Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About The Siuslaw news. (Florence, Lane County, Or.) 1960-current | View Entire Issue (Oct. 21, 2020)
8A | WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 21, 2020 | SIUSLAW NEWS Development from page 1A The process of gaining approval for this large project has made the time- line for final approval a multi-meeting affair, with numerous stops and starts along the way. There have been more than two dozen letters and emails sent to the City of Florence, and to coun- cilors, who have raised concerns with several ele- ments of the plan. Those concerns have been recog- nized by city staff and ad- dressed in public hearings and virtual meetings that have been taking place since spring. Many of these concerns were repeatedly men- tioned by residents, three of whom filed official objections to the Plan- ning Committee deci- sion. These three appeals outlined their respective objections and the offi- cial documents related to those appeals were pre- sented to councilors at Monday’s meeting. During a Planning Commission meeting held Sept. 8, the discussion and deliberation of the appli- cations included the re- sults of new traffic counts and studies, as well as peer review comments, initial discussions of stormwater removal and the necessary inclusion of native vegeta- tion in landscaping for the PUD. The end result of the Planning Committee meeting was the condi- tional approval of Resolu- tion PC 20 07 PUD 01 and PC 20 08 SUB 01, with 36 conditions that need to be met prior to the issuance of Certificates of Occu- pancy. The PC’s decision to approve the application, pending fulfillment by the applicant of condi- tions required by the city, resulted in appeals being filed by three individuals whom claim the process and the results are flawed — thereby invalidating the application filed by 3J Consulting on behalf of the applicant, APIC Flor- ence Holdings. Three appeal requests were submitted to the city during the 12-day win- dow allowed in response to the PC decision, and the reasons for the appeal were detailed in the forms needed to process the ap- peal. These items were dis- cussed individually by FarleyCampbell and two petitioners who partici- pated in the last Monday’s meeting: Alan Matisoff and Steve Williams. In the materials pro- vided to councilors, staff provided a summary of the issues raised by the ap- pellants. According to the staff report, “Steve Williams, Darryl and Debra Fisher and O. Gary and Fran- ces Plunkett filed appeals per FCC 1-1-7 related to timing, design and instal- lation of Rhododendron Drive and its intersection with 35th St., density, stormwater plan design and infiltration, native vegetation retention, qual- ity of life, internal park- ing, short term rental mitigation, neighborhood compatibility, required setbacks, wetland miti- gation and construction bonding.” The list of items pre- sented to the councilors included questioning left- hand turn lane require- ments from Rhododen- dron onto 35th Street, questions as to the possible usage of the properties for short-term rentals, storm- water management, neigh- borhood incompatibility and a lack of a Phase 1 Site Investigation Report, and density standards, among other concerns. Each of these issues was reviewed and planning de- partment staff responded in detail, citing City Code and precedent in the re- sponses. The lack of a site investi- gation report is one of the more challenging of the concerns raised by the ap- pellants, as any building in an area that has wetlands must be investigated be- fore any construction can be approved. Staff responded directly to this point by highlight- ing a decision made by the Planning Commission, which was included in the materials provided for the meeting. “Prior to receiving ap- provals for final PUD or final plat, the developer shall obtain the services of a qualified hydrogeolo- gist (not only a geologist) and perhaps someone that is a coastal geomorphol- ogist to supplement the proposed stormwater plan and assist in preparation of the Phase 1 Site Inves- tigation Report that can bring a better understand- ing of all the factors in play related to how infil- trated groundwater affects hydrology in this sub-ba- sin and those adjacent up and down-grade,” staff wrote. “In the event the Phase 1 Site Investigation reveals wet areas and wet soil types, then a Phase II Conditional Use permit would be reviewed before the Planning Commission as required by Title 10 Chapter 7.” That would require the applicant to demonstrate how they would mitigate the risk of hazardous soil types through their storm- water management design. “There is risk to the applicant should they proceed in advance of completing this investiga- tion work; required Site Investigation work must be completed prior to site disturbance,” staff wrote. “The above condition ad- dresses this requirement.” FarleyCampbell was not pressed by the council on the comments included in the appeals, with the council expressing that in- formation shared by staff was comprehensive in its rebuttal to most of the concerns raised. Mercedes Serra of 3J Consulting was the point person for the applicants and presented a recap of the areas which the appli- cant believed countered four of the main. These were issues of compati- bility, compliance with development standards, stormwater management plans and traffic and safe- ty concerns. There was also the city requirement that “devel- opment enhancements” be added to the PUD propos- al and Serra detailed those enhancements. “The first development enhancement includes providing high quality de- signs using Old Town and Main Street architectural standards. The proposed development will meet the Old Town design require- ments as defined by city code,” Serra said. “The second development en- hancement is to provide more recreational space than required. The project exceeds the recreational space requirement and the third enhancement is to provide onsite amenities reflecting value for both active and passive recre- ation.” Serra next addressed the more challenging issues in the appeal — stormwater removal and traffic con- cerns — by pointing out that the PUD applicant had hired firms to conduct additional traffic studies and to create a stormwa- ter plan, which would not add to the water removal done by the city. Both of those firms’ reports were accompanied by data and illustrations, and were in- cluded in the meeting ma- terials. After nearly two hours of testimony and review of dozens of pages of infor- mation, the council decid- ed to delay a final discus- sion and vote until Nov. 9, when the council will hold a special session on the ap- plication. This was done to allow for legal review of the eve- ning’s work product and to allow staff to respond to any additional concerns which might be created by actions of the developer. In addition to the main item on the agenda, there were an additional three items which were passed by consent with little dis- cussion. There has been some confusion among resi- dents regarding the PUD proposal and a requested annexation by Benedick Holdings LCC for prop- erty located on Oceana Drive. The proposed an- nexation will be discussed at the Nov. 10 Planning Commission meeting and is separate from the Rho- dodendron and 35th Street development — which is a proposed development within city boundaries. All of the materials pre- sented to the city council are available for viewing online at ci.florence.or.us. The next regular meet- ing of the Florence City Council will be Nov. 2, be- ginning at 5:30 p.m. KRAB KETTLE Did you know that FTS off ers a Tech Support Member- ship in addition to our Remote Support for just $35/ Month? FTS will support you via phone, email, online or in-store. IT Services simplfi ed. • Diagnostic & Repair • Virus & Malware removal • Remote Tech Support • Computer Sales • Security Soft ware • Smartphone & Tablet support • Small Business IT • Data Backup & Recovery 541-991-3705 • 541-590-2474 info@ftscomputerrepair.com • ftscomputerrepair.com 1255 Bay Street, Florence OR 97439 Wednesday - Sunday 12 - 4PM LEGACY PORTRAITURE Portraits that will show your innermost self. RODGER BENNETT PHOTOGRAPHY 1234 Rhododendron Drive #7 | Florence, Oregon 97439 541-991-0777 | www.photobyrodger.com Cel 70 ebrat + Y ing ear s! Hoberg’s Complete Auto Repair www.hobergsautorepair.com 280 Hwy. 101 M 541-997-8996 Fresh Seafood Market New Service d Offere Try our canned tuna in variety of flavors! Open Daily 10-6pm FREE Taxi Ride via: River Cities Taxies Florence City Limits Only From our shop to your home or work 345 Hwy. 101 • P.O. Box 357 Florence, OR 97439-0012 • 541-997-2413 Deadline for Press Releases Is Every Monday and Thursday by Noon. Email P RESS R ELEASES @T HE S IUSLAW N EWS . COM . Serving Your Auto Needs Since 1945 Kevin McMullen 3rd Generation Owner, hobergsautorepair@gmail.com LES SCHWAB TIRE CENTERS Tires • Brakes Shocks • Alignment Support and Encourage Youth Artists 4325 Highway 101, Florence 541-997-7178 Art Classes HOME OF THE BEST TIRE VALUE PROMISE We are open and ready to assist you! 2020 Scholarship Award Celebrations Art Festivals Open Studio Gallery Johnston Motor Company Since 1939 Poetry Open Mic 2150 Hwy. 101 • Florence (541) 997-3475 • 1-800-348-3475 Poetry Slam Our mission is to unify and support all the arts, enrich cultural life and stimulate economic vitality in Florence. Community Support, Giving Tree
