Council Communication

Appeal of Planning Action 2004-150 - A Request for a Conditional Use Permit to modify a non-conforming site by constructing a social hall addition on the existing Unitarian Church building located at 87 Fourth Street. In addition, the Conditional Use Permit request includes the use of the residence at 65 Fourth Street for additional meeting space, and of the backyard as a playground. The site is considered non-conforming because the existing amount of off-street parking is less than that required by ordinance.
Meeting Date:	May 3, 2005		Primary Staff Contact: Maria Harris, 552-2045 harrism@ashland.or.us
Department:	Planning		Secondary Staff Contact: John McLaughlin, 552-2043, mac@ashland.or.us
Contributing Departments:
Approval:	Gino Grimaldi

Statement: This is a continuation of the public hearing on this matter. No new information has been submitted to the Planning Department since the previous meeting on April 19, 2005. The public testimony including the applicant and appellants presentation has not yet occurred. Citizens, both in favor and opposed, are still signed up to present testimony as part of the public hearing. The applicant also has an opportunity to provide rebuttal testimony at the end of the hearing. Due to the Council continuing this action to the May 3, 2005 meeting, the 120-day time limit comes into play. The 120-days runs out on May 18, 2005. The Council will need to make a decision on this action at the May 3, 2005 meeting so that findings can be prepared and adopted at the May 17, 2005 meeting. The record for Planning Action 2004-150 was distributed prior to the regular packet for the April 19, 2005 meeting to provide additional time for the Mayor and Council to review the materials. The Planning Action was approved by the Planning Commission on January 11, 2005, and the decision was subsequently appealed in a timely manner by the applicant. The public hearing was started at the April 19, 2005 Council meeting.
0
Background: On November 5, 2004, the applicant filed the request for the above referenced planning action. On November 17, 2004, the application was deemed complete by staff. The 120-day limit expired on March 19, 2005. The applicant granted a 60-day extension to the 120-day time limit resulting in the new time limit of May 18, 2005. The Council will need to make a decision on this action at the May 3 meeting so that findings can be prepared and adopted at the May 17 meeting. A public hearing was properly noticed and scheduled to be held in front of the full Planning Commission on December 14, 2004. The Planning Commission did not review the item due to a full agenda, and a public hearing was then held at the January 11, 2005 meeting at which time testimony was heard and evidence was submitted. The Planning Commission voted to approve the Conditional Use Permit by a unanimous vote. The Planning Commission adopted the findings supporting their decision to approve the application on February 8, 2005, and the findings were mailed to the involved parties on February 14, 2005. A timely appeal was filed by Philip Lang on March 1, 2005. The appeal request stated four issues as the grounds for the appeal: 1. The decision is in violation of the Comprehensive Plan title on Land Use Policies. 2. The approval does not meet the approval criteria for a Conditional Use Permit. 3. The parking variance included in the decision summates with other sanctioned and non-sanctioned parking deficits to seriously degrade livability. 4. The approval countervenes both City (Council) policy on not eliminating affordable housing units as well as staff recommendation against allowing the deletion of an affordable housing unit. In addition, the appellant stated that he had not received a mailed copy of the Planning Commission findings as is required 18.108.070. Mr. Lang did testify and submit written evidence at the public hearing on January 11, 2005, and therefore is a party that would be mailed the findings. City records indicate a copy of the findings was mailed to the appellant at the correct address. The appellant submitted additional materials that were included in the packet for the April 19, 2005 meeting (letter from Philip Lange received April 14, 2005). The issues raised in the appellant's letter were addressed in a memo from Mike Reeder, Assistant City Attorney dated April 15, 2005, which was also included in the packet for the April 19, 2005 meeting.
0
Council Options: The Council may approve, approve with modifications and conditions, or deny the application
0
Staff Recommendation: The Planning Commission approved the Conditional Use Permit by a unanimous vote. After review of the concerns raised by the appellant, Staff supports the decision of the Planning Commission and recommends the Council approve the request with the attached conditions as stated in the findings on pages 10-17 of the record. The Council may wish to attach other conditions that they deem relevant to the criteria for approval.
Possible Motions: Move to approve the application for a Conditional Use Permit included in PA 2004-150 with 18 attached conditions as approved by the Planning Commission on January 11, 2005. Move to approve the application as submitted. Move to deny the application as submitted.
0
Attachments: • PA 2004-150 EXHIBITS Please click on the link below to view the following attachments:      • Corrected Notice and Mailing List/Record of Planning Action

RECORD FOR PLANNING ACTION 2004-150.PDF(10846.3KB)