From: Spencer Parsons
Sent: Mon Oct 29 14:40:12 2018
To: Dan Huff; Aldo Rodriguez; Gerald Fisher
Cc: Kristen Ketchel - Bain
Subject: FW: Jim Taylor - New Tenant
Importance: Normal
I was just responding to these emails when Aldo’s came in and I accidentally hit “Send” on my message instead of “Open” on his…picking up where I left off:
However, as to approval conditions specific to the now-terminated use approved via Site Design Review, those approval conditions are not transferable to a subsequent use and remain enforceable only so long as that use continues. A new Site Design Review comes into play for “new development” and “to expand a nonconforming use or development.” So to wrap up what I didn’t get in to my previous email, the City would be able to require a new Side Design Review (and have the opportunity to impose the approval conditions imposed but not satisfied for the previous Site Design approval) for: 1) a new development; 2) the proposed expansion of a nonconforming use; or 3) a change in occupancy from one type of use to another IF the change results in an increase in vehicular traffic and/or development.
If and when a new Site Design Review comes into play, the City wants to make sure to enforce all approval conditions while the use is still active, so that it doesn’t find itself trying to require compliance from a subsequent occupant who, under the provisions of the Development Code, is not subject to the previous Side Design approval.
Spencer
Spencer Q. Parsons
Beery Elsner & Hammond, LLP
1750 SW Harbor Way, Suite 380
Portland, OR 97201
t (503) 226 7191 | d (503) 802 0014
P Please consider the environment before printing this email.
Caution! This communication may contain a privileged attorney-client communication or attorney work product. Please do not distribute, forward or retransmit without prior approval. If you have received this e-mail by mistake, please notify me by reply e-mail and delete all copies.
From: Spencer Parsons
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2018 2:28 PM
To: 'Dan Huff'; Aldo Rodriguez; Gerald Fisher
Cc: Kristen Ketchel - Bain
Subject: RE: Jim Taylor - New Tenant
Under Section 17-4.2.020.A, Site Design Review is not required for any of the following:
A. Change in occupancy from one type of land use to a different land use resulting in no increase in vehicular traffic or development;
B. Single-family detached dwelling (including manufactured home) on its own lot, except as required for designated historic landmarks or properties within a designated historic district;
C. A single duplex;
D. Non-residential building addition of up to 500 square feet or 10 percent, whichever is greater;
E. Home occupation, except for uses requiring a Conditional Use Permit;
F. Development and land uses that are already approved as part of a Site Design Review or Conditional Use Permit application, provided that modifications to such plans may require Site Design Review, pursuant to Chapter 17-4.2;
G. Public improvements required by City standards or as stipulated by a condition of land use approval (e.g., transportation facilities and improvements, parks, trails, utilities, and similar improvements), as determined by the Planning Official and City Engineer, except where a condition of approval requires Site Design Review; and
H. Regular maintenance, repair, and replacement of materials (e.g., roof, siding, awnings, etc.), parking resurfacing, and similar maintenance and repair.
The basis upon which the City did not undertake Site Design Review previously was subsection (A), a change in the type of land use that did not result in an increase in vehicular traffic or development. In this case, Site Design Review could again be avoided, assuming that there is no anticipated increase in development and/or vehicular traffic related to the new use. However, if the anticipated traffic is expected to increase from the previous use, or the development is to be expanded, Site Design Review would be triggered.
Dan, as to your question, the new use will neeed to comply with all applicable City regulations (building code, municipal code, etc). However, as to approval conditions specific to the now-terminated use site design approval, those approval conditions are not transferable to a subsequent use
Spencer Q. Parsons
Beery Elsner & Hammond, LLP
1750 SW Harbor Way, Suite 380
Portland, OR 97201
t (503) 226 7191 | d (503) 802 0014
P Please consider the environment before printing this email.
Caution! This communication may contain a privileged attorney-client communication or attorney work product. Please do not distribute, forward or retransmit without prior approval. If you have received this e-mail by mistake, please notify me by reply e-mail and delete all copies.
From: Dan Huff [mailto:dhuff@cityofmolalla.com]
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2018 1:15 PM
To: Aldo Rodriguez; Gerald Fisher
Cc: Spencer Parsons
Subject: RE: Jim Taylor - New Tenant
No change of use. However, remind me of how we are going to deal with the remaining development standard issues?
From: Aldo Rodriguez
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2018 1:00 PM
To: Dan Huff <dhuff@cityofmolalla.com>; Gerald Fisher <gfisher@cityofmolalla.com>
Cc: Spencer Parsons <Spencer@gov-law.com>
Subject: Jim Taylor - New Tenant
Hello,
As you recall Jim Taylor had established a tenant a couple weeks ago; the marijuana manufacturing/production business in his new building. Turns out the tenant no longer wishes to rent the space. On Friday I received new application from Jim Taylor for a new tenant. I have the application attached.
It looks like they will be manufacturing cabinets. I don’t believe the new use would trigger a site design review. But I would like any comments on the matter.
Regards,
Aldo Rodriguez | Community Planner
City of Molalla
117 N Molalla Ave. | PO Box 248 |Molalla, OR 97038
Office: 503.759.0219 I Fax: 503.829.3676