Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-078 Findings - MaharBEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ASHLAND JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #89-071, A ) REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE ) FINDINGS, CONSTRUCTION OF 96 APARTMENT UNITS AND ) CONCLUSIONS SUBDIVISION OF PROPERTY TO CREATE SEVEN ) AND ORDERS PARCELS. PROPERTY LOCATED SOUTH OF HERSEY ) STREET BETWEEN THE INTERSECTIONS OF HERSEY ) WITH MOUNTAIN AVENUE AND WILLIAMSON WAY. ) APPLICANT: MIKE MAHAR - PACIFIC TREND ) ) RECITALS: 1. Tax lots 3501, 3502'and 3600 of 391E 4DC; and tax lot 6400 of 391E 9AB are located south of Hersey Street between the intersections of Hersey and Mountain Avenue and Williamson Way and are zoned E-l; Employment. 2. The applicants are requesting a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of 96 apartment units and subdivision of the property to create seven parcels. Site improvements are outlined on the site plan on file at the Department of Community Development. 3. The Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit for construction of 92 apartment units and a preliminary plat for the subdivision of the property to create seven parcels. The Council received this matter on appeal from the Planning Commission, which held a Public Hearing on May 10, 1989, and adopted findings on June 15, 1989. 4. The council, following proper public notice, held Public Hearings on August 15, 1989 and August 29, 1989, at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. 5. 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 shalI 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. Now, therefore, the City Council of the City of Ashland finds and concludes 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, including findings submitted by Craig Stone, lettered with a "P" Opponent's Exhibits lettered with an "0" Hearings Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with a "M" ~ SECTION 2. FINDINGS 2.1 The Council finds that it has received enough information to decide the Conditional Use Request. 2.2 The applicants' preliminary subdivision plat meets all of the requirements of Chapter 18.80 ALUO. The development of this project will provide for the extension of Williamson Way to 23 acres of property owned by the Southern Pacific Railroad, making that property available for eventual development for employment uses. The extension of Williamson Way to the boundary of the applicants' property is not an illegal cul-de-sac or dead end. Such extensions are in accord with normal accepted land planning practices in anticipation of development of the adjacent property. Such street extensions are authorized by FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDERS - 2 Section 18.80.020(B,5) ALUO. There is no requirement in Ashland ordinances that applicants extend Williamson Way beyond their property boundary. 2.3 In connection With applicants' request for a conditional use permit, the Council finds specifically that: A. THE PROPOSAL IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. Many provisions of the Comprehensive Plan have been cited by the proponents and opponents in this proceeding as having a bearing on the applicants' project. The main issues appear to be the preservation of lands zoned E-1 for future uses as provided in the economic element of the Comprehensive Plan versus the provision of an adequate supply of affordable housing which is also dictated by the Comprehensive Plan. The opponents have arg6ed that the two goals are conflicting, and that the use of this E-1 land for housing purposes will affect future economic development and affect the Plan's goal of providing employment in the City. The applicant's evidence, on the other hand, suggests that the two goals are not in conflict, and, in fact, are complementary when applied to this site. The implementation of the Comprehensive Plan through the zoning ordinance shows that multiple family uses are allowed uses in the E-1 zoning district under certain conditions. Applicants have provided substantial evidence that the sloped portion (approximately 6.5 acres lying north of the sewer line) of the property is comprised of 15 to 25 percent slopes and, therefore, unsuitable for building sites for uses permitted outright in the E-1 zoning district. Paul Mace, a local businessman who recently developed adjacent property and who is on the Ashland Economic Development Commission, Corky Leister, Executive Director of Southern Oregon Regional Economic Development, Inc., Ron Kelso, realtor, Jim Wright, developer and a member of the State Board for Economic Development, and Evan Archerd, real estate appraiser and consultant, and others provided reliable testimony that commercial/industrial uses would not locate on such steep slopes. Applicants' architect demonstrated that the cut and fill requirements to create flat parcels for E-1 uses on the sloped part of the property would make development too expensive for commercial/industrial uses. Parking and truck turnaround requirements for commercial/industrial uses permitted in the E-1 zone are much more substantial than for an apartment complex. Opponents have presented pictures of some commercial/industrial uses that have located on individual sloping parcels. The hospital, and doctors offices FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDERS - 3 surrounding it, are in an R-2 zone, and are not comparable. The Council finds that applicants' architect has provided satisfactory evidence that the subject parcel is not suitable for commercial/industrial uses because of lack of infrastructure and because the overall property is too steep. The opponents and proponents have provided differing statistics concerning the inventory of vacant lands for employment uses and for multiple family uses within the City. The inventory of vacant lands done by the planning staff indicates an adequate supply of employment lands. There are 50 acres of vacant lands designated for E-1 uses and 73.03 acres of land designated for commercial 'and industrial uses, making approximately 123 acres of lands for all employment purposes. The R-2 and R-3 lands inventory is also subject to differences of opinion, but there is a limited supply of those lands by anyone's calculation. Vacancy rates for apartments within the City are less than two percent. Although the opponents have shown that a number of apartment projects have been approved over the past two years, applicants have shown that many units have not been built, that about 100 are for senior citizen housing and that about another 130 are for s~udent housing for Southern Oregon State College. Present vacancy rates would indicate there is still a need for such housing. Applicants project that one and two bedroom units in the complex will rent for $450 to $550 per month. The median income for Jackson County is $24,500. HUD estimates that families can pay thirty percent of their income for housing. These apartments should be affordable to most residents in the County and will make some lower cost apartments available as people upgrade. According to Ashland building permits, the average value of a new Ashland home is approximately $95,000, not including land and site improvement costs which add approximately $20,000-$50,000. With a normal down payment, monthly housing costs, including debt service at currently available terms, taxes and insurance will equal about $1,200 per month. Recent trends in sale prices for existing homes indicate a similar rapid increase in value, also placing existing homes generally out of reach for the average household. The Council finds that approval of applicants' 92 unit apartment complex and seven parcel E-1 subdivision will comply with the Comprehensive Plan for the following reasons. 1) The sloped portion of the property is not suitable for commercial/industrial uses and the FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDERS - 4 development of this part of the property for multi-family residential purposes, will not decrease the usable E-1 lands inventory by any significant amount. 2) The development of the 92 residential units will increase the supply of housing that will be affordable to some residents and will make lower cost housing available to other residents as present occupants upgrade. 3) The development of the hillside with multi-family residential housing will allow for the development of the infrastructure for the seven parcel E-1 subdivision on the flat part of the property. The testimony established that commercial/industrial uses will not locate in Ashland if E-1 lots are not available for immediate construction with infrastructure in the ground. This development will provide the City with needed E-1 lots that are ready for construction and occupancy. 4) The City can increase its inventory'of E-1 lands by rezoning more suitable parcels and by annexing lands within the Urban Growth Boundary. 5) Lack of an adequate supply of affordable housing has discouraged development of some E-1 uses because employers .locate in communities that can provide a reasonable supply of housing for employees. In addition, the Council adopts by reference the findings submitted by the applicants with respect to conformance with the Ashland Comprehensive Plan, pages' 6 through 37, inclusive. ~ The Council does not find any significant conflict with the Ashland Comprehensive Plan raised by the opposing testimony. While diverse opinions and interpretations were offered of the plan document, the Council finds no factual information in the testimony that indicates a conflict. 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 opponents have not objected to the development of the seven parcel subdivision for E-1 purposes. The objections have been to the development of the sloped portion of the property with multiple family units. In FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDERS - 5 order to evaluate that the development will be reasonably compatible with and have minimum impact on the surrounding neighborhood, a comparison should be made of the proposed multiple family residential development to the other E-1 uses permitted in the E-1 zone. The property lies within an area of mixed uses. It is bordered by the railroad tracks and M-1 lands, by Grizzly Industrial Park .and by single family residential uses. The apartment complex will be constructed on lands between the commercial-industrial lands and the residential lands. Multiple family developments are believed by many planners to provide a good buffer between single family residential lands and commercial-industrial lands and would be more compatible with the single family residential properties than other E-1 uses would be. The development of the hillside with multi-family residential units will be more compatible with the surrounding neighborhood than development for other E-1 uses would be. There will be less intrusion and damage to the hillside because there will be less need for cut and fill operations. The building footprints for the apartment buildings will be smaller and more compact and will be able to be located in areas on the hillside that will have the smallest impact. Opponents have argued that the development will have severe traffic impacts on the surrounding neighborhood. However, planning staff, the city engineer and applicants have all presented adequate evidence that the apartment project will add 644 additional vehicle trips per day, and that with existing traffic, traffic will be well within the capacities of the streets adjacent to the project. Additionally, the traffic generated by ~he development will be about the same as the traffic that would be generated by the other E-1 uses that are permitted outright. The apartment buildings will be sized and designed to blend into the hillside. The density is less than seventy five percent of what would be allowed in an R-2 zone. The applicants will use a Victorian design to have the complex be in character with Ashland. This project will have no impact on the development of abutting properties and the surrounding neighborhood. The development of the hillside for multiple family uses will have minimal impact on the livability on abutting properties and the surrounding neighborhood compared to the development of the property for permitted commercial/industrial uses, as illustrated by Mr. Abeloe's analysis of building permitted E-1 uses on sloping sites. Streets within and adjacent to the project can be located during the Site Review procedure to minimize FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDERS - 6 traffic impacts. The improvements made by applicants~to Hersey Street will further minimize impacts. The Council, therefore, concludes that the size, design and operating characteristics of the apartment complex are compatible with and will have minimal impact on the surrounding neighborhood as is demonstrated by the following further findings. C. IN DETERMINING THE ABOVE CONSIDERATION SHALL BE GIVEN TO THE FOLLOWING: 1) Harmony in scale, bulk~ coverage and density. Applicants have asked for approval of 96 multi-family units. The Planning Commission has approved 92 multi-family units. This reduces the density and allows for more open space. The buildings will be smaller in scale than originally proposed by applicants and will be located to blend into the hillside with minimal cuts and fills. The design of streets and driveways will be much less intrusive on the hillside than permitted commercial/industrial uses would require. The land coverage will be small with the provision of large areas for open space. About 'fifty percent of the lands subject to the conditional use permit will be landscaped. The Council concludes that these factors are sufficient to assure harmony in scale, bulk, coverage and density. The opponents have objected to the density of the apartment units. However, the density of the project will be less than fifty Percent of the density that would be allowed in the R-3 zoning district and less than seventy five percent of the density that would be allowed in the R-2 zoning district. The Council finds that the lower density and blending of buildings into the hillside will make the development harmonious with the neighborhood. The requirement of less cuts and fills will minimize soil erosion compared to other E-1 development. Because development of other E-1 uses on the hillside would require more cut and fill construction operations, other E-1 development would cause a greater disturbance of the hillside. Other E-1 uses would also require larger parking areas and more room for truck traffic and would not be harmonious with the neighborhood. Based on Council's knowledge of other projects in the City, noise generated by the apartment complex will not be any more than would be generated by the FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDERS - 7 business traffic and operating machinery used in businesses and people working in or otherwise using E-1 uses permitted outright in the E-1 zoning district. 2) The 9vailability and capacity of public facilities and utilities. The testimony of the Public Works Director and applicants' representative and the report of planning staff indicate that sufficient capacity is available for water, sewer, storm drainage, and electricity to serve the project. This testimony was not contradicted with any facts in the hearings. The Council makes the following specific findings. Sewer Service: Existing concrete sanitary sewer lines exist within the Mountain Avenue (10-inch) and Hersey Street (8-inch) rights-of-way. An existing 10-inch concrete sanitary line also exists within subject property. The sewer easement through subject property is illustrated on the site plan. All lines are reported to be in sound condition and have adequate capacity to serve project requirements. Water Service: Existing (6-inch) ductile iron water mains are within the Mountain Avenue and Williamson Way rights-of-way, and a 12-inch cast iron main exists within the Hersey Street right-of-way. All water lines are also reported by public works officials to be in sound condition and have adequate line capacity to serve project requirements. Public Street Access: Actual and ~irect access'to the residential project is provided by Hersey Street and Williamson Way. Williamson Way provides access %o new employment parcels created by the subject subdivision. The Hersey Street frontage will be improved as part of Phase 1 improvements. Williamson Way will be terminated in a temporary cul-de-sac as illustrated on the plans. Potential access to adjacent residential land to the east has been afforded. Public Schools: The project will generate approximately 22 school age children. Schools serving the project area are Helman Elementary, Ashland Middle School, and Ashland High School. Existing schools have sufficient operating capacity to absorb new students based on each school's design capacity, the children generated in each age group, and prevailing enrollments. School Bus Service: An existing school bus stop is located at the Hersey/Mountain intersection. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDERS - 8 Storm Drainage: An existing riparian drainage Way exists along the northly portion of~the site near the east property boundary. This drainage will not be altered except for the removal of weeds and shrubs which might otherwise restrict storm flows. A 24-inch storm drain will be installed along the Hersey Street frontage. Police Protection: Police protection is furnished by the Ashland Police Department. The Jackson County Sheriff's Office and Oregon State Police afford supplemental protection. Fire Protection: Fire protection is furnished by the Ashland Fire Department. .Fire Chief King estimates response time at approximately two minutes. Garbage Disposal: Ashland Sanitary Service provides contract garbage collection services. Electrical Service: The Ashland Electric Utility reports adequate power supply and distribution to serve the site. Natural Gas: An existing 4-inch high pressure line, and 2-inch service line exist in the Hersey Street right-of-way along the frontage of subject property. Capacity is reported by CP National Gas Company officials to be adequate to serve project requirements. Cable Television: Existing service lines owned by the Cooke Cablevision Company run along the Hersey Street frontage of subject property. The utility is available for use within the project. 3) The generation of traffic and ~the capacity of surrounding streets. The testimony of applicants and the report of staff indicate that the traffic generated by the apartment project will be about the same as traffic generated by other E-1 uses. It is uncontradicted that the adjacent streets have sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional traffic which this use would generate. There may be specific improvements required at the project site and on adjacent streets, and further analysis is required for the Site Review procedure. The Site Review procedure is appropriate to deal with the requirements of traffic control, and contains specific authority to require traffic improvements, specifically Section 18.72.070(L.) ALUO, which states that the City may Require new developments to provide limited controlled access into a major street by means of traffic signals, traffic controls and turning FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDERS - 9 islands, landscaping, or any other means necessary to assure the viability, safety, and integrity of the major street as a through corridor. The Council interprets this final ~ection to include the authority for off-site traffic improvements when it can be demonstrated that the additional traffic generated by this use is the reason for the necessary improvements. The Council finds there is no conflict between the residential and employment traffic. However, the concern about the mix of residential and commercial-industrial traffic will be and is properly addressed during Site Review procedure. There is adequate evidence that such conflicts, if any, can be resolved during the Site Review procedure. 4) Public safety and p~otection. The location of the project with respect to the fire and police stations, and the statements of staff and the proponents in the record are sufficient for the council to conclude that there is sufficient public safety and protection in the City of Ashland. There were no facts presented to the contrary. See, also, C.2), above. 5) Architectural and aesthetic compatibility with the surrouhding neighborhood. The architectural styles of the surroundSng neighborhood are diverse and, therefore, it would not be feasible nor practical for the applicants to design housing units which incorporate design elements of both the single family neighborhood and the surrounding employment development. The design of%the units in a Victorian character' and the blending of the project into the hillside will improve the beauty of the property. Pictures shown by applicants of their other projects indicate that the project will be designed to provide a quality transitional area between employment uses and single family residential uses. Commercial or industrial development on the hillside will be more intrusive and less compatible with the neighborhood. Based on the architectural plans submitted and the proposed density of the development, the Council concludes that the proposal is consistent with the surrounding architecture as well as being aesthetically compatible with the density of surrounding development. SECTION 3. DECISION 3.1 Based on the record of the Public Hearing on this matter, and subject to the conditions set forth herein, the Council concludes that the proposal for the construction of 92 FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDERS - 10 apartment units and subdivision of the property to create seven parcels is supported by evidence contained in the whole record. The following are the conditions and they are attached to the approval: A. That the site plan be modified to show pedestrian access at the drive entrance and at the northwest corner of the property, that the units along Hersey Street have their primary orientation toward the street, and that the units at the south of the property along Williamson Way be deleted. The revised site plan, with all requirements of the Site Review Chapter, including elevations of all different structures proposed, shall be processed as a Type II planning action. B. That all units be constructed to the City's energy efficient standards. C. That the applicants perform all street improvements for Hersey Street as required by the Public Works Department, and that the applicants coordinate all improvements with the Engineering Division. D. That the extension of Williamson Way be improved with services, excluding the short 'Cul-de-sac, concurrent with the development of the residential units. Also, that the applicants investigate the formation of a local improvement district for funding the improvements. E. That all necessary easements for sewer, water, electric, streets and drainage way be provided as required by the City of Ashland and shown on the survey plat. F. That all hydrant requirements Of'the Ashland Fire Department be met as part of the Site Review and installed prior to the issuance of building permits. G. That the development be limited to a total of ninety two (92) units. Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, and upon the proposal being subject to each of the conditions set by the Planning Commission in its order, dated June 15, 1989, we deny the appeals of Planning Action ~89-071. DATED this 5th day of September, 1989. Na ' Fr kl _ ~-~--~7 Cathy ~oyden City Recorder Mayor FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDERS