Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-1106 SECURE STORAGE FINDGSBEFORE THE ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL September 18, 1990 IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #90-120, REQUEST FOR ) ANNEXATION, WITHDRAWAL FROM JACKSON CO. FIRE DISTRICT ) NO. 5, SITE REVIEW, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ) CONSTRUCT MINI-STORAGE UNITS WITH ASSOCIATED MANAGER'S ) APARTMENT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT EAST MAIN STREET ) IN THE VICINITY OF OAK KNOLL DRIVE AND HIGHWAY 66. ) APPLICANT: SECURE STORAGE ) FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDERS RECITALS: 1) Tax lot 320 of 391E 12 is located at East Main Street in the vicinity of Oak Knoll Drive and Highway 66 and is zoned RR-5; Rural Residential - Jackson County. 2) The applicant is requesting Annexation, Site Review and a Conditional Use Permit to construct mini-storage units with associated manager's unit. Site improvements are outlined on the site plan on file at the Department of Community Development. 3) The criteria for approval of an Annexation are found in 18,108,190 and are as follows: That the land is within the City's Urban Growth Boundary. B. That the proposed zoning and project are in conformance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. C. That the land is currently contiguous with the present City limits. D. That public services are available or can be made available to the site. E. That a public need for additional land, as defined in the City's Comprehensive Plan, can be demonstrated. Criteria for approval of a Site Review are found in Chapter 18.72 and are as follows: A. All applicable City ordinances have been met and will be met by the proposed development. B. All requirements of the Site Review chapter have been met. C. The site design complies with the guidelines adopted by the City Council for implementation of this chapter. Further, the criteria for approval of a Conditional Use Permit are found in Chapter 18.104 and are as follows: A. The proposal is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. B. The location, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed development are such that the development will be reasonably compatible with and have minimal impact on the livability and appropriate development of abutting properties and the surrounding neighborhood. C. In determining the above, consideration shall be given to the following: 1) Harmony in scale, bulk, coverage and density. 2) The availability and capacity of public facilities and utilities. 3) The generation of traffic and the capacity of surrounding streets. 4) Public safety and protection. 5) Architectural and aesthetic compatibility with the surrounding area. 4) The Planning Commission, following proper public notice, held a Public Hearing on June 12, 1990, at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the application subject to conditions pertaining to the appropriate development of the site. The City Council, following proper public notice, held a Public Hearing on August 21, 1990, at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. The Council's motion resulted in a tie vote, and a tabling of the action until September 4, 1990, at which time the Mayor would be present to consider the action and vote. At the September 4, meeting, the action was delayed to the September 18, 1990. At this meeting the City Council granted approval of the annexation and conditionaluse requests, and continued the request regarding the Site Review. Now, therefore, The Ashland City Council finds, concludes and orders. as follows: SECTION 1. EXHIBITS For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the attached index of exhibits, data, and testimony will be used. Staff Exhibits lettered with an "S" Proponent's Exhibits, lettered with a "P" Opponent's Exhibits, lettered with an "O" Hearing Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with an IIZVZll SECTION 2. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS 2.1 The City Council finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision based on the Staff Report, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received. 2.2 The City Council finds that the request to construct mini- storage units with associated manager's unit meets all criteria outlined in the Annexations Chapter 18.108.190 and Conditional Use Chapter 18.104. The Council, however, finds that Site Review approval should be deferred to a later date until all issues regarding the wetland have been addressed by the appropriate State Agency, and the issues regarding on-site circulation have been addressed. The Ashland City Council makes the following findings concerning the request for Annexation: That the land is within the City,s Urban Growth Boundary. The property is within the UGB. B. That the proposed zoning and project are in Conformance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The proposed zoning is E-1 in conformance with the Comp Plan, and the use is listed as a Conditional Use for the E-1 zone. C. That the land is currently contiguous with the present City limits. The City limits border this property on three sides'. D. That public services are available or can be made available to the site. Sewer and water are available from mains in Highway 66, and all other City services are readily available to the site. E. That a public need for additional land, as defined in the City,s Comprehensive Plan, can be demonstrated. Although the current inventory of vacant lands has yet to be field checked, the Council believes annexation of additional E-1 zoned land is appropriate. The Comprehensive Plan states that the City shall strive to maintain at least (emphasis added) a five year supply of land for any particular need in the City limits (Comprehensive Plan Policy XII-1). Data supplied by staff indicates that there is approximately a five year supply at this time, therefore the Council does not find this annexation to conflict with the stated policy. In addition, based on the preliminary results of the vacant lands study, the Council does not believe there exists within the City Limits a parcel of land of similar quality to the subject parcel which would accommodate the proposed use. This finding is in compliance with Policy XII-2 of the Comprehensive Plan, which states "This City shall incorporate vacant land only after a showing that land of similar qualities does not already exist in the City limits, or if annexation is necessary to alleviate a probable Dublic health hazard." From the preliminary vacant lands study, there are 6 vacant parcels within the City zoned E-1 or M-1 of similar or larger size as to that parcel proposed for annexation. These parcels are as follows: 1) 391E4DC 3502 Hersey Street 7.78 acres This land is more commonly known as the Mahar parcel. It is presently under review for an apartment complex and E-1 subdivision. The sloping portions are not conducive for mini-storage development, while the flatter portions are prime employment lands and are scheduled to be used for higher employment generating businesses, when fully accessed and served by public facilities. 2&3) 391E12 309 and 310 Dead Indian Road 7.6 and 12 acres This land is currently owned by the City of Ashland and is scheduled for airport related uses in the future, as part of the Airport Master Plan. At present, there is no sewer or water presently extended to these parcels. This land would not be available for mini-storage use at this time. 4&5) 391E14D 101 and 201 Crowson Road 7.0 and 6.73 acres This land is within the City limits, but has been limited for further development until full sewer service is extended to the site and paved access throughout the site is provided. At present, there is one small development on this property which is currently on a well and septic. A condition of approval for this development has restricted any future development to when full services ar made available to the site. When this land is fully serviced, due to it relatively flat topography and location, is proposed for higher intensity employment uses and is not an appropriate location for lower intensity employment associated with mini-storage units. 6) 391E9BA Railroad Tracks near A Street 16.85 acres This land is currently owned by Southern Pacific Railroad and has very limited access. The only access point is from Oak Street via a short unimproved street dedication for New Street. Again, this land is relatively flat and due to its location near the center of Ashland, it has a strong potential for future higher intensity employment uses and would not be an appropriate location for low employment mini-storage units. Therefore, the Council finds that there are not other locations available within the City which would accommodate the low- employment mini-storage use and finds that it is appropriate to annex this land for this use as there is a public need for this land as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. The City Council makes the following findings in support of the Conditional Use Permit for Mini-Storage Units in the E-1 zone, and allowing for a manger's apartment on the site. A. The proposal is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan, implemented through the Land Use Ordinance, states that mini-storage units are allowed in E-1 zone as a Conditional Use. Quoting from 18.104.010 of the Land Use Ordinance: "The purpose of conditional use approval is to allow the proper integration into the community of uses which may be suitable only on certain conditions and at appropriate locations." The Comprehensive Plan states that the employee per acre ratio should be approximately 10/acre for E-1 lands. However, this area is within the Primary Safety Zone of the Ashland Airport as indicated in the "Ashland Municipal Airport Master Plan." As stated in the Transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan, "This (Airport Master) plan was completed and adopted by the Ashland City Council on October 5, 1976. This plan is the ruling document concerning airport development and is hereby adopted by reference. The plan is currently being updated by Waddell to reflect changes that have occurred since 1975." The Master Plan states that developments within the safety zone should be of a low intensity. While the City's Comprehensive Plan has indicated this land as E-1 when annexed, the Airport Master Plan suggests little development be allowed. In reviewing this application, the City Council finds that mini- storage is an allowable use in the E-1 zone, and that the safety concerns of the airport are a significant factor in determining that a low-employment use is the most appropriate for this location. Further, we find that the location within the Primary Safety Zone is abutting an area outside of safety zone constraints, and therefore constitutes the safest area within that zone. B. The location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed development are such that the development will be reasonably compatible with and have minimal impact on the livability and appropriate development of abutting properties and the surrounding neighborhood. The Council further finds that the submitted site plan and elevations, along with the applicant's project description are such that the use will be less intensive than other permitted uses within the zone, such as commercial retail uses, and thereby compatible with the abutting properties. C. In determining the above, consideration shall be given to the following: 1) Harmony in scale, bulk, coverage and density. 2) The availability and capacity of public facilities and utilities. 3) The generation of traffic and the capacity of surrounding streets. 4) Public Safety and Protection. 5) Architectural and aesthetic compatibility with the surrounding area. The Council finds that the single-story design of the structures, except for the low two-story apartment, maintain an appropriate scale for this area, while protecting views of the neighborhood to the southwest. The lot coverage and density are in conformance with the requirements of all uses within the E-1 zone. All public facilities are available, or can be made available to the site, as indicated by the City of Ashland. The access to the site is from Highway 66, a state highway. Adequate capacity remains on this highway to accommodate the expected traffic flows for this use, which the applicant expressed to be less than 100 trips/day. Other uses which are normally allowed outright within this zone include retail, office, and light manufacturing uses, which if the parcel were fully developed for these uses, would generate approximately 5000, 1000, and 500 trips per day. Again, these estimates are for a fully developed parcel to these intensive uses and are intended to provide a guide to the relative impact of the proposed mini-storage use. Further, the subsequent site review of this proposed use will further address the proposed access of the site onto Highway 66 and the internal circulation of the site. This use will not increase any public safety or protection problems. An on-site manager will ensure the security and the site and appropriate fencing will inhibit trespassing. Additionally, lighting requirements will provide adequate security for the site while still being in conformance with the City's requirements regarding the shielding of lighting from view from residential areas, and an attached condition prohibits exterior lighting from interfering with aircraft operations. The structures are proposed to be constructed of a split face block with blue metal roofs. The construction will also include the use of pitched roofs and single story construction to further mimic some of the residential characteristics of the neighborhood across Highway 66. Further, the Council finds that these materials are similar in nature to those generally used for commercial construction on other E-1 lands, while still being less "institutional" than standard concrete block or metal siding and flat roof design and are appropriate for the development of this property. Also, the area along Highway 66 is proposed to have the highest intensity of landscaping on the parcel, mitigating impacts to surrounding properties. This are will include street trees and fencing which will provide an aesthetically pleasing streetscape along Highway 66. The City Council makes the following findings for the Conditional Use Permit for a residential use in the Airport Overlay Zone: A. The proposal is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. Refer to the finding for this criterion above. In addition to the previous findings, the purpose of a conditional use permit for a residential use in the airport overlay zone is to ensure that there are few conflicts between the uses, and to place the resident on notice that the.airport is the overriding permitted use in the area and that the residential use is the conditional use. In this instance, the Council finds that the primary use of the property is for mini-storage, a commercial use, and that the residential use for a one-unit apartment is the minimum necessary to complement the mini-storage use and does not result in a conflict with airport operations and is in conformance with the Airport Master Plan, a supporting document of the Comprehensive Plan. B. The location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed development are such that the development will be reasonably compatible with and have minimal impact on the livability and appropriate development of abutting properties and the surrounding neighborhood. The location of the proposed apartment unit is at the outer fringe area of the safety zone of the airport, nearest Highway 66, representing the location with the least impacts within the safety zone. Further the height limitation of no greater than 20' within the zone controls the height such that this use is not out of scale with the remainder of the development, or surrounding uses. Since the residential component of the application is limited to one unit, it is the minimal size necessary, and will have the least impact on residents in relation to airport operations. The approval of only 1 residential unit ensures that the primary commercial use of the property zoned E-1 will be maintained and will not hinder airport operations or obstruct views from the residential area across Highway 66. C. In determining the above, consideration shall be given to the following: 1) Harmony in scale, bulk, coverage and density. 2) The availability and capacity of public facilities and utilities. 3) The generation of traffic and the capacity of surrounding streets. 4) Public Safety and Protection. 5) Architectural and aesthetic compatibility with the surrounding area. In addition to the findings made above for the overall commercial development, the following findings are made specifically for the residential use: 1) The size of the apartment unit will be in scale with the remainder of the project, and will follow the design and materials outlined for the mini-storage units. The two story height will not obstruct views and will conform with the height limitations of the Airport Overlay Zone. All requirements for lot coverage and landscaping will be as outlined for the mini-storage use. 2) The public facility needs for an apartment unit are minimal and shall not cause any facilities to operate beyond their established capacities. 3) As stated above, Highway 66 is a fully improved 2-lane Oregon State highway providing access from the site into the City of Ashland. The traffic generated by an apartment unit, approximately 7 trips per day, shall not significantly impact the traffic handling capabilities of Highway 66. 4) The location of the apartment on site shall increase the safety aspects of the proposal by providing on-site security and surveillance, as well as monitoring the access to the site by users. 5) The findings made for the mini-storage approval above are equally applicable to this portion of the application. Further, the Council makes the following findings regarding the Site Review: A. All applicable City ordinances have been met and will be met by the proposed development. B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met. C. The site design complies with the guidelines adopted by the City Council for implementation of this Chapter. The Council finds that the information regarding on-site circulation presented on the site plan is not in conformance with the City's ordinance. Further we find that until all issues regarding the wetland are reconciled, that the site plan is subject to change from that presented, and therefore we find that the criteria for Site Review have not been met. SECTION 3. DECISION 3.1 Based on the record of the Public Hearing on this matter, the City Council concludes that the request to Annex approximately 6.2 acres of land to construct mini-storage units with associated manager's unit is supported by evidence contained within the record. Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, and upon the proposal being subject to each of the following conditions, we approve Planning Action #90-120. Further, if any one or more of the conditions below are found to be invalid, for any whatsoever, then Planning Action #90-120 is denied. The following shall be the conditions of approval: 1) That no development be allowed on the areas indicated as wetlands, until this area is reviewed and inventoried by the Division of State Lands. 2) That if the area is determined to be a wetland, the applicant would follow the process and procedures outlined by the Division of State Lands for obtaining a permit for altering the wetland, which includes the mitigation measures outlined in Senate Bill 3. 3) That the proposal be subject to a continuance of the Site Review, allowing the applicant to redesign the project to not include the wetland areas. Further conditions regarding design~ on-site vehicular circulation, landscaping, etc... will be addressed at that time. 4) That City services be made available to the site, including sewer, water, and electric, and that the required water lines and appurtenant devices be installed for fire hydrant installation as required by the Public Works Department.' 5) That all system development annexation fees be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. 6) That a survey and legal description of the property be prepared by a registered land surveyor prior to first reading of the annexation ordinance by the City Council. Also that the survey indicate the primary safety zone of the airport and horizontal and transitional safety surface regarding building height in the airport overlay zone. 7) That all fire hydrants be installed as required by the Ashland Fire Department prior to the commencement of combustible construction on the site. 8) That the applicant grant an easement to the City of Ashland to allow for the trees penetrating the horizontal and transitional surface of the Airport Overlay Zone. 9) That all necessary easements for sewer, water, and electric be provided as required by the City of Ashland. 10) That the applicant obtain ingress/egress approval from the State Highway Division for access to the property. 11) That the applicant sign an agreement with the City, agreeing that airport noise is likely to increase in the future and that they waive all rights to complain about airport noise. 12) That the building height for the two-story office/residence not exceed 20' as required by the Airport Overlay zone, or protrude through the transitional or horizontal surface of the Airport Overlay Zone. 13) That all cuts and fill be indicated on the building permits to be reviewed and approved by the Staff Advisor. 14) That no lights from the project be directed to interfere with airport operations. 15) That the City shall not adopt ordinances annexing the land until the following is completed: That the property owner enter into an agreement with the City of Ashland, after Site Review approval, agreeing to construct and develop the property in complete accord with the approved mini- storage use and plan indicated by this Conditional Use Permit approval (PA90-120) and subsequent Site Review approval; and that the property will never be used for any other purpose without the approval of the City of Ashland. Subsequent to the property owner signing the agreement, the City Council shall adopt the appropriate ordinances annexing the land. 16) That a separate planning action be processed for garage or yard sales, and outside storage of recreational or other vehicles, boats and trailers. Dated this day of November, 1990. Nan E. Franklin City Recorder Mayor