Full Text
City of Woodburn Community Development Dept. Memorandum 270 Montgomery Street Woodburn, Oregon 97071 Phone (503) 982-5246 Fax (503) 982-5244 Date: January 27, 2023 To: Dago Garcia, P.E., City Engineer Cc: Roy Reyes, Project Engineer Chris Kerr, AICP, Community Development Director John Raugust, PE, AKS Engineering & Forestry From: Colin Cortes, AICP, CNU-A, Senior Planner Subject: Planning Division review comments on original/1st submittal January 9 of civil engineering plans for Marion Pointe PUD Summary Planning Division requests revisions and re-submittal by the applicant and affirms that the Public Works Department is not to approve civil engineering plans until Planning outstanding items are resolved. We met to talk about the issues January 26. Revision Items The applicant needs to address the few remaining items below. Referenced land use conditions of approval are found in the Annexation ANX 22-02 final decision document via the City project webpage. For the convenience of consolidated reviews, I reviewed the plan set not only for public/street improvements conformance but also conformance of private common area tracts improvements as a means of administering Condition PUD-11c (PUD Detailed Development Plan [DDP]). The developer’s civil engineering plan (CEP) set is AKS Job Number 7564 dated 1/06/2023. A. Review fee: Per final decision Condition G6 through Attachment 205, Table 205, p. 3, row G6, the applicant owes the Community Development Department ---PAGE BREAK--- 2 Planning Division a civil engineering plan (CEP) review fee of $250. See attachment p. 1 for guidance about payment through the Planning Division and pay no later than upon 2nd submittal / 1st revised submittal. Because there is a fee also for each subsequent review of $346, pay a total of $250 + $346 = $596. B. Lot numbers: The site plans show lot numbers out of order compared to the ANX 22-02 land use review set. For Condition G2 substantial conformance and because some conditions of approval are tied to specific lots, revise the site plans, at least the cover sheet, Sheets C008-C011, C030-C034, and the landscape series, to be consistent with the land use plans that are final decision Attachment 103 (final decision PDF pages 93+). C. Cover letter: See and follow final decision Note to the Applicant 18a-c about transmittal to the Planning Division 14). D. Public/street improvements: Condition PUD-3: 1. Planter strip width: There’s an error in the developer’s favor. For all streets (except along Hazelnut Dr), the planter strip min width is “6½ ft inc. curb width” per Condition PUD-3, but the proposal shows planter strips of 7 ft including curb width – at least Sheet C102 Details A, C, & D local street cross sections show such. Certainly these are welcome, and staff observes simply to make sure the developer either confirms that this is desired or if not desired revises to narrow to the minimum. 2. PUD3-b(3) Olympic St culvert crossing sidewalk width: The min width is 9 ft for the sidewalk segments that are curb-tight along the parking lanes, but Sheet C102 cross section and C111 plan view dimension 8.5 ft. Revise accordingly. 3. PUD3-b(4) Olympic St culvert crossing fence/railings: Sheet L109 Details 1 and Sheet L104 attempt to address the condition, but: a. The fence/railings dimensioned heigh of 4 ft (48 inches) exceeds the max height of 3.5 ft (42 inches). Revise. b. Note 1 defers too much detail about the fence/railings, precluding determination of conformance. Revise to indicate the spec (vendor and model), specify color other than black or charcoal, and indicate whether or not there is any fencing that Public Works requires at each end of railings and if so that such is the same color. 4. PUD3-b(6) flood elevation: Identify the sheet(s) that address the condition or revise and specify a sheet to address. 5. PUD3-f sidewalk width: N. Boones Ferry Rd: The 8-ft min width applies also along the road north of Hazelnut Dr. Revise Sheets C101 & C113 to show 8 ft ---PAGE BREAK--- 3 width. (Staff is aware that the ANX 2020-03 Dove Landing developer is constructing sidewalk in this segment first and at a narrower width, but the ANX 22-02 condition remains as is and necessitates the Marion Pointe developer to add width to this sidewalk segment to have 8 ft.) 6. PUD3-h street trees: a. Size: To demonstrate conformance with WDO 3.06.03A.2 (size at maturity based on street functional class), revise the Sheet L101 plant schedule to indicate for each street tree species the size category at maturity. Look to Table 3.06B for category descriptions. b. Number: Based on min 1 per 30 ft of block frontage (1:30), Sheet L101 is missing 4 street trees total, which seem to be precluded by short block and proposed utilities: Magnolia south side east of Olympic N. Boones Ferry Rd south of Owl Owl south side between BF Rd & Nightingale Owl north side between BF Rd & Nightingale Upon building permit application, staff will assess the fee in-lieu per Attachment 205, row PUD-3 of $950 per street tree unless the developer illustrates a plan revision between CEP re-submittal and building permit issuance. When the time comes, somewhere in writing – particularly if paying by check, putting in the memo field – “ANX 22-02 PUD-3h(3) street trees GL [PHONE REDACTED]”. 7. PUD3-j traffic calmed crosswalks: At Magnolia & Nightingale, the condition requires 3 such patterned crosswalks, but 4 are proposed. The fourth – along the west/NW intersection leg – is welcome, and staff observes simply to make sure the developer either confirms that this fourth leg is desired or revises to not propose it. 8. For all streets (except along Hazelnut Dr), the planter strip min width is “6½ ft inc. curb width” per Condition PUD-3, but the proposal shows planter strips of 7 ft including curb width – at least Sheet C102 Details A, C, & D street cross sections show such. Certainly these are welcome, and staff notes the observation simply to make sure the developer either confirms that this is desired or revises to narrow to the minimum if not desired. E. Dead-end street barricades: To conform with PUD-4, supplement Sheet C131 Detail 1100 to conform with the signage that 3.01.05A.2c requires, and revise: Sheet C103 construction note 3; Sheet C104 construction note 4; Sheet C106 construction note 3; and Sheet C109 construction note 3. Specify what sheet has the supplemental information. F. Wayfinding signage: Regarding Condition T-BP, Sheet L108 Detail 4 indicates that the developer opts for condition part to provide the signage (instead of part ---PAGE BREAK--- 4 b. fee in-lieu). However, the detail and notes are too conceptual and defer too much. Revise to conform more with T-BPa, Note and referenced memo INT 22- 0608, seeing memo p. 5, row “Signage” and column “Specifications” text about the Intertwine guidelines, and the p. 6 image. (The developer can see installed examples along the Mill Creek Greenway trail within Smith Creek Development between S. Settlemier Ave and Kirksey St.) G. Bus stop shelter and bus stop bicycle parking: Regarding Conditions T-T1 & T-T2, direct staff as to whether the developer is opting to provide the improvements (and via what sheets) or intends to pay fees in-lieu. H. Driveways: Regarding Attachment 202, Table 202B p. 4 row “Driveways”, Sheet C105 General Note 2 is too general to conform. Where the table refers to the WDO, refer to WDO Table 3.04A, rows “Paved Width of Driveway” and “Throat Length”. Revise to indicate that approach / apron / curb cut widths do not exceed the max (lots: 16 ft for two-car wide driveway; tracts: 10 ft per Attachment 202 Part C1). I. Tract fencing: To conform with Attachment 202, Part C2, revise plan sheets indicating tract fencing of height max 3.5 ft (42 inches), of permissible color, and – if chain-link fencing – then coated. Revise at least Sheet C116 Detail E, C215- C218, L104, L106, and L109 Details 3 & 4. If L109 Detail 2 (wood fence) is relevant in this tract context, revise or supplement it also. J. Tract retaining walls: To conform with Attachment 202, Part C3, revise plan sheets indicating how tract retaining walls conform to 3.06.05C, at least Sheets C116, C119, C215-C218, L104-L106, & L109 (Tracts C, G, & K. Golf cart path: To conform with Attachment 202: 1. Part C4a, revise Sheet C102 Detail D and C118 Detail H to provide and dimension a min 1-ft buffer between sidewalk and golf cart path. 2. Part C4b, revise Sheets L104 and L106 to illustrate mostly groundcover per Part C4c and some lawn grass. L. Subdivision identification monument signage: Revise Sheet L105 to indicate more clearly conformance with Note to the Applicant 3 (separate sign permit remains required) and Attachment 202 Part C6 (Tract I height max 6 ft) and – by labeling and dimensioning the dashed line represented easements boundaries – that the proposed monument sign from within the public easements that Attachment 203 Part D requires at the south/SE corner of N. Boones Ferry Rd & Owl Ave (Tract M. VCA: Per Attachment 202 Part D, typical vision clearance area may be a 15 x 15 sight triangle; the developer may revise Sheets including L104 and L105. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5 N. Lighting: Confirm that no exterior lighting is proposed on tracts, making Attachment 202 Part E1 irrelevant. O. Common area improvements (Attachment 203): 1. Part A Table 203A: a. Benches: Tract A: Shift to be within 8 ft of ROW. Revise Sheet L102. Tract D: Shift south from Tract C to be just within Tract D and set back 2 ft from sidewalk. Revise Sheet L104. Tract E: Relocate to be either at the west end of or along the south side of Path E1. Tract G: Set back 2 ft from Path G. Tract H: Shift back farther from sidewalk to be 2 ft. Revise Sheet L105. b. Picnic benches: Tract E: The City spec is missing. The Sheet L108 Detail 6 spec is permissible except for Tract E, for which it needs to be per referenced memo INT 22-0608 p. 3 ("Tree Top Products 46” SuperSaver Commercial Square Picnic Table in black (SKU 1WG5685-KB), and the standard ADA model is SKU #1WG5686-BK."). Revise Sheet L108 to add the spec detail and Sheet L104 to refer to the detail. The picnic bench isn’t ADA-accessible from “a sidewalk or path other than a golf cart path”. c. Dog waste stations: Tract E is missing the specified model. The Sheet L108 Detail 3 spec is permissible except for Tract E, for which it needs to be per referenced memo INT 22-0608 p. 4. Revise Sheet L108 to add the spec detail and Sheet L104 to refer to the detail. d. Shelter: Tract E: Revise shelter walkway to conform with, “Provide a walkway min 4 ft wide between each shelter and any of a sidewalk or path other than a golf cart path. Walkway may be flush with a golf cart path if distinguished with any of concrete or (ii) hatch pattern thermoplastic striping of walkway asphalt.” 2. Part B1: Specify what sheet indicates conformance with the bark dust max 3. Part B4 trees: a. Tract C: One of the 8 trees proposed to meet the requirement is more than 14 ft from ROW. Revise Sheets L101 & L104. b. Tract D: Add 2, “1 each centered within where north and south street stub landscape strips would have been” (had Tract D become a street stub). Revise Sheets L101 & L104. c. Tract E: Relocate or add 2 trees to meet min 14 within 5-14 ft of ROW. Revise Sheets L101 & L104. 4. Part C Paths: ---PAGE BREAK--- 6 a. Tract D: Path D is missing. Revise at least Sheets C012, C015, C016, and C032 and revise L104 to illustrate and label. b. Tract E: Two paths are required in the south yard. Revie the proposed meandering cedar chip path as Path E2, move it north to the boundary of the gray hatched area representing eco-lawn ground cover, and add a note referring to Sheet L107 Detail 6. Provide also in this south yard a paved path min width 10 ft and label as Path E1. E1 may be a straight line and as close to Lot 37/57 as 8 ft. Revise Sheets C012, C015, C016, C032, and L104. c. Tract G: Revise site plans including Sheet L106 to meet INT 22-0608 Part B3b, i.e. to set back the path from the tract south boundary “min width either 5 ft each or 8 ft on south, southwest, or west side of facility and 2 ft on remaining north, northeast, or east side”. Revise Sheet L106 also to label the path as Path G. 5. Part D: Staff observes simply that if the proposed retaining wall that straddles N. Boones Ferry Road ROW and Tract H shifts during civil engineering plans (as seen through Sheets C103 and L105), to maintain within the bus shelter public easement that Table 203D requires for Tract D enough room and reasonable grade to fit a bus shelter pad, specifically a rectangle 12 x 7 ft per INT 22-0609. P. Tree preservation / tree protection: 1. Tree 13296: Revise Sheet C030, note “Situational Tree” to read “Situational Tree 13296 per ANX 22-02 final decision document Condition PUD-5 and Attachment 204 Part A1”. 2. Tree protection during construction (Attachment 204): Revise the Sheets C030-C033 tree protection construction fence details to conform with Attachment 204, Part B, pages 3 & 4, sections & f. 3. Reconsider removal of Tree 12610 from along N. Boones Ferry Rd Lot 3/70 and report on feasibility of meandering sidewalk to be curb-tight and narrowing the segment sidewalk within the root protection zone (RPZ) to 6 ft width. (If removed, the tree removal fee specific to Tree 12610 would apply per Attachment 205, row PUD-5 by building permit issuance.) Q. Irrigation: Add to Sheets C400, L100, and L101 a note specific to rights-of-way (ROWs): “Provide temporary irrigation during construction and install permanent irrigation per Public Works Department Engineering Division standard specifications and drawings or as the City Engineer directs, (503) 982-5248.” ---PAGE BREAK--- 7 Next Steps Planning Division requests revisions and re-submittal by the applicant and affirms that the Public Works Department Engineering Division is not to approve civil engineering plans until Planning outstanding items are resolved. When you receive a 2nd submittal / 1st revised submittal from the applicant, please notify me and provide PDF and print copies of the materials and specify a desired due date for Planning review comments. Feel free to contact me at (503) 980-2485 or <[EMAIL REDACTED]>. Attachment(s): n/a