Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence PLANNER 3/19/2008 Hexion Page 1 of3 '. " .... "- HOPKINS Steve From: HOPKINS Steve Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2008257 PM To: Robinson, Michael C (Perkins COle) Cc: DONOVAN James Subject: RE Hexlon PRE-5UBMITTAL REC'O MAR 1 9 2008 ~e, . _._._ ._4 Our meeting last week was very informative and gave a better understanding of the Hexion site and what IS being proposed During our dIScussion, you noted several citations from the SDC that you felt were applicable and could have an Impact to the city's review of the project Based on our discussIOn and the information provIded at the meeting, a Type II Major Site Plan Modification will be the only applIcation required for the Hexion project ThIs is a land use decision with public nobce. A hearing is not required. Although your message indicated a minor modificabon could be processed for the portion of the facility located in the HI zone, SDC 5.17-145(C)(2) requires a major modification because the site is adjacent to residential uses. There IS one point of clarification still needed. At the meeting on 2/22, the number of new delIvery trucks was estimated to be 4-5 trucks per week During the meeting on 3/12, the number of trucks was estimated to be 4 per day For the followmg reasons, a Major Site Plan ModIfication is the only permIt needed for the proposed project. 1 Major Site Plan ModIfication required. Because the site is zoned industrial and IS adjacent to residential uses to the east and to the south, a change to the site plan requires a major modIfIcation. SDC 5.17-145(C)(2). 2. ModIfication of a Non-Conforming Use not required' Because SDC 5.8-140(B) is applicable, an applIcation for ModifIcabon of a Non-Conforming Use IS not required The site is zoned LMI and HI and contams a chemIcal processing facility. This is not an allowed use in the LMI zone, but is allowed in the HI zone The site also abuts the LDR zone to the east and the south Because of this, only a Site Plan Review is requITed It does not appear that SDC 5.8-140(A) is applIcable because that subsecbon applies only within Glenwood. 3. Greenway and DIscrebonary Use not required: Because there will be no significant visual impact, a Greenway permit is not required [SDC 3.3-320(B)]. The Greenway permit would have been processed as a Discrebonary Use. Because the Greenway permit is not required, the DU is not required (SDC 3 3-315) 4. Floodplain not required: Replacement of a "T" fItting on the eXIsting storage tank is not expected to have an impact on the flood carrying capaCIty of the flood hazard area. As you stated in your message, it would be very helpful to VIsit the site. If future changes are planned, this familiarity will allow the city to quickly determine what permits, if any, would be requITed. An application for a Final Site Plan Equivalent was submItted on Feb 14. It will be approved and issued tomorrow. 3/19/2008 Hexion Page 2 of3 ~- - 1 The pre-application for a Major Site Plan Modification was also submitted Feb 14 A pre-submittal meeting was held on Feb 22. At that meeting, the Major ModificatIon was considered incomplete and waiting additIonal informatIon. The addItional info was obtained during our meeting last week and from the revised sIte plan map that was submitted on March 14 The next step is to submIt the complete application package using the revised site plan map and the fee ($4,308.80). A copy of the application form is attached. Let me know if you have any questIons Steve HopkIns, AICP Planner JJ Development ServIces Dept CIty of Sprmgfield 726-3649 PRE-SUBMITTAL REC'D MAR 1, 9 2008 -............ ;(J _ From: Robinson, Michael C. (Perkins Coie) [mailto:MRobinson@perklnscoie.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 19,2008 11:34 AM To: DONOVAN James Cc: HOPKINS Steve Subject: RE: Hexion Thanks, Jim Mike Michael C. Robinson Attorney at Law PerkinS COle LLP Phone 503-727-2264 From: DONOVAN James [mallto:]donovan@ci.spnngfleld.or.us] Sent: Wednesday, March 19,200811:02 AM To: Robinson, Michael C. (Perkins COle) Cc: HOPKINS Steve Subject: RE: Hexlon HI Mike, \ Steve and I have come up With a response I think you will appreciate Steve IS drafting the answer and will have It back to you by tomorrow Thanks for your patience JD From: Robinson, Michael C. (Perkins Coie) [mallto:MRobinson@perklnscoie.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 18,20088:22 PM To: DONOVAN James Subject: Hexlon 3/19/2008 Hexion Page 3 of3 , . - . Jm, Have you had a chance to take a look at my e-mail from last Thursday? Thanks. Mike NOTICE: This communication may contain privileged or other confidential information. If you have received it in error, please advise the sender by reply email and immediately delete the message and any attachments without copying or disclosing the contents. Thank you. PREDSUBMITTAl REC'D MAR 1 9 2008 3/19/2008 My Client, Hexion Specialty C"'~'llicals Page 1 of3 '. HOPKINS Steve From: Ryan, Connne F (PerkIns COle) [CRyan@perklnscole com] on behalf of Robinson, Michael C (PerkIns COle) [MRoblnson@perklnscole com] Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2008433 PM To: DONOVAN James Cc: HOPKINS Steve, LEAHY Joe (HL), m howard@satrepc com, Robinson, MIchael C (Perkins COle) Subject: My Chent, Hexlon SpecIalty Chemicals PRE-SUBMITTAL REC'O MAR 1 3 2008 Dear Jim, Thank you for taking the time to meet with Michael Howard and me on Wednesday. I am writing to confirm our discussion and to ask for your confirmation of the conclusions contained in this' emait-.I will not treat your response as a land use decision for purposes of appeal. 1. Description of proposed improvements. Hexion proposes two improvements on its property in order to facilitate truck transportation of methanol to its Springfield facility. First, in the portion of the property zoned Heavy Industrial ("HI"), Hexion proposes to install an above-ground pump and pipe for unloading of the trucks. The trucks will enter the Hexion facility at "D" Street and 2nd Street, and exit at "C" Street. No new driveways, parking areas or access points will be constructed. Hexion expects about four (4) truck trips per day to this facility. The pipe will be routed to and across the existing pipe bridge over the Union Pacific Railroad where a new "T" connection will be installed to the existing pipe. This will allow the methanol to be piped to the existing storage tank and, containment area in the Light Medium Industrial ("LMI") zoning district north of the railroad tracks. The City has determined that the Hexion facility is a chemical processing use. A chemical processing use is a permitted use outright in the HI zoning district. Springfield Development Code ("SCD") 3.2- 410. A chemical processing facility is not permitted in the LMI zoning district, but the City has determined that it is a non-conforming use, i.e., meaning that it was lawfully established but no longer conforms to applicable SDC requirements. You also noted during our meeting that there are non-conforming development issues associated with the portion of the property zoned HI, but these would not interfere with your consideration and potential approval of the applications we discussed. You also mentioned that the existing methanol tank and containment area (a wall) has been improved since a spill and breach several years ago. 2. Permits required. F or the HI zone, we agreed that only a Site Plan Modification application is required. SDC 5.17-100 contains the Site Plan requirements. You agreed that this permlt would be processed as a minor site plan modification as specified in SDC 5.17-145. We believe that the proposed minor improvement in the HI zone will have no adverse impact on water quality or residential uses. <? For the LMI zone, as many as three (3) permits may be required. First, the City will require a ~ Plan Modification lust like the HI zoning district. Second, the City may require both a .Discretionary Use permit and Non-Conforming Use Modificationapplication. Howe\;'er, we discussed why a Non- Confurming Use Modification application may not be required. A0 - rl!t}/rir'fd bv I-fL~ +'f:': ~ ? SDC 5.18-140 is in the non-c~mforming use section of the Springfield Development Code and is entitled 3/17/2008 My Client, Hexion Specialty C~ 'licals Page 2 of3 "Exemptions." Subsection A provides in relevant part: "Commercial and industrial buildings and uses existing and legally permitted. . . shall be exempt from [SDC] sections 5.8-115, 5.8-120 and 5.8-125." Subsection B provides: "Any proposed expansion on property zoned or designated LMI that has a use listed under HI, as specified in section 3.2-410, and abuts any residential use, shall require Site Plan Reviewapproval. The exemption shall apply applies [sic] as follows: To expansions, regardless of the direction, buildings or land or both; and expansions onto contiguous properties under the same ownership. " Assuming for the purposes of discussion that the Hexion facility, constructe9 in 1948, was legally permitted at that time, it is also existing and, therefore, pursuant to'SDC 5.18-140.A, it is exempt from SDC sections 5.8-115 through 5.8-125. We agreed that because the property is zoned LMI and has a use listed under the HI zone, that it is subject to Site Plan approval. Based on the above, it appears that the plain language ofSDC 5.18-140.A exempts this application from a Non-Conforming Use Modification application if the applicant demonstrates that the use was legally permitted. 3. Process. We discussed the processing of each of these applications. A Site Plan permit and a Non-Conforming Use Modification application are reviewed under the Type II process. We also discussed and agreed that the Discretionary Use permit could be pro(;essed as a Type II permit because there will be no adverse impact on adjoining land uses. Because the discretionary use applies only to the LMI zone, and because the only development proposed in that zone is the installation of a "T" connection to the existing pipe, there can be no adverse impact on adjoining land uses. Moreover, it appears that the impact, if any exists today, will be reduced because the purpose of the development is to provide truck loading instead of rail loading which currently occurs in the LMI zone. Consequently, there will be less activity in the LMI zone. ' Finally, we disc.ussed whether a Willamette River Greenway permit or a Flood Plain Overlay permit is required. A Willamette River Greenway permit is required under SDC 3.3-320 only where any change or intensification of use or construction that has a significant visual impact. We agreed that the installation of a "T" connection in the pipe will not have a significant visual impact because of its distance from the Greenway and,the location of intervening uses will block any visual impact even if the small "T" connection could be seen. We also agreed that a Flood Plain Overlay permit is not required since this development will not occur within the Flood Plain Overlay area. Would you please confirm the processing of the permits through the Type II process and that the only permits required are Site Plan Review (minor modification\ Discretionary Use and possibly a No~- Conforming Use Modification? We would also appreciate your reviewing whether a Non-Conforming Use Modification is required, nor whether you agree that it could be exempt with the proper evidentiary showing. . 4. Other issues. I raised with my client in a phone call on Wednesday the two (2) separate issues we discussed. First, I have asked my client whether it will allow Mr. Hopkins to visit the plant. Provided that no camera is included in his visit and the purpose of the visit is to acquaint himself with the existing facilities, the visit would assist Mr. Hopkins in his review and potential approval of the Hexion applications. Second, I mentioned to my client that the City would like to see .a dedication of a portion of the land adjacent to the millrace. If Hexion were willing to consider this dedication, I understand the City would be willing to consider, subject to a proper application and a public hearing, the vacatio~~Alf :.Jil.J-SKeet west of 2nd Street. I will let you know after my client gets back to me on th~s~~ JM~~l:!sr/"\L <I:t.,-U MAR 1 3 2008 3/17/2008 ..:;~.:...~ ---..-... Jl My Client, Hexion Specialty C' llicals Page 3 of3 . . ' Thanks again for your courtesy and assistance. Should you have any questions about this email, please call me. Mike Michael C. Robinson Attorney at Law PerkinS COle LLP 1120 N W Couch Street, Tenth Floor Portland, OR 97209-4128 Phone 503-727-2264 Mobile 503-407 -2578 Fax 503-346-2264 www perklnscole com sent by Corinne F. Ryan Legal Secretary to MIchael C Robmson and Seth J. Kmg Perkins Coie LLP 1120 N.W. Couch Street, Tenth Floor Portland, OR 97209-4128 Phone: (503) 727-2000 DIrect: (503) 727-2137 Fax' (503) 727-2222 IMPORTANT TAX INFORMATION: ThIs commumcatIon is not mtended or written by Perkins Coie LLP to be used, and cannot be used by the taxpayer, for the purpose of aVOIdmg penalties that may be unposed on the taxpayer under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. NOTICE: This communication may contain privileged or other confidential information. If you have received it in error, please advise the sender by reply email and immediately delete the message and any attachments without copying or disclosing the contents. Thank you. . PRE.SUBMIITAL REC'D MAR .2 2 2008 3/17/2008