HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence APPLICANT 8/4/2010
.
.
LAW OFFICE OF BILL KLOOS, PC
OREGON LAND USE LAW
375 W. 4TH STREET, SUITE 204
EUGENE, OR 97401
TEL (541) 343-8596
FAX (541) 343-8702
E-MAIL BILLKLOOS@LANDUSEOREGON.COM
August 4,2010
Springfield Dev't Services Dept.
225 Fifth Street
Springfield, OR 97477
Re: Emmitt Properties MDS Application; 14th and Main Street
DRC201O-00024
Dear City of Springfield:
Please accept this letter and the enclosures in support of the MDS application above. These
materials are submitted on behalf of the applicant.
This matter has been on hold at the request of the applicant; with this submittal the applicant
requests further processing.
1. Request for Type II process.
The applicant requests a Type II process for this decision, and will pay the additional small
charge for public notice. Under the SDC 5.15-115.A., the Director has discretion to provide a
,
Type II process. The applicant wants a Type II process and, given the nature of the decision, is
entitled to a Type II process. Based on the application materials, and the discussion below, the
Director will be making a discretionary decision here. He will be making factual and legal
judgments. This is the kind of decision that requires an opportunity for appeal and hearing.
Furthermore, depending on what decision the Director makes initially, the applicant may need a
local appeal forum for determining what the MDS ground rules are and then submitting relevant
facts.
2. For purposes of compliance with the SDC, the applicant gets the benefit of the MDS
Decision and Development Agreement made in 2008.
The MDS approval for this site was on August 28, 2008. That approval was reduced to a
Devclopment Agreement in September 2008. Copies of both city documents are enclosed.
The 2008 decision and contract applied the MDS standards to this property in connection with a
change in use, from retail to a church. These documents are as binding on the city as they are on
the applicant. The current proposal is to change the use of the space from a church back to retail.
It is applicant's position that the MDS review has already been conducted for this site. When the
use changed in 2008, the property was brought into compliance with the MDS of the code. Since
that time there has been no change in what the Minimum Development Standards require.
~/\D
Date Recelved:~/
(l.o;t. ~ -Planner: JD I o-f (3p~
.
.
Springfield Dev't Services Dept.
August 4, 20 I 0
Page 2
3. If the MDS standards can be applied to this change of use for a second time, the
applicant believes the proposal complies with the MDS.
The discussion that follows is premised on the assumption that the Director gets a second bite at
the apple - that is, that the Director can revisit the issues that were decided in favor of the
applicant in the change of use approved in 2008. As a further introduction, we note that there is
a mote of cruel irony at work here. The Director approved the change of use from retail to a
church in 2008 without requiring appreciable changes under the MDS. Now, based on
discussions with staff, the Director is proposing major changes under MDS to restore the retail
use. The MDS standards have not changed - only the position of the Director.
MDS standards appear at SDC 5.15-120. We understand from discussions with staff that
parking along the Main Street frontage is the issue. The relevant standard is SDC 5.15-120.D.,
which states:
"Parking and circulation areas shall be paved and striped and wheel stops
installed as specified in Sections 4.6-100 and 4.6-120. Required paving and
other impervious surfaces on the site shall comply with on-site storm water
management standards as specified in Section 4.3-1 lO for required parking,
circulation area and storage area impervious surfaces only."
The reference to SDC 4.6-100 and -200 includes the following, at SDC 4.6-120:
"A. All parking areas shall have a durable, dust free surfacing of Asphaltic
concrete, Portland cement concrete or other materials as specified in the
Building Safety Codes and approved by the Building Official. Parking lot
surfacing shall not encroach upon the public right-of-way.
* * * *
D. Backing into the public right-of-way, other than alleys is prohibited."
We understand that staff believes that use of the existing parking along the Main Street frontage
involves backing into the public right-of-way, contrary to subsection D. above. That assumption
is not apparent to the applicant. The definition of "right-of-way" under SDC 6.1-100 is:
"Right-of-way. Land acquired by purchase, reservation, dedication, forced
dedication, prescription or condemnation intended to be occupied by a street,
crosswalk, railroad, electric transmission lines, oil or gas pipeline, water line,
sanitary/storm sewer and other similar facilities."
I
Based on this definition, it would seem that the public right of way would include the street, but
not the sidewalk or other publicly owned land beyond the sidewalk. Thus, backing into public
land north of the sidewalk, or even backing into the sidewalk area, would not seem to violate the
.
Springfield Dev't Services Dept.
August 4,2010
Page 3
~
Enc\. MDS Apraval (Aug. 28, 2008)
MDS Development Agreement (Sept. 12,2008)
Cc: Client
.
.
.
TYPE I TENTATIVE MINIMUM
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS,
STAFF REPORT & DECISION
Project Name: Mt. Vernon Church
Nature of Application: Change of use from a retail furniture store to a church.
Case Number: DRC2008-00045
Project Location: 1408 Main Street, Map and Tax Lot 17-03-36-323400
Current Site Conditions: This site is on the northeast comer of Main Street and 14'" Street in a multi-use
commercial strip.
Zoning: Community Commercial (CC)
Metro Plan Designation: Commercial
Zoning of Surrounding Properties: North-HDR, South-CC, East-HDR and West-HDR
Application Submitted Date: July 14,2008
Site Visit Conducted Date: July 16,2008
Decision Issued Date: August 28, 2008
Recommendation: Approved, with Conditions
CITY OF SPRJNGFIELD DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TEAM
POSITION REVIEW OF NAME PHONE
Proiect Manager Planning Lissa Davis 726-3632
Senior TranSDortation Planner TransDortation Judith Johnduff 736-7134
Public Works EIT SanitarY & Stornl Sewer Matt Stouder 736- I 035
APPLICANT'S DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TEAM
Owner: Applicant:
Emmitt Property LLC Bill White! Mt Vernon Church
PO Box 2829 285 South 420" Street
Clackamas OR 97015 Soringfield OR 97478
.
.
Purpose: Minimum Development Standards (MDS) are intended to support economic development by
minimizing City review for minor additions, expansions or changes in use. MDS shall ensure compliance
with specific appearance; transportation safety and efficiency; and stormwater management standards
specified in the Springfield Development Code (SDC) and otherwise protect public health, safety and
welfare.
Criteria of Approval: In order to grant MDS approval, the Director shall determine compliance with all
applicable standards specified below:
.~ ~~-~~(..
~,,"p
..~!
",,' .
it.
A
(Existing storefront, west elevation)
Applicable Special Use Standards:
1) A five-foot wide landscaped planter strip, including street trees, with approved irrigation or
approved drought resistant plants as specified in SDC Sections 4.4-100-105 and 4.2-140 shall be
installed between the sidewalk and parking areas or buildings.
D Complies as Shown on Plot Plan
X Proposal Complies when the following Condition(s) is/ are met:
Condition 1: The property is fully developed and does not allow for the placement of a
5-foot planter strip between the sidewalk and parking areas. There is however, an
asphalt bump out, 8 feet in length an'd 18 inches in width is located on the northern
edge of the 14th Street driveway that, if planted, would meet the requirements for
planting based on SDC 5.15-150(A)(2)(b). Tbe planting shall be shown n the final plot
plan. I
.
.
2) Trash receptacles and outdoor storage areas shaH be screened by a structure or enclosure
permanently affixed to the ground as specified in SDC Section 4.4-110.
D Complies as Shown on Plot Plan
x: Proposal Complies when the following Condition(s) is/are met:
Condition 2: The trash receptacle shall be shown on the final plot plan with uniform
sight-obscuring screening,
3) Bicycle parking spaces shaH be added to meet the numerical standards for the appropriate
use or upgraded to meet the standards set in SDC Sections 4.6-140, 4.6-145, and 4.6-155.
D Complies as Shown on Plot Plan
X Proposal Complies when the following Condition(s) is/ are met:
Condition 3: Provide a total of 3 bicycle parking adjacent to the site on the Final Plot
Plan.
4) Parking and circulation areas shaH be paved and striped and wheel stops instaHed as
specified in SDC Sections 4.6-100 and 4.6-120. Required paving and other
impervious surfaces on the site shaH comply with on-site stormwater management standards
as specified in SDC Section 4.3-110.
D Complies as Shown on Plot Plan
:X Proposal Complies when the following Condition(s) is/are met:
Condition 4: Twenty-eight parking spaces are available on the site. As the other
businesses are closed on Sunday and evenings, the amount of parking is adequate.
Provide striping to a minimum of four parking spaces and bring the existing
Handica ed arkin s ace into com liance with SDC 4.6-1.
5) Access onto the public right-of-way shaH comply with SDC Section 4.2-120.
X Complies as Shown on Plot Plan
Proposal Complies when the following Condition(s) is/are met:
6) Concrete sidewalks shaH be instaHed where the site abuts a curb and gutter street as
specified in SDC Section 32.040.
X. Complies as Shown on Plot Plan
D Proposal Complies when the following Condition(s) is/are met:
7) Streetlights shaH be instaHed as specified in SDC Section 32.060.
~J Complies as Shown on Plot Plan
.
.
o Proposal Complies when the following Condition(s) is/ are met:
8) The development shall connect to public utilities as specified in Sections 32.100 through
32.120 of the SDC and comply with the Springfield Building Safety Codes, where applicable.
Easements may be required as specified in Subsection 32.120(5) of this Code.
~: Complies as Shown on Plot Plan
o Proposal Complies when the following Condition(s) is/ are met:
Timelines and Conditions of Approval: The property owner and/or applicant has 30 days from the date
oUhis decision to submit a Final Plot Plan demonstrating compliance with the following Conditions of
Approval:
,Condition 1: The property is fully developed and does not allow for the placement of a 5-foot
planter strip between the sidewalk and parking areas, There is however, an asphalt bump
out, 8 feet in length and 18 inches in width is located on the northern edge of the 14th Street
driveway that, if planted, would meet the requirements for planting based on SDC 5,15-
150(A)(2)(b). The planting shall be shown n the final plot plan.
Condition 2: The trash receptacle shall be shown on the final plot plan with uniform sight-
obscuring screening.
Condition 3: Provide a total of 3 bicycle parking adjacent to the site on the Final Plot Plan.
Condition 4: Twenty-eight parking spaces are available on the site. As the other businesses
are closed on Sunday and evenings, the amount of parking is adequate. Provide striping to a
minimum of four parking spaces and bring the existing Handicapped parking space into
compliance with SDC 4.6-1.
In order to complete the review process, a Development Agreement is required within 45 days from the
date of this decision to ensure the terms and conditions of this application are binding upon both the
applicant and the City. This agreement will be prepared by Staff and upon approval of the Final Plot Plan,
must be signed by the property owner prior to issuance of a building permit.
THE APPLICANT MAY SUBMIT CONSTRUCTION OR BUILDING PLANS TO OTHER CITY
DEPARTMENTS FOR REVIEW PRIOR TO FINAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL IN ACCORDANCE
WITH SDC 5.17-135 AT THEIR OWN RISK. ALL CONCURRENT SUBMITTALS ARE SUBJECT TO
REVISION FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FINAL PLOT PLAN. A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
IN ACCORDANCE WITH SDC 5.17-140 WILL NOT BE ISSUED UNTIL ALL PLANS SUBMITTED
BY THE APPLICANT HAVE BEEN REVISED. CONFLICTING PLANS CAUSE DELAYS.
The construction of the required improvements shall begin within 90 days of the date of this decision. If the
established time line cannot be met, the applicant may submit a written request for a time line extension as
specified in SDC Section 5. I 5-125(A)(4)(b). .
The Director may allow a one-time extension of the 90~day start of construction time line due to situations
including but not limited to, required permits from the City or other agencies, weather conditions and the
unavailability of asphalt or the unavailability of street trees. If the time extension is allowed, security shall
be provided as specified in SDC Section 5.17-150 of this Article. The time line extension shall not
exceed 90 days.
.
.
If the established time line is not met and the applicant has not requested an extension, the Director shall
declare the application null and void if the property is occupied and the property owner shall be considered
in violation of this Code. Ifthe established time line is not met and the applicant has requested an
extension and. that time line has not been met) the Director may require the improvements be installed as
specified in SDC Section 5.17-150.
PERMITS THAT MAY BE REQUIRED:
. Building permits will be required for selected construction.
. Sign Permit-NOTE: Signs are regulated by the Springfield Municipal Code Article 9, Chapter 7.
The number and placement of signs must be coordinated with the Community Services Division.
The location of signs on a Site Plan does not constitute approval from the Community Services
Division.
Additional Information: The application, all documents, and evidence relied upon by the applicant, and
the applicable criteria of approval are available for free inspection and copies are available for a fee at the
Development Services Department, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, Oregon.
Appeals: This Type I decision is exempt from the provisions ofORS 197.195, 197.763 and 227.173 and
therefore call1lot be subject to the appeal provisions of SDC Section 5.3-100, Appeals. In the event the
applicant disagrees with the application of the development standards in this decision, the applicant may
request a Type III Formal Interpretation or a Type 1\ Site Plan Review application.
Questions: Please call Lissa Davis in the Planning Division of the Development Services Department at
(541)726-3632 if you have any questions regarding this process.
r:.~
I
.
.
-"-.'; .
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
MINIMUM DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS' # DRC2008-00045
This DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, hereafter "Agreement", entered into
this 3rd day of September, 200S (the "Effective Date") by and between the
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD, hereinafter "CITY", and Emmitt Properties LLC; Bill
White; and the Mount Vernon Church, hereInafter "Applicant", memorializes
. compliance with the Decision and Conditions of Tentative Approval for City
Planning File DRC200S-00045 and constitutes Final Site Plan and
Development Approval in accordance with Sections 5.17-135, 5.17-140, and
Sections S.1-125, 5.1-130, 5.1-135, 5.1-140 of the Springfieid Development
Code. The purpose of this agreement Is to ensure that the terms and
conditions of Site Plan Review are understood and binding upon both the
applicant and the City. Upon completion of site development as determined
by a Final Site Inspection, the Approval shall be considered Finaled.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, on the 2Sth day of August, 200S, the City approved the.
MInimum Development Standards application submitted by the Applicant for
the purpose of the following:
CITY JOURNAL NUMBER DRC2008-00045. Type 1 Minimum Development
Standards Application requesting approval for a change of use from retail to
church in a 3,200 ft2 portion of an existing commercial strip on property
zoned Community Commercial (CC) in the City of Springfield. The
development site is located at 140S Main Street. Development approval Is .
subject to compliance with the conditions of Site Plan Approval contained
herein and limited to the use and improvements reviewed.
. .WHEREAS, in consideration for Type I Minimum Design Standards
Application approval/Applicants agree to remain in compliance with the
aforementioned Decision, all of the standards in the Springfield Development
Code and the Springfield Municipal Code which may be applicable to this
development project unless modified or excepted by the Site Plan Review
Development Agreement, Development Services Director, Planning
Commi!;>sion, Building Official or their agents, or the Fire Marshall, which
modifications or exceptions shall be reduced to writing in accordance with
Section 4 of this Agreement.
WHEREAS, in consideration for Minimum Standards Approval, the
Applicant has submitted final site plan complying with the following
conditions imposed by the City as part of the Minimum Development
Standards approval:
DRC2008-00045
Page I of 4
.
.
"'
Condition 1: The property is fully developed and does not allow for
the placement of a 5-foot planter strip between the sidewalk and
parking areas. There is however, an asphalt bump out, 8 feet in length
and 18 inches in width, Is located on the nor:t,hern edge of the 14th
Street driveway that, iF planted, would meet the requirements for
planting based on SDC 5.15-150(A)(2)(b). The planting shall be shown
n the final plot plan.
Condition 2: The trash receptacle shall be shown on the final plot
plan with uniform sight-obscuring screening.
Condition 3: Provide a total of 3 bicycle parking adjacent to the site
on the Final Plot Plan.
Condition4: Twenty-eight parking spaces are available on the site.
As the other businesses are closed on Sunday and evenings, the
amount of parking Is adequate. Provide striping to a minimum of four
parking spaces and bring the existing Handicapped parking space into
compliance with SDC 4.6-1. ?
All Improvements shown on the Final Site Plan shall be constructed,
installed or guaranteed in accordance with security and/or bonding
procedures of SDC Section 5.15-100, Minimum Development
Standards.
NOW THEREFORE IN CONSIDERATION OF THE FOREGOING RECITALS
WHICH ARE EXPRESSLY MADE A PART OF THIS AGREEMENT, CITY
AND APPLICANT AGREE AS FOLLOWS;
1.
FINAL SITE PLAN. The Applicant has submitted a Final Site Plan
in accordanCe with Section 5.17-135 ofthe Springfield
Development Code.
2. STANDARDS.. The applicant shall comply with all standards 1isted
in the RECITALS prior to the Occupancy or use of the site unless
certain conditions have been deferred to a later date In
accordance with Section 5.17-150 of the Springfield
Development Code. Upon satisfactory completion of all
improvements shown on the approved Final Site Plan, the
'application will be deemed completed.
.
3. CONDmONS. The applicant shall comply with all specific
conditions of approval required by the City listed in the
RECITALS, unless certain conditions have been deferred to a
later date in accordance with Section 5.7-150 of the Springfield
Development Code.
DRC2008-00045
..).~r
" ~\ . :
, ," o:,! .;.~
Page 2 of 4
.
.
4. MODIFICATIONS. The Applicant shall not modify the approved
Final Site Plan without approval from the City. Changes to the
Final Site Plan proposed by the applicant shall be reviewed in
accordance with" Modification procedl!r.es of Springfield
Development COde Section S.IS-IOO'ln effect at the timeofthe
proposal. . ,
5. MAINTAINING THE USE. The Applicant agrees to the following:
a. In order to continue the use, the building and site shall be
maintained In accordance with Improvements required by
Planning DecIsion DRC2008-00045, and all improvements
shown on the approved Final Site Plan.
b. The plantlngs required on the approved final site plan shall
be maintained In an attractive manner free of weeds and
other invasive vegetation. In addition, plantJngs in the vision
clearance area shall be trimmed to meet the 2 Y2 - foot
height prohlbltloriln accordance with Section 4.2-130 of the
Springfield Development Code.
c. . Parking lots shall be maintained In a condition free of litter or
dust, and deteriorated pavement conditions shall be
Improved to maintain conformance with these standards.
d. Undeveloped land within the development area shall be
maintained free of trash and stored materials In a mowed
and attractive manner. Undeveloped land shall not be used
for parking.
e. In addition to all other remedies which may be provided by
law or equity (Including but not limited to penalties provided
by applicable State Law or City Ordinances), Applicant
agrees the City may enforce Applicant's responsibilities.
6. Any Final Site Plan approval becomes null and void if
construction does not commence within two years of the date of
the agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Applicant and City have executed this
Agreement as of the date first herein above written.
(Signature Sheets Attached)
DRC2008-00045
",I "
Page 3 of 4
.;;,
:','
.
'.,
.
.
APPLICANT
BY:
Drew Baldwin! Emmit Properties llC
"
.'.
.,
September 12,2008
Date
Owner ~~h\~\)~
TITLE:
S i\T OF re on, County of lane
/ ,2008. Personally appeared the above named
, who acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be
their voluntary act.
Before me:
I) OFFICIAL SEAL
, . SANDRA MARX
. : NOT ARY PUBLIC - OREGON
",,% COMMISSION NO. 385725
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES NOV. 12. 2008
No'" Po";' 10< ~ ~
My Commission expires:'~ Z
-=
CITY
,.
"'."
September 12. 2008
Date
BY: Lissa Davis
~1M~\~
TITLE: Planner 2
, County of lane .
,2008. Personally appeared the above named
. who acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be
I) OFFICIAL SEAL
. 'SANDRA MARX
\ i NOTARY PUBLIC - OREGON
.,.. COMMISSION NO. 385725
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES NOV. 12, 2008
Notary Public for Oregon
My Commission expires:
1
,
~~'ifrJ
II /2 7-0~~
Before me:
DRC2008-00045
,.;" " .;' page,4 of 4
;...--
/
II' . .Ylf
I " ~iS~
Y(L0~l'~ ..
>.
.1
.
AI\.e
.
o
:r::
\'
TO
.
~
l-
"
,
I
;iO_
~+2 -~"
if
I_t
3~
'1 e,'
YY\A-Il\
! Please note that BiJiWhlte's-measurements 01
I e I ;b'~'~rlr/iJg lot';;; Inco~ A~~i dlstante
I . from south curbo/bui/dlng to Main Street = 32'.(J"
~ and2Z'-o" to the sidewalk. ActuoJdJstanceto
14111 St. = 40'-0" and 31'-0" to the sidewalk. More
~-\-'( than en~uf1h room for caTS to safely negotiate
this parle/ng fot arnmgement.
.
.