HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit Correspondence 1983-9-29
"
...
"
.
.-
LANE COUNTY HEARINGS OFFICIAL
STAFF REPORT
Hearin!=l Date: 9/29/83
File No. HZC 83-049
--
I. PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION
A.
Applicant:
Leon Keefe
2255 Laura Street
Springfield, OR 97477
B, PROPOSAL:
,
Rezone from Suburban Residential/Interim
District to Residential Professional
professional office center.
Urbanizing Combining (RA/U)
(RP) District to allow a
II. GENERAL INFORMATION
A. Location and Site Description: Map 17-03-27.1, Tax Lot 1300,
The property is located at 2255 Laura Street, Springfield, opposite
Lindale Drive, The parcel is developed with a single-family dwelling and
contains 2.26 acres.
B. Surroundin!:l Area and Zonin!:l
~ ~
Properties to the north and south are zoned RA/U District. Pr9perties on
the opposite side of Laura Street are within the City of Springfield and
are zoned RH District, a high density apartment zone. Second and Third
Street Couplet is to the east, The subject property is within an area
surrounded by Springfield on three sides.
C,
SERVICES
'..,,:'~""'~'.
...,,'
:1'
,
~: '
Fire: City of Springfield
Police: County Sheriff & State Police
Water: Rainbow Water District
Sewa!:le Disposal: On-site subsurface
Electricity: Springfield Utility Board
Park: Willamalane Park District
Access: Laura Street - County Road
. ~., .,."
<,
D. Referal Responses
1, Springfield Planning Department
i
Opposes this request as it is an intensification of urban uses
adjacent; to the City limits, Annexation of the pioperty to
Springfield and concurrent rezoning to RL/RP is possible, and'Wl>u-ld ;._,,; 7
provide equivalent alternative to this proposal,
:....,..... ..-:....- '...-'-" ....;i:-.:..::..-~~...
.. -" ....' :..:.....~-.: . .
HO STAFF REPORT 9/29/83 (KEEFE HZC 83-049) - ITEM #2
Page 1
-
..
.
~,
.
.
2. Transportation
Statement by Transportation Planning is attached, but in summary it
is recommended that: 1) additional dedication to 35 feet from
centerline be made; 2) a facility permit for driveway improvements
will be required and 3) items to be considered for subsequent site
review are listed,
3, Building and Sanitation
Uses allowed in the RP District vary as far as sewage loading is
concerned, If the proposed use is equivalent to what the existing
sewage disposal system is sized (450 gallons per day) an
authorization notice would be required. If the proposed use exceeds
the current sizing we would not be able to approve on-site service
if Springfield is capable of providing service, OAR 340-71-160
prohibits issuance of a permit if a sewerage system is legally and
physically available. The City of Springfield would be notified for
sewer availability. Building permits would be required prior to any
development,
4. Boundary Corromssion
The property is
Park District.
Springfield,
within the Rainbow Water District and Willamalane
Sewer service is available from the City of
III. APPROVAL CRITERIA AND ANALYSES
A, Comprehensive Plan
This request is subject to the Eugene-Springfield Metro Area General
Plan.
The applicant maintains that the Metro Plan Diagram designates the
subject property commercial and states that the reasons supporting the
designation are existing apartments, professional offices, and other
commercial and industrial uses in the general vicinity, No other
statements addressing compliance with the Comprehensive Plan were
presented.
One of the general precepts of the Metro Plan is that urban development
will take place within incorporated cities (assumption 8, page I-B).
This precept is then expressed as in policy form; namely, policy 7, page
II-B-4, Growth Management and the Urban Service Area Section.' The policy
states that land within the projected urban service area may be converted
from urbanizable to urban only through znnexation to a city when a
minimum level of key urban facilites can be provided.
Based on inf~rmation received from other agencies it is apparent that:
1) the subject property is annexable to Springfield and 2) sewer service
is available from the City,
A further illustration of the County' s "care-taker" role within the urban
growth area is the fact that the properties outside the city limit are
zoned Interim Urbanizing Combining (lU) District, This district is
HO STAFF REPORT 9/29/83 (KEEFE HZC 83-049) - ITEM #2
Page 2
-
..
.
,.
.
.
applied to lands within an urban growth boundary and lands suitable for
conversion from urbanizable to urban uses at some future date. The
appropriate time for conversion relies on meeting other directives,of the
Plan, ie: availability of key urban services, Key urban services are
not available as long as the property is outside the jurisdiction of
Spr ingfield,
Recognizing that the Metro Plan Diagram is a generalized graphic
depiction of broad goals and policies, it is not always possible to
transfer Plan designations to site-specific properties, In this case,
the subject property appears to fall in an area where three Plan
designations converge; commercial, low density residential, and medium
density residential, Considering the allocation criteria for major land
uses contained in the Technical Supplement to the Metro Plan, a case can
be made that the property is within the commercial area indicated at the
southwest corner of Harlow Road and Second Street, Since the Plan calls
for urban development to occur within cities, the acceptance of a
commercial desination for the property 'should be,left to Springfield.
IV. FINAL COMMENTS
A. Summary
Approval of the rezoning request would conflict with the basic premise
and policy 7, page II -B-4 of the Metro Plan that requires urban
development to occur within incorporated areas where the minimum level of
urban services are available, Annexation to Springfield where required
servcies are available, is possible, Annexation of this property and
others in the vicinity should occur in order to coordinate provisions for
city services can proceed,
B. Recommendation
Denial of request based on non-compliance with Metro Plan Policy as noted
in staff report,
C. Materials to be Part of the Record
1. Staff report and attachments,
2, File HZC 83-049,
D. Attachment
1 , Area map
2, Transportation Planning Memo.
HO STAFF REPORT 9/29/83 (KEEFE HZC 83-049) - ITEM #2
Page 3
"
.
AREA MAP
HZC 83~049
HARLOW, HA'JDEN BRID&E
I
15000 ~ '
4903
''1:;10': ,I
~ ;", I
-.!:/~OA,L.,:: DR,
4001
4100
4199 f~
,r
,-
,~
J>
41000
-
-.l
lei)
.~::::::>
CIT'j
5pr~I~K~FIE:LO
1__-
a<<-~~/
RD.
/()
1100
I
1lj~
~ ..
1100
I
500 I
I I
I-I
/0
(PO(
10,
50
I
1400
/0
/0 ~
UJ
/500
IJ
150~
/0\
/0 ~ .\
L'MITS' , \\~, ,__,
/0
..
.
,
I
H~'Il:LO't.L _ _, ~""'oc.!\1 8RtOl:rf
I '\~ ~D,
"1""'''''''''';;';:;;;';;=
c_~. '" "
,Y" ". \/I
SITE \: N -1
c Ul.- X.
~ ~~ulf, ~,
.;. \-~
1: ~ 7' \\ Q ST.
'o~" \\/
VICINITY MAP
NO ~CALE
f:J
I
I
I'
.
.
ME~RANDUM
,
.
lane county
Joe Hudzikiewicz
TO Ph nnp"
Lloyd Holtcamp
FROM Transoortati on Pl anner
PZC 83-49 RA/Y~RP
SUBJECT _Annl; ".nt I pnn' -Kppfp
2255 Laura Street, Springfield, OR 97477
DATE
September 2, 1983
Comments on the requested zone change:
1) Laura Street ;s designated a major collector in the Master Road Plan
with a planned right-of-way width of 70 feet, If dedication to this
width has not taken place, the applicant will need to dedicate right-
of-way to 35 feet from the centerline of the original right-of-way.
2) Applicant will need to apply for a facility permit for his driveway
access. The permit application can be obtained at this office.
3) As this zone change is adjacent to residentially zoned property, the
applicant must submit a copy of the proposed site plan to this office
for site review.
Items that will be reviewed by this office will include the following:
a) Compliance with parking space requirements as outlined by
code.
b) Ingress/egress patterns.
c) Driveway widths and construction.
d) Parking area construction (including screening/fencing if
appl icable),
e) Set back distances from the proposed right-of-way.
f) Drainage requirements for the site.
g) The need for urban street improvements.
If you have any questions, please call me at 687-4492,
LH:goc
dd'~?U'4~