The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCorrespondence APPLICANT 8/21/2008 ,__.__.___'____.____ .____ - ,__=--=~===___==:_" Page 111 '"\ () : \< E.; '-I "" Go 'E t->i: "t \...~....:> Gou\:),-,-, 1..J _ JO\'l"':' \ 1"\"'\J\..ct->,:> ,;~o~C\J""~ ~ ~'t"~___ ~,"Y-\'P:'::';-J \?:\~,~~~- --- --- ~~ \....i'!.(-'\\~I 1!I~~I:~~hli.l~al1y_O,~-~1_=_61r,pdf 4_~_ 0~c:.1'(\. Electronic Correspondence \~~"" ~ \~\'::.c....~)C~ c...u~,,1->~~ D\~ ~ \-1-"" ",-\tA\'c ~ Aug ust 21, 2008 Joseph J, Leahy- jjl@haroldleahy,rom Leahy, Van Vactor and Cox, LLP 223 A Street, Suite D Springfield, OR 97477 Re: Proposed Annexation Requirementfor The Duck Store Dear Joe: ' The Duck Store is still contemplating a request for an intel]lretatim of the DeveiopmentDirector as to the requirementthat its property be annexed as a condition of theClty's acceptance of The Duck Store's site review application, My dient will give some consideration to annexation, We have a number of cnncems, first, as to why an annexation agreement is necessary and, second, as to certain aspects of the proposed Agreement Regarding Annexation ("Agreement"), even subsequent to its revision, It is difficultto see why The Duck Store's consent to annexation is not suffident in and of itself, Once the property is annexed to the City, It will be subject to any improvementdistrict whim is proposed and other assessments for pubiic improvements, as well as SDCs whim will rome due for its building expansion, The Duck Store also may be wiliing to grant the easement sought by paragraph 1.8,3 of the Agreement for a publicstormwater management system on the property (although it isdifficultto see why The Duck Store should undertake the obligation of paragraph 1.8,2 requiring it to bear the burden of providing studies, plans, permit applications and other documentation req uired to obtain permits or approvals necessary to construct the stonnwater management system across Lane County or State of Oregon public rights of way or easements). Given that The Duck Store can address stormwater on site, the granting of the easement without compensation, if done, would be a significantconcession, 975 Oat Sre:t, aile BOO E~ Or~ 97401 McilingAddress P.O.Bax 1147 ELgEnEl; Ora;pl 97440-1147 ftone (541) 686-8833 Fac (541) 345-2034 ''is I z-CP ( O~ oeceived:- Date" H Planner: 5 IQi2,-ili~:..EtrCea~YQ~~?_1:Q~-,p'ij'--'=--:-'::==~======:-:-,=-==:::-~-=:-==.=--=-_--=---==_=:::=:.-Pag~ '2] Joseph J, Leahy August 21,2008 Page 2 The question becomes why mum of the remaind er of theAgreement is necessary, In addition to the above general ooncem, we havethe following specfic ooncems regarding the Ag reement: 1. Ohliaetions of Aooiicant We apprecate the mange in thefirst sentence of this section allowing The Dud< Store to obtain its Dolan rights although, if there is to be an agreement, we would suggest the first sentence of that section read: "Consistent with the above Rectals, and subject to Doian limits to Applicant's obligations for public improvements, and subject to the dear understanding and agreement of the Parties ...." 1.1 AoolicationfAoarovals rea u ired , Of course, the date for application would need to be manged, 1.3 Off Site Imarovements, Whilead<nowledging the mange in languageoonceming Dolan rights, this section would read to place the full finandal responsibility for costs of off site improvements required to demonstrate compliance with cond itions imposed on The Dud< Store, To place that entire obligation on mydient is inoonsistentwith The Dud< Store's Dolan rig hts, 1.5 Waiver of Riahtof Remonstrance We havediffiOJltyseeing the basis for requiring The Dud< Store to waive its right of remonstrance in order to become eligible for annexation, There is certainly no roje or statutory basis for this requirement that a statutory right be waived, 1.7 and 1.7.1 These sections obligate The Dud< Store ".., prior to the issuance of an (sic) certificate of =upancy approval for any new structure on the Property ..," to: "develop on-site wastewater conveyance system and fund off-site public wastewater conveyance system to provide wastewater service to the Property ..' partidpate in fundingthe construction of the Mississippi Avenue Sewer ...." I would advise my dientto certainlyantidpatethat if the property is annexed and that improvement project goes forward, The Dud< Store will be subject to fair assessment for the improvement, related to the benefit to theProperty, If . . IfJo_~I~i'l.hyj:-Ltr [~a_hY.QS:21~@ii(;" Page 311 -~.,"~----'---'._._-------^--'-_._------ Joseph J, Leahy August 21, 200S Page 3 something more is being sought under the provision, I do not know of the justification, If nothing more is sought, there is no reason for thisaspect of the Ag reement. ' 1.8.1 This section provides that prior to CXX1Ipancy approval for any new structure, The Duck Store will construct a public stormwater management systems to collect, treat, convey and discharge stormwater from the property, Such a requirement, I assume, would be made a requirementof development permit approval, assuming there is authority under the drcumstancesto impose a requirement. Again, it is diffirultto see the reason for this ambiguous provision here. 1.S,2 and 1.8.3 These sections were d iSUlSsed above, 1. 9 Frontilae Transoortation Imorovements, Liaht Medium Industrial. First, we do not accept the assertion in Recital G thatfrontilge and transportation improvements are required In order to afford aa:ess and a transportation system for provision of Rre and Life Safety services to and from the annexed property, That redtill, along with the lang uageof section 1,9, ind icate that the intent is that whatever Dolan rights were given back in section 1 are not available with respect to transportatim improvements sought. The Duck Store will oniybe responsible for the share of costs of those public improvementsthat is proportionate to the impact of its small expansion, 9, Delavof, or Chanae In Develooment. There is referenCEd section 1.10, which I was not able to find in theAgreement, and reference to section 9 which is, of course, the section In whichthe reference is contained. Finally,JIm Williams and Rhonda Stoltz of The Duck Store were concemed with and question the assertion at the top of thed raft Ag reement thatthe dOOJment is exemptfrom publicdisdosure,' The only reason that! can thinkthatthe language is present is it is part of a draft between your office and other dty personnel, I can see no reason that the Agreement itself, if oneis reached, would not be subject to publicdisdosure, The Duck Store is willingto explore the possibility of annexation as, ultimately, the property will be part, of the City of Springfield, At the same time, there Is no need, in termsof public services, to annex to the City, The Duck Store does age h~~'~;Y---.f'.:L.tr_L.e2_~y_ O!l:~!:Q~p"~f Josep h J, Leahy Aug ust 21, 2008 Page 4 .-c:-===-____ ~=--=~_F'ilge <4] need to move forward with its plans, If we cannot resolve the terms of an agreement (if it can be established there is a need for an annexation agreement), The Duck Store will seek an interpretatiOl from the hearings offidal as to the City's rightto require annexation as a cordition of the City's fulfillment of its obligation to provide planning services as required by the IGA with Lane County, I look forward to your comments, Very truly yours, James W. Splckerman spckerman@gleav esIaw.rom jca 0:: James L. Williams Rhonda Stoltz