Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014 06 03 RSCity of Springfield Regular Meeting MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION HELD TUESDAY, June 3, 2014 The City of Springfield Planning Commission met in a regular session in the City Council Chambers, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Tuesday, May 3, 2014 at 7:00 p.m., with Commissioner James presiding. ATTENDANCE Present were Chair James, Vice Chair Nelson, Commissioners Kirschenmann, Moe, Vohs and Bean. Also present were, Senior Planner Mark Metzger, City Attorney Lauren King and Management Specialist Brenda Jones and members of the staff. ABSENT None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Vice Chair Denise Bean DECLARATION OF CONFLICT None CRITERIA OF APPROVAL None QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING – 1. REQUEST FOR DISCRETIONARY USE APPROVAL – STEVEN WAGES, SPRINGFIELD UTILITY BOARD, APPLICANT STAFF REPORT Andy Limbird, Senior Planner presented the requesting the Discretionary Use for an existing water utility installation off South 5th Street and Central Boulevard. The site is comprised of three contiguous tax lots and is not currently assigned a municipal address (Map 17-03-35-34, Tax Lot 7100; Map 18-03-02-12, Tax Lot 301; and Map 18-03-02- 21, Tax Lot 100). The portion of the site subject to the development proposal is zoned Low Density Residential (LDR) in accordance with the Springfield Zoning Map and is designated LDR in accordance with the adopted Metro Plan diagram. In conjunction with the Discretionary Use request the applicant is proposing to remove two concrete reservoir pits, relocate the site access driveway, construct a new water pipeline and pump station, and prepare the site for a future 3 million gallon steel reservoir tank. The proposed utility installation work is detailed in a Site Plan Review application submitted for review under separate cover (Case TYP214-00007), contingent upon approval of the subject Discretionary Use request. Andy explain the zoning The northern one-third (approximately) of the subject property extends into the boundary of the Downtown Refinement Plan area. This portion of the site is designated Booth Kelly Mixed Use (BKMU) District. Staff concludes that this request, as determined in the findings of fact in the attached staff report complies with the Discretionary Use criteria of approval listed in SDC 5.9-120. Such findings, determinations and recommendations are provided to the Planning Commission in support of a decision to approve this Discretionary Use application. City of Springfield and Lane County Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes June 3, 2014 Page 2 TESTIMONY FROM THE APPLICANT • Rick Satre Rick Satre representing the Springfield Utility Board, Mr. Satre listed the other applications that have been submitted to the Springfield Planning Department, including the Discretionary Use, which is critical to the success of this project. Thanked the Planning Commission for their time TESTIMONY FROM THOSE IN SUPPORT • None TESTIMONY OF THOSE OPPOSED • None TESTIMONY OF THOSE NUETRAL • Richard Terry, 503 Union Avenue; Springfield, OR 97477 Asked if there is a Site Plan that he can look at. Andy responded that this can be viewed on-line Tree removal. Staff responded that all those trees will be removed with additional trees located ________ will also be removed because_________ Wondered why the workers are wearing masks, what should he be looking for. Andy responded that it is his understanding that they are removing asbestos and are wearing protective gear for their safety. Rick Satre also added that he was not involved with the LRAPA but knows that SUB did obtain a permit. As far as the tree’s SUB will be replacing trees after the project is finished. SUMMATION FROM STAFF • REBUTTAL FROM THE APPLICANT • CLOSE OF THE HEARING • Hearing was closed by Commissioner Bean motioned to close the hearing; seconded by Commissioner Moe 7:0:0 CLOSE OF RECORD • Motioned by Moe and seconded by Nelson 7:0:0 PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION • Commissioner Moe wanted clarification regarding the removal of trees. Andy responded as to where the trees are located and why they have to be removed. Andy reminded the Commission that this Tree Felling Application is under another application, but went on to explain what the plan is. Andy also added that during the storms, many of these tress where damaged and they have taken this into account as well. SUB will be doing some Site Grading for the new pad Commissioner Moe wanted to make sure that the respondent had time to comment on this item. City of Springfield and Lane County Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes June 3, 2014 Page 3 Commissioner Nelson motioned to approve application seconded by IT WAS MOVED BY COMMISSIONER Nelson WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER Vohs TO APPROVAL. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 7 FOR AND 0 AGAINST 0 RECUSED. 7:0:0 2. REQUEST FOR DISCRETIONARY USE APPROVAL – MCKENZIE LIVING LAND LLC, APPLICANT STAFF REPORT Andy Limbird Senior Planner present the requesting for Discretionary Use for an existing building at 6452 A Street and an adjoining parcel that is vacant and not assigned a municipal address (Map 17-02-34-42, Tax Lots 3900 & 4000). The site is zoned Low Density Residential (LDR) in accordance with the Springfield Zoning Map and is designated LDR in accordance with the adopted Metro Plan diagram. In conjunction with the Discretionary Use request the applicant is proposing to construct a 10-bed residential care facility to “mirror” the existing 11-bed facility. The proposed residential care facility is detailed in a Site Plan Review application submitted for review under separate cover (Case TYP214-00010), contingent upon approval of the subject Discretionary Use request. The property that is the subject of the Discretionary Use request is located at 6452 A Street and includes an adjoining vacant parcel that is not municipally addressed. In combination, the two parcels are approximately 0.40 acre in size. The west half of the site contains an existing 15-bed residential care facility that is currently configured for 11 residents (see Photos 1-3). The existing building was approved in 1996 as a 15-unit residential care facility on a 0.2 acre site (Permit #960669). Staff advises that the existing building exceeds the 45% lot coverage provisions of the Springfield Development Code (SDC) Section 3.2-215. To accommodate the excess building coverage, the east half of the site was maintained as vacant, undeveloped space and a deed restriction was recorded against the properties. The applicant is now proposing to adjust the property line between the two adjoining parcels, such that the west half of the site containing the existing building will be enlarged to ensure the 45% lot coverage maximum is not exceeded. Consequently, a smaller building is proposed for the east half of the site – again, to ensure the lot coverage maximum is not exceeded. The proposed Property Line Adjustment has been submitted under separate cover (Case TYP114-00008). The facility has frontage on A Street generally between 64th Place and 65th Street. The applicant has submitted a Site Plan Review application under separate cover (Case TYP214-00010) for a 10-bed residential care facility on the east half of the site. The proposed building would essentially mirror the existing facility and allow for shared staffing and amenities. In accordance with SDC Section 3.2-210, Discretionary Use approval is required for residential care facilities with more than 15 residents. The proposed development would accommodate up to 25 residents at build-out. Any vehicles on the site would be largely used by staff and maybe family member visiting. Staff concludes that this request, as determined in the findings of fact in the attached staff report complies with the Discretionary Use criteria of approval listed in SDC 5.9-120. Such findings, determinations and recommendations are provided to the Planning Commission in support of a decision to approve this Discretionary Use application. Commissioner Vohs asked of staff has received any written testimony or phone calls regarding this application. Andy responded that none have been submitted. City of Springfield and Lane County Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes June 3, 2014 Page 4 Commissioner Vohs also asked if ……………… Andy responded that the lots are similar in size as the other. On the east site of the site the facility will be a much smaller facility because of the lot size. TESTIMONY FROM THE APPLICANT • Mark Kinkade; 611 N. Cloverleaf Loop; Springfield, OR 97477 Testimony – He is currently the owner of the cloverleaf facility, he employees about__; her will be serving a very limited …..mike hudman business partner. • Rick Satre Applicant Representative submitted additional information to the Planning Commission, he added……………because the eastern lot shrinks…….10 bed facility……….serving more than 15 in a residential zoning……….site plan review with the Property Line Adjustment which will cause notification to those residents within 300’ of the TESTIMONY FROM THOSE IN SUPPORT • None TESTIMONY OF THOSE OPPOSED • None TESTIMONY OF THOSE NUETRAL • Barbara Swark; 415 64th Street; Springfield, Oregon 97478 Testimony – has lived in the same house for the last __ years, her concern is with the additional traffic this will cause, the road between 64thand 65th the additional damage to the road which is in pour shape - SUMMATION FROM STAFF • Commissioner James asked staff to respond to the question regarding what staff is requesting from the applicant. The city will be doing monitoring, which ……………. Beyond that the parking spaces required with the application………… regarding the traffic if the city needs to…………..traffic is low for this development, none of the applicant have cars and will not need additional parking needed for this, just for staff and occasional visitors. Staff will take the concern under advisement, but understand there is no other obligation needed from the applicant Commissioner Moe asked about the transport vehicles, how is this being addressed. Andy responded that access to the site is adequate and ……………Commissioner Moe clarified his question regarding the noise that might arise due to the emergency vehicles that might have to respond to this site. Andy added that this would be hard to quantify and nothing that staff can track. Commissioner Moe………………Lauren King added that…………………….. REBUTTAL FROM THE APPLICANT • None CLOSE OF THE HEARING and RECORD • Hearing was closed by Commissioner Bean seconded by Commissioner Moe 7:0:0 PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION • Commissioner Moe wanted to make sure the Speaker City of Springfield and Lane County Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes June 3, 2014 Page 5 IT WAS MOVED BY COMMISSIONER nelson WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER Kirschenmann TO APPROVAL. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 0 AGAINST 2 RECUSED. 7:0:0 UPDATE FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION • Updates to the Planning Commission regarding City Council meeting was presented by Commissioner Moe, Commissioner Kirschenmann, Commissioner James, Commissioner Nelson, • Commissioner Bean announced that she has removed her application from the process for the Planning Commissioner and her seat. Much discussion was had with the Planning Commission. • June 9, 2014 a presentation at the City Council Work Session regarding Council Compensation. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m. Minutes Recorder – Brenda Jones ______________________ Greg James Planning Commission Chair Attest: ____________________ Brenda Jones Planning Secretary