The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPermit Correspondence 1994-02-01CITY OF SPR OREGO'U SPFlllrruFlELD D EV ELOPM ENT S ERV I CES DE PART M ENT FebruarY 1, 1994 Mr. Charles GlasPie 650 North 34th Street Springfield, 0R 97477 h,225 FIFTH STREET SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 (50s) 726-s75s FAX (50s) 726-s689 Re Dear Mr. GlasPie, This letter is a clarification of a previous letter dated 0ctober 6' t993' vhich vas addressed to Ms' Haxton' I have recentlY met vith Joe LeahY,City Attorney, to reviev your situation' Revision of the Status of Property Located at 650 North 34th street (Assessor's Map 1i-OZ-ZL-21, tax Lot 3900) in Springfield Asyoumayrecall,thezoning.ofygurproperty.isLightMediumlndustrial' vhich is in "o,npii"n"e vith If," Uia-Spfln;fi"id Refinement Plan and the Metro plan. Hovever, if,"i"-is-a aouUf"-"iaL maiufactured home and a garage on the property.\^Ihenthereisausevhichisnotcurrentlypermittedbutvhichvas i;duy -;"t.-uiist "Jl-,["t- rse is considered to be a pre-existins non-contorming use. I stated previously, that-the Building-Permit file for this property shoved a permit being i""u"i'in 19BB to, "-aouEre-vide manufactured home (880953)' You "tat.d that a double-vide unit o""upi"d this-property prior to 19BB' I stated that it vas po""iti", ln-t,lna"iehi,'that.staff, in 1'988, could have made a decision ,r,", r"ii."i.e--,i;" "*iiiing.double-vide did not increase the non-conformity .ia tf,"i"fore, no "aiitional approval from the Planning commission voul-d be requirea. _ i "r-riiir viriing to support this theory and accept that the'";i"ii;;-*a,ufa"tuied home is a [re-existing non-conforming use. The Buirding permit file also shoved a permit for a garage issued in 1992 (920985). Upon iuitf,"t researchl lli. f,L"ny and I found that building permit vas issued due to a staff errot;'tftu zoning on-the building permit shoved Lov Density Resideniirr,-i"ir,"I- than Light Medium Industrial. This letter vill be your assurance from the city that both the manufactured home and garage-riif"be consid"i"J pt"-?I1:ting non-conforming uses' A copy of this Letter "iff.-U" placed in thl Building Permit file' Page 2 Glaspie Letter You should be avare that: a.Inordertoexpandthemanufacturedhomeorgarage,approvalfromthe Fianning Commission vilI be required' b.Anon-conformingusemaycontinuesolongasitremainsotherviselavful' subject to the folloving Iimitations: 1. Routine maintenance and repairs may-be performed provided that repair vork does not exceed 5OZ ;i-ih; ,"plt""*"nt costs as determined by the Building 0fficial 2. Any non-conforming structure vhich is determined to be substandard by the Building offici":. ,IV-U" Ui"rgf,i into compliance vith the Building SafetY Codes. 3. Any non-conforming structure suffering damage not-exceeding 50 percent of its replacement costl-""-a"i"rmineI.by the Building 0fficialr ndY be restored to its originai conaition in accordance vith development standards in effect at ih; time of construction, provided that the ,o.t "oilri"r-rith curreni suitding Safety and Fire codes. 4.Ifanynon-conformingStructuresuffersdamage-exceeding50percentofits replacement cost, ";-J;i;;ined by the Building gfficial, the non_"onir;;;il-uJ"-=t.u not be permitted and all subsequent uses shall b;-i; c6mplianc" ,itt, the applicable zoning district. I hope this letter clarifies -the situation concerning this property' If you f,"r"'"nv turtfrer-qu""iion", please call me al 726-3777 ' Sincere /4 Karp Planner III cc:Joe LeahY, CitY Attorney CITY OF OREGOA' sPl JFTELD DEV ELO P MENT SEBY'CES D EPART M EN T Oetober 4, 1993 Ms. Marty Haxton Frontier Title Co. 1800 ValleY River Drive Eugene' 0R 97401 Re: h,225 FIFTH STREET SPF/NGF/EL D, OR 97477 (50s) 726-3753 FAX 6Aq 726-3689 Status of Property Located at 650 North 34th street (Assessor',s Map lt-OZ-lt-Zt, tax Lot 3900) in Springfield Dear Ms Haxton' Ue have had several conversations about this property last.veek' ii,"i-f-vould vriie this letter to clarify the City's position on property. I stated thi s r have researched our files and have found the folloving information: 1. Zoning and Metro/Refinement Plan Designation' The property is currently zoned Light Medium Industrial' The properties io-ti" nottl, east and velt are zoned and designated LMI,-the property to the south i" ,on"a and designated Lov Density Residential' There is a double-vide manufactured home and a garage on the property' The City,s o1d zoning maps shov the property being zoned industrial since at least 1977. In Ju1y, 1985, the Mid-Springfield-Refinement Plan vas adopted' 'rThe primary ,"""on"-ior this'p]ai are 1) to assign site specific PIan designation"-i" areas designated Miied Use on the Metro Plan Diagram; and Z> to recognize the needs of commercial and industrial land uses and to resolve "oiflicts vith residential neighbors.'r r found that no change vas made to the subject property; i.e., thE zoning of the.plop:rly and the plan design"iioi of ttre'property remained the same, Light Medium Indus trial. 2. Building Permits and Discretionary Use' The Building permit file for this property shovs a building permit-being issued in fEAg-ior " double-vide manutactured home (880953). It also ,t,or" a building permit for a garage issued in 1992 (920985)' By revieving oui-ilf[ and talkin! vitir Mr. Glaspie, I have determined that a double-vide unit occupied this property prior to 1988. Page 2 Haxton 3 It is possible, in hindsight, that staff, in L9BB, could have made a decision that replacing the existing double-vide did not increase the non-conformity and therefore, no Discretionary Use approvaL from the Planning Commission vould be required. I vould be villing to support this theory and accept that the existing manufactured home is a pre-existing non-conforming use. Hovever, I cannot guarantee that position could stand a lega1 challenge. Therefore, I strongly suggest that this issue be combined vith the garage issue belov (and Page 3) and be made part of the required Discretionary Use approval. The garage should be regarded as an issue separate from the manufactured home. The building permit should never had been issued until the Planning Commission granted Discretionary Use approval. Until Discretionary Use approval is obtained, the garage cannot be considered a pre-existing non-conforming use. Applicable Sections From the Springfield Development Code (SDC) Pertaining to Non-Conforming Uses: SDC Section 5.010 (1): I'IJithin the zoning districts established by this Code there exist uses vhich vere lavful before this Code vas adoptedr but vhich are prohibited, regulated or restricted under the terns of this Code. It is the intent of this Article to identify such non-conforning uses and to prescribe the conditions under vhich they may continue or be terninated. r The key vord here is "Iavfu1". Vhile a building permit vas obtained, no Discretionary Use approval vas obtained. SDC Section 5.020(1) states: nThe expansion or nodification of a non-conforming use and/or the expansion of a non-conforming structure vith an increase in inpact shall be revieved under type III procedure (Discretionary Use). This means that approval is required from the Planning Commission. SDC 5.030 states: 'A non-conforning use nay continue so long as it remains othervise lavful, subject to the folloving linitations: (1) Routine naintenance and repairs may be performed provided that repair vork does not exceed 502 of the replacenent costs as deternined by the Building 0fficial. (2) Any non-conforning structure vhich is deternined to be substandard by the Building 0fficial nay be brought into conpliance vith the Building Safety Codes. Page 3 Haxton Letter (3) Any non-conforming structure suffering damage-19t el999ding 50 percent of its replacement cost, ""-a.i.rnined by the nuilaing offi-cial' nay be restored tr'it;-;;iginai condition in accordance vith development standards in effect at the time of construction, provided that the vork ""rpii.= vith current Building safety and Fire codes. (4) If any non-conforning structure suffers da.mage exceeding 50 percent of its repla".rl"t-"o"t, as determined by the Building Official, the non-conforri"s-"""-sha11 "oi-U. fermiited and all subsequent uses shall be in compliance vith the provisions of this Code''r This means that if the manufactured home is completely destroyed, it cannot u. r.pr"""a.- until the garaSe addition receives Discretionary use approval, i;';;;;ot Ue *oaiiiea:or ieplaced if only partially (1ess than 50- percent) damaged' Section 5.040 states: trAn expansion or nodification of a non-conforming use and/or it.-.*pansion of-a'non-conforming structure, or the expansion of a building or structure resulting it "l increased impact upon adjacent propertie=,'-!n"if be considered an Expansion of a non-conforning use' Approvar ,.V--u!-g.-t"a o"rv-"t"" the increased impact of the expansion upon adja".it-p.3p.iii.".h; b;; adequately mitiglted in the opinion of the Appro.r"f-arttirity, -in addition to satisfying the Discretionary Use .iit.ii" of Section 10.030 of this Code'n In this case, the city vould not consider the impact of the garage.!o P" an ,,incre.""i irp"ct"'since-ati residential uses can have garages if they meetcertainSDCandbuildingcoderequirements. 4 " l.lhat are Mr. GlasPie's OPtions? Mr. Glaspie should apply to the City for Discretionary Use approval for the garage. -ih;-pr;llss vi11 take Lpproximately tvo,months and cost 5650.00. f viff te happy to assist ilr. Glaspie to fill out the apptication. At the samL time' as part of the City's staff report, the existing manufactured home can'be "bd"d to this action to legitimize the unclear .t.iu" discussed on-Page 2 of this letter. Please be avare that this approval vi11 allov ,""on!t.uction of the manufactured home and g"rig"'it t["r" is less than 50 Percent damage, but this is not a zone change. ve had diseussed the possibility of a zone change and refinement plan amendment from industrial io r""rla"ntial. A Plin amendment is rarely an easy matt"t-.rra therefore, -predicting-the.outcome is not something staff is inclined tovards. In this particllar instance, the introduction of a residential zone in this area vould be counter productive to the industrial policies of the Metro Plan' this property. If You Page 4 Haxton Letter I hope this letter clarifies the situation coneerning have any further questions' please call me at 726-3777 S rp Planner III cc:Greg Mott, Planning Manager Dave Puent, Building 0fficial Charles Glaspie