Item 4 - PH/Ord. on Kaufman Hse - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

north of the center (see Attachment G). Tile proposal included prov~saon fora six space parking area (including two handicapped spaces.) on Tax Lot 9200 and a 12 space parking area across the · alley on Tax Lot 9600. Tile decision of the Hearings Official indicated that a modification of the ori,,inal conditional use permit was re'anted to i~llow construct/on of tine six parkin~ spaces on Tax Lot 9200. but that tile Request for Conditional Use approval for tile 1.2" parking spaces on/ax Lot 9600 was dertied. The rationale for tile denial was that tile lots were not contiguous and.c0uld not 'be considered under the same perlnit. Furthermore. the decision noted that parking areas were not permitted ill tile residential zon/n,, districts unless accessory to another use. Tile modification approval was subject to the following conditions:. .1. hnprovements to the public facilities must be processed through tlie privately engineered public improvement procesS, to include an5' alley improvements and storm sewer extension." 2. Ali lights must be shielded SO that the light element is not directly visible to ally adjacent prOperts; lines. Tile lighting plan must be reviewed by the Permit and i'nformation Center prior to installation.' 3. Revised landscaping and lighting plans shall be submitted prior to conditional use permit agreement to reflect relevant conditions imposed in this application. Tile landscape plan should reflect which species ofosmanthus will be used. A modification agreement was never signed with the Cits.-' to complete the construction allowed by file modification and. as such, the approval lapsed. Tile most recent land use action on tlie subject parcel was an interpretation bythe planning division dated October 3, 2001 that tile 1994 lot line removal was null and void because the approval had never been recorded with the county (see Attachment H). Analysis of the land use history, on the subject parcels indicates tliat while conditional use pem~its have been.approved tbr tile site, tile conditions of approval attached to those permits have not a/ways been met. Zoning District Analysis In order to determ ine whether or not a rezone could potentially facilitate sale of the annex, Satre completed an analysis ora number of zoning districts. Each disti'ict was reviewed for its applicabili .ty to tile present site as well as its ability to thcilitate the needs of the city.. PRO - Park. Reo'ealion and Olde, ,~pace Given that tile subject parcels are owned by tile ci~, of Eugene and controlled by tile Recreation DiVision of'LARCS. Satre looked into the possibility of' rezonJng the parcel(s) to PRO (Park. Recreation and Open Space). Based on the siting requirements./fth.e rezone were to implement park. recreation. Open space. or natural resource preservation objectives ('by classif.ving tile s.ite as a neighborhood parl.:, community park. metropolitan park. or non-publicly owned open space..) then the PRO zone could be appropriate I-bt the site. The determination of park classification is based on tile Eugene Parks and Recreation Plan or by tile C/tv. Mana,',er= . Given the cleveloped nature ol"th'e Senior Center site. however, it is unclear how appropriate tile PRO >zoning ' des/gnat/on wotlld be. Fm'thermoi'e. even it' PRO zoning were cleemecl appropriate, a ~ew CUP 60