Comprehensive Plan and Zone Change for Albina Fuel Co. Site

City Council’s Actions, April 23, 2003

Report to SGNA Board

The Board of Sullivan’s Gulch Neighborhood Association at its April 8th meeting voted to support a Comprehensive Plan change and the rezoning of the 5-acre Albina Fuel Co. site. from its present industrial and general commercial zoning to a CS Storefront commercial along Broadway and a RX high density mixed use residential on the remainder of the site.

The above support was based on three sets of conditions.  See below.

COUNCIL ACTION

City Council voted unanimously to approve the Comp Plan change and the rezoning, left in place the three conditions attached earlier by the Hearing Examiner and added two additional conditions.

The two addtional conditions are:

1. That design review be a Type III process,

 2. That the maximum number of residential units that can be built on the site is the minimum number now required by code.

Response to our set of conditions

1. Place a 30% cap on the addtional traffic generated by the new development.......mitigation to be paid for by the developer.

RESPONSE:
The 30% cap was determined to be arbitrary (unsupported by a legal nexus which is necessary to impose such a condition on a development).  Further, a single property owner should not bear responsibility for mitigation.

Instead, a better way of limiting traffic was seen in capping the number of residential units which can be built.  This is done in the second condition adopted by Council which limits the maximum number to the minimum required.

(City code has a provision for a minimum number of housing units on a site.  Applied to the Albina site as currently configured this comes out to about 320 units.  The amount of square feet of commercial space in an RX zone is limited based on the amount of residential, so in effect the cap on the number of units also limits the amount of commercial space.  Further, a developer of the site could seek an adjustment to the minimum density through a Type III process. Based on Council’s action, that minimum COULD BE REDUCED BUT NOT INCREASED.)

2.  Require the establishment of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program that includes at least a shuttle to the MAX and a free bus pass program.

RESPONSE:

Without a specific development to condition, this step was felt to be premature.  The issues can be raised during the Type 1 process when the TDM is established. 

(All of the written testimony presented yesterday goes into the official record.  Our requests are a part of the record and can be used in an appeal of any Type 1 decision directly to LUBA.)

3. Minimize spillover parking in the surrounding areas.

RESPONSE:

There was general agreement that any development of the nature that would go on the site would need to include parking to be marketable.  

4. Limit the total floor area ratio (FAR) of development on the site to 3:1

RESPONSE:

This was addressed in the condition to limit the number of housing units.

5.  Limit the height along the 32nd Ave. frontage.....

RESPONSE:

To be addressed in design review. 

(Here staff misread our request --and apologized after the hearing-- to be a setback from the east side of 32nd rather than the west side, in which case it would have conflicted with the setback already required in a RX zone.  As noted above, our request is in the record and can be brought forth when a plan goes before the Design Review Commission.)

6.  Require Design Review through Type III.

RESPONSE:

Added as a condition.

(A Type III Review goes directly to the Desgin Review Commission and can be appealed to City Council.  This condition keeps the process fully in the public arena where we can participate.)

7.  Add a Design Review requirement...that a pedestrian and bicycle circulation system be created that provides connection to surrounding urban grid, including connections to Broadway, NE 32nd Ave. and the planned Gulch Trail.

RESPONSE:

Without a specific development to condition, this is premature.  Again, our written statement is a part of the official record and can be brought forth when the Design Commission reviews a development plan.

The Record on this case is now offically closed.  Within the next two weeks city staff will assemble the testimony while Steve Abel, attorney for Albina Fuel,  reviews the record which will include both that from the Hearing Examiner and the actions of Council.  After staff has reviewed Mr. Abel’s response, the matter goes back to Council on May 7th to be officially adopted.

Submitted by:

Lynne Coward

Land Use Chair

4/25/03