts the development site on the north, has approximately 130 feet of frontage immediately south of the 90-degree curve in Laura Street. Existing access to Tax Lot 1000 is via a driveway located approximately 40 feet from this curve. SDC Table 32-4 specifies that driveways onto collector streets serving multi-family development shall be at least 100 feet from the nearest intersection curb return. To meet this standard and adequately address traffic safety, redevelopment of Tax Lot 1000 would require locating its driveway to the southern boundary of that property, which would place it within approximately 50 feet of the northernmost driveway proposed for the Bayberry Commons development. The close proximity of these two driveways would introduce additional traffic conflicts and have an adverse effect on pedestrian and vehicular safety. Shared use of the proposed northern most driveway by both Tax Lot 1000 and Tax Lot 1100 is warranted as a means to avoid these adverse impacts. Condition 25: The northernmost site driveway shall be re-designed to be 24 feet wide in accordance with the dimensional standards specified in SDC 32.080 Table 32-1. Finding: The applicant's plans do not provide the required driveway stub to serve future development of the northern MDR lot [SDC 16.11 0(4)(i)2.] Condition 26: In the Final Site Plan, the northerly on-site driveway shall be stubbed to the abutting MDR property in accordance with SDC 16.11 0(4)(i)2. Future access from Laura Street through the development site to the abutting Tax Lot 1000 on the north shall be ensured by recording a joint-use access and maintenance easement ove'r the proposed service/employee driveway, and extending northward to the shared property line of the two parcels. The driveway stub location and easement shall be reviewed and approved by the Springfield Transportation Planning Engineer prior to submittal of the final site plan. Date Received: . MAR 29 2011 Site Plan Review DRQ005-00065 /6 Ori!.lln~! Submittal. " .. . Finding: The applicant proposes an emergency-vehicle-only site access via a driveway onto Pioneer Parkway. The proposed location of this driveway is within the section of Pioneer Parkway that is under Lane County jurisdiction. Condition 27: Construction of the proposed emergency access site driveway onto Pioneer Parkway West will require a facility permit from Lane County. Access to this driveway shall be controlled by a locked gate utilizing a locking system that limits its use to emergency service providers (police, fire and ambulance). The criteria for fire access gates is outlined in SFC D I 03.5. For additional information please contact Melissa Fechtel at Springfield Fire and Life Safety (S41) 726-3661. Conclusion: As conditioned, ingress-egress points will be planned to facilitate traffic and pedestrian safety, avoid congestion and to minimize curb cuts on public streets as specified in SDC Articles 31 and 32, applicable zoning and or overlay district Articles, and applicable refinement plans. (5) Physical features, including, but not limited to significant clusters of trees and shrubs, watercourses shown on the Water Quality Limited Watercourse Map and their associated riparian areas, wetlands, rock outcroppings and historic features have been evaluated and protected as specified in this Code or other applicable regulations. The Natural Resources Study, the National Wetlands Inventory, the Springfield Wetland Inventory Map, the Water Quality Limited Waterways Map, applicable refinement pla,ns, the Wellhead Protection Overlay District Map and the list of Historic Landmark Sites have been consulted. Finding: There are no features which require protection. Conclusion: The tentative site plan satisfies this criterion. OTHER NOTES AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Condition 28: Prior to Final Site Plan approval, the Final Property Line Survey for the subject property 'shall be recorded at Lane County Deeds and Records. Condition 29: In the Final Site Plan, the utility and paving notes on Sheet CO I shall be filled in with the correct specifications. Finding: The paving detail on Sheet CAO specifies A.C pavement for the new street section. No approval of AlC is granted with this Site Plan approval. Type of pavement will be determined at Public Improvement Plan review. Condition 30: In the Final Site Plan, the paving detail on Sheet CO I shall be filled in to reference the correct specifications. Condition 31: In the Final Site Plan, remove sheet E 1.1 from the plan set and remove reference to "Proposed Future Building" from sheet E 1.2in the submittal. CONCLUSION: As conditioned, the proposed Site Plan, as submitted and conditioned, is in conformance with the applicable Criteria I -5 of SDC 31.060. WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE BY THE APPLICANT TO OBTAIN FINAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL? Date Received: Site Plan Review DRQ005-<J0065 MAR 2,9 2011 /7 ""'-"f""".'- -~"'n ": '.J, !,:.;f! ~ "_"~;; "J-rmt~: '''', ---~. . . FINAL SITE PLAN: A Final Site Plan Application, the Final Site Plan Fee, five copies of a Final Site Plan and any additional required plans, documents or information are required to be submitted to the Planning Division within 90 days of the date of this letter. This decision is based on the submitted Tentative Site Plan. The Final Site Plan must show conformity with the Tentative Site Plan; compliance with SDC Article 31 Criteria of Approval 1-5, and the conditions of approval. The Final Site Plan shall become null and void if construction has not begun within two years of Final Site Plan approval, I.e. the signing of a Development Agreement. A single one-year extension may be granted by the Director upon receipt of a written request by the applicant including an explanation of the delay. Work under progress shall not be subject to Development Approval expiration. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT: In order to complete the review process, a Development Agreement is required to ensure that the terms and conditions of site plan review are binding upon both the applicant and the City. This agreement will be prepared by Staff upon approval of the Final Site Plan and must be signed by the property owner prior to the issuance of a building permit. A Building Permit shall be iss'ued by the Building Official only after the Development Agreement has been signed by the applicant and the Director. No building or structure shall be occupied until all improvements are made in accordance with this Article, except as specified in Section .31.110, Security and Assurances. Upon satisfactory completion of site development, as determined by a Final Site Inspection (prior to the final building inspection), the City shall authorize the provision of public facilities and services and issue a Certificate of Occupancy. NOTE: A Land Drainage and Alteration Permit is required for this development. The applicant shall not commence any construction activities on the site without an approved Land Drainage and Alteration Permit approved by City Public Works Department. Additional Information: The application, all documents, and evidence relied upon by the applicant, and the applicable criteria of approval are available for free inspection and copies are available at a cost of $0.75 for the first page and $0.50 for each additional page at the Development Services Department, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon. Appeals: If you wish to appeal this Tentative' Site Plan Approval, a Type II Limited Land Use decision, your application must comply with SDC Article 15, APPEALS. Appeals must be submitted on a City form and a fee of $250.00 must be paid to the City at the time of submittal. The fee will be returned to the appellant if the Planning Commission approves the appeal application._ln accordance with SDC 15.020 which provides for a 15 day appeal period, the appeal period for this decision 'expires at 5:00 p.m. on January 3, 2006, Additional Fees and ADDlications f A FINAL SITE PLAN/DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FEE is due at the time of Final Site Plan submittal. Ouestions: Please contact Linda Pauly at the City of Springfield Urban Planning Division if you have questions regarding this process. Prepared by: Date Received: Linda Pauly Planner II, n6-4608 MAR 2 9 2011 Original Submittal Site Plan Review DRCl005-<J0065 lB.