Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020 06 16 Minutes RSPlanning Commission Minutes 1 Springfield Planning Commission Minutes for Tuesday, June 16th, 2020 Regular Session Meeting held in Person in Council Chambers & via GoToMeeting.com Planning Commissioners Present: Chair Sherwood, Vice Chair Gill, Bergen, Koivula, Vohs, Landen, and McGinley Absent: None Staff: Jim Donavan, PlanningSupervisor; Melissa Cariño, Senior Planner; Michael Liebler, Transportation Engineer; Shannon Morris, Administrative Specialist; Kristina Kraaz, Assistant City Attorney Applicant: Bill Randall, Arbor South Architecture, 380 Lincoln Street, Eugene, OR 97401 Chair Sherwood called the Public Hearing of the Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. Business from the Audience – None PUBLIC HEARING(S) 1. DISCRETIONARY REVIEW OF MULTI-UNIT ALTERNATIVE DESIGN CRITERIA SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 3.2-245, AS APPLIED TO A PROPOSED 9-UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING ON A PARCEL LOCATED ON “A” STREET NORTHEAST OF 58TH STREET AND IDENTIFIED AS ASSESSORS MAP 17-02-34-32, TAX LOT 201. CASE 811-20-000072-TYP2 Staff: Melissa Cariño, Planner 30 Minutes Kristina Kraaz, Assistant City Attorney, read a brief statement regarding conflicts of interest. Potential Conflicts of Interest: • Sherwood – None • Gill – None • Koivula – He visited the site online through Google Maps but has no conflict of interest or ex parte communication. • Vohs – None • Landen – None • McGinley – None • Bergen – has a potential conflict of interest since she is a licensed real estate professional in the State of Oregon. Planning Commission Minutes 2 Melissa Cariño / Staff: gave a presentation on the discretionary review of a multi-unit design criteria to a proposed 9-unit apartment building on a parcel located on A Street Northeast of 58th Street and identified as assessors map 17-02-34-32, lot 201 (see PowerPoint Presentation). Ms. Cariño explained that the alternative design criteria would change according to Development Code Section 3.2-245. Ms. Cariño went over the proposed revisions in detail and answered questions of the Commission. Applicant Representative, Bill Randall, Arbor South Architecture, Arbor South Architecture, 380 Lincoln Street, Eugene, OR 97401: requested that the Planning Commission approve the alternative standards for their project due to the odd shape of the property and confirmed that they have no issues with the conditions for approval that staff recommended. The only question the applicant has regards condition 18. The applicant would prefer not to remove parking spaces since this would force people to park on the street. They would like staff to give them direction on how much the City would like to shift the parking lot to the west. There is about a 2.6 ft. back-up space and they could shift the parking lot 1 or 2 feet to the west. Jim Donovan / Staff: confirmed that if the applicant can move the parking lot one foot west that would be enough to keep the planned parking. Commissioner Koivula: since the Planning Commission is requested to approve the parking area on A Street, can the applicant give the Commissioners perspective views from across the street? Bill Randall / Applicant Representative: Unfortunately, they do not have other graphic materials to present to the Commission. When asked, the applicant confirmed that he had no rebuttal of the questions or comments at this time. Commissioner Bergen: had three questions: Is there a pedestrian walkway to the nine units near the southern parking spaces or do they have to walk to the west side to access a walkway; Are there ADA requirements for a parking lot of this size and; how does one access the back storage / bike area? Would one have to go through the inside of the units or is it possible to access from the side of the units. Kristina Kraaz / Staff: stated that the ADA spaces and signs are based on the size of the stalls. These questions will be addressed during the final approval and permit inspection process. Melissa Cariño / Staff: assumed that the pedestrian walkway would go back to the sidewalk. This is why staff did not require a walkway near the southern parking spaces. The back storage / bike area is only accessible from inside of the individual units. Planning Commission Minutes 3 Bill Randall: In response to Commissioner Bergen’s questions he confirmed that the bicycle parking area is only accessible through the individual units. ADA parking is only required after a certain number of units has been reached and the units are townhouses, which are exempt from this rule according to the city’s Building Code. The southern parking spaces were envisaged as overflow parking for visitors who would be walking across the parking area to access the units and not necessarily for the residents of the units. Commissioner Sherwood: based on the testimony that the conditions of approval need to be modified to move the parking lot a little bit to the west, it may be necessary to redraft that condition of approval since it currently states that either two parking spaces be erased or the parking area can be moved to the west. After discussing this with the applicant and the Planning Supervisorr, the Commissioners have a better understanding of the applicant’s intention and can now closer define that condition. Kristina Kraaz / Staff: recommended that the condition be modified to add the reference that the parking area be moved one foot to the west and leave the applicant some flexibility to either eliminate two parking spaces or move the parking area. Chair Sherwood: asked the applicant, if they agreed to the change in the findings. Bill Randall / Applicatant: was in agreement that the condition be more narrowly defined i.e., the parking lot can be shifted west by 1 foot to fulfill the condition. Public Testimony In Favor – None Neutral – None In opposition – None Commissioner Koivula: moved to close the Public Hearing and the written record. Commissioner Bergen seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Sherwood – Aye Gill – Aye Vohs – Aye Koivula – Aye McGinley – Aye Bergen – Aye Planning Commission Minutes 4 Landen – Aye Motion passed 7/0/0 Absent Commissioner Landen moved to adopt the Planning Commission Order in the Agenda Packet as Attachment 1 to approve the application with the changes noted in the staff report. Conditions of Approval: (see page 9) In the case that the root zones of the two existing trees located east of the proposed building are negatively impacted during construction and must be removed, the applicant shall replace the trees with two trees at least 2 inches (dbh) in diameter in the approximate location of the existing trees to screen the east side of the building. Conditions of Approval: (see page 10) Finding 23: Due to the proposed building being set back only 5 feet from the eastern side property line, the two existing trees the applicant wants to retain may become an issue during construction. In the case that the root zones of the two existing trees located east of the proposed building are negatively impacted during construction and must be removed, the applicant shall replace the trees with two trees at least 2 inches (dbh) in diameter in the approximate location of the existing trees to screen the east side of the building. Conditions of Approval (see page 27) Finding 98: There are two additional existing easements that affect the subject property on its southeast corner. One is a public sewer easement and the other is a small sidewalk easement. Prior to Final Site Plan approval, the applicant shall show these additional easements on the site plans. Conditions of Approval: (see page 28) Prior to Final Site Plan approval, the applicant shall show these additional easements on the site plans; and Prior to Final Site Plan approval, the applicant shall provide an on-site lighting plan noting locations and type of lighting proposed. Conditions of Approval (see page 30) Prior to Final Site Plan approval, the applicant shall either remove parking spaces from the plan or shift the entire parking lot west by 1 foot to ensure adequate backing area for the easternmost parking spaces in the parking lot. Planning Commission Minutes 5 Commissioner Gill seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Sherwood – Aye Gill – Aye Vohs – Aye Koivula – Aye McGinley – Aye Bergen – Aye Landen – Aye Motion passed 7/0/0 Absent Report on Council Action • Commissioner Gill reported on the Council’s June 8th Work Session. • Commissioner Bergen reported on the Council’s June 1st Work Session. • Chair Sherwood reported on the Council Session June 15th Work Session • Commissioner Koivula reported on the Council’s on June 15th Ad Hoc Committee meeting. Business from the Planning Commission Kristina Kraaz: informed the Commissioners that the City Council is taking its summer break from July through late August. She is unaware of any change to the Planning Commission’s summer break. If an urgent matter arises, then it would be possible to call the Planning Commission to order in late August. Business from the Development and Public Works Department – None ADJOURNMENT – 8:12 p.m.