The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutApplication Completeness Review March 20, 2015 RENEE CLOUGH BRANCH ENGINEERING, INC th 310 5 STREET SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 Z͗ŽŵƉůĞƚĞŶĞƐƐZĞǀŝĞǁĨŽƌŚĂŵŽƚĞĞdƌĂŝůƐWh;WdϭϱͲϭͿ On February 18, 2015, you submitted a Tentative Planned Unit Development application under the for Chamotee Trails PUD. The Planning Division has assigned a file number (PDT 15-1) and I will serve as the lead City staff person reviewing the application. As you know, t Completeness RevApplication To help ensure City staff know how to proceed with your application, please sign and return this form. Regarding your application, City staff reviewed the application and determined that it is ŝŶĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞ. Completeness review comments from the Public Works Department are enclosed in the document Below are comments from the Planning Department that help to identify the missing or otherwise incomplete materials as they relate to the Tentative Planned Unit Development Approval Criteria for Needed Housing: 1.ϵ͘ϴϯϮϱ;ϯͿ Massed Landscape Standard (L-7): Please inlcude additional information to the standard described at EC 9.6210(7)(a)5., which requires the installation and maintenance of living plant material covering a minimum of 70 percent of the required landscape area within 5 years of planting. If existing plant material is expected to meet this standard, please provide additional evidence to show conformance (e.g. photos, site plan details that inventory the type and amount of existing plant material, and/or narrative completed by a licensed landscape architect or other qualified professional deisgn team member). If new plantings are proposed or otherwise necessary to meet this standard, the application should also include a supplemental landscape plan for the required buffer areas. Staff notes that an additional landscape buffer also appears to be required along the southwestern boundary adjacent to City-owned property (Tax Lot 4500), and the proposed fencing shown on the site plan should be removed, in order to to meet this standard. 2.ϵ͘ϴϯϮϱ;ϱͿ Proposed grading on portions of site exceeding 20% slope: The application states that computer modeling was completed to calculate slope on the subject property, but does not include any evidence other than the site plan to show how slopes were calculated and located on the site plans in compliance with this standard. Please provide additional information or evidence to support this statement regarding the computer program used and the methodology used for slope calculations. Please also revise the site plans to show 5-foot elevation contours as indicated on the application form. The site plans show 10-foot countors, but the box on the application form is checked indicating that 5-foot contours are provided. This is an informational requirement for a complete application and would be consistent with the Planning Commission and Land Use Board of Appeals decisions regarding slope calculations for the Deerbrook PUD (PDT 12-01). For your convenience, I have included these relevant decision documents as attachments to this letter. Staff also notes that the site plan provided for the neighborhood/applicant meeting shows more detailed conour intervals which are inconsistent with the most recent version (not only intervals but locations); please confirm and correct any inaccuracies. Please also explain more specifically how the edge of the 20% sloped area was determined; for example, why the edge appears to show sharp angles in some locations and does not appear to correlate with the existing contours. It would also be helpful to have the licensed project engineer explicitly confirm the methodology used and certify the accuracy of the areas shown to exceed 20% slope. 3.ϵ͘ϴϯϮϱ;ϲͿ;ĐͿ Traffic Dispersal (t-): The application is incomplete without more information and analsyis to show the number of existing and proposed lots that use the existing, dead-end portion of West Amazon Drive as their only means of vehicular ingress and egress, and/or to propose a street layout in the PUD that would disperse traffic onto more than one public local street, if there are more than 19 lots. The brief statement provided in response to this standard presents a confusing interpretation based solely in EC 9.0500; it does not appear to address the plain language of the standard. The mere existence of unimproved right-of- way for West Amazon Drive that eventually connects to Martin Street to the north does not appear to satify what is actually required. In this applicationƐƚƌĞĞƚůĂǇŽƵƚŽĨƚŚĞƉƌŽƉŽƐĞĚWh driveway for access ĚŝƐƉĞƌƐĞŵŽƚŽƌǀĞŚŝĐůĞƚƌĂĨĨŝĐŽŶƚŽŵŽƌĞƚŚĂŶŽŶĞƉƵďůŝĐ ůŽĐĂůƐƚƌĞĞƚAll of the proposed lots will take access onto West Amazon Drive as the only means of ingress and egress. Since the existing street dead-ends to the north and provides only one way out onto Fox Hollow Road, and if the sum of existing and proposed lots using ĂƐƚŚĞƐŝŶŐůĞŵĞĂŶƐŽĨŝŶŐƌĞƐƐĂŶĚĞŐƌĞƐƐĞǆĐĞĞĚƐϭϵ͕ appear that this standard is met. 2 4.ϵ͘ϲϱϬϱ;ϯͿ;ďͿ Improvements Specifications (Streets and Alleys): The application does not appear to fully address the street improvements required under this standard. In addition to the required paving width, this standard requires drainage, curbs and gutters, sidewalks, street trees and street lights adjacent to the development site in accordance with applicable City standards. If the proposal includes a request under EC 9.6505(3)(c) for adjustment for required street improvements in either West Amazon Drive or Vivian Drive which are directly adjacent to the subject site, a concurrent application for Adjustment Review should be filed which would be subject to the approval criteria at EC 9.8030(19). It would need to include the necessary application form, fee and related narrative and any other evidence as necessary to show compliance with those approval criteria. 5.ϵ͘ϴϯϮϱ;ϳͿ;ĨͿ Public Access Required frontage on a public street right-of- because Lots #5, 6, 8, 9, 10 have no frontage on a public street. Please revise narrative accordingly. 6.ϵ͘ϴϯϮϱ;ϭϭͿ Flag Lot Standards: The application narrative states that paving width for the access driveway is 28 feet. EC 9.2775 (Residentia flag lots served by a combined pole, the driveway width shall be ϮϬĨĞĞƚŽƌĂůĞƐƐĞƌǁŝĚƚŚ This code section also Staff recommends that flag lots are not utilized on the site plan because all lots could feasibly share ownership of the common access driveway (and the above standards would therefore become inapplicable). If flag lots are utilized please revise the narrative to address the above referenced standards. 7.'ĞŶĞƌĂůŽŵƉůĞƚĞŶĞƐƐ/ƚĞŵ Legend: The tentative site plan legend includes a symbol for emovals are indicated on the site plan. Please ensure that any tree removals are shown on the site plan. If no tree removals are proposed please remove this symbol from the legend for purposes of clarity. If you have any questions about this completeness review, please contact me at (541) 682-5437 or via e-mail at: erik.berg@ci.eugene.or.us Sincerely, Erik Berg-Johansen Assistant Planner 3 Enclosures: Public Works Completeness Review Form; Land Use Application Completeness Review Step; Incomplete Land Use Application 180 Day Completeness Review Process CC: Tom Walter, Walter Development, LLC 4 Planned Unit Development Completeness Review Form Public Works Department Application File Name (#): PDT15-01 Chamotee Trails PUD Date: 3/17/15 Reviewed by: Deanna Smith Phone: 541-682-5714 General The written statement references a private easement over the open space; please show and label this on the Comments: tentative plans. Wastewater Requirements Submitted Missing Incomplete N/A 1. Show location of the existing public wastewater system and flow line elevation at proposed connection point(s). 2. Show existing and proposed wastewater sewer layout, including service to each lot (each lot must be connected to a public wastewater sewer). Comments: Street and Utility Improvement Requirements Submitted Missing Incomplete N/A 3. Note on the plan proposed public improvements and whether they are to be constructed publicly or privately. 4. Note on the plat the location, size, and species of existing and proposed street trees. 5. Note on plat the location of any existing or proposed street lights. Comments: It appears that the application includes a request to adjust the paving standards in Vivian Drive. Contact the Planning Division for more information about how to file an adjustment review application. Water Supply Requirements Submitted Missing Incomplete N/A 6. Include a diagram (including diameter) of existing and proposed water mains. 7. Show existing and proposed fire hydrants. Comments: Contour Intervals Submitted Missing Incomplete N/A 8. Note on the plans the City Bench Mark used. One-foot contour intervals for ground slopes up to five percent. Two-foot contour intervals for ground slopes between five and ten percent. Five-foot contour intervals for ground slopes exceeding ten percent. Ten-foot contour intervals have been provided; five foot contours are missing. Comments: Storm Drainage Requirements Submitted Missing Incomplete N/A 9. Delineate the Special Flood Hazard Area. 10. Delineate the tops-of-banks of all open waterways on and adjacent to the property and describe extent of impacts and/or relocation work due to proposed development request. 11. Show existing and proposed flood control facilities, including collection, conveyance, and treatment of stormwater in compliance with SW Management Manual, within and adjacent to development site. 12. Show location of the existing piped public system and flow line elevation at proposed connection point(s). 13. Application proposes no construction of public or private streets or shared driveways; provide a site development plan that delineates infiltration rates, bedrock, groundwater elevations, and ground slopes. Conditional Use Permit Completeness Review Form Revised 9/2010 Page 1 of 4 14. Application proposes construction of public streets; provide stormwater treatment plan for public streets based on infiltration, filtration, or mechanical priority and include sizing calculations that demonstrate whether treatment of runoff from adjoining lots will be on-site or in public infiltration or filtration facility in the right of way. 15. Application proposes construction of private street(s) and/or shared driveway(s); provide stormwater treatment plan for private street(s) and shared driveway(s) based on infiltration and filtration priority and include sizing calculations that demonstrate whether treatment of runoff from adjoining lots will be on-site or in private shared facility. 16. Application (CUP/SR/PUD) includes impervious surface area to be constructed with a future development permit; provide stormwater treatment plan and analysis for runoff from impervious surface area based on infiltration, filtration or payment priority. 17. If applicable, identify flow control by demonstrating how there is no increase in flow rates or volumes if contributing to a Headwaters Area waterway, per EC 9.6793(3)(a). 18. Submit three copies of stormwater analysis that demonstrate compliance with stormwater drainage provisions at EC 9.6790 9.6795. 19. If adjustment request includes Stormwater Quality/Flow Control, an approved alternative design was submitted. 20. If adjustment request includes Source Control, a DAR form was submitted. 21. The applicant has submitted approval from Lane County for proposed stormwater discharge to Lane County systems. Please include a clear narrative of how the proposal meets the criteria at EC 9.6790 through 9.6797. The written statement should give a concise and complete picture of the stormwater management proposal and how it complies with the standards. Show the key components of the drainage system on the plans. If detention ponds are proposed to address the flood control standards, please discuss them in the written statement at EC 9.6791 Flood Control Standards. With regards to EC 9.6792, will pumps be required to ensure the runoff from the private drive enters the water quality swale? How will the stormwater runoff be collected and discharged Comments: to the proposed facilities? If they are being conveyed via drainage channels or a piped system, please show this on the tentative plans, include any necessary easements. Show the location of the spreader and any related vegetated buffers on the tentative plans. Is the spreader near an existing watercourse? Please show it if it is. Please delineate the tops-of-banks of all open waterways on and adjacent to the property. As a suggestion only, and although not required, you may like to consider using (and therefore sizing) the proposed swale as the water quality facility for managing runoff from the lots as well as for the shared driveway. Geotechnical Report Requirements Submitted Missing/ Incomplete / / Inconsistent Unsupported N/A -02-25-F. Complete Data Data Level 1 Geotechnical Analysishas been submitted because the 22. development includes public improvements and has site slopes between 5 and 10 percent. The report includes: required record data; a description of the development and property; a specific statement regarding the absence or presence of unstable soils; and concludes that the site is suitable for the proposed development without further investigation or recommendations. Level 3 is required if specific recommendations are necessary. Level 2 Geotechnical Analysis has been submitted because the 23. development includes public improvements and has site slopes equal to or greater than 10%. The report includes: all of the Level 1 information above; test pit locations consistent with the interval requirements in Exhibit A of AO 58-02-25-F; and test pit results are profiled and show soil classifications and ground water elevation. Conclusion must also be per Level 1; if not, a Level 3 is required. Level 3 Geotechnical Analysis has been submitted because either 24. of the required Level 1 or Level 2 reports identified potential Conditional Use Permit Completeness Review Form Revised 9/2010 Page 2 of 4 stability issues that necessitate design-specific geotechnical recommendations. The report includes: all of the requirements of Levels 1 and 2 above; design recommendations for structures, foundations, compacted fill, cut/fill lines, earthwork, and streets; mitigation measures for seismic hazards, landslides, and constraints that cannot be removed; construction measures for backfill, compaction, drainage, weather limitations, access across slope easements; inspection requirements during and following construction; and graphical representation of slope easements and design details for foundations and structures. Comments: Hazardous Materials Review Yes No 25. Is a Hazardous Materials Review application required? Comments: Street and Public Access Way Requirements Submitted Missing Incomplete N/A 26. Identify the number of peak hour trips based on the likely development that will occur on all lots resulting from the land division. If the development will generate 100 or more trips during any peak hour, a Traffic Impact Analysis Review is required in accordance with 9.8650 - 9.8680. 27. Show street names for all existing and proposed streets (public and private) and identify the street classification. 28. Indicate potential slope easements. 29. Delineate any street segments where grade exceeds 15% percent, where driveways are prohibited. 30. Provide a street center profile using ground elevations of proposed streets at or exceeding 15% grade. 31. Show location and widths (right-of-way and paving width) of all existing and proposed streets, intersections, and bike and pedestrian access ways, both within the plat and adjacent to the plat. 32. Show existing and proposed curbs and sidewalks on site and adjacent to property involved. 33. Address EC 9.6815 Street Connectivity and provide supporting narrative or if requesting an exception, provide justifications. 34. Show that the proposal is consistent with Eugene Code Section 9.6780, Vision Clearance Area. 35. Indicate radii of all street curves on the plans. 36. Show location and type of existing and proposed transit-related facilities. 37. Show existing and proposed special setbacks, in accordance with Eugene Code Section 9.6750. 38. Submit an Alternative Traffic Safety Study (ATSS) if an adjustment is requested to the required internal vehicle stacking at EC 9.6703(3)(a). 39. Show all existing access driveways to the property. When the property fronts a street under Lane County jurisdiction, show driveway locations for adjacent properties also. 40. Demonstrate that access to the development site is located in accordance with EC 7.420. 41. Submit an ATSS if requesting more than one access connection for a single development site and/or requesting that an access connection be wider than 20 feet. 42. Include internal pedestrian circulation plan in accordance with EC 9.6730. Please show the existing PUE over Foxboro Ln, dedicated per Spencer Park Cluster plat. Comments: Please address EC 9.6735(2) regarding access connection location standards. Conditional Use Permit Completeness Review Form Revised 9/2010 Page 3 of 4 Please be more specific as to how street connectivity is precluded (e.g., cite street design standards that could not be met in context with the existing constraint conditions, etc.). Please address EC 9.6835 Public Accessways; a response is currently missing. Please label the existing paving width on W. Amazon Drive, as well as the proposed paving width of the shared driveway. As an informational item, our records indicate an 18' paving width for W. Amazon Drive. For Staff Use Only - Referral Information Yes No 43. Does Parks Planning require a referral for this application? Yes, if property is one acre or larger and adjacent to a city park. 44. Is the right-of-way under Lane County jurisdiction? If yes, route land and use referral to Lane County Transportation Lane County Road Maintenance Planning. 45. Is a referral to PWM or PEPI required? Yes, if there are public improvements. 46. Does stormwater discharge to a facility within Junction City Water Control District? If yes, route land use referral to Junction City Attn: Steve Cornaccia. Water Control District, Conditional Use Permit Completeness Review Form Revised 9/2010 Page 4 of 4 Land Use Application Completeness Review Step ___________________________________________________________________________________ The City reviews land use applications for completeness according to State law (ORS 227.178). According to Eugene Code Section 9.7010 Application Filing, a land use application must address each of the criteria and standards applicable to the proposed use, including any adjustments to standards the application complies with the approval criteria and applicable standards. Supplying the information requested by the City will provide the necessary documentation for an informed decision. Refusal to submit all or some of the missing information could result in a denial of the application. If City staff determines that an application contains sufficient information for review, including the required number of copies, staff will inform the applicant in writing and the application will be review process. If staff will inform the applicant in writing applications upon review and determination that the required number of copies and the following items have been received: (1) All missing or incomplete materials requested by the City; or (2) Some of the missing or incomplete materials requested by the City and a written statement from the applicant that none of the other missing information will be provided; or (3) A written statement from the applicant indicating that none of the missing information will be provided. To help ensure that icants are 180 Day Completeness Review According to State law, an applicant has 180 days from the date an application is first submitted to make the application complete. On the181st day after a land use application is first submitted, it will be void if an applicant has not submitted (1), (2) or (3) above. Incomplete Land Use Application: 180 Day Completeness Review Process Please Complete and Return to: Eugene Planning Division Attn: Erik Berg-Johansen File #: PDT 15-1 th 99 West 10 Avenue Eugene, OR 97401 Completeness Review Step ;ŚĞĐŬKEďŽǆͿ I intend to submit all of the missing or incomplete materials as identified by the City in completeness review. I understand that according to State law I have up to 180 days from the date the application was submitted to provide the missing or incomplete materials and that after that date, if I have not submitted the missing information, my application will be void. I also hereby agree to allow the City a reasonable period of time for a review and determination of completeness upon submittal of the missing or incomplete materials and the required number of copies. I intend to submit some, but not all, of the missing or incomplete materials as identified by the City in completeness review. I understand that according to State law I have up to 180 days from the date the application was submitted to provide the missing or incomplete materials that I intend to submit and that after that date, if I have not submitted the missing information, my application will be void. I also hereby agree to allow the City a reasonable period of time for a review and determination of completeness, upon submittal of the missing or incomplete materials and the required number of copies. The materials I do not intend to submit are those items I have listed on the lines below (attach additional sheets if necessary). I do not intend to submit any of the missing or incomplete materials as identified by the City in the completeness review. I understand that the City will proceed with review of the application materials previously submitted. I also understand that incomplete applications may not provide adequate evidence to demonstrate compliance with applicable criteria and standards. Please deem my application complete as of the date this form is received by the City of Eugene Planning Division. Printed Name Signature Date