The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2017 01 24 RS City of Springfield Regular Meeting MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION MEETING OF THE SPRINGFIELD PLANNING COMMISSION HELD Tuesday, January 24, 2017 The City of Springfield Planning Commission met in a regular session in the City Council Chambers, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon, on Tuesday, January 24, 2017 at 7:00 p.m., with Commissioner James presiding. ATTENDANCE Present were Chair James, Vice Chair Koivula, Commissioners, Nelson, Vohs, Dunn, Landen, and Sherwood. Also present were, DPW Director Anette Spickard, Current Development Manager Greg Mott, Senior Planner Andy Limbird, City Attorney Kristina Kraaz and Management Specialist Brenda Jones and members of the staff. ABSENT • Springfield Chair Nelson opened the Regular Session PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Vice Chair Denise Bean DECLARATION OF CONFLICT • Quasi-Judicial Land Use Hearing, this is a DE novo hearing meaning that any issue, procedural or substantive can be raised that is relevant to the approval criteria, which are posted on the wall behind the Planning Commission. Quasi-Judicial means that certain due process procedural rights are associated with the decision that can process which includes the rights to notice, to present evidence, to have a written decision based upon standards, intuitive partial decision maker. Criteria of Approval: Read by Greg Mott QUASI-JUDICIAL PUBLIC HEARING – Commissioner Dunn did not attend the December 20, 2016 Public Hearing, Commissioner Dunn did listen to the recording so he could participate in the Hearing tonight. 1. HIGH VISIBILITY CELLULAR TOWER APPLICATION—SKYWAY TOWERS LLC ON BEHALF OF T-MOBILE WIRELESS, CASES TYP316-00003 AND TYP216-00050- • BRIEF STAFF UPDATE: Andy Limbird Senior Planner presented a brief summation of what happened at the last hearing December 20, 2016. He also indicated that he The applicant has submitted Discretionary Use and Site Plan Review applications for a new wireless telecommunication tower facility within an existing equipment storage yard at 2037 Laura Street. The proposed cellular tower is a standard monopole design with top-mounted antenna array, which is classified as a “High Visibility” wireless telecommunication facility requiring Planning Commission approval. Section 4.3-145.F of the Springfield Development Code (SDC) provides Discretionary Use standards for approving the cellular tower City of Springfield and Lane County Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes January 24, 2017 Page 2 placement. The public hearing for this application was held on December 20, 2016 and the written record was extended to January 5, 2017. One comment was submitted during the extended written record period The public hearing for the proposal was conducted on December 20, 2016. During the hearing the Planning Commission received one written comment from the public notice procedures, two testimonials and a request for the extension of the written record until January 5, 2017. Staff received one additional comment during the extended written record (Attachment 4). Staff advises that the responses and subsequent comment do not relate to the criteria of approval and, instead, raise issues under Federal Communications Commission purview. Staff stands by their original recommendations of approval with conditions for the Conditional Use and Site Plan Applications and submits draft motions for the Planning Commission’s consideration. The proposed monopole tower facility is located at the northeast corner of an industrial property that abuts the western edge of Pioneer Parkway West north of the intersection with Q Street. The subject property is vacant and has been used for storage of construction equipment and machinery. The subject site is zoned mixed use Light- Medium Industrial/Community Commercial (LMI/CC) in accordance with the Springfield Zoning Map and the adopted Gateway Refinement Plan diagram. Properties in the immediate vicinity are zoned for mixed use commercial, industrial, and residential. High Visibility cellular tower facilities are allowable in the Light Medium Industrial district subject to Discretionary Use approval. Staff has prepared a staff report and recommendation based on the review criteria found in SDC Section 4.3-145.F and SDC Section 5.9-120 (Attachment 1). The findings presented by staff provide a substantive basis for conditionally approving a high visibility wireless telecommunication system facility at the subject property. Staff has also prepared a staff report with recommended conditions of approval for the Site Plan Review application, which is based on the review criteria found in SDC Section 5.17-125 (Attachment 2). • PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION: Commissioner Koivula responded to the information that was submitted into the record at the last hearing that the height of the tower of 105’ tower Commissioner also asked about the category 4, he believes that the 150’ is too large for this area and saying that the 15’ tree’s will not screen the tower as the applicant states that it will. Andy responded that he didn’t hear a question so he asked if this is just how Commissioner Koivula feels about this development. Commissioner Koivula responded that this is his view. Andy responded that Commissioner Koivula’s view is …………….. but that this is not something that the applicant is required to do because of the zoning of the property. The actual location in theory it could be relocated, but the applicant would need to be directed by the Planning Commission as to what they would like to see. The applicant did not attend tonight’s meeting because they agreed with the staff’s recommendation, so if the Commission decided to deviate from the staff recommendation that the applicant would not be able to rebut the Commissions new view. Commissioner James added that when this section of the code was rewritten, it was there hope that with the re-right would stop these types of developments to happen is area’s that are part of the Cities …………….. Commissioner Vohs is not in favor of adding any new criteria to this application. Commissioner Dunn stated that he was not at the last meeting but has since listened to the recordings and re the staff reports so he feels he can make a decision on this application by the materials he had reviewed. City of Springfield and Lane County Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes January 24, 2017 Page 3 Commissioner Landen asked if moving the tower, would this really make a difference in the view of the tower Commissioner Sherwood responded that Commissioner Koivula’s points and made him thinks a little more, but thinks this is a perfect spot and MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS OR DENIAL OF THE REQUEST BASED ON STAFF REPORT AND ORAL/WRITTEN TESTIMONY. IT WAS MOVED BY COMMISSIONER Landen WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER Dunn TO APPROVE TYP316-00003, Skyway Towers LLC on behalf of T-Mobile Wireless’s application for a high visibility wireless telecommunications system facility at 2037 Laura Street; Map 17-03-27-10, Tax Lot 2200; because the application meets the applicable criteria in the Springfield Development Code.. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR AND 1 AGAINST 1 RECUSED. 5:1:1absent IT WAS MOVED BY COMMISSIONER Landen WITH A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER Vohs TO APPROVE TYP216-0050, Skyway Towers LLC on behalf of T-Mobile Wireless’s Site Pan Approval at 2037 Laura Street; Map 17- 03-27-10, Tax Lot 2200; because the application meets the applicable criteria in the Springfield Development Code.. THE MOTION PASSED WITH A VOTE OF 5 FOR; 1 AGAINST 1 Absent. 5:1:1absent 2. REQUEST FOR METRO PLAN DIAGRAM AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE FOR A 7.1 ACRE PROPERTY ON HIGHBANKS ROAD, CASES TYP416-00003 AND TYP316-00005- • Staff Explanation of Quasi-Judicial hearing process (ORS 197.763)- Council Kristina Schmunk Krazz • Chair Opens the Public Hearing • Commission members declaration of potential conflict of interest, disclosure of “ex-parte” contact: o Commissioner Landen indicated that he is of the LDS Faith, but has not had any Exparte Contact with the applicant and this will not influence his judgment of this application. • Staff Report o The subject property is located on the north side of Highbanks Road at 53rd Street. The site is vacant and is zoned and designated for low density residential development in accordance with the adopted Metro Plan diagram and the Springfield Zoning Map. The City limits and Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) runs along the northeastern edge of the property, and the western boundary abuts property that is zoned and designated for Light Medium Industrial use. Property owner-initiated amendments to the Metro Plan diagram are uncommon. The stated intent of the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment and zone change is to facilitate construction of a Bishop’s Storehouse facility on the property. Staff has reviewed the proposed development plans and determined that the physical and operational characteristics of the Bishop’s Storehouse are comparable to a warehouse building with attached office space. Because the facility cannot be accommodated within the LDR district, the applicant has proposed to change the zoning and comprehensive plan designation for the site to LMI. City of Springfield and Lane County Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes January 24, 2017 Page 4 Staff has identified a deficiency in the applicant’s Goal 12 findings submitted with the project narrative and has requested additional information to satisfy TPR requirements under OAR 660-012-0060. To accommodate the submittal of additional information, staff recommends that the public hearing is opened and continued to the next scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission on February 7, 2017. • TESTIMONY FROM THE APPLICANT o Randy Mendihall, 50 East Temple; Salt Lake City, Utah (Preliminary Site Plan submitted to Commission) Testimony – Commissioner Sherwood asked about the low traffic count because of the Low recommendation to the facility. The applicant responded what will happen during the open hours. This facility Commissioner Sherwood asked how many referalls are sent each week, this was answered 40 to 50 per week. Commissioner Sherwood asked if the facility being proposed the same size as the facility they already have. The Applicant responded Commissioner Dunn asked if any home builder have approached the owner to buy the property. • TESTIMONY FROM THOSE IN SUPPORT o None • TESTIMONY OF THOSE OPPOSED o None • TESTIMONY OF THOSE NUETRAL o None • SUMMATION FROM STAFF o Andy Limbird indicated the record will be held open for an additional 7 days so the Commissioner and Staff to review the new material that has been submitted today. • REBUTTAL FROM THE APPLICANT • CLOSE OF THE HEARING • Hearing was closed by Commissioner ____________ PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION • Commissioner Vohs asked staff that if the property was sold would another traffic analysis be requested. Andy responded that …………………. • Commissioner James asked about how the traffic cap be memorialized in order to make sure they …………… Andy responded that this will be a condition on there title report… • Commissioner Dunn asked if the property next to this lot, did they need to rezone the property the same as this application. Andy responded that the property the Commission asking the questions that that property was zoned properly. The applicant asked that the Public Hearing Commissioner Dunn motioned that the Public Hearing be closed seconded by Commissioner Vohs 6:0:1 absent City of Springfield and Lane County Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes January 24, 2017 Page 5 Commissioner Vohs motioned that the record be held open for an addition 7 days seconded by Commission Dunn 6:0:1 absent REPORT OF COUNCIL ACTION: • Commissioner Vohs gave a brief update of the Councils actions. • Commissioner Koivula gave a brief update on last night’s actions. • Commissioner Sherwood attend a meeting in January and gave a brief update. BUSINESS FROM THE PLANNING C OMMISSION: BUSINESS FROM THE DEVELOPMENT and PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR: • Anette Spickard- No Update ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:0 p.m. Minutes Recorder – Brenda Jones ______________________ Greg James Planning Commission Chair Attest: ____________________ Brenda Jones Planning Secretary