"file:///C:From: Jennifer Cline
Sent: Thu Mar 24 16:53:02 2016
To: Nicolas Lennartz
Subject: RE: Followup to conversation yesterday
Importance: Normal
What happens if he subdivides and sells?
Jennifer Cline, P.E. | Public Works Director
Licensed in OR, WA
117 N Molalla Ave. | PO Box 248 * |Molalla, OR 97038
O: 503.759.0218 | F: 503.829.3676
From: Nicolas Lennartz [mailto:nlennartz@cityofmolalla.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 4:19 PM
To: Jennifer Cline <jcline@cityofmolalla.com>
Subject: RE: Followup to conversation yesterday
What if he owns both, and the consolidated access would be for access to both tax lots? The center line of the access could theoretically line up with the property line, no?
Nicolas Lennartz | Community Planner | City of Molalla
O: 503∙759∙0219 | C: 503∙998∙7048
communityplanner at cityofmolalla.com
117 N. Molalla Ave. | Molalla, OR 97038
From: Jennifer Cline [mailto:jcline@cityofmolalla.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 12:38 PM
To: Nicolas Lennartz <nlennartz@cityofmolalla.com>; roger.peterson@yahoo.com
Subject: RE: Followup to conversation yesterday
Please keep in mind the wings cannot extend across the neighboring property lines. The entire approach (incl. wings) must be within primary property limits.
Jennifer Cline, P.E. | Public Works Director
Licensed in OR, WA
117 N Molalla Ave. | PO Box 248 * |Molalla, OR 97038
O: 503.759.0218 | F: 503.829.3676
From: Nicolas Lennartz [mailto:nlennartz@cityofmolalla.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 11:44 AM
Cc: Jennifer Cline <jcline@cityofmolalla.com>
Subject: RE: Followup to conversation yesterday
Hi Roger,
Yes the 30 feet is measured on what is accessible, wings don’t count.
The issue with the gravel is that it would be considered an improvement. Gravel, although seemingly pervious, acts like an impervious surface once its compacted, and is considered a viable driving surface.
Nicolas Lennartz | Community Planner | City of Molalla
O: 503∙759∙0219 | C: 503∙998∙7048
communityplanner at cityofmolalla.com
117 N. Molalla Ave. | Molalla, OR 97038
From: roger.peterson@yahoo.com [mailto:roger.peterson@yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2016 10:32 PM
To: Nicolas Lennartz <nlennartz@cityofmolalla.com>
Subject: Re: Followup to conversation yesterday
Nicolas,
Please allow me to clarify my understanding and ask a couple of questions:
I'm happy to learn that Code likes consolidated access points since that is my preference. If a consolidated access is allowed it would be a minimum 30' wide, not including the 2 wings, correct?
I agree to not make any improvements to 206 but I think it would be advisable to add a little bit of gravel where the cars will be parked since it's mostly grass right now and subject to getting muddy until the weather changes. The access point already has enough gravel and there is no need to put gravel in between the curb and the sidewalk. Will this be acceptable?
I am (and have been) aware that 212 is also zoned Commercial like 206 so don't have any improvement plans.
Thanks,
Roger
503.459.8420
From: Nicolas Lennartz <nlennartz@cityofmolalla.com>
Cc: Jennifer Cline <jcline@cityofmolalla.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2016 11:59 AM
Subject: RE: Followup to conversation yesterday
Roger,
In the interim between now and the streetscape project, we’ll allow the access to your vacant lot for display of used cars on the condition that no gravel be added and no improvements to the site are made. Basically, you’re storing cars that happen to have a for sale sign on them. Cars aren’t considered structures so it’s basically a non-use. As long as those cars can move, it’s not a violation.
As far as the dual-access, this is a possibility as the code likes to consolidate access points where possible. I’d like to remind you that the home that is currently there at 212 S Molalla is actually a non-conforming use as the zoning of the property is C1. What I’m getting at is that this access would likely be built to commercial access standards, likely 30’ minimum in width as both properties are identical in zoning.
We can work on getting a more concrete estimate on your cost for the access construction if you wish.
Nicolas Lennartz | Community Planner | City of Molalla
O: 503∙759∙0219 | C: 503∙998∙7048
communityplanner at cityofmolalla.com
117 N. Molalla Ave. | Molalla, OR 97038
From: roger.peterson@yahoo.com [mailto:roger.peterson@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 4:15 PM
To: nlennartz@cityofmolalla.com
Subject: Followup to conversation yesterday
Hi Nicolas,
Just as a reminder, I own the single family home (rental) at 212 S Molalla Ave and the commercial (vacant) lot next to it at 206 S Molalla Ave.
Bart Kimes (car dealer) would like to rent my vacant lot at 206 which has no driveway apron at this point. Since sometime within the next 3 or 4 months a streetscape project will occur on Molalla Ave that will involve ripping out curbs, sidewalks, and driveway aprons, it is not cost effective for me (or efficient for the city) to have a driveway apron poured now that would be basically destroyed within the next few months. Therefore I would like to propose one of the options that we talked about, namely the following: Temporarily, Bart could use my 212 driveway apron to access the 206 lot since the 212 driveway apron is virtually next to the property line separating 212 from 206. Then, when the new curb and sidewalk is poured as a part of the streetscape project a new driveway apron could be poured for access to 206. I would be willing to pay the extra cost of doing the new 206 driveway which you rough estimated to cost somewhere between $400 and $500. Since the city would also need to redo the existing 212 driveway apron, it is my preference and recommendation to just pour a double wide (sistered together) driveway apron to provide access to both 212 and 206. One benefit would be more contiguous curbside parking for the commercial lot (just thinking ahead).
Please let me know if you need any clarifications, have any questions or concerns.
Thanks,
Roger Peterson
503.459.8420