Hearings Official Public Hearings

AGENDA EUGENE HEARINGS OFFICIAL Sloat Room, Atrium Bu ilding, 99 West 10th Avenue, Eugene, OR 97401 Phone: (541) 682-5377 Web site: http://www.eugene-or.gov/hearingsofficial The Eugene Hearings Official welcomes your interest in these agenda items. Feel free to come and go as you please at any of the meetings. This meeting location is wheelchair-accessible. For the hearing impaired, FM assistive-listening devices are available or an interpreter can be provided with 48 hours notice. To arrange for these services, contact the Planning Division at (541)682-5675. WEDNESDAY, October 17, 2012 (5:00 p.m.) I. PUBLIC HEARING ON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS Chad Drive Athletic Facility (CU 12-2 & TIA 12-8) Assessors Map: 17-03-16-32 Tax Lot: 901 Location: 2877 Chad Drive Request: Indoor athletic facility Applicant: Catherine Nelson, Webfoot Volleyballo Applicant’s Representative: William Sherlock, Hutchinson, Cox Lead City Staff: Becky Taylor, Associate Planner Telephone: (541) 682-5437 E-mail: becky.g.taylor@ci.eugene.or.u s Public Hearing Format: 1. Staff introduction/presentation 2. Public testimony from applicant and others in support of application. 3. Comments or questions from interested persons who neither are proponents nor opponents of the proposal. 4. Public testimony from those in opposition to application. 5. Staff response to testimony. 6. Questions from Hearings Official. 7. Rebuttal testimony from applicant. 8. Closing of public hearing. The Hearings Official will not make a decision at this hearing. The Eugene Code requires that a written decision must be made within 15 days of close of the public comment period. To be notified of the Hearings Official’s decision, fill out a request form at the public hearing or contact the lead City staff as noted above. The decision will also be posted at www.eugene-or.us/hearingsofficial.  Planning & Development Planning City of Eugene 99 West 10th Avenue Eugene, Oregon 97401 (541) 682-5377 (541) 682-5572 FAX www.eugene-or.gov CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS STAFF REPORT Application File Name (Numbers): Chad Drive Athletic Facility (CU 12-2 and TIA 12-8) Applicant’s Request: Concurrent approval of Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) applications for an indoor athletic facility Applicant /Owner: Applicant: Catherine Nelson, Phone: (541) 954-4461 Owner: Superior Products, LLC Applicant’s Representative(s): William Sherlock, Hutchinson, Cox, Coons, Orr & Sherlock, P.C., Phone: (541) 686-9160 Lead City Staff: Becky Taylor, Associate Planner, Phone: (541) 682-5437 Subject Property/Location/Size: Tax Lot 901 – Assessor’s Map 17-03-16-32 / Located at 2877 Chad Drive, northwest corner of Chad Drive and Suzanne Way / Approximately 181,210 square feet (4.16 acres) in area Existing Zoning: I-1/SR Campus Industrial with Site Review Overlay Relevant Dates: Applications submitted on August 7, 2012; deemed complete on September 4, 2012; and scheduled for public hearing on October 17, 2012 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Purpose of Staff Report: The Eugene Code (EC) requires City staff to prepare a written report concerning the subject land use applications. In accordance with the Type III land use application procedures at EC 9.7320, the staff report is made available seven days prior to the public hearing, to allow citizens an opportunity to review the staff analysis of the application. The staff report provides only preliminary information and recommendations. The Hearings Official will consider additional public testimony and other materials presented at the public hearing before making a decision on the application. Pursuant to EC 9.7330, the Hearings Official’s written decision on the application is made within 15 days from the close of the public record, following the public hearing. The quasi-judicial hearing procedures applicable to this request are described at EC 9.7065 through EC 9.7095. Staff Report (CU 12-2 & TIA 12-8) October 2012 1 HO Agenda - Page 1 Background and Present Request: The present request is to change the use of an existing warehouse building, located at the northwest corner of Chad Drive and Suzanne Way and addressed as 2877 Chad Drive, to an indoor athletic facility with volleyball and basketball courts. The existing building is approximately 41,020 square feet; the balance of the site, which is about 91,040 square feet (2.09 acres), is developed with associated parking, landscaping and utilities. The subject property is Parcel 2 of the Summer Oaks Industrial Park and the existing development was built pursuant to the Coburg-Crescent Special Industrial Development Standards, as part of an approved site review in 1996 (SR 96-40). The subject property is zoned I-1/SR Campus-Industrial with Site Review Overlay. With regard to the I-1 zoning, the subject request is considered an “Athletic Facility and Sports Club,” which is listed in EC Table 9.2450 Industrial Zone Land Use and Permit Requirements as being allowed in the I-1 zone, subject to a Conditional Use Permit. The subject request is for conditional use permit approval. With regard to the /SR overlay zone, the request does not meet any of the applicability provisions at EC 9.8430 to require site review approval, nor does the proposal alter the approved site review plan that governs the subject property (SR 96-40). In this case, the applicant proposes no exterior alterations of the site, other than to add striping for parking spaces on existing asphalt. The City applied the /SR Site Review Overlay zone to the subject property, as well as the surrounding industrial properties, in 1990 (Z 90-21). The zone change record reveals that the Planning Commission had wanted to establish standards on a City-wide basis for I-1 properties, although there was some urgency in getting the standards in place for this particular area. The Hearings Official affirmed application of the /SR overlay, concluding that the primary concern at the time of rezoning was not only the compatibility of industrial development with the surrounding residential development, but the compatibility of industrial development with the existing and future industrial development in the area. In that same year, the City established the “Coburg-Crescent Special Light Industrial Development Standards.” These compatibility concerns were addressed for the existing development on the subject property as part of the prior site review approval (SR 96-40), which found that the proposed development complied with the “Coburg-Crescent Special Light Industrial Development Standards.” The subject conditional use permit request will further ensure compatibility for the proposed change of use. Staff notes that the prior site review was specific to site features, such as parking lot landscaping and sidewalks, and was not specific to the use or occupancy of the building. Exterior impacts of the proposed use are further addressed in the applicant’s concurrent Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) application. TIA approval is required because the proposed use is expected to generate approximately 227 peak trips. Pursuant to EC 9.8670 Applicability, a TIA is required when a development will generate 100 or more vehicle trips during any peak hour as determined by using the most recent edition of the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation. The staff evaluation of these applications is provided in this report, relative to the pertinent approval criteria. Staff Report (CU 12-2 & TIA 12-8) October 2012 2 HO Agenda - Page 2 Application Referrals and Public Hearing Notice: On April 10, 2012, the applicant held a pre-application neighborhood/applicant meeting to provide neighborhood members an opportunity to review the proposal, share information, and identify issues regarding the proposal, as required by EC 9.7007. On September 17, 2012, the Planning Division mailed and posted written notice of the public hearing on the subject applications, in accordance with the applicable code requirements. Relevant referral comments received are incorporated into the following evaluation, in the context of the applicable criteria and related standards. Any written testimony received after the date of this report but prior to the public hearing will be forwarded to the Hearings Official for consideration in making a decision on these concurrent CUP and TIA applications. Public testimony, written or otherwise, may also be presented at the public hearing on this matter. As of the date of this report, no public comments have been received. Conditional Use Permit Evaluation: In accordance with EC 9.7330, the Hearings Official is required to approve, approve with conditions, or deny a Type III land use application. The decision must be based on, and be accompanied by, findings that explain the criteria and standards considered relevant to the decision. It must also state the facts relied upon in rendering the decision, and explain the justification for the decision based upon the criteria, standards, and facts set forth. To assist the Hearings Official in rendering a decision on the application, staff presents the following conditional use permit approval criteria (shown below in bold typeface), with findings related to each, based on the evidence available as of the date of this staff report. Staff has also provided a recommendation to the Hearings Official following the staff evaluation, below. EC 9.8090(1): The proposal is consistent with applicable provisions of the Metro Plan and applicable refinement plans. With regard to provisions of the Metro Plan, the current I-1/SR Campus Industrial with Site Review overlay zoning is consistent with the Metro Plan designation of Campus Industrial for the site. The proposed athletic facility is allowed subject to a CUP under the heading ““Athletic Facility and Sports Club,” of EC Table 9.2450 Industrial Zone Land Use and Permit Requirements. The applicant’s written statement (page 1) provides a description of the Campus Industrial designation as cited on page II-G-6 of the Metro Plan, with emphasis on the following text: “…The activities of such firms are enclosed with attractive exteriors and have minimal environmental impacts, such as noise, pollution, and vibration on other users and on surrounding areas…Complementary uses such as corporate office headquarters and supporting commercial establishments serving primary uses may also be sited on a limited basis...” The applicant’s statement describes how the subject request is consistent with this Metro Plan language because the facilities will be completely enclosed with an existing building and will have minimal environmental impacts, such as noise pollution, and vibration, on other users and on surrounding areas. The applicant also states that an indoor sports facility is a complementary and Staff Report (CU 12-2 & TIA 12-8) October 2012 3 HO Agenda - Page 3 supporting commercial establishment to serve primary uses of the industrial area. The applicant correlates the Campus Industrial designation description with the following Metro Plan policy: B.23 Economic Element. Provide for limited mixing of office, commercial, and industrial uses under procedures which clearly define the conditions under which such uses shall be permitted and which; (a) preserve the suitability of the affected areas for their primary uses; (b) assure compatibility; and (c) consider the potential for increased traffic congestion. Staff confirms that the CUP process serves as a local control intended to address the compatibility of the athletic facility within the surrounding industrial area. Further, the applicant’s concurrent Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), which is evaluated later in this report, addresses traffic generated by the proposed uses. Although staff does not find the above Metro Plan policy to be a mandatory approval criterion for the subject request, to the extent it is relevant, it is met by the above findings. Overall, staff concludes that there appear to be no Metro Plan policies that would serve as mandatory approval criteria for the subject request. Potentially relevant policies are evaluated below. Policies in the Environmental Design Element of the Metro Plan that could be relevant to the subject request are as follows: E.1 In order to promote the greatest possible degree of diversity, a broad variety of commercial, residential, and recreational land uses shall be encouraged when consistent with other planning policies. The subject property is located in an area with a diverse mix of existing land uses, consisting primarily of professional offices, but also includes multiple-family residential and commercial development. As stated previously, the proposed athletic facility could serve these surrounding uses. E.3 The planting of street trees shall be strongly encouraged, especially for all new developments and redeveloping areas (where feasible) and new streets and reconstruction of major arterials within UGB. Although this policy only encourages, rather than requires, street tree planting, the segment of Chad Drive abutting the south boundary of the subject property is already lined with street trees. None of the polices within the Transportation Element of the Metro Plan appear to be directly relevant, although staff notes that the level of service policy at F.15 is consistent with the requirements of the Traffic Impact Analysis review process. Additionally, although policies F.26 through F.28 direct local governments to provide pedestrian facilities, the subject property abuts streets that contain sidewalks and existing site improvements include pedestrian amenities. With regard to policy F.36, which requires new development to pay for its capacity impact on the transportation system, the subject request includes a Traffic Impact Analysis and the applicant will be required to pay Transportation Systems Development Charges prior to building permit issuance for the change of use. Based on the above findings, the proposal complies with the relevant Metro Plan policies, none of which appear to be directly applicable as approval criteria. Staff Report (CU 12-2 & TIA 12-8) October 2012 4 HO Agenda - Page 4 The applicable refinement plan is the Willakenzie Area Plan (WAP). The applicant’s written statement (page 2) emphasizes how the proposed athletic facility is consistent with the following WAP Coburg/Crescent Subarea Policy 7: The City shall encourage the development of commercial uses which provide direct services to employees of the Special Light Industrial area. Examples include restaurants, banks, daycare centers, health clubs and recreational facilities. Staff concurs with the applicant’s statement and concludes that none of the WAP policies appear to directly relate to the subject property or otherwise serve as mandatory approval criteria for the subject request. Most of the policies are directed toward the City as guidance for future code amendments; and many of the policies have been implemented or otherwise addressed by codified standards. Most notably, the existing development on the subject property was approved through a site review process (SR 96-40) for conformance with the “Coburg-Crescent Special Light Industrial Development Standards” for the Willakenzie area. Based on the above findings, this criterion is met. EC 9.8090(2): The location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposal are reasonably compatible with and have minimal impact on the livability or appropriate development of surrounding property, as they relate to the following factors: (a) The proposed building(s) mass and scale are physically suitable for the type and density of use being proposed. (b) The proposed structures, parking lots, outdoor use areas or other site improvements which could cause substantial off-site impacts such as noise, glare and odors are oriented away from nearby residential uses and/or are adequately mitigated through other design techniques, such as screening and increased setbacks. (c) If the proposal involves a residential use, the project is designed, sited and/or adequately buffered to minimize off-site impacts which could adversely affect the future residents of the subject property. With regard to subsection (a) above, the applicant’s written statements confirm that the proposed use will not change the existing building’s mass or scale, as there will be no exterior building alterations. The applicant explains how the existing building is physically suitable for the proposed use by having tall interior ceiling heights and wide column spacing, which is ideal for volleyball and basketball courts. With regard to subsection (b) above, the applicant proposes no new structures. The proposal involves restriping some of the existing paved areas on the site to provide additional parking spaces; however, this is not considered a new generation of noise, glare or odors because the paved areas to be striped for parking were previously vehicle-use areas, namely by heavy truck traffic, as evidenced by the loading docks and the wide expanse of pavement between the existing building and the existing parking along the east margin of the site. The applicant proposes to repurpose the loading docks with head-in parking by converting those paved areas to parking spaces by installing wheel stops and striping the pavement, consistent with the parking space dimensions prescribed by EC Table 9.6420(1) Motor Vehicle Parking Dimensions. Staff Report (CU 12-2 & TIA 12-8) October 2012 5 HO Agenda - Page 5 The applicant also proposes to stripe the expanse of pavement with a centralized column of angled parking, which also defines an on-site circulation pattern by establishing a perimeter drive aisle. Staff concurs with the applicant’s parking analysis provided on the applicant’s site plan and confirms that the 72 parking spaces provided complies with the requirements of EC Table 9.6510 Required Off- Street Motor Vehicle Parking for the proposed use. The applicant states that there will be no outdoor use that would cause off-site impacts such as noise, glare and odors. The proposed athletic facility will be contained within the existing building. The applicant further notes that the site is surrounded on all sides by other commercial uses and that there are no abutting or nearby residences that would be impacted. Appendix A of the applicant’s TIA provides an air photo of the area and identifies the surrounding uses more precisely. Staff concurs with the applicant’s statement that the Traffic Impact Analysis further addresses exterior impacts, which is addressed later in this report. Subsection (c) above does not apply, as the proposal does not involve a residential use. Based on these findings, the above approval criterion is met. EC 9.8090(3): The location, design, and related features of the proposal provides a convenient and functional living, working, shopping or civic environment, and is as attractive as the nature of the use and its location and setting warrant. The applicant states that the location, design and related features of the proposed indoor athletic facility provide a convenient and functional environment by encouraging recreational activities in a location that is conveniently and safely accessible for bicyclists, pedestrians, transit users and motorists. Staff confirms that site is surrounded by an improved transportation network that includes paved streets and sidewalks abutting the east and south boundaries of the site, namely Suzanne Way and Chad Drive, respectively. The site is buffered on all sides with existing landscaping, which the applicant proposes to remain and protect. The adjacent uses are developed with similarly sized buildings and parking lots serving commercial uses, such as Office Depot to the west and a real estate office to the north. On the opposite side of Suzanne Way, farther to the east, is a professional office building; on the opposite side of Chad Drive, farther to the south, is a large building and parking lot occupied by Costco. Based on the available information and the findings provided above, staff concurs with the applicant that the location, design, and related features of the proposal will provide a convenient and functional environment. The above criterion is met. EC 9.8090(4): The proposal demonstrates adequate and safe circulation exists for the following: (a) Vehicular access to and from the proposed site, and on-site circulation and emergency response. (b) Pedestrian, bicycle and transit circulation, including related facilities, as needed among buildings and related uses on the development site, as well as to adjacent and nearby residential areas, transit stops, neighborhood activity centers, office parks, and industrial parks, provided the City makes findings to demonstrate consistency with constitutional requirements. “Nearby” means uses within 1/4 mile that can reasonably Staff Report (CU 12-2 & TIA 12-8) October 2012 6 HO Agenda - Page 6  be expected to be used by pedestrians, and uses within 2 miles that can reasonably be expected to be used by bicyclists. Vehicular access to and from the site is provided by two driveways: one on Suzanne Way, to the east; and one on Chad Drive, to the south. Suzanne Way is a private street, whereas Chad Drive is a public street that is classified as a major collector street. The applicant requests to keep the existing access connections in their current location and geometry. The City’s access management standards are invoked and addressed under approval criterion EC 9.8090(8)(c), the findings for which are incorporated by reference. The applicant’s TIA (beginning on page 26) provides an itemized response to the access management standards, including the location, number, and width of the access connections. Overall, referral comments from Public Works staff confirm that the applicable access management standards are met. With regard to on-site circulation and emergency response, the applicant’s TIA includes queuing and turning analyses to show that there is sufficient queuing storage at the driveways and maneuvering areas for emergency vehicles. See Appendix I Emergency Access and Circulation of the applicant’s TIA for a visual representation of this analysis. No concerns were identified in response to the Planning Division’s referral to Emergency Medical Services. As confirmed previously at EC 9.8090(2), the proposed parking layout complies with the parking stall and drive aisle dimension requirements of EC 9.6420 Parking Area Standards. EC 9.6415 Loading and Drive-Through Design Standards do not apply because the existing loading dock areas will be converted to parking spaces. EC 9.6703 Driveways and Internal Circulation further prescribe minimum access widths and internal stacking area. Public Works staff notes that compliance with the minimum 50-foot internal stacking area from the back of the sidewalk to the centerline of the first internal circulation driveway or parking aisle, as required by EC 9.6703(3)(a), is dependent upon the applicant’s proposal for a one-way circular drive aisle surrounding the internal diagonal parking stalls. To ensure compliance as proposed, staff recommends the following condition of approval: • The final site plan shall show directional painting on the drive aisles consistent with the counter-clockwise traffic circulation recommended by the applicant’s engineering analysis. These site plan features shall be in place prior to occupancy. With regard to subsection (4)(b) of the above criterion, the applicant’s site plan shows existing and proposed bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Staff confirms that the applicant’s proposal provides sufficient long-term and short-term bicycle parking spaces; details of the space dimensions and designs will be more precisely determined during the building permit process for consistency with EC 9.6105 Bicycle Parking Standards. An existing paved walkway connects the main building entrance with the parking lot and the adjacent sidewalk along Chad Drive. In addition to sidewalks, Chad Drive contains on-street bike lanes and is a transit route. Staff has not received referral comments from Lane Transit District staff indicating the need for a new stop along the property frontage. EC 9.8090(5): The proposal is designed and sited to minimize impacts to the natural environment by addressing the following… The subject property is not included as part of the City’s acknowledged Goal 5 inventory. There are no significant natural features that would be impacted by the proposed development. The vegetation Staff Report (CU 12-2 & TIA 12-8) October 2012 7 HO Agenda - Page 7 on the subject property consists of parking lot and perimeter landscaping, which the applicant proposes to preserve. No trees are proposed for removal, either on the subject property or within the abutting streets. This criterion is met. EC 9.8090(6): The proposal provides adequate public facilities and services including, but not limited to utilities, streets, and other infrastructure. The applicant states that all public facilities and services are in place and that no new public improvements or changes to services are proposed. Referral comments from Public Works staff confirm that the existing facilities can adequately serve the proposed development per the findings provided at EC 9.8090(8)(b), (8)(d) and (8)(e). The applicant’s TIA, which is evaluated later in this report, also confirms the adequacy of the existing street infrastructure. This criterion is met. EC 9.8090(7): The proposal does not create any significant risk to public health and safety, including but not limited to soil erosion and flood hazard, or an impediment to emergency response. Available evidence indicates that the proposed tenant-infill of an athletic facility within an existing warehouse building and the restriping of existing paved areas for additional parking spaces will not create any significant risk to public health and safety. The proposal does not involve any building construction or expansion, new impervious surface area, or other ground-disturbing activities; as such, there are no soil erosion or flooding concerns. Public Works staff confirms that the subject property is not located within a special flood hazard area and that there are no known geological hazards. The site slopes are relatively flat, being less than five percent. Emergency response and access to and through the site has been confirmed previously at EC 9.8090(4). Other public health and safety issues such as those related to necessary infrastructure improvements have been previously addressed with respect to EC 9.8090(8)(b), and the concurrent TIA application, which is evaluated later in this report. Given the available information, it is concluded that the proposed development complies with the applicable criterion. EC 9.8090(8): The proposal complies with all applicable standards, including but not limited to: (a) EC 9.2000 through 9.3915 regarding lot dimensions, solar standards, and density requirements for the subject zone; The standards identified above do not apply to the subject request because no new lot boundaries are being proposed and there are no density requirements in the industrial zone. (b) EC 9.6500 through EC 9.6505 Public Improvement Standards With regard to EC 9.6500 Easements, referral comments from affected utility providers indicate no need for additional easements. Available information indicates that no changes to utilities or services are proposed or required. Nothing further appears to be required by this standard. Staff Report (CU 12-2 & TIA 12-8) October 2012 8 HO Agenda - Page 8 With regard to EC 9.6505 Public Improvement Standards, although no public improvements appear to be proposed or required, these standards require all development to be served by the following infrastructure improvements: 1) water, 2) sewage, 3) streets, 4) sidewalks, and 5) bicycle paths and accessways. With regard to the water and sewage requirements at EC 9.6505(1) and (2), the subject property is currently served by the existing Eugene Water and Electric Board (EWEB) water supply and the existing City wastewater mainline located within Chad Drive. Available information indicates that no changes to water service are proposed or required. With regard to the street, sidewalk, and bicycle path requirements at EC 9.6505(3), (4), and (5) Public Works staff confirms that the adjacent streets are improved to these standards and those specified at EC 9.6870 Street Width, with drainage, curb and gutter, sidewalks, street trees, and street lights. Chad Drive also includes on-street bike lanes. Available information indicates that nothing further is required by these standards. Based on the above findings, the applicable public improvement standards are met. (c) EC 9.6735 Public Access Required Subsection (1) of these standards is met, which requires all developments to have frontage on or access to a public street, as the site has frontage on Chad Drive to the south and Suzanne Way to the east. Subsection (2) of these standards require new access connections, and existing access connections of development that meet trip generation thresholds defined by these standards, to comply with the requirements of EC 7.420 Access Connections – Location . Referral comments from Public Works staff confirm that the existing access connections, which the applicant proposes to retain in their existing location and geometry, comply with the location requirements at EC 7.420. (d) EC 9.6791 through EC 9.6797 Stormwater Management These standards do not apply to the subject request because the proposal does not involve the creation or replacement of impervious surface nor the creation of any new uses that would be subject to contamination controls. The creation of parking spaces is proposed by striping existing paved areas; staff notes that if the pavement needs to be replaced, these stormwater development standards may be invoked during the building permit process. Similarly, if any change in the trash enclosure is proposed, it will also need to comply with the source control provisions of these standards. Otherwise, referral comments from Public Works staff confirm that the site is currently served by the 30-inch public stormwater system in Chad Drive and that there is no capacity deficiency identified in the City’s stormwater master plan for the affected Willakenzie basin. (e) EC 9.6800 through EC 9.6875 Standards for Streets, Alleys, and Other Public Ways The adjacent streets, Chad Drive to the south and Suzanne Way to the east, comply with EC 9.6870 Street Width, per the previous findings and conditions at EC 9.8090(8)(b), which are incorporated by reference. As such, Public Works staff confirms that no right-of-way dedication is required, pursuant to EC 9.6805 Dedication of Public Ways. The subject property is located at a street intersection, with Chad Drive abutting the south property boundary and Suzanne Way abutting the east property Staff Report (CU 12-2 & TIA 12-8) October 2012 9 HO Agenda - Page 9 boundary. Lands to the west and north are developed. The existing surrounding development prevents additional street connections through the subject property; therefore, an exception to EC 9.6815 Connectivity for Streets is granted pursuant to EC 9.6815(2)(g)(2)(b). The remaining street standards at EC 9.6800 through EC 9.6875 do not apply because no new streets are proposed or required as part of the subject request. (f) Where the proposal is to establish non-residential uses subject to residential density requirements on development sites in the residential zone category… This criterion does not apply to the proposed use on the subject property which is industrially zoned and is not subject to any residential density requirements. EC 9.8090(9): The proposal complies with the Traffic Impact Analysis Review provisions of EC 9.8650 through 9.8680 where applicable. Staff confirms that a TIA is required by EC 9.8670(1) because the development will generate more than 100 peak trips. The applicant submitted a TIA, which is evaluated below. Staff confirms that the development meets the applicable approval criteria, based on the following TIA evaluation. Traffic Impact Analysis Evaluation: A TIA is required by to EC 9.8670(1) Applicability because the development will generate more than 100 peak trips. The proposed athletic facility is estimated to generate 227 p.m. peak hour trips, based on the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 8th Edition, category 493 Athletic Club. Public Works staff confirms that there is no existing traffic or level of service problem in the area. Public Works staff substantiates that the applicant’s TIA is prepared by JRH Transportation Engineering, dated July 23, 2012, meets the “Standards for Traffic Impact Analyses,” established by Administrative Rule #58-02-02, as required by EC 9.8675 General Application Requirements and that no exceptions to the report content requirements were requested or granted. Public Works staff concurs with the applicant’s TIA methodology, specifically noting the following: background counts were performed during the appropriate PM peak hours, to capture the peak service impacts to adjacent intersections; and the site generated trips were adequately distributed and assigned, based upon the existing traffic counts and patterns. EC 9.8680 requires the Planning Director to approve, conditionally approve, or deny a Traffic Impact Analysis review (TIA) based on the listed criteria. To accommodate a request for concurrent review, EC 9.7305 allows the review of multiple applications according to the highest applicable type. Since the applicant requests concurrent CUP and TIA approval, the TIA is being elevated from a Type II application process to a Type III. Staff has provided an evaluation of the applicable approval criteria, which are listed below (in bold), including findings addressing compliance with each, to assist the Hearings Official’s decision. EC 9.8680(1): Traffic control devices and public or private improvements as necessary to achieve the purposes listed in this section will be implemented. These improvements may include, but are not limited to, street and intersection improvements, sidewalks, bike lanes, traffic control signs and signals, parking regulation, driveway location, and street lighting. Staff Report (CU 12-2 & TIA 12-8) October 2012 10 HO Agenda - Page 10 The “purposes listed in this section” are provided at EC 9.8650, which states: “The purpose of Traffic Impact Analysis Review is to ensure that developments which will generate a significant amount of traffic, cause an increase in traffic that will contribute to traffic problems in the area, or result in levels of service of the roadway system in the vicinity of the development that do not meet adopted level of service standards provide the facilities necessary to accommodate the traffic impact of the proposed development.” The subject development will create a significant amount of traffic, which is estimated to be 227 trips in the p.m. peak hour. Public Works staff confirms with the applicant’s TIA that the trips generated by the proposed athletic facility will not contribute to traffic problems or result in substandard levels of service in the study area. The applicant’s TIA concluded that no improvements are necessary to provide safe and efficient site access and operations or to mitigate impacts to the transportation system. The subject property abuts Chad Drive, which is a public street that is classified as a major collector, to the south and Suzanne Way, which is a private local street, to the east. Public Works staff confirms that both streets are improved to urban standards with curbs, sidewalks, drainage facilities and controlled points of access. Chad Drive has three vehicle lanes, for travel in each direction, with a center turn lane and striped bike lanes. Suzanne Way provides two-way access with no on-street parking allowed. With regard to site access, the subject property currently has an unrestricted access connection on each of the abutting streets, which the applicant proposes to keep in their current location and geometry. The applicant’s TIA provided an operational and safety analysis of the existing driveways, demonstrating that the existing access points will provide safe and functional access for the proposed development, while not adversely affecting the abutting streets or adjacent driveways. Public Works staff concurs with the applicant’s analysis of the existing access connections and concurs that they comply with applicable access management standards. With regard to the impact of the traffic generated by the proposal on the level of service of the transportation system, the applicant’s TIA included an operational analysis of affected intersections at the planning horizon year of 2017, as summarized in the following table. Staff notes that the required LOS is D for all intersections (the applicant incorrectly states that LOS E is acceptable for non-signalized intersections). Intersection Without the Development With the Development Coburg Rd. at Crescent Ave. C C Coburg Rd. at Chad Dr. C C Coburg Rd. at Beltline WB Ramps B B Coburg Rd. at Beltline EB Ramps D D Crescent Ave. at Suzanne Way B C Chad Dr. at Suzanne Way B C As shown in the table above, all of the intersections will perform at or above the required LOS D. Public Works staff concurs with the applicant’s TIA conclusions, confirming that the additional trips anticipated by the proposed change of use will not degrade levels of service below the applicable mobility and operational levels of services (LOS) beneath the required minimums. Although not affecting the level of service, Public Works staff acknowledges that the applicant’s TIA queuing analysis identified a deficiency in the available storage of the westbound leg of Chad Drive at Coburg Road, but concurs that the impact is insignificant given the magnitude of the deficiency and Staff Report (CU 12-2 & TIA 12-8) October 2012 11 HO Agenda - Page 11 expected frequency of the event. The applicant’s TIA notes that there is an identifiable amount of fluctuation in the current peak 15-minute volumes, such that the projected deficiency does not significantly affect operations. Public Works staff concurs that no offsite traffic control devices or public improvements are necessary. Based on the above findings this criterion is met. EC 9.8680(2): Public improvements shall be designed and constructed to the standards specified in EC 9.6505 Improvements - Specifications. The requirement of improvements based on a traffic impact analysis does not negate the ability of the city traffic engineer to require improvements by other means specified in this code or rules or regulations adopted there under. This criterion does not apply because no public improvements are proposed or required. EC 9.8680(3): In addition to the above criteria, if the Traffic Impact Analysis Review was required based on EC 9.8670(4), the improvements shall also address the structural capacity of the street in the County’s jurisdiction and address identified structural deficiencies, or reduction in the useful life of existing street structures related to the proposed development. Improvements may be needed to eliminate the identified structural deficiencies and to accommodate vehicle impacts to structures. This criterion does not apply because the adjacent streets are not in Lane County’s jurisdiction. EC 9.8680(4): In addition to the above criteria, if the development is located within the S-WS Walnut Station Special Area Zone, any increase in traffic the development would generate on streets within the Fairmount neighborhood to the south of the Walnut Station Special Area zone shall be mitigated through the use of traffic calming strategies or other mechanisms designed to discourage such traffic. The above criterion does not apply because the subject property is not located within the S-WS zone. Staff Recommendation: Based on the available evidence, and consistent with the preceding findings, staff recommends the Hearings Official approve the concurrent conditional use permit and traffic impact analysis with the following condition of approval: • The final site plan shall show directional painting on the drive aisles consistent with the counter-clockwise traffic circulation recommended by the applicant’s engineering analysis. These site plan features shall be in place prior to occupancy. Consistent with EC 9.7330, unless the applicant agrees to a longer time period, within 15 days following close of the public record, the Eugene Hearings Official shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny these applications. The decision shall be based upon and be accompanied by findings that explain the criteria and standards considered relevant to the decision, stating the facts relied upon in rendering a decision and explaining the justification for the decision based upon the criteria, standards, and facts set forth. Notice of the written decision will be mailed in accordance Staff Report (CU 12-2 & TIA 12-8) October 2012 12 HO Agenda - Page 12 with EC 9.7335. Within 12 days of the date the decision is mailed, it may be appealed to the Eugene Planning Commission as set forth in EC 9.7650 through EC 9.7685. Attachments: A vicinity map is attached. The applicant’s full-size site plans, and the entire application file, are available for review at the Eugene Planning Division offices. The Hearings Official will receive a full set of application materials for review prior to the public hearing. These materials will also be made available for review at the public hearing. For More Information: Please contact Becky Taylor, Associate Planner, City of Eugene Planning Division, at: (541) 682-5437; or by e-mail, at: becky.g.taylor@ci.eugene.or.us Staff Report (CU 12-2 & TIA 12-8) October 2012 13 HO Agenda - Page 13  Vicinity Map HO Agenda - Page 14 TENNY S ON AV MATT DR E LORD BYRON PL CRESCENT AVE E W DR SHADOW VI COBURG RD APT PAR K SUZANNE WAY NT SCE CRE DR W VIE CHAD DR OW AD SH WB BELTLINE ONRP 2011 Air Photo WB B ELTL WB BELTLINE INE OFR EB BELTLINE RD P Caution: RD This map is based on imprecise source data, ´ subject to change, and for EB BE general reference only. LTLIN RP E OF R LINE ON P EB BELT Ft 0 90 180 360