Skip to main content
File #: PC 18-014    Version: 1 Name: Appeal of Abernethy Hotel and Nicita Fee Waiver Request
Type: Land Use Item Status: Public Hearing
File created: 1/29/2018 In control: City Commission
On agenda: 2/7/2018 Final action: 2/7/2018
Title: AP-17-0006: Appeal of the Planning Commission Approval of Planning Files CP-17-0002, DP-17-0003, and NR-17-0004 Including a Request to Waive or Otherwise not Impose the Appeal Fee
Sponsors: Laura Terway
Attachments: 1. Staff Report, 2. Staff Memo on Appeal Fee Waiver Request, 3. Applicant Attorrney Memo on Appeal Fee Waiver Request, 4. James Nicita Email regarding Fee Waiver and Call Up Request, 5. James Nicita Fee Waiver and City Commission Call Up Request, 6. Adopted Fee Ordinances and Resolutions, 7. AP 17-06 Staff Response to Substantive Appeal Issues, 8. AP-17-0006 Appeal as Submitted 11.29.2017, 9. Notice of Decision Mailed 11.15.2017, 10. Exhibit A. Planning Commission Report 11.13.2017, 11. Exhibit B. Final Findings for Adoption 11.13.2017, 12. Exhibit C. Final Conditions of Approval (Tracked Changes Version), 13. Exhibit D. Final Conditions of Approval (Clean Version), 14. Exhibit E. Supplemental Findings Staff Report September 11, 2017, 15. Exhibit F. Staff Report and Recommendation August 14, 2017, 16. Exhibit G. Applicant's Final Written Argument 10.16.2017, 17. Exhibit H. Applicant's 120-Day Extension 10.16.2017, 18. Exhibit I. Items Entered at Hearing on 9.25.2017, 19. Exhibit J. Applicant's PC Letter 9.25.2017, 20. Exhibit K. Hill Architects Letter 9.22.2017, 21. Exhibit L. Mike Robinson email re Sisul Engineering and Lancaster Engineering Response Memos 9.22.2017, 22. Exhibit M. Sisul Engineering Letter on Infiltration 9.22.2017, 23. Exhibit N. Lancaster Engineering Trip Distribution Memo 9.20.17, 24. Exhibit O. Applicant's Requested Revisions to the Conditions of Approval, 25. Exhibit P. Development Services Engineering comments on Revisions to Conditions of Approval, 26. Exhibit Q. Index of Items submitted into Record by James Nicita since 09.11.2017, 27. Exhibit R. Items submitted into Record by James Nicita 9.11.2017, 28. Exhibit S. Sept 11, 2017 Planning Commission Packet, 29. Exhibit T. New Items Submitted into Record Sept 11, 30. Exhibit U. Architectural Renderings from September 11 hearing, 31. Exhibit V. August 14 Planning Commission Packet and All Items Entered into Record, 32. Exhibit W. 1996 End of the Oregon Trail Amended Master Plan, 33. Exhibit X. City Recorder Response to James Nicita Public Records Request - 1991 End of Oregon Trail District Guidelines, 34. Exhibit Y. Nicita Email response to City Record Email Finalizing Public Records Request, 35. Exhibit Z. HRB Draft Minutes April 24 2017, 36. Exhibit AA. Nicita Email on Connectivity with attachments 9.22.2017, 37. Exhibit BB. Waterfront Master Plan 2002, 38. Exhibit CC. Bryon Boyce 1st Open Record Evidence 10.2.2017, 39. Exhibit DD. Yazzolino 1st Open Record Evidence 10.2.2017, 40. Exhibit EE. Nicita 1st Open Record Evidence 10.2.2017 (Note - Large File 108 mb), 41. Exhibit FF. Applicant's 1st Open Record Argument and Evidence 10.2.2017, 42. Exhibit GG. Staff 1st Open Record Evidence Tribal Notice Process 10.2.2017, 43. Exhibit HH. Nicita 2nd Open Record Rebuttal Comments 10.9.2017, 44. Exhibit II. City Recorder 2nd Open Record Evidence 1990-12-19 City Commission Agenda Packet p 168, 45. Exhibit JJ. City Recorder 2nd Open Record Evidence 1990-12-19 City Commission Minutes, 46. Exhibit KK. Applicant 2nd Open Record Evidence 10.09.2017, 47. Exhibit LL. Applicant 2nd Open Record Email 10.09.2017, 48. Exhibit MM. Staff Email re EOT Guidelines Second Open Record period 10.13.2017, 49. Exhibit NN. Jerry Herrmann Comments 2nd Open Record Period

Title

AP-17-0006: Appeal of the Planning Commission Approval of Planning Files CP-17-0002, DP-17-0003, and NR-17-0004 Including a Request to Waive or Otherwise not Impose the Appeal Fee

 

Body

RECOMMENDED ACTION (Motion):

1. Resolve the fee waiver request by making a tentative decision to grant, in whole or part, the requested reduction in the appeal fee.

2. Depending on how the appeal waiver request is resolved, confirm that the Appellant agrees to pay the appeal fee, as determined by the City Commission, and proceed with the appeal.

3. Assuming that the Appellant wishes to proceed with review, deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's decision to approve Planning Files CP-17-0002, DP-17-0003, and NR-17-0004 with Conditions.

4. If the Appellant decides not to proceed with the appeal, the City Commission need not take any further action regarding the substance of the appeal.

 

In any event, staff will return at a subsequent meeting with final findings for the Commission’s consideration and adoption.

 

BACKGROUND:

The Planning Commission reviewed a request for a General Development Plan and Detailed Development Plan in two phases located close to the intersection of 17th Street and Washington Street directly across from the End of the Oregon Trail Interpretive Center. Phase 1 which is the subject of the Detailed Development Plan consists of a 5-story hotel with approximately 99 rooms with associated parking lot, site improvements and street frontage improvements. Phase 2 consists of 131 apartment units, 9,500 square-feet of retail space, a 2,500 coffee shop and associated parking and site improvements. The project proposal includes preservation and retention of the Hackett House, a designated historic landmark which is currently used for offices. The application requested six adjustments to the development code pursuant to OCMC 17.65.070.

After considering the testimony and information in the record, on November 13, 2017 the Planning Commission approved the application with amended Conditions of Approval by a vote of 5-0.

 

This appeal was submitted as well as a separate request for an appeal fee waiver from the City Commission.

 

The City Commission should resolve this waiver request first in a separate public hearing before moving on to consider the substance of the appeal.  The City Commission should open the public record to hear new evidence limited to the fee waiver issue.  Please refer to the staff report outlining the issues and options for resolving the fee waiver request.  After hearing from the Appellant, the Applicant and any other interested parties, the City Commission should make a tentative decision.  If the Commission denies the fee waiver, in whole or in part, the Appellant should be asked to state on the record whether he wishes to proceed with the appeal fee, committing to payment of the appeal fee, including the reimbursement of actual city attorney fees.

 

If the fee waiver is granted or the Appellant decides to proceed with the merits of the appeal, the City Commission will proceed with considering the appeal, on the record, limited to the issues raised in the notice of appeal.  Please refer to the attached staff memorandum with proposed findings regarding how each of the 15 issues raised by the appellant was addressed in the record for the Planning Commission decision.

 

A memorandum on the requested fee waiver as well as a staff report on the appeal, appeal documents, final findings and conditions of approval adopted by the Planning Commission and the entire record prepared for Planning Files CP-17-0002, DP-17-0003, and NR-17-0004 are attached.