Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-064 Findings - City AshlandBEFORE THE ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL June 7, 1994 IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #94-057, ) A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND ) SITE REVIEW FOR AN ELECTRICAL SUBSTATION TO BE ) LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF MOUNTAIN AVENUE ) NEAR HERSEY STREET. ) APPLICANT: CITY OF ASHLAND FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION 1. RECITALS: 1.1. The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit and site review for the construction of an electrical substation on Tax lot 400 & 500 of 391E 04DD located on the east side of Mountain Avenue near Hersey Street. The property is zoned R-l, Single Family Residential. The substation will be located on land within the City of Ashland. 1.2. The Planning Commission, following proper public notice, held a public hearing on April 12, 1994, at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. The Planning Commission found that the application was supported by substantial evidence in the whole record in relation to the approval criteria. The Planning Commission therefore approved the request with attached conditions. 1.3. The Ashland City Council, following proper public notice, held a public hearing on June 7, 1994, after an appeal was filed in a timely manner by Ms. Jill Murphey. The City Council accepted public testimony, and exhibits were presented. The City Council found that the application was supported by substantial evidence in the whole record in relation to the approval criteria. The City Council therefore approved the request with the attached conditions. 2. CRITERIA 2.1. The approval of a conditional use permit is regulated by the Land Use Ordinance (Title 18 of the Ashland Municipal Code (AMC)) in chapter 18.104. The criteria for approval are as follow: A. That the use would be in conformance with aft standards within the zoning district in which the use is proposed to be located, and in conformance with relevant Comprehensive plan policies that are not implemented by any City, State, or Federal law or program. PAGE 1-FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND DECISION (g:plan~.current~$ubcounc,fin) B. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and wi// be provided to and through the subject property. C. That the conditional use will have no greater adverse material effect on the livability of the impact area when compared to the development of the subject lot with the target use of the zone. When evaluating the effect of the proposed use on the impact area, the following factors of livability of the impact area shaft be considered in relation to the target use of the zone: a) Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage. b) Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. Increases in pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit use are considered beneficial regard/ess of capacity of facilities. c) Architectural compatibility with the impact area d) Air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants. e) Generation of noise, light, and g/are. f) The development of adjacent properties as envisioned 'in the Comprehensive Plan. g) Other factors found to be relevant by the Hearing Authority for review- of the proposed use. 2.2. Electrical Substations are listed as a conditional use in the R-l, Single Family Residential zone in section 18.20.030.D, which reads as follows: D. Public and pubtic utility buildings, structures, and uses. 2.3. The approval of a site review is regulated by the Land Use Ordinance (Title 18 of the Ashland Municipal Code (AMC)) in chapter 18.72. The criteria for approval are as follow: Aft applicable City ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed development. Aft requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met. Go The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council for implementation of this Chapter. PAGE 2-FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND DECISION (g:plan\current\subcounc.fin) Do That adequate capacity of City facifities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. 3. 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 "M" All information presented to the Planning Commission and City Council and included as exhibits are incorporated as part of this decision and made a part of the record for this action. TESTIMONY, EVIDENCE, AND FINDINGS. 4. From the staff report and review of the exhibits before us we find that the property which is the subject of this appeal is zoned R-l, Single Family Residential. 5. From the staff report we find that the lot in question was legally created by a minor land partition in December, 1993 approved by the City of Ashland as Planning Action 93-142. 6. The criteria for approval of a conditional use permit have been met. Staff outlined in their staff report and we so find: 6.1 A. That the use would be in conformance with all standards within the zoning district in which the use is proposed to be located, and in conformance with relevant Comprehensive plan poficies that are not implemented by any Cid/, State, or Federal law or program. The use will exceed all landscaping requirements for the R-1-5 zone, and exceed all setback requirements, as indicated on the exhibits. The City is the electrical energy provider and we have a responsibility to all citizens to ensure that adequate supplies of energy are available throughout the year and demand cycle. B. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. PAGE 3-FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND DECISION (g:plan\current\subcounc.fin) City facilities are available to the site. Water and :sewer are available, though only water will be necessary for landscape maintenance. No sewer will be necessary. Mountain Avenue is a paved street accessing the site, and is greater than 20' in width. Electricity will be available to the site. Urban storm drainage will be collected and routed to the existing ditch on Mountain Avenue. The site will be designed such that when a storm drain system is installed on Mountain Avenue, drainage collected from the impervious surfaces on the site will be routed to the storm drain. Since the use has no specific traffic generation, other than scheduled maintenance trips by the Electric Department, Mountain Avenue provides an adequate transportation system. These facts were not disputed during the hearing. C. That the conditional use will have no greater adverse material effect on the livability of the impact area when compared to the development of the subject/or with the target use of the zone. When evaluating the effect of the proposed use on the impact area, the following factors of livability of the impact area shaft be considered in relation to the target use of the zone: The target use for the zone is residential developed at the density allowed by the underlying zone. The zone is R-1-5, which allows a base density of 4.5 units per acre. Therefore, the target use would be a nine-lot subdivision. a) Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage. The development of nine homes on this property would result in the development of structures having, in total, a greater size than that of the substation. The bulk of the nine homes (at approximately 1500 sq. ft. each) would be greater than that of the substation. From the site plan, even if all of the substation were considered as a solid structure, it would only have a total coverage of less than 6000 sq. ft. It will actually be much less than that since the substation is an "open structure", consisting of transformers, lines/wires, and supporting structures. A nine-lot subdivision would have an approximate coverage of 45,000 sq. ft., including all driveways, roads, sidewalks, etc .... Given this information, the Council finds the substation will have less impact due to its reduced scale, bulk, and coverage when compared to the target use. b) Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. Increases in pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit use are considered beneficial regard/ess of capacity of facilities. The target use (9 homes) will have a traffic generation of 90 trips per day. The electrical substation is proposed to generate no more than 6 trips per day, for the purpose of maintenance. PAGE 4-FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND DECISION {g:plan\current\subcounc.fin) The Council finds that the generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets due to development of the substation is substantially less than would be expected from development by the target use. c) Architectural compatibility with the impact area Substations are not considered to be generally compatible with residential areas. However, in this instance, the substation is located on a lot which allows for the installation of a 50'-80' landscape buffer, essentially mitigating the primary negative visual impacts of the use. This, combined with a 10' redwood slat security fence will allow the substation to blend in with the overall design of the proposed active park. The Council finds that given the extensive landscaping proposed, the substation use will be visually compatible with the surrounding area. d) Air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pofiutants. By virtue of the substation use having a much lower traffic generation than that of the target use, the generation of all forms of air pollution will be greatly less than those generated by nine single family homes. Therefore the Council finds that the substation will have a much lower adverse impact on the impact area than the development of the site for nine homes. e) Generation of noise, light, and glare. There will essentially little noise, light, and glare generated by the proposed substation use. When compared to the target use, the Council finds that the amount of noise, light, and glare will be substantially less, resulting in much less impact. f) The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. Adjacent properties on the east side of North Mountain are envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan to develop either as an active park, which is progressing at this time, or are outside of the urban growth boundary. The development of the substation will not adversely affect the development of these properties. Property across Mountain Avenue to the west is zoned for residential development. The development of this property will not be hindered by the development of the substation, but will actually be enhanced due to the availability of adequate electricity. PAGE 5-FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND DECISION (g:plar~\current\subcounc.fin) g) Other factors found to be relevant by the Hearing Authority for review of the proposed use. The remaining factor that may be found to be relevant is the issue of electromagnetic fields (EMF's). The Environmental Assessment indicates that the magnetic field exposures to the public along Mountain Avenue are not expected to increase, and the average levels are expected to be comparable to ambient levels typically found in homes related to wiring and appliances. The Council finds that the issue of EMF's is not of concern as part of the land use review, especially since we have no measurable standards as part of the land use ordinance, nor does it directly relate to any other criterion. However, we find that the evidence included in the Environmental Assessment indicates that there is little problem with the substation at this location, especially given the benefit the additional substation will have on our overall electrical system. 7. The criteria for approval of a site review use permit have been met and we so find: 7.1 A. All applicable City ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed development. The application as presented, and supported by the exhibits and evidence in the record. indicate that all applicable city ordinances have been met by this proposal. No evidence has been presented indicating that any ordinance or requirement has not been met by this application. B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met. The Site Review Chapter specifically outlines the requirements for application. The City Council finds that all necessary information ensuring compliance with the requirements have been met, and that the application meets all applicable standards under the Site Review Chapter (18.72 of the Ashland land use ordinance). C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council for implementation of this Chapter. The City Council recognizes that the application for an electrical substation is unique, in that the Site Design Standards were specifically adopted for regulation of the site design of multi-family and commercial developments. However, the City Council finds that from the submitted site plan and landscaping plan, that the applicant has provided adequate information to show compliance with all relevant standards. PAGE 6-FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND DECISION (O:plan\current\$ubcounc.fin) Specifically, the substation is located on a lot which allows for the installation of a 50'-80' landscape buffer, essentially mitigating the primary negative visual impacts of the use. This, combined with a 10' redwood slat security fence will allow the substation to blend in with the overall design of the proposed active park. The City Council finds that the landscaping and buffering ensure that the design is compatible with the surrounding area, and that the use complies with the Site Design Standards, as they can be,applied in this instance. D. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. City facilities are available to the site. Water and sewer are available, though only water will be necessary for landscape maintenance. No sewer will be necessary. Mountain Avenue is a paved street accessing the site, and is greater than 20' in width. Electricity will be available to · the site. Urban storm drainage will be collected and routed to the existing ditch on Mountain Avenue. The site will be designed such that when a storm drain system is installed on Mountain Avenue, drainage collected from the impervious surfaces on the site will be routed to the storm drain. Since the use has no specific traffic generation, other than scheduled maintenance trips by the Electric Department, Mountain Avenue provides an adequate transportation system. These facts were not disputed during the hearing. 8. Opponents have raised several issues which will be addressed here. 8.1. The opponents state that location of the substation conflicts with the Parks, Open Space, and Aesthetics element of the Comprehensive Plan, specifically citing the EESE analysis, which states: "Alterations to the land to accommodate conflicting uses could compromise the quality of an open space area and potentially decrease surrounding property values." The cooperation of the Parks Department and the City of Ashland on the landscaping and screening will ensure that the adverse visual impacts will be minimized. 8.2. The opponents maintain that the use is in direct conflict with Policy VIII-9 of the Comprehensive Plan, which states: "Require all new residential, commercial, and industrial developments to be designed and landscaped to a high standard to complement the proposed site and the surrounding area." The landscaping plan, included as an exhibit, clearly indicates the high standard of landscaping proposed for the site. The Council finds that the use is not in conflict with this policy. 8.3. The opponents maintain that the use violates Policy VIII-10 of the Comprehensive Plan, which states: "Encourage improvement programs for existing areas with consideration to such items as exterior maintenance, landscaping, signs, and underground placement of utilities." This is a Council Policy, not i~plemented by PAGE 7-FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND DECISION (g:plan\current\subcounc.fin) law, as indicated in Chapter VIII of the Comprehensive Plan. Further, evidence was presented at the hearing by AI Williams, Director of the Electric Utility, stating that the costs of undergrounding major power lines associated with a substation are financially prohibitive, as well as resulting in increased maintenance. 8.4. Opponents argue that the use will not be architecturally compatible with the impact area. In the previous section, the Council has found that the landscaping and setback mitigation measures will ensure that the use is appropriate for the area. 8.5. Opponents argue that the use will have a greater impact on the development of adjacent properties than that of the target use, specifically stating that the substation is not compatible with the adjacent park site. The development of the substation is being undertaken in conjunction with the development of the adjacent park land. Design of use areas of the park take into account the public perceptions of a substation, by locating the intensive recreation uses away from the substation area. Again, the Council finds that the overall design of the site and the future park adequately address this criterion, and the Council reinforces its previous finding that this use will not preclude the development of adjacent properties. 8.6. Opponents have also argued that other factors to be considered by the hearing authority should include the dangers associated with EMF. The Council found that this issue was adequately addressed in the materials presented with the application, and that no substantive information contradicting this information has been presented. We find that the presence or absence of EMF is not a land use standard to be considered. Even if it were to be considered, we find that the exposure of EMF to adjacent properties or to the public using the park or Mountain Avenue is negligible. We also find that there is nothing presented to us that would indicate any danger exists from the amount of EMF emanating from the substation. Any contradictory evidence which may have been presented is adequately addressed in the materials submitted by the applicant and we find those materials to be more credible and thus adopt the findings presented in those materials. 9. DECISION. 9.1. All requirements have been met by the applicant for approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Site Review for the location of an electrical substation at this site. The Ashland City Council approves the request with the following conditions: 1. That all proposals of the applicant be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified here. 2. That all landscaping associated with the use be installed and maintained. 3. That the parking area be paved. PAGE 8-FIN DINGS, CONCLUSION AN D DECISION {o:plan\current\subcounc.fin) 4. That additional landscape screening and trees be provided along Mountain Avenue south of the substation on park property. Purpose of the additional landscaping is to provide additional visual screening from northbound traffic on Mountain Avenue from the higher elevation. Approved and adopted by the Ashland City Council on July 5, 1994. Franklin, Recorder ~// PAGE 9-FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND DECISION (g:pl.n\curre.t\subcounc.fin)