Loading...
Minutes - 11/26/2007 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 26, 2007 TAPE READING 0001 DATE. COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CITY OF WOODBURN, COUNTY OF MARION, STATE OF OREGON, NOVEMBER 26,2007. CONVENED. The meeting convened at 7:00 p.m. with Mayor Figley presiding. 0010 ROLL CALL. Mayor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Figley Bjelland Cox Lonergan McCallum Nichols Sifuentez Present Present c*ee-pm) Present Present Present Present Present (8:00 pm) minutecorre~tion ~oted in 12/10/07 Council minutes Staff Present: City Administrator Brown, City Attorney Shields, Police Chief Russell, Acting Public Works Director Rohman, Community Development Director Allen, Finance Director Gillespie, Associate Planner Do1enc, City Recorder Tennant 0028 ANNOUNCEMENTS. A) Mayor's Christmas Tree Lighting event will be held on Sunday, December 2nd, in the Downtown Plaza. A reception at the Settlemier House will be held earlier in the day beginning at 1 :00 p.m. with their tree lighting ceremony scheduled for 5:30 p.m. followed by a candlelight procession from the Settlemier House to the Downtown Plaza for the City's tree lighting ceremony. Dance Dance Dance troupe and holiday musical performers will provide entertainment, local vendors will sell food items, Santa will arrive, and the City's Christmas tree will be lit at 6:30 p.m.. B) Council Workshop on the Housing Code will be held on December 10,2007 at 6:00 pm in the Council Chambers. The regular City Council meeting will follow at 7:00 p.m.. 0060 CHAMBER OF COMMERCE REPORT. Don Judson, Interim Chamber Executive Director, provided information on the following upcoming Chamber events: a) On Wednesday, November 28th between 4:00 pm and 7:00 pm, the Chamber is honoring education volunteers at the Happy Garden Restaurant; b) Greeter's Program on November 30th will be held at Chris's Hair Salon in Hubbard; c) Greeter's Program on December 7th will be held at AmeriTitle, 1840 Newberg Hwy.; d) Guest Speaker at the December 19th Chamber Forum will be Miss Oregon Kari Virding who will talk about her passion for helping kids with terminal diseases and the Make a Wish Foundation; and e) Mayor Figley will present the "State of the City" address at the January 2008 Chamber Forum. Page 1 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 26, 2007 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 26, 2007 TAPE READING Marilyn Young has been hired as the Chamber's Office Manager and she will be working with the Judson's until March 31,2008 after which time she will be on her own at the Chamber office. Mr. Judson stated that the Chamber is still working on their tourism proposal to the City and hopes to have it completed in December. The statistics show that Woodburn has 4.5 million tourists annually between Woodburn Company Stores, AI's Garden Center, Woodburn Drag Strip, and the Woodburn Tulip Festival. He will be working with the Chamber Board and Tourism Committee to figure out how one-third of the Transient Occupancy Tax CTOT) funds can be invested to economically develop the east side of the freeway thereby injecting new dollars into our economy from tourists already visiting our community. Lastly, he thanked the Council for taking the additional time to consider the business ordinance and it was his understanding that issue between the parties has been resolved. 020 I CONSENT AGENDA. A) approve the Council meeting minutes of October 22,2007; B) accept the Library Board minutes of October 17,2007; C) accept the Planning Commission draft minutes of November 8, 2007; D) receive the report on Claims for October 2007; E) receive the Planning Project Tracking Sheet dated November 20, 2007; F) receive the Building Activity report for October 2007; G) receive the Police Department statistics report for October 2007; H) receive the Code Enforcement statistics report for October 2007; I) receive the Community Services Department statistics for October 2007; and J) receive the Tree Standards report. Mayor Figley stated that Appendix A referred to in the Tree Standards report was inadvertently left out ofthe Council's agenda packet and staff distributed the information to the Council just prior to this meeting. MCCALLUM/NICHOLS... adopt the Consent Agenda as presented. The motion passed unanimously. 0238 PUBLIC HEARING - SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007-08. Mayor Figley declared the public hearing open at 7:09 p.m.. Finance Director Gillespie stated that the General Fund contingency account will be reduced by $42,000 which drops the contingency appropriation to 9.1 % of General Fund expenditures. The Council's goal has been to keep the contingency appropriation at 10% and, once the audit is completed, there will be sufficient beginning fund balance to restore the contingency appropriation to above 10%. Within the General CIP fund, the Community Center design project was budgeted for in last fiscal year but since it was not completed, funds are being carried forward to the current fiscal year. The Greenway construction project and the Parks Master Plan update were included in the Parks CIP and Page 2 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 26, 2007 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 26, 2007 TAPE READING discussed with the Budget Committee but these projects were inadvertently omitted from the adopted line item budget. He stated that the master plan update is funded by Parks system development charges and the Greenway is funded by a combination of State grant funds and system development charges. Councilor McCallum requested further information on the Willamette Broadband versus Gervais Telephone voice and data fiber connection between City Hall and the Police Facility. Finance Director Gillespie stated that the original Gervais Telephone proposal was to provide the City with dark fiber at no cost since they had been in negotiations with the City to provide for a television franchise. Gervais Telephone has since decided that they could not provide the television service as they had originally planned, therefore, the dark fiber would be at a cost to the City and if it was installed, the broadband width would only be about one-half of what the City needed. Staff contacted Willamette Broadband and was able to secure a proposal from them at the price they had quoted the City a year ago. Staff also authorized Willamette Broadband to proceed with the project right away so that the Police Department would not suffer any interruption in service. No one in the audience spoke on the proposed budget amendments. Mayor Figley declared the public hearing closed at 7: 14 p.m.. BJELLAND/NICHOLS... direct staff to draft an ordinance to approve the supplemental budget. The motion passed unanimously. 0410 PUBLIC HEARING: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION IN CASES V AR 2007-01 AND DR 2006-17 (E. Lincoln Street). Mayor Figley declared the public hearing open at 7:15 p.m.. The Mayor also stated for the record that she drives by the site regularly and is familiar with the site. Associate Planner Dolenc read the land use statement required under ORS Chapter 197. He then proceeded to review the staffreport relating to a proposed multi-family dwelling project to be located on a flag lot north of the E. Lincoln Street / Bryan Street intersection. The property is zoned as medium density residential CRM) and the proposed project is an 8-unit dwelling surrounded by residential multi-family lots to the north and east of the subject property, public/semi-public lot on a portion of the west side CWashington School property), and residential single family lots on the south side of Lincoln Street. Single family dwellings are located on either side of the entrance to the undeveloped parcel and would share a driveway with the subject property Creferred to as flag pole portion of development). The appeal by the applicant relates to a decision by the Planning Commission to require construction of an architectural wall around the perimeter of the subject property. He stated that the Woodburn Development Ordinance (WDO) interior yard and buffer standards would require a solid brick or architectural wall if it abuts existing single family or duplex dwelling. The Planning Commission has discretion on the wall requirements or waiver of wall requirements for RM, P/SP zone, or Page 3 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 26, 2007 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 26, 2007 TAPE READING existing medium density residential unit since it is in conjunction with the design review case. In this case, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted the findings that a wall should be required around the entire perimeter except in clear vision areas. The appellant has agreed to construct an architectural wall along the flag pole portion of the development to code requirements. It was noted that the walls along the north and west property lines were the wall areas whereby the Planning Commission has the discretion on wall requirements. Councilor Cox questioned if the applicant has agreed to construct the solid wall along the flag pole portion. Associate Planner Dolenc stated that the applicant has agreed to the flag pole architectural wall with the wall heights as determined by the Planning Commission. Councilor Sifuentez declared for the record that she lives a few feet away from the subj ect property. 0802 Terry Anthony, representing appellant Welkin Engineering, stated that they did not disagree with the code provisions regarding architectural walls but felt that the walls are not always well-suited to every possible instance in which it can be applied. In this case, the initial variance application was submitted since they did not feel that walls were necessary around the complete perimeter of the subject property. The appeal is being made since they did not agree with the reasons for the Planning Commission's denial of the variance. He proceeded with a power point presentation providing background information on the proposed development layout, design and buffers. He agreed that the flag pole and east/south walls are required walls and they will design the wall to City standards. The landscape proposal for the development would provide for dense landscaping and shrubs around the property. The north end of the property and the west side north of the flag pole are the discretionary areas for the architectural walls. He stated that the fence around the Washington school property Cwest side) is an 8-foot fence and on the north side abutting the Head Start School there is an existing screened chain link fence. He stated that the open space lot on the west side which separates the school property from the subject property is landlocked with the only access from the school or from a lot located a street to the north of the school. In their opinion, the walls would not be considered as public amenities since they are not visible from public right of way, however, the staff report stated that the purpose of the walls are for noise abatement. The Planning Commission focused on wood fences being a maintenance problem and they felt that the walls were needed as pedestrian access barrier. They had proposed to construct a fence around the entire property in addition to landscaping and grade separations that would provide a noise barrier. Since the Planning Commission hearing, they have found a vinyl fence alternative which has a lifetime guarantee and does come in two colors which would fulfill the requirements of an architectural wall under the WDO. In regards to access barrier, they believe that the vinyl fence would serve the same purpose of providing a barrier for kids to come across the property to get to Washington School and Page 4 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 26,2007 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 26, 2007 TAPE READING reminded the Council that the school has an 8' foot fence around their perimeter. There are no pathways through the property at this time nor it is expected that there will be an increase in the number of individuals crossing the property once the development is completed. He stated that they feel that the vinyl fence is an appropriate substitution for the masonry cement architectural wall since it provides the amenities and the functionality of the stone wall at a fraction of the cost. The issue of having the stone walls around the complete perimeter of the property was not brought up for some considerable amount of time which caught them by surprise, therefore, they were not prepared to address this issue at the hearing. He requested that the Council look favorably on their appeal. Brief discussion was held on the vinyl fence alternative and it was noted that some maintenance is required to keep it looking attractive. The fence guarantee relates to the product not falling apart and degrading over time. Councilor Bjelland questioned if the townhouses would be rentals or condominiums. Mr. Anthony stated that it was his understanding that the townhouses would start out as rentals but they may be condos at a later date. A Homeowners Association would be required for the future maintenance of the fence and as long as the property continues to be owned and rented out by a single landlord then that landlord would be responsible for all of the maintenance. No one in the audience spoke either for or against the issue before the Council. 1304 Councilor Bjelland questioned what has been the Planning Commission's policy in regards to architectural fence on multi-family projects within the City when they adjoin other multi-family projects. Community Development Director Allen stated that the fence separation from the wall has been used as a defining line between different uses. He stated that he did not know the history since this is a provision in the WDO which has only been in effect for about five years. Councilor Bjelland questioned if Director Allen had a feeling as to where the Planning Commission would be in a future situation between multi-family projects that are not under same ownership and types of fencing required. Director Allen stated that the housing code requires that fencing would be discretionary in this type of case. In this particular case, the Commission had a lot of discussion about architectural walls and other fencing types that they had recently seen and Commission members saw a masonry architectural wall as longer lasting to provide that buffer between the uses of a single family dwelling to the south and southeast, and to the school that exists to the west. In regards to subject property being adjacent to other existing multi-family developments, he did not how the Commission would ultimately decide since they did acknowledge that there was an existing fence on the north end of the subject property but felt that it was still appropriate in this particular case through their discretionary power to require the wall for the entire perimeter. Councilor Cox questioned ifthe staff had any disagreement with the estimated cost Page 5 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 26, 2007 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 26, 2007 TAPE READING provided by the applicant for the architectural wall versus the alternative vinyl fence. Director Allen stated that staff did not do a cost estimate but the numbers did seem realistic, however, cost is not one of the issues for approving a variance because any standard deemed appropriate by the City is likely to involve a cost. When exercising discretion, cost could be a part of the overall factors to be considered but it would still need to be tied into some of the other criteria. 1470 City Attorney Shields stated that the WDO does not specify an appeal procedure other than it is de novo and is confined to the scope of what the appellant raises in the notice of appeal. It would be permissible to allow the staff to respond to a substantive issue that has been raised by the appellant and if that raises any issue, then the appellant could respond to the new issue. Director Allen stated that the Planning Commission did not see the vinyl fence alternative during their hearings process and, unless the Council makes a decision that is different from the Commission, did not feel that there was anything substantially new that require writing additional findings. Associate Planner Dolenc stated that in the conditions of approval, a typographical error was made in that a condition on the architectural wall shall have an anti-graffiti surface. On an architectural wall of brick or concrete masonry units, there is a sealant applied shortly after wall is constructed and provides a surface that can be powerwashed to clean paint off of the surface. Mr. Anthony stated that anti-graffiti chemicals can be applied to any surface and the vinyl fence is graffiti resistant. Applying the chemical to the vinyl fence will make it easier to remove the graffiti. 1625 Councilor Nichols stated that with vinyl and heat there is a danger of fire and, if the vinyl bums, questioned the protection to residents from the toxicity. Mr. Anthony stated that if there is a fire at the location, the vinyl would melt and he had not come across anything that would indicate that under extreme heat such as 1200 there would be any issues with melting, therefore, combustion would be the reason for a fire. Mayor Figley declared the public hearing closed at 7:55 p.m.. 1687 Councilor Cox stated that he has not had a strong inclination to reverse a decision that the Planning Commission has made since he feels that they are charged with making decisions. In this particular case and in terms of reasonableness, he felt that the architectural wall around the entire property is more than what is necessary and the discretionary areas should not have the requirement for the masonry architectural wall. He did not feel that the wall would improve the quality of the neighborhood and even though walls have any advantage in some situations, the feeling of openness can be destroyed in a community by putting up multiple walls. The west side of the property already has a chain link fence around the school property and he did not see any reason to put up an architectural wall on that side of the property. On the north side, there is an existing fence and a vinyl fence would be appropriate. Even though the regulation may Page 6 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 26, 2007 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 26,2007 TAPE READING be well-intentioned which would make sense in most cases but, in this case, it does not make any particular sense for this site. He also has some concern about the open-ended discretion at the Planning Commission level without having any standards by which to exercise that discretion. In regards to this appeal, he felt that the variance to construct a durable vinyl fence should be approved for the back lot area and the Homeowners Association will be responsible for the maintenance of the fence. Councilor Lonergan arrived at the meeting at 8:00 p.m.. 1903 Councilor Bjelland agreed with the Councilor Cox's comments and reiterated that there should be some barrier between the adjoining property and the subject property and felt that the vinyl fence would provide the necessary barrier. He had concerns regarding an architectural wall requirement in the flag lot portion when there is no visibility of the land from the street. Councilor Sifuentez expressed her agreement with the Planning Commission's decision since the walls will provide a noise barrier for residents in the neighborhood. Councilor Nichols agreed that the architectural wall is too much in this particular situation and the durable vinyl fence is acceptable in this flag lot. Councilor McCallum stated that there have been compelling reasons to approve the variance but he expressed his support of the Planning Commission's decision to deny the vanance. Councilor Lonergan stated that he had read the staff report but due to his absence during the public hearing testimony he would not provide an opinion or vote on the issue. 2111 BJELLAND/COX... amend the Planning Commission decision to allow a two-colored vinyl fence of the kind of material or equivalent as presented to the Council on the back part of the flag portion of the lot and the masonry architectural wall will be in the flag pole portion of the lot, as part of the conditions of approval the fence must be maintained by the Homeowners Association, an anti-graffiti application over and above the normal preparation be applied to the vinyl fence, and direct staff to draft an ordinance with findings to support the Council's decision. Councilor Cox reiterated that he is reluctant to overturn the findings of the Planning Commission, however, it is the Council's obligation to look at it anew. Councilor McCallum stated that he believes in what the Commission has presented to the Council and he does have concerns about the future. Councilor Sifuentez felt strongly that the Planning Commission and Council have worked hard over the last few years to make decisions on how Woodburn should look in the future and feels that the Planning Commission did look at this issue hard and made a decision on the buffer standards which should not be overturned. Councilor Bjelland felt that it was unfortunate that the Planning Commission did not have the vinyl fence option before them since much of the concern on the Commission related to wood fences deteriorating and having to be replaced after a number of years. If there is a legitimate lifetime fence application then it should be considered as an option. Page 7 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 26, 2007 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 26, 2007 TAPE READING Councilor Cox stated that the issue before the Council is interpreting a provision of the WDO which has only been in place for 5 years. Councilor McCallum noted that the WDO was adopted for the purpose of setting a more positive image for Woodburn. On roll call vote, the motion passed 3-2-1 with Councilors McCallum and Sifuentez voting nay and Councilor Lonergan abstaining. Mayor Figley stated for the record that if she would have been required to vote on the issue she would have voted in favor of the motion. 2397 COUNCIL BILL NO. 2686 - ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.2399 (BUSINESS REGISTRATION ORDINANCE) TO ELIMINATE THE EXEMPTION FOR PRODUCERS OF FARM PRODUCTS (Continued from October 8. 2007 Council Meetin~). The second reading of Council Bill No. 2686 was read by title only since there were no objections from the Council. Mayor Figley stated that this bill was prepared in order to eliminate a loophole in the ordinance. Councilor McCallum questioned if the issue involving AI's Garden Center had been resolved. City Administrator Brown stated that he had written the staff report about a week ago and, as of this date, he was not aware of any resolution. On roll call vote for final passage, the bill passed unanimously. Mayor Figley declared Council Bill No. 2686 duly passed. 2691 COUNCIL BILL NO. 2691 - RESOLUTION INITIATING CONSIDERATION OF LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENTS TO THE WOODBURN DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE FOR THE YEAR 2008. Councilor Sifuentez introduced Council Bill No. 2691. Recorder Tennant read the bill by title only since there were no objections from the CounciL Councilor Cox stated that this resolution authorizes a study and includes a list of items under consideration which can be added to or subtracted from by the Focus Group. On roll call vote for final passage, the bill passed unanimously. Mayor Figley declared Council Bill No. 2691 duly passed. 2548 FRONT STREET PROJECT STATUS UPDATE. Administrator Brown stated that he is looking for some commitment from the Council on balancing the revenues and expenses on this project by making policy choices so that the project can either proceed or be held back. He provided background information on a project cost increase of over $1.1 million involving utility undergrounding, additional work on some side streets and in the alleyway around utility undergrounding, sidewalks not originally planned on replacing, and engineering problems on Front Street where it Page 8 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 26, 2007 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 26, 2007 TAPE READING intersects with Hardcastle Avenue. Over the last year, staff has tried to secure additional revenues to close the $1 million gap. Initially, consideration was being given to require PGE to absorb up to $500,000 for undergrounding costs and they could go to the Public Utility Commission to obtain a rate adjustment on City ratepayers to recover their costs for the undergrounding. As time went on, the forced undergrounding concept was not as receptive to the Council and other revenue alternatives were explored. The current proposal does not rely on forced utility undergrounding to close any revenue gaps, however, staff has come up with $550,000 in grants and $300,000 in savings by eliminating work that is not essential to completing this project. In more recent months, construction and undergrounding costs have added another $1.2 million to the project cost. He stated that Front Street is in the capital improvement plan and with this being a regional roadway providing a system improvement, system development fees c$724,000) can be used towards this improvement project. Storm drain system development charges ($125,000) is another funding source to expand the storm drain capacity between Harrison Street and Highway 214. Within the franchise ordinance, PGE is required to relocate its facilities on North Front Street thereby saving the City an estimated $71,000. It was noted that PGE does not believe that the North Front Street work qualifies as relocation, however, staff will be pursuing this issue with PGE. Within the General fund, the City has annually budgeted $200,000 for street paving projects and unspent funds from fiscal year 2006-07 and those budgeted for in fiscal year 2007-08 can be used on the North Front Street project c$400,000). Lastly, a local improvement district cLID) could be formed to recover all or a portion of costs related to the conversion of private utility connections c$140,000). Staff is proposing that there be a 50/50 cost share on the LID and the property owner can finance their share of the cost over a ten-year period under the bancroft bond program. As a recommended alternative, he proposed the deferring of the undergrounding in the alley and connected side streets, and alley improvements which will save about $380,000 which would then remove one year General Fund subsidy for the street paving projects. In summary, staff is recommending that the Council approve a one-year shift of the roadway subsidy, use the SDC's from storm drain, increase the SDC's in TIF's cTraffic Impact Fees), authorize staff to pursue the utility relocation issue, and proceed with the process to establish a local improvement district cLID), and to take the $300,000 for the alley work out of the project. He reminded the Council that the LID is not a guarantee of funds since property owners do have a right to remonstrate. Councilor McCallum questioned the reliability of the undergrounding costs submitted by PGE. Administrator Brown stated that there were two sets of estimates developed for the undergrounding portion of the project and staff is using the estimates provided by the engineers who were hired to specifically work on this project. The one area not completed yet by the engineers is the area between Cleveland and Harrison Streets and the estimate being used at this time is last year's estimate increased by the same Page 9 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 26, 2007 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 26, 2007 TAPE READING percentage factor used for the rest of the project. He reminded the Council that engineer's estimate are conservative and the sooner the City proceeds with the project the better off the City will be financially in funding this project. Councilor McCallum complimented staff on obtaining grant funds to assist with project funding in addition to coming up with creative financing to accomplish this project. Councilor Cox also complimented staff in being able to put everything together over the last year, however, he does have concerns as to if it will be done due to rising costs. As it now stands, he stated that he is in favor of the project but reserves the right not to proceed on this project if it becomes too expensive. Administrator Brown stated that the City still has the ability to pull all or a portion of the undergrounding if costs are too high. However, staff would like to finish the specifications and put this project out to bid before a final decision is made on the scope of the project. Councilor Cox stated that he was never in favor of forced undergrounding and it may be necessary to eliminate the undergrounding portion of the project, however, he would like to wait until bids are received to make that decision. 3320 Councilor Bjelland stated that in the original funding source recommendation the LID service conversions was $140,000 whereas the amount listed in staff recommended funding source was $100,000. He questioned the $40,000 difference and, in regards to the $200,000 General Fund contribution, what projects would be delayed if these funds are diverted to the North Front Street project. Administrator Brown stated that part of the total original LID cost of $280,000 was $80,000 of service connections attributable to the alleyway. If the alley portion of the project is deferred then those service connections would not be part of the recommended project. Of the $80,000, the reduced cost share is $40,000 to the City and $40,000 to the local improvement district. In regards to the $200,000 General Fund contribution, those funds are transferred into the Street Fund for general maintenance of streets such as street resurfacing and surface preservation projects and projects will slide back by one year if the General Fund contribution is not made into the Street Fund. Councilor Lonergan stated that he would like to see this project move forward and he appreciates all of the staff work done including the creative financing to accomplish this project. He is a little concern on the impact to downtown businesses while the work is in progress and he is concern about the LID charge to those businesses in addition to their potential loss of business during the construction period. It was the consensus ofthe Council to move forward with the project as recommended by staff. 3475 PLANNING COMMISSION OR ADMINISTRATIVE LAND USE ACTIONS. A) Planning Commission's approval of Design Review 2007-09, Variance 2007-06, and Street Exception 2007-07 located at 2775 N. Front Street (applicant Grating Pacific): Project involves 15,000 sq. foot expansion to an existing 27,500 sq. foot Page 10 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 26, 2007 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 26,2007 TAPE READING industrial building, an exception to the street right-of-way and improvement requirements for Front Street, and a variance from the WDO landscaping requirements. No action was taken by the Council to bring this land use action up for review. Councilor Cox requested that staff provide more information on the location of the subject property so that it will be easier to identify the location when reading the agenda materials. 3502 CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT. A) Administrator Brown stated that the Public Works Director interviews will be held next week and there will be up to 6 individuals being interviewed for the position. Interview panels will consist of Public Works staff, Department Heads, and Public Works Directors from other cities that have volunteered their time to assist the City in this selection process. 3542 MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS. Councilor McCallum thanked the Police and Public Works departments for taking care of the advertising signs that were close to the Woodburn Crossing Shopping Center. He also mentioned that last Friday at midnight Woodburn was a popular tourist attraction at Woodburn Company Stores and cars were parked along the freeway before the stores even opened for business since their parking area was completely full. With this being the first year of the early opening venture, he did not feel that Woodburn Company Stores even imagined the parking problem and hoped that next year alternative parking solutions can be arranged. He also questioned the status of the ODOT property adjacent to the freeway. Chief Russell stated that he is still working on this issue. He has had discussions with Don Jordan from ODOT since they have been working on trying to resolve the issue of people parking their vehicles and advertising them for sale on this property. ODOT had originally stated that they would install No Parking signs, however, the signs posted were No Trespassing. Mr. Jordan assured him that they would resolve the problem but it has not been done as of this date. There was a vehicle parked on the landscaping area and the City did take care of that situation under City ordinance. ATTEST /J~":tt;,-;~-+- MaryT ant, Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon 3680 ADJOURNMENT. MCCALLUM/SIFUENTEZ.... meeting be adjou The meeting adjourned at 8:53 p.m.. Page 11 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 26, 2007