The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutNotes, Meeting PLANNER 12/10/2009 ,,f' .~;: ....... -' " SPRINGFIELD ~ , tIl " OREGON .. City of Springfield Development Services Department 22S Fifth Street Springfield, OR 97477 DEVELOPMENT ISSUES MEETING (DIM) Applicant: St. Vincent de Paul of Lane County Project Proposal: Development of Veteran's Service and Community Center and affordable'lhousing for veterans and families Case Number: ZON2009-00025, Project Address: 2080 Laura Street & Vacant Assessors Map and Tax Lot Number(s): 17-03-27-13-:10900 & 17-03-27-10-04200 Zoning: Mixed-Use Light Medium Industrial & Community Commercial Overlay District(s): N/ A Applicable Refinement Plan: Gateway Refinement Plan Refinement Plan Designation: Mixed Use Light Medium Industrial & Community Commercial Metro Plan Designation: Light Medium Industrial Development Issues Meeting Date: December 10, 2009 Associated Applications: N/A I nlMTPAM IIN~III1E I Molly Markarian I.JO",0~isc6H Eric Walter ~Gilbe."it.Gondon I Ronni Price .- ilt'~H11Ia'r;a JoHHson'1 rAGENGYSR~M!!'W SF. City of Springfield - Planning l@it'/lofj.Sgr,ingfield\;;iollil'ansoofitation City of Springfield- Utilities, Storm '~ Sanitilry Sewer , ~y!6ftSpniriiifield~F.ire\'and.~iM,Safet~~ Willamalane - Parks 'Jl-- -I I. 11.1111111:1 11"'1111';11\1 I '" . r:SI:)B.E eGtrlC-..E ectmc~F.aclltles SUB Water - Water FacjJiti~s -"I ~ ' ",: ., ~ ", Date Received: lill~1(}1': Planner: MEM Page 10f3 PlanninlZ Questions Question #1: Per ti)e Gateway Refinement Plan, up to 40% of the areo within the 'Q' Laura Street Subarea (14 acres) is allowed to be developed for commercial uses. Is it possible that this would permit the development of the two parcels as proposed (mixed use with commercial and residential), given that the proposed Veterans Service & Community Center is a permitted use in the Community Commerciol Zone, as is residential with specific development standards? ifistrue that,thepJ"opertviiszQnedanddesigl)ated lIiIixed,Use.LIIiII/CC;and that 40%ofthe Qj~aura StreE!tSuba."~a:iD~y. ,bed~velop~dforforr1,m,er,cial'us.es. .,TheVewans Services & CommunityCenterare permitted uses under Commurjity FO"1~ercial Zoni[lg',. However, resideritial uses are not. SOU.2-310 indii:ate.~ that residential uses are .aHowed subj~c~ to specific development,standards in areas designatedmixed"use a refinement plan, . However, this refersJo'i area's th'at :aredE!Signatedm}~~d-Us,ewiththe,intentionof residentia]bei[lgallowed; Le. rviUR;or MUG. M.ixe~-Use LMI/CC areJa ir nota;!rue;mixedcusede~i~n,~tion,andthe.implementationactionsqfthe Gateway Refinem~f1tPlan;werenever. .. " lcornpleted reg~ rdlngzqning and'development standardsJorthisarea, Reading,the text of the RefiriementPlan, thl~re~is 1,0 mention'of the af!pr6priateness,6fresidential uses, and,especially mediumor'high density,uses,in,this'a'real Question #2: If a Zoning Mop Amendment is required, is this a quasi-judicial Zoning Map Amendment process - a Type III review process - or would this also require a Metro Plan Diagram Amendment, raising the process to a Type IV Review? Ifso, please confirm our understanding of the legislative Type IV process and timelinen. (see DIM application questions for the rest]: ~Hif w,,iluldreq ~ire. a. Tw~WRefi nem~rit Map' ~ me nd me nt/Metro Pia n. a'm end me ht. a nd a co ncurrentZon ing Ma p. amend[lle,nL fhe;prbteSS'~nd,timelinequtlined.in !h~ Olrvl al?plication question is gener~lIy,ac,c,L1rate.,Som~ barificatiC:lns':'tti~~ta'ff'rep9rt will bemailedtoaffected/iriterested parties when itisdelivered tHthePC;the 120-day plo-c,kdCfes'nqt apply.tel TypglVlegislative clecisions;and noticeofthe'P(p_ublic hearing will be'Rublishe~'in'theRe~ist~ fiuard and'mailedF2-~roperty owners/residents within300feet of the subject proRerty, 'Key tim'eframes; as outlined.in SOC,5:14'140. are: t preparationof~~'P.licatjo[l ~tirilE~fra'~e depends upon afmlicanf . ,Corr1[!leteriess,Review - 30:,days max ~' ,'Revisiqns toApplicatiori,-tirnefrarr1'e,dep~nds upori.applic,apt [ Staff'Report'F w,ithin30 daysaflerappliCation is dee"1'~d:co~plet~ . PC Hearing -:- Withirl:30,daVs'afterstafj'report'is delivered I., PEJRecomrriendation ~within 3Q.days'Qf public.hearingandclose ofreCord I ,.. ". n '." r r, )<JCi:le~:.i?g;~~!t~i94~clay~of;PCa.c,tion~ !>,., CCOeclslon"wlthlri30.days,of'pubhc hearing , tle,!~e note t,hat,the.,a [!'I'I,ii:~ti.O[l;mnus,t'i nc,l u~e .'Fi n~ i ng~ '~fF;act.a.d? f~~S.i.ng,the .Grifepa"ofi;\pprgya I,a.n~ ~n1 ust'incLiid~il~e.. requJred ,findiri~~ for addresslng.theStatewlde Plannln&,Goals, In p~rtlcLllar,.Gelalsg,lO, .and '12,...ln~omplete;a ppllc~tlo~ ~s,well as~n~ufficien! orunclear data; wiU d_el;fy the a-pl?lication review. process and mai{result inderiial. 'Itis1advisable' to'hire'a professional'plaririeror land.use attorney to prepare'the required'findirig~ Staffw6U1dJiave',tMevie'w'lhe Findings oHaGHo evaluate:sl!8norffor theproposeikoning and'plan'designatibns! Public Works Questions Transportation Question #1: Is the continuation of Lochaven Avenue as a public street (and thus a ROW dedication) required to develop the parcels? If connectivity is regui~'eii, c~n:!.h~s .~~1ft}(11qp'eg.~~ a private street or driveway? See'John ,bJiscoll's;Merno;dated '12/.7 /Ogl!ilr"",' , Page 2 of3 ,;. Transportation Question #2: Arethere any existing or additional ROW dedications or easements required along Laura Street or through the site? SeeJohn Oriscoll's Me'modated12/7/09! Engineering Question #1: Where andwhat size are the nearest water,storm, and sanitary services adjacent to the prop,erty? :See-Eric Walter's Memo dated 12!8!09! Heads UD Comments :1. sot 2'.1-135 outlinesthefee'waiver'guidance for non-profit affordable housing'proviiJers. SOC 2.1-135 (a) states' rhaf'Development feesrequired by, t.his Code may be waived for up to 50affordable,housing units per year~ more, upon the determinationof.need bv the Director iriorder to encouralZethe construction of affordable I . . hciusingj jfhisproposal would require a Flefinement.Plan amendmentaf)dia ZQning,Map ainengment, followe~y Site Plan Review, Based,ona develcipment site of 4 acres; ,the:RefinementPlan amendment wouldtota! :approximately $14,000 and ttieZoningMap amendment would total approximately $6,000. The quantity of fees ~hat would be. waived requires dem?nstratio,n of need in'this'case;because'tv.picaIlYi~only,fees'associated witH Site Plan Review have been waived'irittle.past! P.uestion astoneed for fee waiver for project to m,ove forward - couldfees.for the initial steps be worked int~ fhe sales price negotiated on the property? ~noth.er issue is h~w direcUhe connection between theVetE!rans\ service and community c~nter IStO the hOUSing being built - It IS posslble'that the fees,would.only be waived In hroportion to the housingto,be built. If this proiect moves fOrward, recommend additional conversations witH 'Planning regarding fee waiver! -- Note that the fee waiver requires tnata covenarit be recorded against the property to ensure the.fees, are repaid I'.' . . " , . ' - if the use is no loneer fOr affordable housing, so the applicant must have site control! :2. SUB and Willam'alanewere notifiedOfthe OIM meeting. No corr1mentswere submitted. Please coordinateanv. ---'regulatory and/or fee questions directly withthose"agendes! , - Date Received:J1J 10 10'1 Planner: MEM Page 3 of 3 541-726-3753 Phone 541-726-3676 Fax ' Description CTY Refinement Plan Amend PostagelLegal Notice Fee IV + 5% Technology Fee 13G\->U' onL.{ ~ s:ITidemarklformslcasefeesl.rpt Trans Code 1262 1299 2299 Fees AssociateI' -lith Case #: TEST->-_.P City Wide CITY OF SPRINGFIELD Revenue Date Calculated Account Number Calculated By ] 00-00000-425002 12/9/2009 EM 100-00000-425505 12/912009 EM 100-00000-425605 12/9/2009 EM Original Amount 13,085,00 543,00 654.25 Total Due: Date Received:~ Planner: MEM Page I ofl ]2/9/2009 JO:25:55AM Amount Due 13,085.00 543.00 654.25 $14,282.25 541-726-3753 Phone 541-726-3676 Fax Description CTY Zoning Map Amendment + 5% Technology Fee Postage Fee Type III - $385 s:ITidemarklformslcasefees I,rpt Trans Code 1242 2299 2226 .Fees Associatel'-~:ith Case #: TEST-:...~N . City Wide CITY OF SPRINGFIELD Revenue Date Calculated Account Number Calculated By 100-00000-425002 9/18/2009 DDK 100-00000-425605 9/18/2009 DDK 100-00000-425505 9/18/2009 DDK Total Due: Date Received: Planner; MEM Page 1 ofl .Original Amount 5,178.00 258.90 385,00 12/912009 1O:27,19AM Amount Due 5,178.00 258.90 385.00 $5,821.90 ~'2--IJdQ1