Agenda - 12/10/2007
CITY OF WOODBURN
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
DECEMBER 10,2007 - 7:00 P.M.
KA1HRYN FIGLEY, MAYOR
WAL1ER NICHOLS, COUNCILOR WARD 1
RICHARD BJELLAND, COUNCILOR WARD II
PmR MCCALLUM, COUNCILOR WARD III
JAMES COX, COUNCILOR WARD IV
FRANK LONERGAN, COUNCILOR WARD V
EUDA SIFUEN1EZ, COUNCILOR WARD VI
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 270 MONTGOMERY STREET
6:00 PM - WORKSHOP
1. DRAFT HOUSING CODE
7:00 PM - REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
1. CALL TO ORDER AND FLAG SALUTE
2. ROLL CALL
3. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND APPOINTMENTS
Announcements:
A. Holiday Closures:
Christmas: City Hall and the Library will close at noon on
December 24 and will reopen for regular business hours on
December 26. The Aquatic Center will be closed on December
24 and 25.
New Year's: City Hall and the Library will be closed on
January 1. The Aquatic Center will be closed December 31 and
January 1.
B. The Community Services Department is updating the City's Parks
and Recreation Master Plan. A public meeting will be held on
Thursday, December 13, at 7:00 pm in the Library multi-purpose
room to review the results of the focus group sessions with key
stakeholders that are being held tomorrow and Wednesday. All
interested community members are encouraged to attend the
December 13 meeting and provide feedback.
C. Carleton Hart Architecture will present its report on the feasibility
of expanding the aquatic center, and for constructing a stand-
alone cultural arts and community center at the January 14.
2008, City Council meeting. All interested community members
are encouraged to attend. or to watch the report on WCAT.
uHabra il1terpretes Disrol1ibles rara aquellas rerSOl1aS que 110 hablal1 Il1gles/ previo acuerDo. Comu111quese
al (5031980-2.485:'
December 10, 2007
Council Agenda
Page i
Appointments:
D. Appointments and Reappointments:
1. Library Board
2. Planning Commission
3. Recreation and Parks Board
1
4. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS
Proclamations:
None.
Presentations:
None.
5. COMMITIEE REPORTS
A. Chamber of Commerce
B. Woodburn School District
6. COMMUNICATIONS
None.
7. BUSINESS FROM THE PUBLIC - This allows the public to introduce items
for Council consideration not already scheduled on the agenda.
.
8. CONSENT AGENDA -Items listed on the consent agenda are considered
routine and may be enacted by one motion. Any item may be removed
for discussion at the request of a Council member.
A. Woodburn City Council minutes of November 26, 2007 2
Recommended Action: Approve the minutes.
B. Woodburn City Council Special Meeting/Workshop minutes of 12
November 15,2007
Recommended Action: Approve the minutes.
C. Woodburn Recreation and Parks Board draft minutes of 16
November 13,2007
Recommended Action: Accept the draft minutes.
D. Police Department Statistics for November 2007 18
Recommended Action: Receive the report.
December 10, 2007
Council Agenda
Page ii
E. Code Enforcement Statistics for November 2007
Recommended Action: Receive the report.
24
F. Building Activity for November 2007
Recommended Action: Receive the report.
26
G. Planning Project Tracking Sheet dated December 5, 2007
Recommended Action: Receive the report.
27
H. Woodburn Downtown Development Plan Update - Transportation 30
& Growth Management Program Grant Update: Contract
Termination
Recommended Action: Receive the report.
9. TABLED BUSINESS
None.
10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
None.
11. GENERAL BUSINESS -Members of the public wishing to comment on items of
general business must complete and submit a speaker's card to the City
Recorder prior to commencing this portion of the Council's agenda.
Comment time may be limited by Mayoral prerogative.
A. Council Bill No. 2692 - Ordinance adopting a supplemental 35
budget for Fiscal Year 2007 -2008 and declaring an emergency
Recommended Action: Adopt the ordinance.
B. Council Bill No. 2693 - Resolution granting the application in DR 40
2006- 17 and V AR 2007-01, removing specific conditions
previously imposed by the Woodburn Planning Commission,
adopting alternative findings and conclusions, and imposing
addffionalcondffions
Recommended Action: Adopt the resolution.
C. Council Bill No. 2694 - Resolution establishing the compensation 82
schedule for certain part-time hourly and seasonal employees
Recommended Action: Adopt the resolution.
D. Position Upgrade: Municipal Court Clerk 86
Recommended Action: Authorize the upgrade of a Municipal
Court Clerk position from .5 FTE to .75 FTE.
December 10, 2007
Council Agenda
Page jji
E. Wastewater Facility Plan Consultant Agreement and Wastewater 88
Facility Plan Advisory Committee
Recommended Action: Authorize the City Administrator to sign
the agreement for professional services with CH2M Hill Inc. to
prepare an updated facilities plan for the City's wastewater
treatment facilities and the Mayor to appoint a Wastewater
Facility Plan Advisory Committee.
F. Appointment of Administrator Pro Tem 115
Recommended Action: Appoint Police Chief Scott Russell as
Administrator Pro Tem for the period of December 14, 2007
through January 1, 2008.
G. Cancellation of December 24, 2007 Meeting 117
Recommended Action: Cancel the December 24, 2007
meeting.
12. NEW BUSINESS
13. PLANNING COMMISSION OR ADMINISTRATIVE LAND USE ACTIONS - These
are Planning Commission or Administrative Land Use actions that
may be called up by the City Council.
A. Community Development Director's Approval of Planning Case 118
DR 2007-11 on the Property at 985 Lawson Avenue (property
containing the existing Taco Bell restaurant)
14. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
15. MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Proposed Letter of Support to Fund the "Big Look"
119
16. ADJOURNMENT
December 10, 2007
Council Agenda
Pageiv
('--", ,~
~.,,"iW...-.'..'..
,. Yl ...... "
WOODBURN
'.'"'l'a,auJ 1889
3D
~~
.
.
December 7, 2007
TO:
FROM:
City Council ~,.
Kathy Figley, Ma I or
Appointments and e ppointments
SUBJECT:
The following appointments and reappointments are made, subject to the
approval of the Council. Please forward any adverse comments to me prior to
the Council meeting on Monday, December 10, 2007. No reply is required if you
approve of my decision.
LIBRARY BOARD
Position 1- J.D. Mitchoff - term ends 12/31/10
Position IV - Neal Hawes - term ends 12/31/11
PLANNING COMMISSION
Position 2 - Brad Hutchison - term ends 12/31/11
Position 3 - David Vancil- term ends 12/31/11
Position 5 - Larry GrosJacques - term ends 12/31/11
RECREATION AND PARKS BOARD
Position I -Eric Morris - term ends 12/31/10
Position VII - Charlene Williams - term ends 12/31/08
l
SA
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 (8:00 pm)
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
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 Dolenc, 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 perfonners
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 infonnation 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 tenninal 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
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 staff report 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 (RM) 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
(Washington 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 (referred 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
3
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
subject 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 (west 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
4
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 oftime 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 if the staff had any disagreement with the estimated cost
Page 5 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 26,2007
5
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
6
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. I f there is
a legitimate lifetime fence application then it should be considered as an option.
Page 7 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 26,2007
7
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
8
TAPE
READING
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
NOVEMBER 26, 2007
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, staffhas 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 ($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 ($400,000). Lastly, a local improvement district (LID)
could be formed to recover all or a portion of costs related to the conversion of private
utility connections ($140,000). Staff is proposing that there be a 50/50 cost share on the
LID and the property owner can finance their share ofthe 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 (Traffic Impact Fees), authorize staff to pursue
the utility relocation issue, and proceed with the process to establish a local improvement
district (LID), 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
9
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.
Co unci lor Lonergan stated that he would like to see this project move fOIWard 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 of the Council to move fOIWard 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
10
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.
3680 ADJOURNMENT.
MCCALLUM/SIFUENTEZ.... meeting be adjourned. The motion passed unanimously.
The meeting adjourned at 8:53 p.m..
APPROVED
KATHRYN FIGLEY, MAYOR
ATTEST
Mary Tennant, Recorder
City of Woodburn, Oregon
Page 11 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 26, 2007
11
8B
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING / WORKSHOP MINUTES
NOVEMBER 15, 2007
TAPE
READING
Side A
~ DATE. COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CITY OF WOODBURN,
COUNTY OF MARION, STATE OF OREGON, NOVEMBER 15, 2007.
CONVENED. The special meeting convened at 7:00 p.m. with Mayor Figley presiding.
:2 ROLL CALL.
Mayor Figley Present
Councilor Bjelland Present
Councilor Cox Present
Councilor Lonergan Absent
Councilor McCallum Present
Councilor Nichols Absent
Councilor Sifuentez Absent
Staff Present: City Administrator Brown, City Attorney Shields, Acting Public Works
Director Rohman, City Recorder Tennant
Consultant: John Ghilarducci, FCS Group
Mayor Figley stated that Councilor Sifuentez was unable to attend this meeting due to
illness and Councilor Nichols was on vacation.
1.4 PALOMAR GAS TRANSMISSION PROJECT - RESPONSE TO
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT.
BJELLAND/LONERGAN... authorize the Mayor to sign letter to respond to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission about the potential impacts of locating a 36-inch
diameter natural gas pipeline within the Woodburn Urban Growth Boundary.
The motion passed unanimously.
2.0 ADJOURNMENT INTO COUNCIL WORKSHOP ON SYSTEM
DEVELOPMENT CHARGES FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS.
COX/MCCALLUM... adjourn into a Council workshop.
The motion passed unanimously. The Council adjourned into the workshop session at
7:02 p.m..
Administrator Brown stated that this workshop was called in order to provide the Council
with advanced information on policy items that are being considered in this proposal, an
opportunity for the Mayor and Council to modify policy recommendations, and to review
the assumptions used by the consultants to develop the proposed system development
charges before it becomes a more formal document for public review.
3.3 John Ghilarducci stated that the purpose of the study is to update the City's existing
transportation system development charge (also known as Traffic Impact Fee), and to
Page 1 - Special Council Meeting / Workshop Minutes, November 15, 2007
12
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING / WORKSHOP MINUTES
NOVEMBER 15, 2007
TAPE
READING
develop a separate system development charge for the area directly served by the
interchange. He reviewed background information on state legislative intent to provide
equitable funding for orderly growth and development by allowing imposition of system
development charges for capital costs that can be assessed for new development or for re-
development that increases the demand on infrastructure systems. The two components
of system development charges are (I) a reimbursement fee which is a fair share of
unused existing capacity and (2) an improvement fee which is fair share of future planned
capacity for growth. Oregon State law places limits on how system development charges
can be spent with reimbursement fee receipts available for any non-growth related capital
facilities expenditures, and improvement fee receipts available only for capacity-
increasing facilities expenditures. The City currently tracks these receipts separately
since there is flexibility available for reimbursement. State law also requires developers
to be given a credit against the improvement if a developer is required to oversize a
qualified capital improvement. The legal minimum credit is up to the amount of the
improvement fee but in many cases cities will credit the developer for the full oversizing
costs even ifit exceeds the improvement fee since it would have been money the City
would have had to spend anyway. If a credit exceeds the improvement fee amount, it can
be a paper credit that the developer can use on a future project rather than giving the
developer a cash reimbursement. He stated that his firm would like to recommend in
their report that the City adopt a Transportation SDC credit policy that would provide a
credit for the full excess capacity cost of a qualified improvement only and the City
would provide the developer a cash reimbursement of those credits as development and
building permits are pulled by builders who subsequently develop on the site. Compared
to the current City credit policy, the proposed credit policy is more generous for qualified
public improvements and less generous for non-qualified public improvements. He also
felt that the proposed policy protects the City's cash flow since the credit will only be
disbursed after builder fees are paid.
Lengthy discussion was held regarding credits as it relates to different methods of
returning the credits, determining actual costs related to the added capacity, and when
developers would be eligible for credits. Mr. Ghilarducci reminded the Council that
developers should only get a credit for oversizing an improvement that provides a
capacity that others can use and that the project meets the qualified improvement criteria
If a developer is required to build a standard street to their development for the purpose of
connectivity, a street improvement for this purpose would not necessarily meet the
criteria for receiving a credit. Developers will only get reimbursed for their credits as
their own property is developed and not through SDC funds received from other
developments. It was also mentioned that generally there is a 10-year limit in which
credits would be reimbursed back to the developer.
37.0 Administrator Brown expressed concern about returning more of the credit than what is
legally required since the developer is able to use the improvement immediately rather
than waiting until other property owners elect to build or contribute to the improvement.
He suggested that the Council think about the policy options as to whether or not the City
Page 2 - Special Council \leeting / Workshop Minutes, November 15,2007
13
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING / WORKSHOP MINUTES
NOVEMBER 15, 2007
TAPE
READING
should go beyond what the law requires to the full cost of the improvement or to stop at
the SDC amount. lfthe credit is limited to the SDC amount, then the City could retain
SDC dollars for cost overruns on future eligible SDC projects.
Councilor Bjelland felt that if a development has significant improvements from which
other property owners benefit then establishing a reimbursement district would be another
way for the developer to be reimbursed for eligible project costs.
It was the consensus of the Council to limit the SDC credit and Mr. Ghilarducci stated
that he would make the change in the SDC credit policy to provide for an amount up to
the S DC.
Side B
.2 Mr. Ghilarducci stated that the existing SDC charge is $343.32 per average daily trip with
the single family residence charged for 9.57 average daily trips or $3,286. The Institute
of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual is the document used to
determine the average daily trips for all types of uses based on type of land use and size of
the development. In evaluating the City's existing charges, the consultants have made the
following additional recommendations for Council consideration:
1) Change from average daily trips as a charge basis to peak-hour trips since SDC's are a
share of capacity in a system and a transportation system is built to meet peak loads.
Changing the charge basis will shift costs between the different land use types but the
single family residence charge will remain about the same. It was also noted that the
peak-hour trip data is more accurate than the average daily trip data.
2) Less than 5% of certain bicycle and pedestrian facilities are included in the planned
costs of alternate modes of transportation.
3) Trip generation estimates for retail land uses have been adjusted to sustain allowance
for diverted linked trips or pass-by trips.
4) The SDC's will be indexed to annual cost escalation due to inflation as allowed under
state law.
5) Adopt an additional SDC to apply only in the Interchange Management Overlay
District based on a portion of the City's interchange cost.
Mr. Ghilarducci reviewed the assumptions used in developing the proposed charges
which include 1) planned projects providing system capacity to year 2020,2)
reimbursement fee basis is limited to facilities constructed with SDC's, 3) an adjustment
for anticipated developer participation in projects, 4) a City-wide trip growth calculated
from 2020 traffic modeling plus additional development in the Interchange Management
Area,S) an eligible interchange cost split of 50/50 between City-wide SDC and
Interchange District, and 6) a 49% deduction of traffic volumes which originate and end
outside of the City limits. He reviewed the fee calculation formula and, for comparison
purposes, stated that the SDC for a single family residence would be $3,315 per Peak
Hour Trip versus the current charge of $3,286. It was also noted that SDC's have not
been adjusted since 1999 and, for a single family residence, the proposed charge is about
3% higher over an 8-year period. In cases of an office building or some industrial
Page 3 - Special Council Meeting / Workshop Minutes, November 15, 2007
14
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING / WORKSHOP MINUTES
NOVEMBER 15, 2007
TAPE
READING
development, there will be a higher charge over current rate since they experience higher
peak hour trips versus average daily trip generation. As part of an appeal process,
businesses would be able to submit documentation to the City to show that they are
different than the Institute of Traffic Engineer's (ITE) peak hour trip generation manual
and the charge could then be adjusted based on the documentation. He briefly reviewed
the SDC Transportation Improvement Plan list and it was suggested that staff take a
closer look at the percent oflocal trips value for each of the listed projects and, if
necessary, adjust to a more accurate percent number based on the project.
Mr. Ghilarducci then reviewed the fee calculation for the Interchange Development
Charge which resulted in a peak hour trip charge of$I,109 utilizing a 50/50 cost split.
He stated that their recommendation is to only have one-half of the interchange
development costs used in the calculation which spreads the cost more evenly to all land
uses and it was noted that the interchange district will pay both a system development
charge and an interchange development charge towards future costs on interchange
capacity improvements.
29.9 Acting Public Works Director Rohman stated that the state statute provides specific time
frames relating to adoption of SDC's. The City must give a 90-day notice to interested
parties prior to the public hearing and a completed methodology must be available for
review 60-days before the hearing. Staff sent out the 90-day notice on November 13,
2007 to interested parties, Mr. Ghilarducci will have the methodology completed by
December 13, 2007, and the public hearing will be held on February 11, 2008. Once the
fees are adopted, they can be implemented immediately but there is a 60-day period in
which a challenge can be filed in Circuit Court. The proposed effective date of the new
charges will be April 1 ,2008.
33.5 ADJOURNMENT.
MCCALLUM/LONERGAN... meeting be adjourned. The motion passed unanimously.
The meeting adjourned at approximately 8:20 p.m.
APPROVED
KATHRYN FIGLEY, MAYOR
ATTEST
Mary Tennant, Recorder
City of Woodburn, Oregon
Page 4 - Special Council Meeting / Workshop Minutes, November 15,2007
15
Minutes
Woodburn Recreation and Parks Board
Tuesday,November13,2007
7:00 p.m.
8C
1.
Call to Order
The meeting and was called to order at 7:00 pm.
DRAFT
2.
Roll Call
Board Chair
Board Secretary
Member
Member
Member
Member
Member
Bruce Thomas
Rosetta Wangerin
Vacant
Joseph Nicoletti
Judy Wesemann
Eric Yaillen
Vacant
Present
Present
Vacant
Present
Present
Present
Vacant
Staff present: Jim Row, Community Services Director; Debbie Wadleigh, Aquatic
and Facilities Manager; Paulette Zastoupil, A.A.
3. Approval of Minutes from October 9, 2007.
Joseph NicolettilEric Yaillen Motion to accept the minutes from October 9, 2007
The motion passed unanimously.
4. Business from the Audience
None
5. Mill Creek Greenway Design Proposal
Jim reported that 8 design proposals were submitted and that the review team would
include City engineers and City park maintenance staff. The proposals would be
scored, and the team would meet in Early December to make their recommendation.
6. Playground Restoration Projects
There was nothing new to report.
7. Park and Recreation Master Plan Update
Jim presented the Board with a current timeline for the Master Plan update process.
He reported that Group McKenzie/ GreenPlay Team will conduct six focus groups,
each consisting of 10 to 12 individuals, with meetings on December 11, 12 and 13.
Each group will be asked a series of fifteen to twenty questions in an effort to gather
their opinions and desires with regard to parks and recreation services and facilities in
Woodburn. The Board members agreed that they would each attend one of the focus
group sessions in lieu of the December Board Meeting. The results of the focus
groups will be presented in a Public forum on Thursday, December 13th at 7:00 p.m.
in the Woodburn Library's multi-purpose room. Discussion took place about how the
UBG expansion would affect the recommendations made in Comprehensive Master
Plan.
8. Weed and Seed
Jim reported that the Weed and Seed fiscal year began October 1. He is currently
working to resolve final budget issues. They City is currently reviewing the
Page 1
16
Minutes
Woodburn Recreation and Parks Board
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
7:00 p.m.
possibility of the Portland Police Activities League becoming the administrator of the
Weed and Seed program through an agreement with the City.
7. Business from the Department
Recreation and Parks - Jim Row
Jim reported that the youth soccer program just finished. 240 children participated
this year. The PAL Teen Adventures program went to Disney on Ice, the Oregon
Aquarium and is scheduled to go bowling in December. Active Adult trips are
planned to the Winter Wonderland Christmas Lights in November and the World's
Largest Christmas Bazaar in December. Registration for youth basketball and next
session of adult basketball league is now open. He reported that the initial Recreation
Manager interviews were completed and that he hopes to have the position filled by
January. Jim shared that he had returned from an After School Club parent meeting
concerning the 21st Century School Grant. The grant is in the 4th year out of 5.
Funding levels drop of dramatically next year. The school district provides the
enrichment programs and discussion was how this loss of funding would affect the
program. Jim explained that the ASC fees would most likely be increased again next
year.
Aquatics - Debbie Wadleigh
Debbie reported that the pool closure resulted in 11 projects being completed. Some
of the projects were: new flagpole and flag, re-stripped parking lot, family and
handicapped pool entrance access, lane lines changed, locker rooms painted, damaged
pool tiles replaced, pressure washed the floors, new mechanical room door and hooks
in the shower rooms. Debbie reported that swim lessons had 155 participants, and
they are hosting three swim teams: Woodburn High, North Marion High and the
Barracudas (local year-round club). The Aquatic Center will be closed on
Thanksgiving, but open from 1 :00 - 4:00 p.m. the following Friday.
8. Future Board Business
Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Master Plan
Playground Restoration Program
Weed and Seed
Greenway Design Proposal
9. Board Comments
Reminder:
Focus Group Session in lieu of December Board meeting.
Board Workshop from 6:00-9:00 PM on January 8,2008.
10. Adjournment
8:20 p.m.
Rosetta Wangerin, Board Secretary
Paulette Zastoupil, Recording Secretary
Date
Page 2
Date
17
~."".'..
~
WOODBURN
8D
A~'~
1.'011'0'0"" 1889
.
.
December 10, 2007
TO: Mayor and City Council through City Administrator
FROM: Scott Russell, Chief of Police V
SUBJECT: Police Department Statistics - November 2007
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive the Report
BACKGROUND:
The attached report lists year to date reported offenses and arrests displayed by
month.
DISCUSSION:
The statistics have been gathered from the Police Departments Records
Management System. The Previous year's crime statistics are also displayed for
comparison purposes.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None
Agenda Item Review: City Administrat
City Attorney
18
Woodburn Police Dept.
DATE: 12/04/2007
TIME: 14:29:34
ORI#: OR0240500 WPD
DATE USED: OFFENSE DATE
MONTHLY CRIMINAL OFFENSES FOR JANUARY THRU NOVEMBER 2007
RESULTS FOR ALL OFFENSES
CHARGE DESCRIPTION
....
\0
AGGRAVATED ASSAULT
ANIMAL ORDINANCES
ARSON
ASSAULT SIMPLE
ATTEMPTED MURDER
BURGLARY BUSINESS
BURGLARY - OTHER STRUCTURE
BURGLARY - RESIDENCE
CHILD ADBANDOMENT
CHILD NEGLECT
CITY ORDINANCE
CRIME DAMAGE-NO VANDALISM OR ARSON
CURFEW
CUSTODY - DETOX
CUSTODY - MENTAL
CUSTODY PROTECITVE
DISORDERLY CONDUCT
DOCUMENTATION
DRINKING IN PUBLIC
DRIVING UNDER INFLUENCE
DRUG LAW VIOLATIONS
DRUG PARAPHERNALIA
DWS/REVOKED-MISDEMEANOR
ELUDE
EMBEZZLEMENT
ESCAPE FROM YOUR CUSTODY
EXTORTION/BLACKMAIL
FAIL TO DISPLAY OPERATORS LICENSE
FAMILY-OTHER
FORCIBLE RAPE
FORGERY/COUNTERFEITING
FRAUD ACCOUNT CLOSED CHECK
FRAUD BY DECEPTION/FALSE PRETENSES
FRAUD CREDIT CARD/AUTOMATIC TELLER MACHINE
FRAUD IMPERSONATION
FRAUD NOT SUFFICIENT FUNDS CHECK
FRAUD OF SERVICES/FALSE PRETENSES
FUGITIVE ARREST FOR ANOTHER AGENCY
FURNISHING
GARBAGE LITTERING
HIT AND RUN FELONY
HIT AND RUN-MISDEMEANOR
INTIMIDATION /OTHER CRIMINAL THREAT
KIDNAP - FOR ADDITIONAL CRIMINAL PURPOSE
KIDNAP HI-JACK,TERRORIST
LICENSING ORDINANCES
MINOR IN POSSESSION
MISCELLANEOUS
MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT
OTHER
PROPERTY FOUND LOST MISLAID
JAN
o
2
o
12
o
3
2
7
o
1
4
36
o
2
1
o
3
o
o
12
27
o
5
o
o
o
o
4
o
o
8
o
o
o
o
o
1
27
2
2
o
8
1
o
o
2
3
33
7
16
23
FEB
1
3
o
7
o
1
4
10
o
1
5
26
1
1
1
o
3
2
2
11
20
o
7
o
o
1
o
8
1
o
4
o
o
o
2
1
1
44
o
o
2
6
o
o
o
2
1
13
14
12
22
MAR
4
1
o
12
o
1
3
6
o
1
8
27
5
o
1
2
5
o
4
17
19
o
2
3
o
1
1
6
o
1
5
o
o
o
1
o
1
36
5
1
o
10
1
1
o
1
5
5
12
8
23
APR
2
5
o
12
o
1
2
2
o
1
o
13
o
3
1
o
7
1
1
7
16
o
4
o
1
o
o
1
1
o
6
1
3
4
o
o
o
38
o
o
o
8
o
o
1
o
o
9
6
9
18
MAY
3
12
o
7
o
2
o
6
o
o
4
15
2
1
1
o
5
o
o
7
14
o
3
o
o
o
o
2
o
o
15
o
1
o
o
o
o
30
o
3
1
16
1
1
o
3
2
11
4
11
16
JUN
1
15
o
14
o
4
2
5
o
2
6
11
1
1
o
o
5
o
o
10
19
o
4
1
o
o
o
3
o
o
16
o
o
2
1
o
o
32
2
o
1
15
3
1
o
o
3
2
5
9
20
JLY
5
6
o
18
2
1
1
9
o
3
1
11
1
2
o
o
10
o
1
14
15
o
6
1
o
o
o
5
o
2
3
o
1
1
4
o
o
38
1
1
o
16
2
1
o
o
2
7
5
6
20
AUG
5
6
o
11
o
1
2
7
o
o
1
20
1
1
2
o
4
o
o
21
10
o
3
1
2
o
o
3
o
2
10
2
1
5
2
o
o
41
1
1
o
19
o
o
o
o
6
7
3
13
23
SEP
3
5
o
15
o
4
1
5
o
1
o
33
o
o
1
o
5
o
o
10
13
1
3
2
o
o
o
2
o
o
3
1
o
3
7
o
1
30
2
o
1
20
2
1
o
o
4
6
5
6
18
OCT
NOV
3
6
1
16
o
o
1
4
o
2
2
12
1
o
o
o
6
o
o
2
37
o
3
1
o
o
1
4
o
o
7
o
5
2
1
o
o
20
o
1
o
12
4
o
o
1
o
5
7
5
16
1
5
o
14
o
3
1
4
1
o
o
16
o
4
3
o
6
o
1
11
11
o
2
4
1
o
o
2
o
o
7
o
2
o
4
o
o
20
o
o
o
11
4
o
o
o
2
4
6
4
6
PAGE 1
PL6860
SCOTTRU
TOTAL
28
66
1
138
2
21
19
65
1
12
31
220
12
15
11
2
59
3
9
122
201
1
42
13
4
2
2
40
2
5
84
4
13
17
22
1
4
356
13
9
5
141
18
5
1
9
28
102
74
99
205
Woodburn Police Dept.
DATE: 12/04/2007
TIME: 14:29:34
ORI#: OR0240500 WPD
DATE USED: OFFENSE DATE
MONTHLY CRIMINAL OFFENSES FOR JANUARY THRU NOVEMBER 2007
RESULTS FOR ALL OFFENSES
CHARGE DESCRIPTION
to.)
o
PROPERTY RECOVER FOR OTHER AGENCY
PROSTITUTION - ENGAGE IN
PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY ORDINANCES
RECKLESS DRIVING
ROBBERY BUSINESS
ROBBERY HIGHWAY
ROBBERY OTHER
RUNAWAY
SEX CRIME
SEX CRIME
SEX CRIME
SEX CRIME
SEX CRIME
SEX CRIME
SEX CRIME
SEX CRIME
SEX CRIME -
STALKER
STOLEN PROPERTY - RECEIVING,BUYING,POSSESSING
SUICIDE
THEFT BICYCLE
THEFT BUILDING
THEFT COIN OP MACHINE
THEFT FROM MOTOR VEHICLE
THEFT MOTOR VEHICLE PARTS/ACCESSORIES
THEFT OTHER
THEFT PICKPOCKET
THEFT PURSE SNATCH
THEFT SHOPLIFT
TRAFFIC ORDINANCES
TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS
TRESPASS
VANDALISM
VEHICLE RECOVERD FOR OTHER AGENCY
WARRANT ARREST FOR OUR AGENCY
WEAPON CARRY CONCEALED
WEAPON EX FELON IN POSSESSION
WEAPON - OTHER
WEAPON POSSESS ILLEGAL
WILLFUL MURDER
ZONING ORDINANCE
CONTRIBUTE TO SEX DELINQUENCY
EXPOSER
FORCIBLE SODOMY
INCEST
MOLEST (PHYSICAL)
NON-FORCE RAPE
OTHER
PORNOGRAPHY/OBSCENE MATERIAL
SEXUAL ASSAULT WITH AN OBJECT
TOTAL:
2007 TOTAL:
2006 TOTAL:
2005 TOTAL:
JAN
FEB
o
o
o
1
1
o
3
4
2
o
o
o
2
o
o
o
o
o
o
1
3
2
1
21
8
13
o
o
5
o
11
6
31
3
o
2
o
o
2
o
o
1 1
o 0
17 14
2 3
o 0
o 0
1 1
4 4
o 0
o 0
1 0
o 0
2 3
o 1
o 0
o 0
o 0
o 1
1 0
1 0
2 0
o 3
o 0
34 27
5 16
9 14
o 0
o 1
3 6
1 0
20 26
11 9
49 103
5 1
1 0
2 3
1 0
2 0
o 1
o 0
1 5
376
416
376
444
429
416
432
386
MAR
488
488
499
377
APR
1
o
10
2
o
1
o
4
o
1
o
o
1
o
o
o
o
o
1
o
o
6
o
14
6
18
o
o
9
1
12
9
41
1
o
o
o
o
o
o
5
327
327
464
359
MAY
1
1
13
2
o
o
1
6
o
1
o
o
3
o
o
1
o
o
o
o
1
4
o
20
5
12
o
o
9
2
9
10
50
o
2
1
o
o
3
o
4
360
360
411
508
JUN
1
o
23
2
2
o
2
5
o
o
o
o
6
o
o
o
1
o
o
o
o
2
o
24
3
9
o
o
25
1
11
6
51
4
o
2
o
o
o
1
1
398
398
379
481
JLY
o
o
3
3
o
o
1
4
o
o
o
o
3
o
o
o
1
o
1
o
4
3
o
16
3
19
o
o
12
1
25
7
45
3
3
o
o
o
3
o
1
383
383
428
429
AUG
o
o
6
6
o
o
1
4
1
o
o
1
3
o
1
o
o
o
1
o
2
2
o
33
5
17
o
1
15
2
29
7
50
o
o
2
o
o
2
o
o
428
428
349
412
SEP
1
o
2
4
1
o
1
6
o
o
o
o
3
o
o
o
o
o
1
o
2
2
o
42
4
19
2
o
8
3
9
4
42
4
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
374
374
323
371
OCT
o
o
3
o
o
o
o
11
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
2
1
1
1
o
16
4
11
o
2
5
5
12
2
33
2
o
1
1
o
4
o
o
305
279
305
366
364
279
390
474
NOV
o
o
o
2
o
o
1
3
o
o
o
o
1
o
o
o
o
o
4
1
3
2
o
12
4
16
o
o
8
4
4
3
48
1
2
o
o
o
o
o
o
PAGE 2
PL6860
SCOTTRU
TOTAL
6
1
91
27
4
1
12
55
3
2
1
1
27
1
1
1
2
1
11
4
18
27
1
259
63
157
2
4
105
20
168
74
543
24
8
13
2
2
15
1
17
4134
o
o
o
4134
4485
4590
Woodburn Police Dept. PAGE 1
DATE: 12/04/2007 PL6850
TIME: 14:29:56 MONTHLY ARRESTS BY OFFENSE FOR JANUARY THRU NOVEMBER 2007 SCOTTRU
ORI#: OR0240500 WPD RESULTS FOR ALL CHARGES
CHARGE DESCRIPTION JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JLY AUG SEP OCT NOV TOTAL
- - - - - -- - -- - -- ---- - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - -- - - ---- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -- -- - - - - - -- ----------------------------------------
AGGRAVATED ASSAULT 0 0 2 6 4 2 4 3 4 2 5 32
AGGRAVATED MURDER 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ANIMAL ORDINANCES 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 3 2 6 4 18
ARSON 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ASSAULT SIMPLE 12 5 14 15 11 14 19 11 9 15 14 139
ATTEMPTED MURDER 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
BOMB THREAT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BRIBERY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BURGLARY BUSINESS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BURGLARY OTHER STRUCTURE 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
BURGLARY RESIDENCE 1 9 4 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 16
CHILD ADBANDOMENT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
CHILD NEGLECT 2 0 0 3 0 3 2 0 0 1 0 11
CITY ORDINANCE 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4
CRIME DAMAGE-NO VANDALISM OR ARSON 4 4 1 0 6 0 0 2 0 0 1 18
CURFEW 0 2 7 0 7 1 2 1 0 2 0 22
CUSTODIAL INTERFERENCE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CUSTODY DETOX 2 1 0 3 1 1 2 1 0 0 4 15
CUSTODY - MENTAL 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 4 11
CUSTODY - PROTECITVE 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
DISORDERLY CONDUCT 4 5 6 15 7 8 11 4 5 11 11 87
DOCUMENTATION 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
DRINKING IN PUBLIC 0 2 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 9
DRIVING UNDER INFLUENCE 12 11 18 6 7 10 15 22 10 2 11 124
DRUG LAW VIOLATIONS 25 19 22 19 28 30 21 14 10 25 28 241
DRUG PARAPHERNALIA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
DWS/REVOKED FELONY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
DWS/REVOKED-MISDEMEANOR 5 7 4 4 3 4 6 3 4 3 3 46
to) ELUDE 0 1 3 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 3 11
"'" EMBEZZLEMENT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 2
ESCAPE FROM YOUR CUSTODY 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
EXTORTION/BLACKMAIL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
FAIL TO DISPLAY OPERATORS LICENSE 5 8 7 1 2 3 5 4 2 5 2 44
FAMILY-OTHER 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
FORCIBLE RAPE 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 4
FORGERY/COUNTERFEITING 6 1 3 3 8 13 2 6 1 6 2 51
FRAUD ACCOUNT CLOSED CHECK 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
FRAUD BY DECEPTION/FALSE PRETENSES 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 1 0 5 0 11
FRAUD CREDIT CARD/AUTOMATIC TELLER MACHINE 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2
FRAUD IMPERSONATION 0 1 1 0 1 1 2 1 3 1 0 11
FRAUD NOT SUFFICIENT FUNDS CHECK 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
FRAUD OF SERVICES/FALSE PRETENSES 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
FRAUD WIRE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
FRAUD-OTHER 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
FUGITIVE ARREST FOR ANOTHER AGENCY 28 46 40 42 30 33 48 41 30 22 20 380
FURNISHING 2 0 4 0 0 2 1 1 2 0 0 12
GAMBLING - GAMES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
GAMBLING - OTHER 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
GARBAGE LITTERING 3 0 1 0 3 0 1 1 0 1 0 10
HIT AND RUN FELONY 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 3
HIT AND RUN-MISDEMEANOR 1 0 2 2 5 3 3 4 2 1 2 25
ILLEGAL ALIEN - INS HOLD 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Woodburn Police Dept. PAGE 2
DATE, 12/04/2007 PL6850
TIME, 14,29,56 MONTHLY ARRESTS BY OFFENSE FOR JANUARY THRU NOVEMBER 2007 SCOTTRU
OR III , OR0240500 WPD RESULTS FOR ALL CHARGES
CHARGE DESCRIPTION JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JLY AUG SEP OCT NOV TOTAL
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- --- -- - - - -- --- -- -- --- - - - -- --- ---------------- ---------- ------ --------------- ---- ----------- - -- --- ----------
INTIMIDATION /OTHER CRIMINAL THREAT 2 0 4 3 2 3 4 3 2 1 3 27
JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
KIDNAP FOR ADDITIONAL CRIMINAL PURPOSE 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 4
KIDNAP FOR RANSOM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
KIDNAP - HI-JACK,TERRORIST 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
KIDNAP HOSTAGE/SHIELD OR REMOVAL/DELAY WITNESS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
LICENSING ORDINANCES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
LIQUOR LAW-OTHER 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
LIQUOR LICENSE VIOLATIONS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
MINOR IN POSSESSION 3 1 33 0 3 6 11 11 10 0 3 81
MINOR ON PREMISES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
MISCELLANEOUS 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
MOTOR VEHICLE THEFT 0 3 0 1 0 0 3 1 0 0 4 12
NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE TRAFFIC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NEGLIGENT MANSLAUGHTER 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NON CRIMINAL DOMESTIC DISTURBANCE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
OTHER 12 14 8 10 13 12 10 13 5 4 3 104
PROPERTY FOUND LOST MISLAID 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PROPERTY RECOVER FOR OTHER AGENCY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
PROST I TUT ION COMPEL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PROSTITUTION - ENGAGE IN 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
PROSTITUTION - PROMOTE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY ORDINANCES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2
RECKLESS DRIVING 2 2 4 2 3 2 3 5 4 0 3 30
ROBBERY BANK 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ROBBERY BUSINESS 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 4
ROBBERY CAR JACKING 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ROBBERY CONV.STORE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
lI,) ROBBERY HIGHWAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
lI,) ROBBERY OTHER 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 4 8
ROBBERY RESIDENCE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ROBBERY SERVICE STATION 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
RUNAWAY 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 3 1 9
SEX CRIME CONTRIBUTE TO SEX DELINQUENCY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SEX CRIME EXPOSER 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
SEX CRIME FORCIBLE SODOMY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SEX CRIME INCEST 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
SEX CRIME MOLEST (PHYSICAL) 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 6
SEX CRIME NON FORCE SODOMY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SEX CRIME NON-FORCE RAPE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SEX CRIME OBSCENE PHONE CALL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SEX CRIME OTHER 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SEX CRIME - PORNOGRAPHY/OBSCENE MATERIAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SEX CRIME SEXUAL ASSAULT WITH AN OBJECT 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2
STALKER 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
STOLEN PROPERTY RECEIVING,BUYING,POSSESSING 1 1 0 3 1 1 1 0 1 2 2 13
SUICIDE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
THEFT BICYCLE 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3
THEFT BUILDING 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3
THEFT COIN OP MACHINE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
THEFT FROM MOTOR VEHICLE 1 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
THEFT MOTOR VEHICLE PARTS/ACCESSORIES 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Woodburn Police Dept. PAGE 3
DATE: 12/04/2007 PL6850
TIME: 14:29:56 MONTHLY ARRESTS BY OFFENSE FOR JANUARY THRU NOVEMBER 2007 SCOTTRU
ORI#: OR0240500 WPD RESULTS FOR ALL CHARGES
CHARGE DESCRIPTION JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JLY AUG SEP OCT NOV TOTAL
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- ------------------ - - - - - - -- - - - - - - -- ---- --- - -- - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- ---------
THEFT OTHER 1 0 3 5 2 1 0 0 0 2 3 17
THEFT PICKPOCKET 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
THEFT PURSE SNATCH 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
THEFT . SHOPLIFT 3 1 7 13 9 27 11 17 6 4 7 105
TRAFFIC ORDINANCES 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2
TRAFFIC VIOLATIONS 33 38 54 21 23 33 30 54 21 18 9 334
TRESPASS 13 12 9 7 8 6 7 7 1 2 2 74
VANDALISM 0 0 9 0 1 6 3 3 3 0 8 33
VEHICLE RECOVERD FOR OTHER AGENCY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
WARRANT ARREST FOR OUR AGENCY 0 1 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 4
WEAPON CARRY CONCEALED 2 3 3 0 1 1 0 2 0 2 0 14
WEAPON . EX FELON IN POSSESSION 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 3
WEAPON . OTHER 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
WEAPON POSSESS ILLEGAL 2 1 2 0 2 1 2 2 0 13 0 25
WEAPON . SHOOTING IN PROHIBITED AREA 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
WILLFUL MURDER 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
ZONING ORDINANCE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-------------- - --- -- - ----- - - - -- --- - - - --- - -- --- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 TOTAL: 194 213 291 201 205 235 242 250 151 163 174 0 2319
2006 TOTAL: 213 218 322 253 223 226 267 226 192 248 225 0 2613
2005 TOTAL: 129 149 144 234 241 231 237 250 206 187 229 0 2237
N
(,)
~
WOODBURN
8E
A~'~
I.,orpora/cd 1889
.
.
December 10, 2007
TO: Mayor and City Council through City Administrator
FROM: Scott Russell, Chief of Police ~
SUBJECT: Code Enforcement Statistics - November 2007
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive the Report
BACKGROUND:
The attached reports list the Code Enforcement Incidents for the month of
November 2007.
DISCUSSION:
The statistics have been gathered from the Police Departments Records
Management System. Code Enforcement Statistics are displayed to show the
amount of incidents handled by Code Enforcement for the month.
FINANCIAL IMP ACT:
None
Agenda Item Review: City Administrat
City Attorney
Finance
24
Code Enforcement Statisitcs November 2007
Incident Type Total
Abandon Vehicles 8
Abate Nusiance 9
Animal Complaints 56
Business License Check 0
T all Grass 0
Ordinance Violation 39
Area Check 0
FIR 1
rnhM 11
Total of All Incidents 124
25
SF
CITY OF WOODBURN
Community Development
MEMORANDUM
270 Montgomery Street
Woodburn, Oregon 97071
(503) 982-5246
Date:
December 5, 2007
To:
Jim Allen, Community Development Director
From:
Building Division
Subject: Building Activity for November 2007
2005 2006 2007
No. Dollar No. Dollar No. Dollar
Amount Amount Amount
Single-Family Residential 5 $925,932 3 $399,083 3 $488,296
Multi-Family Residential 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0
Assisted Living Facilities 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0
Residential Adds & Alts 0 $0 3 $36,000 2 $25,000
Industrial 0 $0 0 $0 1 $700,000
Commercial 5 $434,232 6 $159,520 6 $561,307
Signs and Fences 4 $19,101 0 $0 1 $27,131
Manufactured Homes 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0
TOTALS 14 $1,379,266 12 $594,603 13 $1,801,734
Fiscal Year to Date (July $14,621,693 $7,507,844 $15,515,791
1 - June 30)
1:ICommunity DevelopmentlBuildinglBuilding ActivityIBldgAct-2007\Bldg Activity - MemoS\a~t- November 2007.doc
PI...ANNINGfP,
, ''<, ", ~ ,~,J:::~-:}_&,~'.1 ;:"'
,RevlSed:hW" .
~{: "'~ii~l', ,-~>
Project
Applicant
Description
SiteLocation:
DR 2006-
17,VAR 2006-
17, EXCP
2007-02, VAR
2007-01,
APPEAL
Welkin
Engineering
8 unit Multi-family
Development on Vacant
Parcel
1037 Linroln St
Status:
Date Deemed 120 Day Planner
Received Complete Date
Referrals Facilities Mail Notice Notice to
Meeting for PC Paper
Post Stf Rpt Due PC Hearing PC Final
Property Admin Dec. Order
Appeal
Deadline
Appeal
10/12/2006 07/20/2007 11/17/2007 Don Dolene 10/16/2006 04/2712007 09107/2007
09/1112007 09/21/2007 0912712007 10/11/2007 10/2312007
DR 2007- Buteh Remove existing 2311 sf Received 06/13/2007 11/16/2007 03/15/2008 Don Dolene 06/13/2007 11/2312007 11130/2007 12/06/2007 12/1312007
05,VAR 07-04 PriceJBend Oil gas station canopy and
(Stop N Go) replace with new 1520 sf
canopy.
100 Arney Rd.
DR 2007-11. John Baker Type /I design review for Approved-Appeal 10105/2007 12/03/2007 04/01/2008 Don Dolene
(Cuppy's Drive- a new rommercial Period
Thru) structure
987 Lawson Avenue
DR 2007- Mark Grenz, Multiple-family dwellings Received 11/13/2007
12,VAR 2007- P,E, / Multitech 845 East Linroln Street
tlJ)7, EXCP
~007-O8
FPUD 2007- Bryan Final approval of PUD -
02,ANX 97-08, Cavaness Boones Crossing /II,
ZC 97-12, CU Type I
97 -03, PUD 97- Dahlia Street and Brown
03, VAR 97-12 Street
LA 2007 -02, City of Legislative Amendment
Woodburn Period Review Remand
City of Woodburn
LA 2007-03, City of Legislative Amendment
Woodburn
270 Montgomery SI.
Received
07/12/2007
Don Dolene
Received
Jim Allen
Received
11/26/2007
Jim Allen
00
;RlrANNJN"'~'fR
~:':; -L :_~.., :':tL',: ,yv~;.:y;.~:-~k-f~\>~
Project Applicant SiteLocation: Description
DR 2007-06 Axis Design Group A&E, 3001 W. Newberg Hwy Upgrade to facility and build a vestibule. Additional signage to site.
LLC (Miles Chevrolet)
DR 2007-10 King's Moy Management 770 N. Pacific Hwy Site upgrade, install new fire hydrant, landscaping & restripe parking
for new fumiture store.
DR 2007-13 ValVitsiotis Architecture 1755 Mt Hood Ave. Fast food restaurant
(JCK Restaurants)
PUD 2006-01ZC 2006-01, CU Soones Crossing, LLC - Parcels 1, 2 & 3 of Partition Modifications to Soones Crossing PUD
2006-04, CPC 2007-01 Mike Hanks Plat 2006-55
SIGN 2007-18 Jack & Deanna Sigej 1220 N. Pacific Hwy New pole sign; double-faced illuminated readerboard sign
ZA 2007-03 Mastery Leaming Institute 591 Gatch SI. Modification to the conditions of approval with a Zoning Adjustment
N
00
Status: Date Received 180-Expiration: Planner
Incomplete 0611912007 12/16/2007 Don DoIenc
Incomplete 1010412007 04101/2008 Sam GoIlah
Incomplete 1112012007 05/18/2008 Sam GoIlah
Incomplete 10/3112006 04/29/2007 Jim Allen
Incomplete 0811412007 02/1012008 Sam GoIlah
Incomplete 0812712007 02123/2008 Sam Gollah
Activity Report - November 21st through December 5th
Folder Name Applicant Project SiteLocation Description Date Rec'd: App Comple Status: Planner:
BL 2007-174 Janette Marie Threads of Joy 839 E. Lincoln St. Quilting 11/26/2007 1113012007 Approved Sam Gollah
Schiedler
BL 2007-175 Norma T. Norma T. Bloomberg 2571 Heron Dr. Speech and language pathology service 11130/2007
Bloomberg MSEd, CCC-SLP
TSP07-34 Connie Grade Portland-Woodburn 115 N. Armey Road this a 2-15 day temporaray permit 11/2912007 11/29/2007 Approved Sam Gollah
RV Park
11.;)
\0
....-..,"'"__v..... ._ ~ __..
Wed"esday, December OJ, 1007
HI. = Business License EXT = Extension SIGN = Sign Permit TMKT = Temporary Marketing Pennit TSP = Temporary Sign Pennit PAPP = Pre-Application FNC = Fence Pemtit
~~.~.,
W~N
t.,.rp.,a,tJ '889
8H
~~
.
.
December 10, 2007
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council through City Administrator
FROM: Jim Allen, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Woodburn Downtown Development Plan Update - Transportation &
Growth Management Program Grant Update: Contract Termination
RECOMMENDATION:
No action required by the City Council.
BACKGROUND:
The Oregon Transportation & Growth Management Program (TGM) has
terminated both contracts with Seder Architects, PC for the Woodburn
Downtown Plan update, including the Downtown contract and the separate
contract for the gateway areas extending along Front Street to Highway 214
and Young Street to Highway 99E. Notification of the termination was received
on November 30, 2007 after attempts were made by Community Development
and TGM staff to identify methods to bring the project to completion with a
satisfactory product and within a revised time schedule. The contracts were
terminated for causes listed in the attached letter from TGM.
DISCUSSION:
TGM is determining the remaining funding left from the grants, based on the
products delivered, billed to date, and product usefulness in completion of the
project. Following that determination, Transportation and Growth Management
Program will request proposals from qualified consultants for completion of the
project. City staff will participate in the consideration of the consulting group
selection process. TGM staff has also indicated that additional funding may be
available through TGM, if needed to complete the elements identified in both
grants.
Agenda Item Review: City Administrato
I
City Attorney'
Finane
30
Honorable Mayor and City Council
December 10,2007
Page 2
.
.
FINANCIAL IMP ACT:
The existing contracts call for an in-kind share of City of Woodburn staff time as
part of the two grants. With the selection of the new consulting team,
additional staff time will be needed for review of consultants, copying of
documents to provide to the new consultants, and help in bringing the
consultants up to speed on the elements of the project that have been
evaluated and completed. A City cash match may also be necessary to ensure
that the final product is of a quality that is useful to the City in implementing its
urban renewal program. Such amounts, if any, have yet to be quantified and
would be brought back to the Council for consideration prior to executing a
contract to complete this work.
31
Transportation & Growth Management Program
555 13th Street, Suite 2
Salem, OR 97301-4178
(503) 986-4121
Fax: (503) 986-4174
Web Address: http://www.oregon.gov/lcd
regon
Theodore R. Kulongoski, Governor
November 29, 2007
* REC'O -tc
Mark Seder
Seder Architects, PC
1314 NW Irving St, Suite 511
Portland, OR 97209
NOV 3 0 2007
WOODBuRN COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT OEPT.
Subject: Tennination of Contracts 25976 City of Woodburn, Downtown
Development Plan Update and 26124, City of Woodburn, Downtown
Development Plan Update - Gateway Project Area
This letter serves a notification that ODOT is exercising the right to tenninate
for cause Contract 25976 and Contract 26124, as provided by Article 15.c.iv.
"15. c. iv Consultant commits any material breach or default of any covenant,
warranty, obligation or agreement under this Contract, fails to perform the
Services under this Contract within the time specified or any extension
thereof, or so fails to perform the Services as to endanger Consultant's
performance under this Contract in accordance with its terms, and such
breach, default or failure is not cured within 10 Business Days after Agency's
notice to Consultant, or such longer period as Agency may specify in such
notice. "
Our letter to you dated November 5, 2007 provided four items to cure.
a) "A new Certificate of Insurance, which indicates all required insurance
under Exhibit C of contracts 25976 and 26124 are met by November 9,
2007. "
ODOT received notice from Willis-Clay Insurance Inc., showing current
insurance coverage.
b) "Proof that subconsultants have been fully paidfor their services
rendered, within 10 (ten) business days of receipt of this letter. "
Your letter of November 15,2007 indicates you did not meet this
requirement.
c) "A written plan, acceptable to Agency, of how Contractor expects to
complete tasks that are overdue and get the project back on schedule for
Form 734-2368 (7/05)
32
A Joint Program
of the
Department of
Transportation
and the
Department of
Land Conservation
and
Development
,rr..;;.
'7:.t;i
the remaining task in the contract, within 10 (ten) business days of receipt of this letter"
Your letter of November 15,2007 indicates you do not have a schedule prepared, and
therefore did not meet this requirement.
d) "An acceptable version of Final Memo #1 that addresses all comments previously
received. Also, except for transportation-related components, complete versions of
the Draft Plan and Draft Comprehensive Plan, TSP, and Development Ordinance
Amendments that are to the standards required by the contracts, within 10 (ten)
business days of receipt of this letter"
ODOT did not receive the above mentioned products by the deadline. Your letter
dated November 15,2007 suggested Contracts 25976 and 26124 be transferred to
another finn and you would become a subconsultant to that firm. The new team
would then complete the work under this requirement. ODOT is bound to follow an
open and competitive process for consultant selection, Oregon statue and rule does
not allow ODOT to transfer contracts to a third party. The terms of the November 5,
2007 letter to cure have not been met.
Agency has received invoices #0008 and #0009 dated October 3, 2007 for work
submitted but not accepted under these contracts requesting additional payment in the
amount of$10,151. Twenty-five percent of this work is usable by Agency. The
breakdown by deliverable is as follows: Final Memo #1: $750 invoiced, 0% usable; Draft
Plan: $8,550 invoiced, 20% usable ($1,710); Revised Trip Generation Analysis: $850
invoiced, 100% usable ($850). The total of $2,560 will be held until your subconsultants
are paid in full. The remainder of your invoice will not be reimbursed. Exhibit E -
Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Required Provisions Section 11 of the above
mentioned contracts states:
Consultant must pay each subcontractor for satisfactory performance under
the subcontract no later than 10 (ten) calendar days from receipt of each
payment Consultant receives from Agency. Consultant shall also return
retainage payments to each subcontractor within 10 (ten) calendar days after
subcontractor's work is satisfactorily completed. Any delay or postponement
of payment from the above referenced period may occur only for good cause
following written approval of the Agency's Contract Administrator. This
policy applies to both DBE and non-DBE subcontractors. ..
Exhibit E - Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Required Provisions
Section 12 of the above mentioned contracts states:
"12.0 - Remedies - In addition to any other remedies provided under this
Contract, failure of Consultant to meet these Disadvantaged Business Enterprise
(DBE) Required Provisions and program authorities cited in Section 01.00 (b) of
these provisions constitutes a breach of contract for which the imposition of the
following sanctions could occur:
a) Temporarily withholding progress payments until Consultant complies
with these Contract provisions through future performance.
33
b) Permanently withholding payment for Services already performed in a
manner that constitutes a breach of contract.
c) Suspension of services for cause as provided under the standard
Specifications for Highway Construction, Section 00150.00 and 00180.70.
d) Consultant, ifin violation of the provisions ofORS 200.075, shall have its
right to propose on or participate in any public contract suspended for up
to 90 days for a first violation, up to one year for a second violation and
up to five years for a third violation. Each violation shall remain on
record for five years. After five years, the violation shall no longer be
considered in reviewing future violations.
Failure of Consultant or any subcontractors to comply with these
Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Required Provisions and other
authorities cited in Section 01.00 (b) of these provisions wherein there
appears to be evidence of criminal conduct shall be referred to the Oregon
Department of Justice or the FHWA Inspector General, or both, for criminal
investigation, and ifwarranted, prosecution. "
For ODOT to release final payment you must show proof of payment signed by both you
and your subconsultants.
All work must cease immediately.
If you have questions regarding this issue, please contact me at the address listed above.
Respectfully,
I L)i., ~d
j "fJ lU)!i
Cindy Lesmeister
Grants/Contracts Program Manager
CC: ODOT Procurement Office
Robert Maestre, TGM Manager
City of Woodburn I
Sue Geniesse, Contract Administrator
TGM File 2P-07 and 2P A-07
34
A~~.
W~N
I.,."o,."tl 1669
~~llA
.
.
December 10, 2007
FROM:
Mayor and City Council through City Administrator
Ben Gillespie. Finance Director ~
2007 -08 Supplemental Budget
TO:
SUBJECT:
RECOMMENDATION:
Council pass the attached ordinance adopting a supplemental budget for
fiscal year 2007-2008.
BACKGROUND:
At its November 26, 2007 the Council conducted a hearing to consider budget
amendments. The attached ordinance, as amended, reflects the Council's
direction to staff at the conclusion of the hearing.
FINANCIAL IMP ACT:
In the General Fund revenue is increased by $7,200. Expenditures are increased
by $27,065, and transfers to other funds are increased by $22,000. Contin-
gencies are decreased by $41,865. This leaves Contingencies at $939,303 or
9.1% of the expenditure budget. When the audit is complete, actual Beginning
Fund Balance will be posted. That figure is now anticipated to be $200,000
greater than the amount budgeted. This will serve to increase Contingencies as
well. When that occurs, Contingencies will be greater than 10%.
In the General CIP Fund Beginning Fund Balance is increased $5,200 to reflect
the carry over of funds for a project not completed in the 2006/07. Beginning
Fund Balance will be adjusted to actual when the audit is finished. Revenue is
increased by $252,500. Transfers from other funds are increased by $347,000,
and expenditures are increased by $604,700. Contingencies are not affected.
In the Parks SDC Fund transfers to other funds is increased $325,000, and
Contingencies are decreased a like amount.
Agenda Item Review: City Administrator. _
City Attorney
Finane'
35
Mayor and City Council
December 10, 2007
Page 2
.
.
In the Information Services Fund expenditures are Increased by $11,000, and
Contingencies are decreased by the same amount.
In the Equipment Replacement Fund expenditures are increased by $49,500,
and Contingencies are decreased by $49,500.
36
COUNCIL BILL NO.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING A SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007 -
2008 AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
WHEREAS, Oregon State Statute 294.480 allows for the adoption of a supplemental
budget during a fiscal year to meet changes in financial planning, and
WHEREAS, the Notice of Supplemental Budget Hearing and Financial Summary was
published in the W oodbum Independent on November 14, 2007 as required under State budget law;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on November 26, 2007 to give
citizens an opportunity to comment on the proposed 2007-2008 supplemental budget, now, therefore,
THE CITY OF WOODBURN ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the supplemental budget for fiscal year 2007-2008 is hereby adopted as
set forth below.
Section 2. That fiscal year 2007-2008 revenues and appropriations are adjusted as
follows:
Revenues
Appropriations
GENERAL FUND:
Revenue Adjustments:
Donation - Parks
Police Athletic League (PAL) Grant
Total Revenue Adjustments
Appropriations Adjustments:
Municipal Court:
Personnel Services
Leisure Services:
Personnel Services
Materials & Services
Library:
Materials & Services
Non-Departmental:
Interfund Transfer to General CIP Fund
Operating Contingency
Total Appropriations Adjustment
$ 2,700
4.500
$ 7.200
$ 14,415
6,200
1,000
5,450
22,000
( 41.865)
$ 7.20j!
Page 1 - COUNCIL BILL NO.
ORDINANCE NO.
37
Revenues
Appropriations
GENERAL CIP FUND:
Revenue Adjustment:
Beginning Fund Balance
Burlingham Trust Donation
State Grant
Donations
Transfer from General Fund
Transfer from Parks SDC Fund
Total Revenue Adjustment
Appropriation Adjustment:
Capital Outlay
Total Appropriation Adjustment
$ 5,200
12,500
210,000
30,000
22,000
325.000
$604, 70~
$ 604.700
$ 604,7QQ.
PARKS SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT (SDC) FUND:
Appropriation Adjustment:
Interfund Transfer to General CIP Fund
Operating Contingency
$ 325,000
(325,000)
INFORMATION SERVICES (IS) FUND:
Appropriation Adjustment:
Capital Outlay
Operating Contingency
$ 11,000
( 11,000)
EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND:
Revenue Adjustment:
Federal Grant
Total Revenue Adjustment
Appropriation Adjustment:
Transit - Capital Outlay
Total Appropriation Adjustment
$ 49.500
$ 49.50Q
$ 49.500
$ 49.50q
Section 3. That if any clause, sentence, paragraph, section or portion of this ordinance
for any reason shall be adjudged invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such judgment shall be
confined in its operation to the clause, sentence, paragraph, section or portion of this ordinance directly
involved in the controversy in which such judgment is rendered.
Section 4. This ordinance being necessary for the public peace, health and safety, an
emergency is declared to exist in that appropriation adjustments are necessary to meet estimated
expenditures that will need to be paid within the next 30 days and payment cannot be made until such
time as appropriations are adopted by the Council and this ordinance shall take effect immediately
upon passage by the Council and approval by the Mayor 1;:[
Approved as to Form:~,'I--1-/K") 11-- 6 (01) 1-
City Attorney D e
APPROVED
KATHRYN FIGLEY, MAYOR
Page 2 - COUNCIL BILL NO.
ORDINANCE NO.
38
Passed by the Council
Submitted to the Mayor
Approved by the Mayor
Filed in the Office of the Recorder
ATTEST:
Mary Tennant, Recorder
City of Woodburn, Oregon
Page 3 - COUNCIL BILL NO.
ORDINANCE NO.
39
~~
W~N
loc"",."d fll'
11B
~~
.
.
December 10,2007
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council through City Administrator
FROM: Jim Allen. Communily Developmenl Director WL
SUBJECT: Adoption of Resolution Regarding the Appeal of Planning
Commission Decision In Cases Design Review Number DR 2006-17
and Variance Number VAR 2007-01 (Lincoln Commons Multi-Family
Dwelling Applications Located at 1037 East Lincoln Street)
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt the Resolution approving the land use application.
BACKGROUND:
The requested land use application is for design review for an 8-unit multiple-
family dwelling, a variance from the Woodburn Development Ordinance
Section 2.1 04.06.D .2.a and Table 2.1 .7 requiring construction of an architectural
wall, and an exception to street right-of-way and improvements on East Lincoln
Street. The appeal was limited to the design review and architectural wall
variance applications.
DISCUSSION:
The Resolution removes specific conditions previously identified by the
Woodburn Planning Commission related to architectural walls. The Resolution
adopts alternative findings in support of the decision. The Resolution imposes
additional conditions related to the establishment and continued maintenance
of a fence along the area previously required to have an architectural wall
constructed.
FINANCIAL IMP ACT:
No public sector financial impact is anticipated.
Agenda Item Review: City Administrator.
City Attorney
Finane
40
COUNCIL BILL NO.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION GRANTING THE APPLICATION IN DR 2006-17 AND VAR 2007-01,
REMOVING SPECIFIC CONDITIONS PREVIOUSLY IMPOSED BY THE WOODBURN
PLANNING COMMISSION, ADOPTING ALTERNATIVE FINDINGS AND
CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPOSING ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS.
WHEREAS, the Woodburn Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing on September 27, 2007 in cases DR 2006-17 and V AR 2007-01 and EXP
2007-02 (Lincoln Commons); and
WHEREAS, the applicant requested a variance from the requirement of
the Woodburn Development Ordinance to construct an architectural wall; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission approved the exception subject to
certain conditions.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission denied the variance and approved
the design review subject to certain conditions; and
WHEREAS, the applicant timely appealed variance and design review to
the Woodburn City Council under WDO 4.102.01; and
WHEREAS, the appeal was limited to the issue of the architectural wall
under WDO 4.1 02.01.C.7; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a de novo public hearing on the appeal
on November 26,2007; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY OF WOODBURN RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The application in DR 2006-17 and Y AR 2007 -01 (Lincoln
Commons) is hereby granted.
Section 2. Approval of the application is subject to all of the conditions
previously imposed by the Woodburn Planning Commission in its final order,
which is attached hereto as Attachment "A" and by this reference is
incorporated herein, with the exception of the following conditions set forth
below, which are hereby removed:
Page 1 - COUNCIL BILL NO.
RESOLUTION NO.
41
A. The applicant shall demonstrate compliance with the wall
height requirement of WDO 2.104.06.D.2.a and Table 2.1.7
for the retaining wall on the westerly 13 feet of the
southernmost exterior parking space and the proposed 30"
architectural walls on top of the retaining walls along the
flagpole portion of the lot.
B. The south exterior parking spaces shall be screened with an
architectural wall along their entire length, in accordance
with WDO 2.1 04.06.D.1.b.l.
C. D. Exhibit C - Aerial photo of subject property. Wall
required (except at vision clearance areas) by Table 2.1.7 is
shown in solid red. Wall that is discretionary in Table 2.1.7,
but required by the Commission, is shown in dashed yellow.
Section 3. Approval of the application is sUbject to the following
additional conditions imposed by the Woodburn City Council:
A. The property owner shall provide an architectural wall along both
sides of the flagpole portion of the lot, as depicted by the diagram attached
hereto as Attachment "B" and by this reference incorporated herein. Within the
vision clearance areas, the height of the wall shall be in accordance with WDO
3.103.10.E. In all other locations along the flagpole, the wall shall be not less
than 6 feet in height, measured from the grade of the flagpole driveway.
B. The property owner shall provide a vinyl fence not less than 6 feet in
height along all other property lines and shall meet the following specifications:
1. The fence shall be Privacy Vinyl Fence, as submitted by the
appellant to the Council, manufactured by Kroy Building Products (grade: Kroy
Performance Privacy) or equal.
2. The fence shall incorporate two colors, as depicted in the
photograph provided by applicant attached hereto as Attachment "C" and by
this reference incorporated herein.
3. The fence shall be treated with Graffiti Solution System@
manufactured by American Polymer Corporation, or equal anti-graffiti coating.
C. The property owner shall execute and record a document, in a
form acceptable to the City Attorney, to maintain the walls and fencing in a
sound and graffiti-free condition.
Page 2 - COUNCIL BILL NO.
RESOLUTION NO.
42
Section 4. This decision is based upon evidence in the record before the
Woodburn City Council and is justified by the findings and conclusions which are
attached hereto as Attachment liD" and by this reference are incorporated
herein.
Approved as to form:
/f)(~k:)
City A Horney
t:d ?-( 21JO~
Approved:
Kathryn Figley, Mayor
Passed by the Council
Submitted to the Mayor
Approved by the Mayor
Filed in the Office of the Recorder
ATTEST:
Mary Tennant City Recorder
City of Woodburn, Oregon
Page 3 - COUNCil Bill NO.
RESOLUTION NO.
43
ATTACHMENT A
IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF WOODBURN, OREGON
DR 2006-17
V AR 2007-01
EXCP 2007-02
)
)
)
FINAL ORDER
WHEREAS, a request was made by Welkin Engineering on behalf of Tim Murphy and Gerard
Stascausky, for a design review for an 8-unit multiple-family dwelling, a variance from WOO
2.104.06.0.2.a and Table 2.1.7 requiring construction of an architectural wall, and an exception
to street right-of-way and improvements on East Lincoln Street and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the matter at their meeting of September 27th,
2007 and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the written and oral testimony presented by
staff, the applicant, and other interested persons in a public hearing, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission closed the hearing, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission moved to deny case V AR 2007-01 and to approve cases
DR 2006-17 and EXCP 2007-02 subject to conditions of approval, and instructed staff to prepare
findings and conclusions,
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED BY THE COMMISSION:
The Planning Commission denies case V AR 2007-01 based on the findings and conclusions
contained in Exhibit "A." The Planning Commission approves cases DR 2006-17 and EXCP
2007-02 based on the findings and conclusions contained in Exhibit "A", and subject to the
conditions of approval contained in Exhibits "B" and "C," which the Planning Commission finds
reasonable. Exhibits "A," "8," and "C" are attached hereto and by reference are incorporated
herein.
Approved:
10/11/07
Date .
[:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01
EXCP 2007-02 Lincoln Commons\Final Order.doc
44
CITY OF WOODBURN, OREGON
PLANNING COMMISSION
DR 2006-17
V AR 2007-01
EXCP 2007-02
Exhibit A
I General Provisions
2
3 The provisions of the WDO shall be considered the minimum regulations adopted to promote
4 the pubUc health, safety and general welfare; and shall apply uniformly to each case or kind
5 of use, structure or land unless varied or otherwise conditioned as allowed in the WDO.
6 [WDO t.tOt.Ol.A)
7 All officials, departments, employees (including contractor-officials), of the City vested with
8 authority to issue permits or grant approvals shall adhere to and require conformance with
9 the WDO, and shall issue no permit or grant approval for any development or use which
10 violates or fails to comply with conditions or standards imposed to carry out the WDO. [WDO
II 1.101.04)
12 Findings: The planning commissioners are officials of the City and are collectively vested with
13 authority to grant approvals. The planning division staff are employees of the City and are vested
14 with authority to issue permits or grant approvals.
15 Conclusions: The planning commissioners and planning division staffmust adhere to and require
16 conformance with the WDO, and must not grant approval for any development or use which
17 violates or fails to comply with conditions or standards imposed to carry out the WDO.
TABLE 4.1 SUMMARY OF DECISIONS BY TYPE
Section Decision I II III IV V Appeal
5.103.02 Design Review for All Structures 1000 Sq. Ft. OR .
MORE
18 The Planning Commission shall render all Type III decisions.[WDO 4.101.10.C)
19 All City decision-making bodies have the authority to impose conditions of approval
20 reasonably related to impacts caused by the development or designed to ensure that all
21 appUcable approval standards are, or can be, met on Type II, III and IV decisions EXCEPT
22 annexation. All conditions of approval shall be clear and objective or if the condition requires
23 discretion shall provide for a subsequent opportunity for a public hearing. (WDO 4.101.1S.A)
24 Findings: Design Reviews for Structures 1000 Square Feet or More are Type III decisions. The
25 Planning Commission is the City decision-making body with authority to render type III decisions.
I:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 1 of 28
45
1 Conclusions: The Planning Commission has "the authority to impose conditions of approval
2 reasonably related to impacts caused by the development." If a condition of approval requires
3 discretion, the Commission may require a public hearing on the matter.
4
S Under a consolidated review, all applications shall be processed following the procedures
6 applicable for the highest type decision requested. It is the express policy of the City that
1 development review not be segmented into discrete parts in a manner that precludes a
8 comprehensive review of the entire development and its cumulative impacts. (WDO 4.101.02]
TABLE 4.1 SUMMARY OF DECISIONS BY TYPE
Section Decision I II III IV V Appeal
5.103.02 Design Review for All Structures 1000 Sq. Ft. OR .
MORE
5.103.12 Exception to Street Right of Way and Improvement .
Requirements
5.103.11 Variance .
9 Finding: Variances, Design Reviews for Structures 1000 Square Feet or More, and Exceptions to
10 Street Right of Way and Improvement Requirements are Type III decisions.
II Conclusions: Under WOO 4.101.02, the applications are consolidated as a Type III decision.
12 Considering the applications together allows a comprehensive review of the entire development and
13 its cumulative impacts.
14
IS
16 WDO 2.104 Medium Density Residential (RM) District Standards
11
18 There shall be no minimum lot area or dimensions for multiple family residential dwellings
19 units or living units in the RM zone. [WDO 2.104, Table 2.1.S.B]
20 The number of multiple family residential dwelling units on a lot shall be regulated by:
21 1. Maximum residential density, not exceeding the following standards:
22 a. Multiple family dwellings: 16 dwelling units per net buildable acre. [WDO 2.104,
23 Table 2.1.S.C)
24 Finding: The proposed density is 11.3 DUA.
2S Conclusion: The proposed density complies with WOO 2.104, Table 2.1.5.C.l.a.
26
21
28 The number of multiple family residential dwelling units on a lot shall be regulated by:
29 2. Compliance with the applicable open space and site design standards and guidelines of
30 Sections 2.104.07.C. [WOO 2.104, Table 2.1.S.C)
3\ Findings: The proposed development either complies with the applicable open space and site design
32 standards of Sections 2.104.07 .C, or can be brought into conformity with appropriate conditions of
33 approval. The proposed development does not comply with all open space and site design
I:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 2 of 28
46
1 guidelines of Sections 2.l04.07.C. Compliance with the guidelines may require redesign of the
2 project or a reduction in the number of dwelling units.
3 Conclusion: The Commission has the discretion to approve the development even if it does not
4 comply with all open space and site design guidelines of Sections 2.104.07 .C, or to require
5 compliance with any or all such guidelines.
6
7
8 The maximum height of buildings shall not exceed 35 feet. (WDO 2.104.06.C)
9 Finding: The elevation drawings show the building height as approximately 23 feet.
10 Conclusion: The proposed buildings comply with WDO 2.1 04.06.C.
11
12
13 The setback abutting a street shall be a minimum of 20 feet plus any Special Setback, Section
14 3.103.05. (WDO 2.104.06.D.l.a)
15 Finding: The site plan shows that the buildings are set back at least 120 feet from E. Lincoln Street.
16 Conclusion: The proposed development complies with WDO 2.1 04.06.0.l.a.
17
18 "Off street parking and storage shall be prohibited within a required setback or any yard
19 abutting a street EXCEPT for parking and maneuvering within a driveway leading to a
20 garage (or carport in the case of a manufactured home) or adjacent to a wall." (WDO
21 2.104.06.D.l.b.l)
22 Findings: The grading plan shows a 6 foot architectural wall 24 feet long adjacent to the north
23 exterior parking spaces. The grading plan shows a 6 foot architectural wall 11 feet long adjacent to
24 the south exterior parking spaces. No other parking spaces are within required setbacks.
2S Conclusions: The proposed development complies with WDO 2.104.06.0.1.b.l at the north exterior
26 parking spaces. The south exterior parking spaces are not adjacent to an architectural wall along
27 their entire length and do not comply with WDO 2. 104.06.0. l.b. 1. The south exterior parking
28 spaces should be screened with an architectural wall along their entire length.
TABLE 2.1.7 Interior Yard and Buffer Standards for RM Zones
Abuttin Pro e Interior Setback
RS or RIS zone; or Existing 30 ft. from any portion of a primary building 16.1 ft. to 28
sin e famil or du lex dwellin ft. in hei t.
RM zone; or Existing medium 30 ft. from any portion of a main building more than 16 ft.
densi residential unit and less than 28 ft. in hei t
29 Findings: The elevation drawings show the building height as approximately 23 feet. The site plan
30 shows the buildings to be set back at least 30 feet from all property lines.
31 Conclusion: The proposed development complies with the interior setback requirements of WOO
32 2.1 04.06.0.2.a and Table 2.1.7.
33
34
I:\Conununity Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 3 of 28
47
1
2
The entrance to a garage shall be set back a minimum of 20 feet from the closest edge of a
shared driveway. [WDO 2.104.06.D.1.b.2)
Finding: The site plan shows that the garage entrances are set back from the shared driveway
approximately 28 feet.
Conclusion: The proposed development complies with WOO 2.1 04.06.D.l.b.2.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Multiple density residential buildings shall be subject to the design standards or guidelines of
Section 3.107.05. [WDO 2.104.07.C.l)
Findings: WOO 2.104.07.C.l contains a scrivener's error, and should read either "Multiplefami/y
residential buildings" or "Medium density residential buildings." The proposed project consists of
multiple:fami/y residential buildings in a medium density residential development.
Conclusion: As the proposed project consists of multiple:family residential buildings in a medium
density residential development, either interpretation leads to the conclusion that the development is
"subject to the design standards or guidelines of Section 3.107.05."
10
\1
12
13
14
15
[6
17
18
19
20
Common refuse collection facilities shall be screened on all sides by an architectural block
wall and soUd gate, both with an anti-graffiti surface, a minimum of six feet and a maximum
of seven feet in height. [WDO 2.104.07.F.3]
Findings: The site plan does not show common refuse collection facilities. The WDO does not
require common refuse collection facilities, only that they be screened if they are provided.
Conclusion: Individual refuse collection facilities should be required as a condition of approval, or
common refuse collection facilities provided and screened in accordance with WOO 2.104.07.F.3.
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
WDO 5.103.11
Variances
The purpose of a variance is to allow a deviation from a WDO development standard
EXCEPT a standard regarding use, where strict adherence to the standard and variance to a
standards will not unreasonably impact the adjacent existing or potential uses or
development. [WDO 5.103.11.A]
Findings: Wood fences provide a visual barrier equivalent to brick or block walls. Wood fences do
not provide a noise barrier equivalent to brick or block walls. Brick or block walls maintain their
appearance without regular repainting, and are more durable and resistant to damage than wood
fences. The required anti-graffiti surface makes brick or block walls more resistant to vandalism.
The WOO requirement for an architectural wall is an accepted development standard in the
community. The WDO requirement for an architectural wall is imposed in specific circumstances
where a development could reasonably be anticipated to generate visual and noise impacts on
adjacent properties. An architectural wall is the appropriate method to reduce impacts created by
the development. The WDO requirement for an architectural wall is not a method to create a public
amenity. The applicant's statement did not address "the adjacent existing or potential uses or
development." The applicant's submittal did not include drawings or a detailed description of the
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
4[
42
43
I:\Commuruty Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Fina1 Order Exhibit A.doc Page 4 of 28
48
1 proposed wood fence. The applicants submittal did not include any information regarding the
2 functionality of the proposed wood fence.
~ Conclusions: The requested variance would allow a deviation from a WOO development standard,
4 but not a standard regarding use. The requested variance would impact the adjacent existing or
5 potential uses or development by allowing the substitution of a less capable barrier to visual and
6 noise impacts. The applicant's assertion that "the functionality of this wall (Le. screening and
7 buffering, as opposed to its design attributes) can be provided with a 6-foot high wood fence" is
8 unsupported by any evidence in the submittal. The applicant should submit drawings and a detailed
9 description of the proposed wood fence to the Commission, together with information supporting
10 the assertion that the proposed wood fence can provide the functionality ofthe required
11 architectural wall.
12
1~
14 Development in an RM zone, except for a single family dwelling and duplex dwelling, shall be
IS subject to the setback and buffer requirements of Table 2.1.7. [WDO 2.104.06.D.2.a)
TABLE 2.1.7 Interior Yard and Buffer Standards for RM Zones
Abuttin Pro e Wall
Existing single family or duplex Solid brick or architectural wall with anti-graffiti surface,
dwellin no less than 6 feet or eater than 7 feet in hei t.
RM, P/SP zone; or Existing Wall requirements shall be determined in conjunction with
medium densi residential unit the a licable Oesi Review rocess.
v.... (.......... ~ $..- to om.-.,
AlJ~-:. ,
I ;
. .
* .
. . I
,.. .
,
.......
I
.
.
.
.
.
. .
A vision clearance area shall contain no plants,
fence, wall, structure, or temporary or permanent
obstruction exceeding 30 inches in height
[measured from the top of the curb or, where no
curb exists, from the established street centerline
grade), EXCEPT as follows:
1. Trees, provided branches and foliage are
removed to a height of 7 feet above grade;
2. Telephone, power and cable television poles;
3. Telephone and utility boxes less than ten inches
at the widest dimension; and
4. Traffic control signs and devices. [WDO
3.103.10.E)
Flpn 6..1 \1sIoa c.1earua .\rta
16 Findings: A solid brick or architectural wall with anti-graffiti surface, no less than 6 feet or greater
17 than 7 feet in height, is required where the property abuts lots developed with single-family
18 dwellings (933, 1035, and 1129 East Lincoln Street, to the southwest, south, and east), in
19 accordance with Table 2.1.7, except at the access points to the abutting lots and their associated
20 vision clearance areas. It is discretionary but appropriate to require a wall along the northern 215
21 feet of the west property line, where the lot abuts school property in the P/SP zone, in accordance
22 with WOO 2.104.06.0.2.a and Table 2.1.7. It is discretionary but appropriate to require a wall
23 along the north property line, where the lot abuts an existing medium density residential
I:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Conunons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 5 of 28
49
1 development in the RM zone, in accordance with WOO 2.1 04.06.0.2.a and Table 2.1.7. The
2 applicant has requested a variance from the wall requirement except at the northernmost exterior
3 parking space and the easterly 11 feet of the southernmost exterior parking space. The applicant .
4 also proposes 30" architectural walls on top of the retaining walls along the flagpole portion of the
5 lot. The submittal contains no detail of the proposed architectural walls. The submittal does not
6 address the requirement that the walls have an anti-graffiti surface.
7 Conclusions: The applicant has not demonstrated that the retaining wall on the westerly 13 feet of
8 the southernmost exterior parking space or the proposed 30" architectural walls on top of the
9 retaining walls along the flagpole portion of the lot meet the standard of being "no less than 6 feet
10 or greater than 7 feet in height" as required by WOO 2.104.06.0.2.a and Table 2.1.7. The applicant
11 should demonstrate compliance with the wall height requirement of WOO 2.1 04.06.0.2.a and Table
12 2.1.7.
13
14
15 Wall, Architectural: A wall that incorporates at least two colors and/or textures. [WDO 1.102)
16 Findings: The submittal did not include drawings or a detailed description of the ofthe proposed
17 architectural walls. Architectural walls are intended to buffer adjacent properties from the subject
18 property - not to buffer the subject property from adjacent properties. The grading plan shows
19 retaining walls along portions of the north, west, and south property lines, and the flagpole portion
20 of the lot. The grading plan shows 30" architectural walls on top of the retaining walls on either
21 side of the flagpole portion of the lot.
22 Conclusions: All architectural walls should incorporate at least two colors and/or textures on the
23 side facing away from the subject property. The applicant should submit details of the proposed
24 architectural walls demonstrating compliance with the requirement of WOO 1.102 that architectural
25 walls incorporate at least two colors and/or textures. Retaining walls should have the same
26 appearance as architectural walls.
27
28
29 Criteria. A determination of whether the criteria set forth are satisfied necessarily involves
30 the balancing of competing and conmcting interest. The factors that are listed to be
31 considered are not criteria and are not intended to be an exclusive list. The facton to be
32 considered are used as a guide in deliberations on the application. [WDO 5.103.11.C)
33 The variance is necessary to prevent unnecessary hardship relating to the land or structure,
34 which would cause the property to be unbuildable by application of the WDO. Factors to
35 consider in determining whether hardship exists, include:
36 a. Physical circumstances over which the applicant has no control related to the piece
37 of property involved that distinguish it from other land in the zone, including but
38 not limited to lot size, shape, topography.
39 b. Whether reasonable use similar to other properties can be made of the property
40 without the variance.
41 c. Whether the hardship was created by the person requesting the variance. [WDO
42 S.103.11.C.l)
43 Findings: No physical circumstances such as lot size or topography distinguish the subject property
44 from other land in the RM zone. Other flag lots in the RM zone are subject to the same
I:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 6 of 28
50
1 requirements. Reasonable use similar to other properties in the RM zone can be made of the subject
2 property without the variance. Multiple-family dwellings are identified as a use that carries impacts
3 to existing development. Other uses also have been identified as creating impacts, and similar
4 WOO provisions require construction of an architectural wall. An architectural wall is the
5 appropriate method to reduce impacts created by the development, and is not a method to create a
6 public amenity. The applicant's statement does not address whether reasonable use similar to other
7 properties can be made of the property without the variance or whether the hardship was created by
8 the person requesting the variance.
9 Conclusion: The requirement ofWDO 5.l03.ll.C.l that the property be "unbuildable by
10 application of the WDO" without the requested variance is not met.
11
12
13 Development consistent with the request will not be materially injurious to adjacent
14 properties. Factors to be considered in determining whether development consistent with the
1 5 variance materiaDy injurious include but are not limited to:
16 a. Physical impacts such development will have because of the variance, such as
17 visual, noise, traffic and drainage, erosion and landslide hazards.
18 b. Incremental impacts occurring as a result of the proposed variance. [WDO
19 5.103.11.C.2]
20 Findings: The variance would not create or exacerbate traffic, drainage, erosion or landslide
21 hazards. The variance would affect adjacent properties by allowing the substitution of a less
22 capable barrier to visual and noise impacts.
23 Conclusions: The requested variance could impact but may not be materially injurious to adjacent
24 properties. The requested variance may meet the standard ofWDO 5.103.1l.C.2.
25
26
27 Existing physical and natural systems, such as but not limited to traffic, drainage, dramatic
28 land forms or parks will not be adversely affected because of the variance. [WDO
29 S.103.11.C.3)
30 Findings: The property does not abut drainageways, dramatic land forms or parks. The property
31 abuts school property to the west. The variance would affect the adjacent school property by
32 allowing the substitution of a less capable barrier to visual and noise impacts.
33 Conclusions: Traffic, drainage, dramatic land forms, and parks would not be adversely affected
34 because of the variance. The variance may not have a materially adverse affect on the adjacent
35 school property. The requested variance may meet the standard ofWDO 5.l03.l1.C.3.
36
37
38 The variance is the minimum deviation necessary to make reasonable economic use of the
39 property. {WDO S.103.11.C.4)
40 Findings: The applicant provided cost estimates showing that the variance will result in a savings of
41 $29,920.50, but did not address how the cost savings was necessary to make reasonable economic
42 use of the property.
I:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 7 of 28
51
I Conclusion: The requested variance has not been shown to be "necessary to make reasonable
2 economic use of the property" and therefore does not meet the standard ofWDO 5.103.11.C.4.
3
4
5 The variance does not conflict with the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan. [WDO 5.103.11.C.5)
6 Findings: The property is zoned Medium Density Residential (RM) and is designated Residential
7 More than 12 Units per Acre on the Comprehensive Plan Map. The proposed use of the property is
8 a medium density multiple-family residential development. Abutting properties are zoned Medium
9 Density Residential (RM) and Public and Semi-Public (P/SP), and are designated Residential More
10 than 12 Units per Acre and Open Space and Parks on the Comprehensive Plan Map.
II Conclusions: The variance does not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan, and meets the standard
12 ofWDO S.103.11.C.5.
13
14 WDO 3.101 Street Standards
15
16 All public streets under the jurisdiction of the City of Wood bum shall comply with the
17 applicable cross section design standards noted in Section 3.101.03 and construction
18 specifications of the Public Works Department. [WDO 3.101.02.C.1)
19 Street, Boundary: That portion, or portions, of a street right of way abutting a subject
20 property where existing or proposed development is located within 260 feet of the subject
21 right of way. (Figure 6.12) [WDO 1.102)
22 The full right of way for the subject street classification, Section 3.101.03, shall be required for
23 a connecting street segment without an approved exception or variance. [WDO 3.101.02.D.1.a]
24 The full street improvement for the subject street classification, Section 3.101.03, shall be
2S provided for a connecting street segment without an approved exception or variance. [WDO
26 3.101.02.D.1.b]
27 The full right of way for the subject street classification, Section 3.101.03, shall be required for
28 a boundary street without an approved exception or variance. (WDO 3.101.02.D.2.a)
29 The full street improvement for the subject street classification, Section 3.101.03, shall be
30 provided for a boundary street without an approved exception or variance. [WDO
31 3.101.02.D.2.b]
I:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 8 of 28
52
Figure 6.12 Connecting, Boundary and Intel'nal Streets
I Findings: East Lincoln Street is the Boundary Street for the subject parcel, as defined in WDO
2 1.102 and shown in Figure 6.12. East Lincoln Street is the Connecting Street for the subject parcel,
3 as defined in WDO 1.102 and shown in Figure 6.12. The Connecting Street segment extends to the
4 intersection with Carol Street.
5 Conclusions: The applicant must provide the full right of way and the full street improvements
6 required by the Transportation System Plan or obtain an exception to street right of way and
7 improvement requirements, in accordance with WDO 3.1 0l.02.D.
8
9
10 The street right of way and improvement cross-sectional standards required for development
11 are depicted in Figure '-2 and Table '-I of the Woodburn Transportation System Plan.
12 These standards are based on the (unctional classification of each street as shown in Figure'-
13 1 of the Woodburn Transportation System Plan. The street right-of-way and improvement
14 standards minimize the amount of pavement and right-of-way required for each street
IS classification consistent with the operational needs of each facility, including requirements for
16 pedestrians, bicycles, and public (acilities.{WDO 3.101.03.Al
17
I:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 9 of 28
53
SERVICE
COLLECTOR
STREET ..
.:)
PUaIC UTIJ1Y -'. ~
......,. t
'--
5f",'2.-
,
.{ Yo.,
,,,:,,.. PUalCImUT'f
:~i __
....'/
.. .. r
..==:
,r
TJIIAVIL
LAllI
,r
CIJI1Wl
LIPT 1UIIIt
LAlla
tr
TJIIAVIL
LAllI
.. .. r
... LAIe ...
LAllI ICtorlI WAUt r
-
ItOW . 7r
- -
Detail from Figure 7-2 of the Transportation Systems Plan
1 Findings: East Lincoln Street is classified as a Service Collector in the Woodburn Transportation
2 System Plan (WTSP.) The required cross-section for a Service Collector is a 72 foot of right- of-
3 way, 36 foot improved driving surface (two 12 foot traffic lanes and a 12 foot center turn lane), 6
4 foot bike lanes, 6 foot landscape strips and 6 foot sidewalks on both sides. The existing cross-
5 section is a 50 foot right-of-way, 34 foot improved driving surface (two 17 foot traffic lanes), no
6 planter strip, and a 4-5 foot sidewalk on the north side of the street. East Lincoln Street is posted
7 "No Parking" on the south side, but not on the north side.
8 Conclusions: The existing cross-section of East Lincoln Street does not meet the requirements for a
9 Service Collector. The applicant must provide the full right of way and the full street improvements
10 required by the Transportation System Plan or obtain an exception to street right of way and
11 improvement requirements, in accordance with WOO 3.101.02.0.
12
13
14 The street frontage of a subject property shall be improved with either property line
15 sidewalks and street trees or curb line sidewalks. The improvement shall be determined at
16 the time of subdivision, PUD or design review as applicable. Sidewalks and trees shall be
17 installed by the property owner to the standards of Section 3.101 and 3.106. (WDO
18 2.104.07.F.l)
19 Finding: The applicant has requested an exception to street right-of-way and improvements on East
20 Lincoln Street.
21 Conclusions: The current Design Review triggers the provision that "improvement shall be
22 determined at the time of... design review." If the requested exception to street right-of-way and
23 improvements is not granted, the property owner would be required to provide all improvements
24 required by the Transportation System Plan. If granted, the exception would identify the applicant's
25 proportionate share of required street improvements based on the impacts of the proposed
26 development, and could be conditioned on execution of a non-remonstrance agreement to provide
27 the improvements when reconstruction of East Lincoln Street is timely based on participation by
28 other property owners and the availability of public funding.
29
30
31 Street Trees. Within the public street right of way abutting a development, street trees shall
32 be planted to City standards prior to ("mal occupancy.
33 a. Acceptable Types of Trees. See Section 6.103 for a description of acceptable and
1:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 10 of 28
54
1 unacceptable trees for this purpose, classified by size and species.
2 b. Tree Density. Trees shall be planted at the following intervals within the right of way,
3 subject to Clear Vision Area standards, Section 3.103.10 and Section 6.103:
4 1) Four (4) small trees per 100 feet of street frontage;
5 1) Three (3) medium trees per 100 feet of street frontage; or
6 3) Two (1) large trees per 100 feet of street frontage. [WDO 3.106.03.A.l)
7 Finding: The applicant has requested an exception to street right-of-way and improvements on East
8 Lincoln Street.
9 Conclusions: If the requested exception to street right-of-way and improvements is not granted, the
10 property owner would be required to provide street trees as required by WDO 3.1 06.03.A.l. If
11 granted, the exception could be conditioned on a non-remonstrance agreement to provide street
12 trees when reconstruction of East Lincoln Street is timely based on participation by other property
13 owners and the availability of public funding.
14
15
16 Sidewalks should/shall be located at the property line along streets with street trees, Section
17 3.106. [WDO 3.107.05.C.6)
18 Finding: The applicant has requested an exception to street right-of-way and improvements on East
19 Lincoln Street.
20 Conclusions: If the requested exception to street right-of-way and improvements is not granted, the
21 property owner would be required to provide sidewalks as required by WDO 3.107.0S.C.6. If
22 granted, the exception could be conditioned on a non-remonstrance agreement to provide sidewalks
23 when reconstruction of East Lincoln Street is timely.
24
25
26 WDO 5.103.12 Exception to Street Ri&ht of Way and Improvement
27 Requirements
28
29 The purpose of an exception is to allow a deviation from a WDO development standard cited
30 in Section 3.101.01. (WDO 5.103.11]
31 Application Requirements. An application shall include a completed City application form,
32 filing fee, deeds, notification area map and labels, written narrative statement regarding
33 compliance with criteria, location map and the fonowing additional exhibits:
34 1. Street and Utility Plan as applicable;
35 2. Site Plan; and
36 3. A "rough proportionality" report prepared by a qualified civil or traffic engineer
37 addressing the approval criteria. (WDO 5.103.12.8)
38 Finding: The applicant's submittal included the required elements.
39 Conclusions: If granted, the Exception to Street Right of Way and Improvement Requirements
40 would satisfy the guideline of WDO 3.101. Also, if granted, the Exception would identify the level
4\ of improvements the property owner would be responsible for. A non-remonstrance agreement for
42 public improvements could be required as part of the Exception. If the exception is not granted, the
I :\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007 -0 I EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 11 of 28
55
1 property owner would be required to construct East Lincoln Street to the cross-section specified in
2 the Transportation System Plan.
3
4 \
5 Assumptions underlying the Planning Division's proportionality analysis include:
6 . All vacant lots in the RM zone and lots currently developed with single-family dwellings will be
7 redeveloped to the same density proposed by the applicant (11.3 DUA.) This is less than the 16
8 DUA permitted in the RM zone.
9 . All lots in the RS zone larger than 12,000 square feet will be partitioned into conforming
10 (minimum 6,000 square foot) lots and developed with single-family dwellings.
11 . Properties owned by churches are not redeveloped for residential use.
12 . All lots dedicate additional right-of-way for East Lincoln Street upon redevelopment.
13 The Planning Division's analysis examined all available data for traffic on East Lincoln Street:
14 . City traffic count west of Gatch Street conducted in 2000: 4,839 ADT
15 . City traffic count east of Gatch Street conducted in 2002: 373 ADT
16 . City traffic count west of Corby Street conducted in 2003: 246 ADT
17 . ODOT traffic model estimates of3,455 and 3,696 ADT
18 . No counts have been conducted on East Lincoln Street since 2003.
19 . The Public Works Department reports that the 2002 and 2003 traffic counts are out of scale with
20 the other data and should be disregarded.
21 The Planning Division examined four scenarios:
22 . Method 1 attributed all improvements to the increase in average daily trips for each lot,
23 distributing the cost over 505 additional daily trips. The proposed development would generate
24 10.6% of the additional traffic generated by redevelopment.
25 . Method 2 attributed improvements to the increase in average daily trips for each lot as a
26 proportion of all traffic - the 505 daily trips generated by redevelopment plus the existing trip
27 count - distributing the cost over the total daily trips. Method 2a uses the 2000 trip count of
28 4,839, while methods 2b and 2c use ODOT's traffic model figures of3,455 and 3,696 ADT. The
29 proposed development would generate between 1.0 and 1.4% of the total future traffic.
30 . Method 3 attributed all improvements to the proportion of each lot's boundary on Lincoln Street
31 as defined in Section 1.102 and Figure 6.12, distributing the cost over 2,589 feet of half-street
32 frontage. The proposed development represents 4.9% of the boundary street frontage.
n . Method 4 attributed all improvements to the proportion of each redevelopable lot's boundary on
34 Lincoln Street as defined in Section 1.102 and Figure 6.12, distributing the cost over 1,841 feet
35 of redevelopable half-street frontage. The proposed development represents 6.2% of the
36 boundary street frontage.
37 Finding: The proposed development will cause a level of impacts amounting to between 1.0 and
38 10.6 percent of the required street improvements to East Lincoln Street between the subject property
39 and Carol Street. The proposed development represents 4.9% ofthe boundary street frontage as
40 defined in WOO 1.102 and shown in Figure 6.12.
41 Conclusions: The proposed development's proportionate share of boundary street improvements is
42 4.9% of the reconstruction between the subject property and Carol Street.
43
44
I:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 12 of 28
56
I The estimated extent, on a quantitative basis, to which the rights of way and improvements
2 will be used by persons served by the bunding or development, whether the use is for safety or
3 convenience. (WDO S.103.1Z.C.l)
4 Findings: Persons served by the development are expected to generate approximately 54 vehicular
5 trips per day. Neither conventional traffic counts nor the ITE Trip Generation Manual account for
6 non-vehicular traffic. The sidewalk required by the Transportation System Plan is for safety. The
7 landscape strip required by the Transportation System Plan is for convenience and is a standard of
8 aesthetics promulgated and accepted by the community. The right-of-way dedication and specified
9 improvements are needed to provide vehicle and non-motorized transportation facilities throughout
10 the street corridor.
II Conclusions: Residents of the development will necessarily use East Lincoln Street for both their
12 vehicular and non-motorized traffic needs.
13
14
15 The estimated level, on a quantitative basis, of rights of way and improvements needed to
16 meet the estimated extent of use by persons served by the building or development. [WDO
17 5.103.1Z.C.Z)
18 Findings: The center turn lane required by the Transportation Systems Plan would facilitate left
19 turns into and out ofthe driveway - movements that occur in approximately half ofthe 54 daily
20 trips estimated to be generated by the project. Provision of a bicycle lane and wider sidewalk than
21 currently exists will facilitate safe bicycle and pedestrian use of East Lincoln Street by the residents
22 of the development. The proportion of improvements to East Lincoln Street that could be attributed
23 to the subject property ranges from 1.0% to 10.6% depending on the method of analysis used. The
24 subject property represents 4.9% of the boundary street frontage as defined in WDO 1.102 and
25 Figure 6.12.
26 Conclusion: All improvements required by the Transportation Systems Plan would be utilized by
27 and are needed to meet the vehicular and non-motorized transportation needs of residents of the
28 development. It is appropriate to require the property owner to participate in the cost of providing
29 all improvements required by the Transportation System Plan for East Lincoln Street. It is
30 appropriate that the subject property should bear a portion of those costs commensurate with the
31 property's boundary street frontage as defined in WDO 1.102 and Figure 6.12 - 4.9%. The
32 property owner should enter into a nonremonstrance agreement to participate in the cost of
33 reconstructing East Lincoln Street to the standards of the Transportation Systems Plan when such
34 reconstruction becomes timely.
35
36
37 The estimated impact, on a quantitative basis, of the building or development on the public
38 infrastructure system of which the rights of way and improvements will be a part. [WDO
39 5.103.12.C.31
40 Findings: Lincoln Street connects to Highway 99E on the east and Front Street and Settlemier
41 Avenue on the west. The impact of the proposed development on the larger public infrastructure
42 system is estimated to be small in comparison to the impact of off-site development on that larger
43 public infrastructure.
I :\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 13 of 28
57
1 Conclusions: The larger public infrastructure system has sufficient capacity to accommodate the
2 traffic generated by the proposed development. The incremental impact of the proposed
3 development on the larger public infrastructure system would be adequately addressed through
4 assessment of System Development Charges in the building permit process.
5
6
7 The estimated level, on a quantitative basis, of rights of way and improvements needed to
8 mitigate the estimated impact on the public infrastructure system. [WOO 5.103.12.C.4)
9 Finding: The larger public infrastructure system has sufficient capacity to accommodate the traffic
10 generated by the proposed development.
11 Conclusion: The incremental impact of the proposed development on the larger public infrastructure
\2 system would be adequately addressed through assessment of System Development Charges in the
13 building permit process.
14
\5
16 When a lesser standard, subject to Section 3.101.02.F, is justified based on the nature and
17 extent of the impacts of the proposed development, an exception to reduce a street right of
18 way or cross section requirement may be approved. No exception may be granted from
19 applicable construction specifications. [WOO 5.103.12.0)
20 Finding: The applicant has not requested an exception from construction specifications, but rather
21 an exception to the street cross section requirement.
22 Conclusion: An exception to reduce a street right of way or cross section requirement is not
23 precluded by WOO 5.103.12.0.
24
25
26 To assure a safe and functional street with capacity to meet current demands and to assure
27 safety for vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians, as well as other forms of non-vehicular traffic,
28 there are minimum standards for right of way and improvement that must be provided.
29 Deviation from these minimum standards may only be considered by a variance procedure,
30 Section 5.103.11. [WDO 5.103.12.E)
31 Findings: The existing street cross-section consists of two 17 foot travel lanes with a 4-5 foot
32 sidewalk on the north side of the street, and provides sufficient capacity to meet current demands
33 for vehicular and (on the north side of the street) pedestrian traffic. Future upgrading to improve
34 pedestrian, bicycle, and other fonns of non-vehicular traffic may be accomplished through a non-
35 remonstrance agreement.
36 Conclusions: The property owner should either construct the improvements required by the
37 Transportation Systems Plan or execute a non-remonstrance agreement to provide the necessary
38 improvements when reconstruction of East Lincoln Street is timely based on participation by other
39 property owners and the availability of public funding.
40
41
42 \VDO 3.104 Access Standards
43
44 Residential Driveways Serving Any Number of Multiple Family Dwelling Units
I:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 14 of 28
58
I 1. Paved Driveway Width:
2 b. Two-way driveway:
3 - 1) Width: 20 feet, minimax. "No parking" restrictions shan be posted by the
4 owner. [WDO 3.104.05.0)
5 Finding: The site plan shows a 20 foot two-way drive aisle posted "no parking."
6 Conclusion: The two-way drive aisle complies with WOO 3.104.05.D.I.b.l.
7
8
9 Radius of Curb Flare: 25 feet minimum. [WOO 3.104.05.0.2)
10 Finding: The site plan does not callout the curb radius, but at the indicated scale it appears to be
\l approximately 5 feet -less than the 25 foot minimum radius required by WDO 3.104.05.0.2.
12 Conclusion: The development must provide curb returns with a radius of at least 25 feet, in
13 accordance with WOO 3.104.05.0.2.
14
15
16 Flag Lot Driveway Access Width. 24 foot wide, as either an irrevocable easement or a strip of
17 land in fee ownership. [WOO 3.104.05.0.3)
18 Finding: The site plan shows a 30 foot access as part of the subject parcel.
19 Conclusion: The site plan complies with WOO 3.104.05.0.3.
20
21
22 Throat length of a driveway, extending from the closest off street parking or loading space to
23 the outside edge of right of way for a:
24 b. Driveway accessing Major and Minor Arterial Streets: SO feet minimum, with greater
25 improvement as may be required by a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA). [WDO
26 3.104.05.D.4)
27 Findings: East Lincoln Street is designated as a Service Collector in the Transportation System Plan
28 and is defined as a major street under WOO 1.102. The site plan shows a throat length of over 60
29 feet to the first driveway on adjacent property that also uses the flagpole access.
30 Conclusion: The site plan complies with WOO 3.1 04.05.0.4.b.
31
32
33 WDO 3.105 Off Street Parkin& and Loadini Standards
34
35 Off Street Vehicle Parking Requirements.
36 1. Off street vehicle parking spaces shall be provided in amounts not less than those set
37 forth in Table 3.1.1.
38 2. Off street vehicle parking spaces shall not exceed 2.0 times the amount required in
39 Table 3.1.1. [WDO 3.105.01.E)
TABLE 3.1.2
Use
Off Street Parkin Ratio Standards
Parking Ratio - spaces per activity unit or
s uare feet of oss floor area sf! fa
[:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 15 of 28
59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
I 2. Three or more dwelling units per structure I 2.0/ dwelling unit
Finding: The proposed development is 8 dwelling units. This yields a total parking requirement of
16 parking spaces. The building plans show one space in each garage. The site plan shows one
parking space outside each garage and four additional exterior parking spaces. The parking
complies with WOO 3.105.01.E (with the exception of the accessible space requirement.) The use
of stacked or tandem parking can be problematic, although the additional exterior parking spaces
will mitigate the inconveniences associated with visitor parking and access to the garage when the
exterior parking space is occupied.
Conclusions: The proposed parking meets the requirements ofWDO 3.105.01.E.l and 2. Each
parking space outside a garage should be reserved for the exclusive use of the dwelling unit served
by the garage. A sign should be posted on each garage door indicating this reserved status.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
The number of disabled person vehicle parking spaces shall be provided to the standards of
the state Building Code and applicable federal standards. The number of disabled person
vehicle parking spaces shall be included as part of total required vehicle parking spaces.
[WDO 3.105.01.E.3]
The number of accessible
s aces shall be:
Total Parkin In Lot
Re uired Minimum Number of Accessible S aces
19
1 to 25
[ORS 447.233(2)(a))
1
20 In addition, one in every eight accessible spaces, but not less than one, shall be van accessible.
21 [ORS 447.233(2)(b)]
22 Off street parking for disabled persons shall be designed to the standards of the state Building
23 Code and applicable federal standards. [WDO 3.105.01.8.4.c)
24 A van accessible parking space shall be at least nine feet wide and shall have an adjacent
25 access aisle that is at least eight feet wide. [ORS 447.233(2)(b))
26 Accessible parking spaces shall be at least nine feet wide and shall have an adjacent access
27 aisle that is at least six feet wide. [ORS 447.233(2)(c))
28 A sign shall be posted for each accessible parking space. The sign shall be clearly visible to a
29 person parking in the space, shall be marked with the International Symbol of Access and
30 shall indicate that the spaces are reserved for persons with disabled person parking permits.
31 Van accessible parking spaces shall have an additional sign marked "Van Accessible"
32 mounted below the sign. [ORS 447.233(2)(e))
33 Findings: For the required 16 total off-street parking spaces, the proposed development requires one
34 van-accessible space. The site plan does not show an accessible space. The additional exterior
35 spaces could be reconfigured to provide the required van-accessible space and accessibility aisle.
I:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 16 of 28
60
1 Conclusion: The proposed development must provide one van-accessible space and accessibility
2 aisle, in accordance with WDO 3.l0S.0l.E.3, WDO 3.10S.01.H.4.c, Section 1104 of the Oregon
3 Structural Specialty Code and ORS 447.233.
4
5
6 Fifty percent of the required parking should/shall be covered by garages. [WDO 3.107.0S.C.4)
7 Finding: One parking space for each unit (of the two spaces required) is in a garage.
& Conclusions: The proposed off-street parking meets the guideline ofWDO 3.l07.0S.C.4. The
9 additional exterior parking spaces are not required and therefore are not subject to WDO
10 3.107.05.C.4.
11
12
13 Off street loading spaces shall comply with the dimensional standards and amounts not less
14 than those set forth in Table 3.1.3. [WDO 3.10S.01.G.1)
TABLE 3.1.3 Loadin2 Space ReQuirements
Minimum Size of Space
Use Minimum No. Width Length Height
of Spaces
Medium Density Dwellings
0-9 Units 0 --- --- ---
15 Findings: For the proposed 8 dwelling units, no loading space is required. The site plan does not
16 show a loading space.
17 Conclusion: The application complies with WDO 3.1 05.01.G.l.
1&
19
20 Turn arounds shan be required within the off street parking area(s) and/or as specific
21 circulation features, to Department of Public Works requirements based on the review of the
22 Fire District. (WDO 3.10S.01.G.5)
23 Findings: The applicant has requested that the Department of Public Works and the Fire District
24 modify this requirement. The Fire District and the Building Division have previously
25 communicated conditions of approval for this modification to the applicant.
26 Conclusions: The buildings shall be sprinkled with a full NFP A 13 (not an NFP A 13-0) sprinkler
27 system. Each building shall have its own Post Indicator Valve. A fire alarm system complying
2& with NFP A 12 which is monitored by a central station shall be provided. The sprinkler riser room
29 shall have a Knox box for fire department access. The required fire hydrant shall be located at the
30 entrance to the access road along with the required FDC (Fire Department Connection.) The
31 hydrant shall be located within five and twenty feet of the FDC. The 20 foot access road shall be
32 marked and posted "No Parking" on both sides of the access. A flow test shall be conducted to
33 determine the fire flow that can be achieved. A minimum fire flow of one thousand five hundred
34 gallons per minute (1500 gpm) shall be provided.
35 Findings: The building plans and site plan do not show sprinkler riser rooms. Sprinkler riser rooms
36 are required by the fire and building codes.
I:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007 -01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 17 of28
61
1 Conclusions: The applicant must either provide sprinkler riser rooms within the proposed building
2 footprint or amend the site plan to depict external sprinkler riser rooms. External sprinkler riser
3 rooms must comply with setback requirements.
4
5
6 Off street vehicle parking spaces and maneuvering areas, EXCEPT those for single family
7 and duplex dwellings and those for disabled persons, within off street parking areas shall be
8 designed in compUance with Table 3.1.4. Three or more off street parking spaces provided
9 subject to Table 3.1.4 shall be designed so that no backing or maneuvering within a public
10 street right of way is required. [WDO 3.105.01.H.4.a)
TABLE 3.1.4
Parkin S ace and Aisle Dimensions
Aisle Type
Width (Measured from
the midpoint of the
double stripe)
C
9.0 feet
Curb
Length
I-Way
Aisle
Width
E
24.0 feet
Stall
Depth
11 Findings: The site plan shows the parking spaces as 10 feet wide and 24 feet long. The site plan
12 shows a 20 foot wide drive aisle. No backing or maneuvering is required within a public street
13 right of way. Figures 6.7 and 6.8 depict private driveways to flag lots.
14 Conclusions: The parking spaces comply with WOO 3.105.01.Ho4 and Table 3.104. The 20 foot
15 drive aisle does not comply with WOO 3.105.01.Ho4 and Table 3.1.4. As the subject property is a
16 flag lot, a 24 foot wide drive aisle is not required. The 20 feet of improved surface shown in Figure
17 6.8 is appropriate for the proposed development.
18
19
20 Off street parking and maneuvering areas shall have directional markings and signs to
21 control vehicle movement. [WDO 3.105.01.H.5)
22 Finding: The site plan indicates that the driveway will be posted "no parking." The Fire District
23 indicates that, in addition, the pavement must be marked "no parking" to comply with WOO
24 3.105.01.G.5 (see discussion above.)
25 Conclusions: The proposed "no parking" signs comply with WOO 3.1 05.01.H.5. The property
26 owner should provide pavement marking indicating "no parking" along the driveway, in accordance
27 with WOO 3.105.0l.H.5 and WOO 3.105.0l.H.5.
28
29
30 orf street parking spaces shall be delineated by double parallel tines on each side of a space.
31 The total width of the lines shall delineate a separation of2 feet. [WDO 3.105.01.H.6)
32 Findings: The site plan shows the additional exterior parking spaces to be delineated by double
33 parallel lines. All other exterior parking spaces are physically separated from other spaces.
34 Conclusions: The exterior parking spaces that are physically separated from other spaces do not
35 require striping. The development complies with WOO 3.105.01.H.6.
I:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Dcsign Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 18 of 28
62
1
2
3
4
5
AU outdoor lighting shall be designed so as not to shine or reflect into any adjacent
residentially zoned or used property, and shall not cast a glare onto moving vehicles on any
pubnc street. [WDO 3.105.01.8.8)
Findings: One of the proposed luminaires is 17 feet from one adjacent house and 4S feet from
another. The photometric plan does not show illuminance levels on the adjacent residential
properties or call for shielding of the luminaires.
Conclusions: The submittal does not provide a basis to conclude that the proposed illumination will
not "shine or reflect into any adjacent residentially zoned or used property." The applicant has not
demonstrated compliance with WDO 3.IOS.OI.H.8. The applicant should submit a revised
photometric plan or details of lurninaire shielding demonstrating compliance with WOO
3.10S.0l.H.8 to the Planning Division prior to issuance of any building permit.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
All uses required to provide 10 or more off street parking spaces shall provide a bicycle rack
within SO feet of the main entrance. The number of required rack spaces shall be one plus one
per ten vehicle parking spaces, with a maximum of 20 rack spaces. [WDO 3.105.01.8.10)
Findings: The development requires 16 off-street parking spaces. This yields a requirement of three
bicycle rack spaces. The site plan does not show any bicycle rack.
Conclusion: The applicant must provide at least three bicycle rack spaces, in accordance with WOO
3.10S.0l.H.IO.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WDO 3.106
Landscapin& Standards
The subject property shall be landscaped to the standards of Sections 3.106 and 3.107.03.
[WDO 2.104.07.F.2]
The provisions of this section shall apply: -
A. To the site area for all new structures and related parking EXCLUDING single-
family and duplex dwellings and accessory structures. [WDO 3.106.01]
Findings: The proposed development consists of new structures and related parking. The structures
are not single-family or duplex dwellings.
Conclusion: The development is subject to WOO 3.106 under WDO 2.104.07.F.2 and 3.106.01.A.
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
Development in an Ri\t zone, except for a single family dwelling and duplex dwelling, shall be
subject to the setback and buffer requirements of Table 2.1.7. [WDO 2.104.06.D.2.a)
Interior Yard and Buffer Standards (or RM Zones
Landsea in
All interior yards shall be fully landscaped subject to Section
3.106.
TABLE 2.1.7
Abuttin Pro e
Existing single family or duplex
dwellin
I:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 19 of 28
63
TABLE 2.1.7
Abuttin Pro e
RM, P/SP zone; or Existing
medium densi residential unit
Interior Yard and Buffer Standards for RM Zones
Landsca in
All interior yards shall be fully landscaped subject to Section
3.106.
1 Finding: The property abuts existing single-family dwellings to the south, southwest, and southeast,
2 property zoned P/SP to the west, and an existing medium density residential to the north.
3 Conclusion: All interior yards must be fully landscaped subject to Section 3.106, in accordance with
4 Table 2.1.7.
5
6
7 All required landscaped areas shall be permanently irrigated. [WDO 3.106.02.B)
8 Findings: The utility plan shows sprinkler lines for individual units and common areas, and calls out
9 metering and control requirements.
10 Conclusion: The proposed irrigation meets the requirements ofWDO 3.106.02.B.
\1
12
13 The property owner shall be responsible for maintaining all landscaping in good condition so
14 as to present a healthy and orderly appearance. Unhealthy and dead plants shall be removed
15 and replaced in conformance with the original landscape plan. [WDO 3.106.02.E)
16 Finding: This is an ongoing requirement.
17 Conclusion: This requirement will be enforced on current and future property owners.
18
19
20 Front Yard and Yard Abutting a Street.
21 a. Landscaping Density for all uses in the RM zones. All front yards and yards abutting
22 a street shan be landscaped at a density of one (I) plant unit (PU) per 20 sq. ft. [WDO
23 3.106.03.A.2)
24 Finding: The front yard (most of which is designated as the southern common open space) contains
25 139 plant units and approximately 2,449 square feet of area not used for parking or site access and
26 vehicular circulation, or 1.14 plant units per 20 square feet. A total of 123 plant units is required to
27 provide 1 plant unit per 20 square feet.
28 Conclusions: The front yard meets the standard ofWDO 3.l06.03.A.2.a.
I:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 20 of28
64
~"d:.*.
1 --,
.
'""" &......
......
y..... . i
--L
~r &=J
. ,.,..---. ~
_.:k...... ~~~.~-.'i1_
~TL..T
...-"~
--.-.-..-.._..~..
IC.. tf:J. w.
....-.......
FIpre ,.3 StthdI aM Yards
1 Yard, Buffer: An yard improved with landscaping and/or screening to applicable standards
2 of the WDO that is located between two land uses of differing character to minimize potential
3 conflicts and to provide a more aesthetic environment. [WDO 1.102]
4 Findings: The property abuts lots developed with single-family dwellings (933, 1035, and 1129 East
5 Lincoln Street) to the southwest, south, and east. The property abuts an existing multiple-family
6 development to the north. The property abuts school property in the P/SP zone along the northern
7 215 feet of the west property line.
8 Conclusion: Yards abutting lots developed with single-family dwellings or school property are
9 buffer yards.
10
11
12 AU buffer yards shall be landscaped at the rate of one (1) plant unit (PU) per 20 sq. ft.
13 EXCEPT for interior buffer yards abutting a wall which are paved and which may be used
14 for parking or site access and vehicular circulation. [WDO 3.106.03.B)
15 Finding: The west side yard extends from the east property line to the east building wall, in
16 accordance with Figure 6.3. The west side yard abuts school property. The west side yard contains
17 approximately 185 plant units and approximately 2,654 square feet of area not "used for parking or
18 site access and vehicular circulation", or 1.39 plant units per 20 square feet. A total of 133 plant
19 units is required to provide 1 plant unit per 20 square feet.
20 Conclusion: The west side yard is a buffer yard. The west side yard meets the standard of WOO
21 3.106.03.8.
22 Finding: The east side yard extends from the east property line to the east building wall, in
23 accordance with Figure 6.3. The east side yard abuts a lot developed with a single-family dwelling
24 (1129 East Lincoln Street.) The east side yard contains 197 plant units and 5,392 square feet, or
25 0.73 plant units per 20 square feet. A total of 270 plant units is required to provide 1 plant unit per
26 20 square feet.
27 Conclusion: The east side yard is a buffer yard. An additional 73 plant units must be planted in the
I:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007 -02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 21 of 28
65
east side yard in order to meet the standard ofWDO 3.106.03.8.
2 Finding: The property abuts an existing multiple-family development to the north.
3 Conclusions: The rear yard (on the north) does not abut a land use of differing character. The rear
4 yard is not a buffer yard and is not subject to WDO 3.106.03.8.
5 Finding: The property abuts an existing single-family dwelling to the south (1035 East Lincoln
6 Street.) The front yard contains 139 plant units and approximately 2,449 square feet of area not
7 "used for parking or site access and vehicular circulation", or 1.14 plant units per 20 square feet.
8 Conclusion: The front yard is a buffer yard. The front yard meets the standard ofWDO 3.106.03.8.
9
10
11 All unpaved land within off street parking areas, and within 20 feet of the paved edge of off
12 street parking and/or circulation improvements, shan be landscaped in the following
13 proportions:
14 a. RM... zones: Landscaped area(s) equivalent to 200/0 ofthe paved surface area for off
15 street parking and circulation. [WDO 3.106.03.C.l)
16 Finding: The landscaping plan shows that all unpaved land within the off street parking area, and
17 within 20 feet of the paved edge of off street parking and circulation improvements (except for the
18 area occupied by buildings) is landscaped. This constitutes more than 20% of the paved surface
19 area for off street parking and circulation.
20 Conclusion: The proposed development meets the standard ofWDO 3.106.03.C.1.
21
22
23 The density of landscaping required in and adjacent to off street parking and circulation
24 facilities, EXCLUDING required trees, shall be one (1) plant unit per 20 square feet. [WDO
25 3.106.03.C.2)
26 Finding: The area of adjacent to off street parking and circulation facilities contains approximately
27 2,947 square feet. The relevant area contains approximately 252 plant units (excluding the two
28 trees required to satisfy WOO 3.l06.03.C.3), for a plant density of approximately 1.7 plant units
29 per 20 square feet.
30 Conclusion: The proposed development meets the standard ofWDO 3.1 06.03.C.2.
31
32
33 Trees, Section 6.103, shall be planted within and abutting off street parking facilities in a
34 pattern that is in proportion to the distribution of the parking spaces, at the following
35 densities:
36 a. 1 small tree per 5 parking spaces;
37 b. 1 medium tree per 10 parking spaces; or
38 c. 1 large tree per 14 parking spaces. [WDO 3.106.03.C.3)
39 Findings: The site plan shows twelve external off-street parking spaces. The equivalent of two
40 medium trees is required by WOO 3.106.03 .C.3. The landscaping plan shows 9 Acer platanoides
41 "Dntmmondii" abutting the parking area This cultivar of Norway maple is reported to grow 35-40
42 feet high, and would be classified as a medium tree in WOO 6.103.
I:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 22 of 28
66
1 Conclusion: The proposed development meets the standard of WOO 3.106.03.C.3.
2
3
4 Multi-Purpose Landscaping. Trees and other required landscaping located on private
S property within a required setback abutting a street or an interior lot line that is within 20
6 feet of the paved surface of off street parking and circulation facilities, may also be counted in
7 calculating required landscaping for off street parking and circulation areas. [WDO
8 3.106.03.C.4)
9 All common areas shall be landscaped with at least three (3) plant units per 50 square feet.
10 [WDO 3.106.03.D)
11 Findings: The north common area contains 2,418 square feet and is landscaped with 128 plant units,
12 which equates to 2.6 plant units per 50 square feet. A total of 145 plant units is required to provide
13 3 plant units per 50 square feet. The south common area contains 2,306 square feet and is
14 landscaped with 123 plant units, which equates to 2.7 plant units per 50 square feet. A total of 138
15 plant units is required to provide 3 plant units per 50 square feet.
16 Conclusions: An additional 17 plant units must be provided in the north common area to meet the
17 standard of WOO 3.106.03.0. An additional 15 plant units must be provided in the south common
18 area to meet the standard ofWDO 3.106.03.0.
19
20
21 The entire yard area of a property, EXCLUDING areas subject to more intensive landscaping
22 requirements shall be landscaped to a standard of at least one (1) plant unit (PU) per 50
23 square feet prior to fmal occupancy. [WDO 3.106.03.E]
24 Finding: The entire yard area of the property is subject to more intensive landscaping requirements
2S (1 plant unit per 20 square feet) under WOO 3.106.03.A.2.a and WOO 3.106.03.B.
26 Conclusion: No portion of the property is subject to the provisions ofWDO 3.106.03.E.
27
28
29 Conservation of Significant Trees
30 A. Applicability. The provisions of this Section apply to the removal of any significant
31 tree and the replacement requirements for significant tree removal. A "significant
32 tree" is any existing, healthy tree 24 inches or more in diameter, measured 12 inches
33 above ground level. [WDO 3.106.04]
34 Finding: The landscaping plan does not show any existing trees on the site. No significant trees
3S were observed during a site inspection.
36 Conclusion: The provisions of WOO 3.106.04 do not apply to the subject property.
37
38
39 The required number of plant units shall be met by a combination of plant materials listed in
40 Table 3.1.5, so that eighty (80) percent of the area to be landscaped is covered within three
41 years. Required plant units need not be allocated uniformly through out specified
42 landscaping areas, but may be grouped for visual effect. [WDO 3.106.05.A)
I:\Conununity Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Conunons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 23 of 28
67
TABLE 3.1.5
Plant Material
1 Si . ticant Tree
1 Lar e Tree, Section 6.103
I Medium Tree, Section 6.103
I Small Tree, Section 6.103
I Large Deciduous or Evergreen shrub
at maturi over 4' wide x 4' hi
1 Small to Medium shrub (at maturity
maximum 4' wide x 4' hi
Lawn or other livin ound cover
Defmition of a Plant Unit P
Plant Unit P
15 PU
10PU
8PU
4PU
2PU
Value Minimum Size of Plant
24" Cali er
10' Hei t or 2" Cali er
10' Hei t or 2" Cali er
10' Hei tor 2" Cali er
3 gallon or balled and
burla ed
I gallon
1 PU
1 PU
50 s . ft.
1 Applicant's statement: "All shrubs and ground cover will be sized so as to attain 80% of ground
2 coverage within 3 years."
3
4
5 Landscaped areas that are not covered by plant materials shaD be covered by a layer of bark
6 mulch or decorative rock, EXCLUDING ordinary crushed gravel, a minimum of2 inches in
7 depth. [WDO 3.106.05.8)
8 Finding: The landscaping plan does not show any landscaped areas that is not covered by plant
9 materials.
10 Conclusion: The site plan meets the guideline ofWDO 3.106.05.B.
11
12
13 A six-inch concrete curb shall be provided between a landscaped area and a parking area or
14 access way. [WOO 3.106.05.C)
15 Finding: The site plan calls out a six-inch concrete curb along the driveway. The site plan also
16 shows apparent wheel stops between the exterior parking spaces and landscaped areas. The site
17 plan does not show curbing north of the northernmost exterior parking space, or south of the
18 southernmost exterior parking space.
19 Conclusion: The curb along the driveway and the apparent wheel stops meet the standard ofWDO
20 3.106.05.C. The lack of a curb north of the northernmost exterior parking space, or south of the
21 southernmost exterior parking space does not meet the standard ofWDO 3.1 06.05.C. The applicant
22 should provide a six-inch concrete curb between the landscaped areas and parking areas or access
23 ways at the northernmost exterior parking space and the southernmost exterior parking space, in
24 accordance with WOO 3.1 06.05.C.
25
26
27 WDO 3.107
Architectural Desien Guidelines and Standards
28
29 Guidelines and Standards for Medium Density Residential Buildings
30 A. AppUcability. Pursuant to Section 1.102, "Medium Density Residential Building"
31 means any building where the predominant use is multiple family, nursing care or
32 assisted care residential.
I:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 24 of 28
68
1 2. For a Type II or III review, the criteria Section 3.107.05.B shaD be read as
2 "should" and shaD be applied as guidelines. (WOO 3.107.05]
3 Common open space and facilities consist of the site area and facilities not devoted to
4 dwellings, parking, streets, driveways or storage areas that are available for use by aD
5 residents of a development. (WOO 3.107.05.B.l.a]
6 Required yard setbacks should/shall be included as common open space. (WDO 3.107.05.B.l.b]
7 Finding: Required front and rear yards are included as common open space. The east side yard is
8 private open space.
9 Conclusion: The site plan meets the guideline ofWDO 3.107.05.B.1.b.
10
11
12 A minimum of 30 percent of the net site area of each medium density residential development
13 should/shall be permanently designated for use as common open space and facilities. (WOO
14 3.107.05.B.l.c.l]
15 Findings: The applicant submitted a Common Open Space Exhibit at the public hearing, which was
16 admitted as Exhibit L and accepted by the Commission. The exhibit shows 19,246 square feet of
17 common open space, which equals 61.1 % of the site area
18 Conclusion: The development meets the guideline ofWDO 3.107.05.B.l.c.1.
19
20
21 The common area should/shall include at least one open space containing 2000 sq. ft., with a
22 minimum width of36 feet. [WOO 3.107.05.B.l.c.2]
23 Finding: The northern common open space contains approximately 2,418 square feet and measures
24 approximately 31 feet by 72 feet. The southern common open space contains approximately 2,306
25 square feet and measures approximately 30 feet by 72 feet.
26 Conclusion: The common open spaces meet the guidelines ofWDO 3.107.05.B.l.c.2.
27
28
29 "Recreation Areas and Facilities. Facilities to accommodate children's and/or adult
30 recreation, meeting or education activities should/shall be provided at a ratio of 36 sq. ft. of
31 outdoor, or 12 sq. ft. of indoor, common area per dwelling unit or living unit. The minimum
32 improved common area for this purpose should/shall be 720 square feet of outdoor or 240 sq.
33 ft. indoor space. The space for such improvements may be counted as part of the common
34 area required by Section 3.107.05.B.l.c.2). at a 1:1 ratio for outdoor space and 3:1 ratio for
35 indoor space. [WDO 3.107.05.8.1.c.3]
36 Findings: For the proposed 8 dwelling units, a total of288 square feet of outdoor, or 96 square feet
37 of indoor recreation, meeting or education areas and facilities should be provided. The applicant
38 submitted a Common Open Space Exhibit at the public hearing, which was admitted as Exhibit L
39 and accepted by the Commission. The recreational - parking space would satisfy the requirement
40 for recreational facilities if improved with a basketball hoop. Alternatives to a basketball hoop
41 could be approved by staff.
I:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-0 I EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 25 of 28
69
1 Conclusion: The 1,338 square feet of recreational- parking space, improved with a basketball hoop
2 or approved alternate facility, meet the guideline ofWDO 3.107.0S.B.1.c.3.
3
4
S Medium density dwelling units sited on the fmished grade, or within 5 feet of the finished
6 grade, should/shall have 96 square feet of semi-enclosed, private open space, with no
7 dimension less than 6 feet. [WDO 3.107.05.B.2.a.l]
8 Findings: The site plan shows each unit as having a 12 foot by 10 foot pervious patio and a lawn
9 area, totaling 600 or 660 square feet. The site plan shows lines that represent a 6-foot high fence.
10 The private courtyards are separated by shrubbery and the 6 foot fence.
11 Conclusion: The private open spaces meet the guidelines ofWDO 3.107.05.B.1.c.2.
12
13
14 Ground level private open space should/shall be visually and physically separated from
1S common open space through the use of perimeter landscaping or fencing. WDO
16 3.107.05.B.2.a.2)
17 Finding: The landscaping plan shows the two relevant patios to be separated from the common open
18 spaces by shrubbery. The site plan shows lines that represent a 6-foot high fence between the patios
19 and the common open spaces.
20 Conclusion: The separation between the private open spaces and the common open spaces meets the
21 guidelines ofWDO 3.107.0S.B.2.a.2.
22
23
24 Medium density residential buildings should/shall have no dimension greater than 150 feet.
2S [WDO 3.107.05.C.l.a]
26 Finding: The maximum building dimension is approximately 80 feet.
27 Conclusion: The buildings meet the guideline ofWDO 3.107.0S.C.l.a.
28
29
30 Every two attached medium density residential dwelling units should/shall be offset by at least
31 4 feet in depth. (WDO 3.107.05.C.1.b)
32 Finding: The site plan shows a 4 foot offset at the midpoint of each 4-unit building, .
33 Conclusion: The buildings meet the guideline of the guideline ofWDO 3.107.05.C.l.b.
34
3S
36 Adjacent medium density residential buildings located within 28 feet of a property line,
37 should/shall vary the setback at least 4 feet. [WDO 3.107.05.C.l.cl
38 Finding: The site plan shows the buildings to be located approximately 30 feet from the north, east,
39 and south property lines, and approximately 50 feet from the west property line.
40 Conclusion: The guideline ofWDO 3.107.05.C.l.c does not apply.
41
42
[:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 26 of 28
70
\ A flat roof, or the ridge of a sloping roof, for a medium density residential building
2 should/shall not exceed a borizontallength of 100 feet. [WDO 3.107.05.C.l.d)
3 Finding: The maximum length of a ridgeline is approximately 40 feet.
4 Conclusion: The buildings meet the guideline ofWDO 3.107.05.C.l.d.
S
6
7 Medium density residential buildings should/shall incorporate a porch or recessed entry for
g each ground level dwelling unit. Covered porches and entries should average at least 30 feet
9 square per unit, witb no dimension less than 6 feet. [WDO 3.107.05.C.1.e)
10 Finding: The building plans show each unit having a covered porch containing approximately 100
11 square feet and having a minimum dimension of approximately 8Y2 feet.
12 Conclusion: The buildings meet the guideline ofWDO 3.107.05.C.l.e.
13
14
1 S All habitable rooms, except bath rooms, facing a required front yard should/shall incorporate
16 windows. [WDO 3.107.05.C.l.f]
17 Finding: The building plans show windows only on the east and west facades. The front yard is to
18 the south of the buildings. As this is a flag lot, the front yard abuts (for the majority of its length)
19 the rear yard of a single-family dwelling. The proposed development could provide windows in
20 rooms facing south on the southern building. The applicant's narrative did not address this issue.
21 Conclusion: The property owner should provide windows in rooms facing south on the southern
22 building, in accordance with the guideline ofWDO 3.107.05.C.1.f.
23
24
2S Stair cases providing access above the first Ooor level should/shall not be visible from a street.
26 [WOO 3.107.0S.C.l.g)
27 Finding: The building plans show that the stair cases providing access above the first floor are
28 internal.
29 Conclusion: The buildings meet the guideline of WDO 3.107.05 .C.1.g.
30
31
32 The exterior finish for at least 90 percent of the facade should/shall be:
33 1) Either siding, brick or stucco. Plain concrete, corrugated metal, plywood and sheet
34 press board should/shall not be used as exterior rmish material. [WOO 3.107.0S.C.2.a)
3S Finding: The elevation drawing shows the predominant exterior finish to be lap siding. Cultured
36 stone and architectural shakes are also used.
37 Conclusion: The buildings meet the guideline of WDO 3.1 07.05.C.2.a.l.
38
39
40 "The exterior finish for at least 90 percent of the facade should/shall be:
41 2) Either white, tinted with a minimum of 10 parts per 100 of white, or shaded with a
42 minimum of 10 parts per 100 of black or brown. "Flourescent," "day-glo," or any
I:\Conununity Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007 -02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 27 of 28
71
similar bright color should/shall not be used on the facade." [WDO 3.107.05.C.2.a)
2 Finding: The color elevation drawings and the applicant's statement show the predominant color to
3 be army green.
4 Conclusion: The color scheme of the buildings meets the guidelines ofWDO 3.l07.05.C.2.a.2,
5 except that the predominant color is not a shade of "black or brown," and has not been shown to be
6 "tinted with a minimum of 10 parts per 100 of white." The development should utilize paint or
7 other exterior finish for at least 90 percent of the facade that is either white, tinted with a minimum
8 of 10 parts per 100 of white, or shaded with a minimum of 10 parts per 100 of black or brown, in
9 accordance with the guideline ofWDO 3.l07.05.C.2.a.
10
II The roofing material for medium density dwellings should/shall be either composition
12 shingles; clay or concrete tile; metal; or cedar shingles or shakes. Composition shingles
13 should/shall be architectural style with a certified performance of at least 25 yean. [WDO
14 3.107.0S.C.2.b]
15 Finding: The elevation drawing shows composition shingles as the roofing material.
16 Conclusion: The property owner should utilize either composition shingles; clay or concrete tile;
17 metal; or cedar shingles or shakes as a roofing material. Composition shingles should be
18 architectural style with a certified performance of at least 25 years, in accordance with the
19 guidelines ofWDO 3.l07.05.C.2.b.
20
21
22 The internal pedestrian system in medium density residential developments should/shall
23 connect to other areas of the site, to other building entrances and to adjacent streets. [WDO
24 3.107.05.C.3.a]
25 Finding: The site plan shows a sidewalk fronting all units, and extending to the sidewalk on Lincoln
26 Street.
27 Conclusion: The buildings meet the guideline ofWDO 3.l07.05.C.3.a.
I:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit A.doc Page 28 of 28
72
CITY OF WOODBURN, OREGON
PLANNING COMMISSION
DR 2006-17
EXCP 2007-02
Exhibit B
1
2
Cases DR 2006-17 and EXCP 2007-02 are approved subject to the following conditions of
approval:
1. The property owner shall develop and maintain the subject property in accordance with
all provisions of the WDO, whether or not addressed in the staff review, conditions of
approval, or public hearing. The term "substantial accordance" shall not be interpreted
as relieving the property owner from complying with any requirement of the WDO.
The term "substantial accordance" shall not be interpreted to mean that City staffhave
the authority to waive or vary any development standard set forth in the WOO.
2. The property shall be developed in substantial conformity to the site, utility,
landscaping, grading, and lighting plans dated June 6, 2007, attached hereto as Exhibits
"A" though "G," except as modified by these conditions of approval.
3. The buildings shall be constructed in substantial conformity to the floor plans and
elevations dated October 11, 2006.
4. The buildings shall not exceed 35 feet in height, in accordance with WOO 2.1 04.06.C. *
5. The buildings shall be set back at least 30 feet from all interior property lines, in
accordance with WOO 2.104.06.0.2.a and Table 2.1.7.*
6. The garage entrances shall be set back from the shared driveway at least 20 feet, in
accordance with WOO 2.104.06.0.1.b.2. *
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
7. Individual refuse collection facilities shall be required, or common refuse collection
facilities provided and screened in accordance with WOO 2.I04.07.F.3.
8. The applicant shall demonstrate compliance with the wall height requirement of WOO
2.l04.06.0.2.a and Table 2.1.7 for the retaining wall on the westerly 13 feet of the
southernmost exterior parking space and the proposed 30" architectural walls on top of
the retaining walls along the flagpole portion of the lot.
9. The south exterior parking spaces shall be screened with an architectural wall along
their entire length, in accordance with WDO 2. 104.06.0. Lb. 1.
10. All architectural walls shall incorporate at least two colors and/or textures on the side
facing away from the subject property.
The development as proposed meets these conditions of approval. These conditions are
included to reiterate mandatory minimum standards required by the Woodburn
Development Ordinance or adopted by the Planning Commission.
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
*
1:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit B.doc Page 1 of 5
73
1 11. The applicant shall submit details of the proposed architectural walls demonstrating
2 compliance with the requirement of WDO 1.102 that architectural walls incorporate at
3 least two colors and/or textures and the requirements of Table 2.1.7 that the wall have
4 an anti-graffiti surface and be no less than 6 feet or greater than 7 feet in height.
5 12. Retaining walls shall have the same appearance as architectural walls.
6 13. The property owner shall provide a 20 foot two-way drive aisle posted "no parking," in
7 accordance with WDO 3.104.05.0.1.b.I.*
8 14. The development shall provide curb returns with a radius of at least 25 feet, in
9 accordance with WOO 3.104.05.0.2.
10 15. The property owner shall provide a throat length of at least 50 feet to each driveway on
11 adjacent property that uses the flagpole access, in accordance with WDO
12 3.l04.05.D.4.b.*
13 16. Each parking space outside a garage shall be reserved for the exclusive use of the
14 dwelling unit served by the garage. A sign shall be posted on each garage door
IS indicating this reserved status.
16 17. The proposed development shall provide one van-accessible space and accessibility
17 aisle, in accordance with WOO 3.105.01.E.3, WOO 3.105.01.H.4.c, Section 1104 of the
18 Oregon Structural Specialty Code and ORS 447.233.
19 18. Exterior parking spaces shall be reconfigured to provide the required van-accessible
20 space and accessibility aisle.
21 19. All parking spaces shall comply with the dimensional requirements ofWDO
22 3.105.0l.H.4 and Table 3.1.4.*
23 20. The buildings shall be sprinkled with a full NFP A 13 (not an NFP A 13-D) sprinkler
24 system.
25 21. Each building shall have its own Post Indicator Valve.
26 22. A fire alarm system complying with NFP A 72 which is monitored by a central station
27 shall be provided.
28 23. The sprinkler riser room shall have a Knox box for fire department access.
29 24. The required fire hydrant shall be located at the entrance to the access road along with
30 the required FDC (Fire Department Connection.)*
31 25. The hydrant shall be located within five and twenty feet of the FDC. *
32 26. The 20 foot access road shall be marked and posted "No Parking" on both sides of the
33 access.
* The development as proposed meets these conditions of approval. These conditions are
included to reiterate mandatory minimum standards required by the Woodburn
Development Ordinance or adopted by the Planning Commission.
I:\Conununity Devdopment\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Conunons\Final Order Exhibit a.doc Page 2 of 5
74
1 27. A flow test shall be conducted to determine the fire flow that can be achieved. A
2 minimum fire flow of one thousand five hundred gallons per minute (1500 gpm) shall
3 be provided.
4 28. The applicant shall either provide sprinkler riser rooms within the proposed building
5 footprint or amend the site plan to depict external sprinkler riser rooms. External
6 sprinkler riser rooms shall comply with setback requirements.
7 29. The property owner shall post the driveway "no parking," in accordance with WDO
8 3.105.01.0.5 and WDO 3.105.01.H.5.*
9 30. The property owner shall provide pavement marking indicating "no parking" along the
10 driveway, in accordance with WDO 3.105.01.0.5 and WDO 3.105.01.H.5.
11 31. The applicant shall submit a revised photometric plan or details of luminaire shielding
12 demonstrating compliance with WDO 3.1 05.01.H.8 to the Planning Division prior to
\3 issuance of any building permit.
14 32. The applicant shall provide at least three bicycle rack spaces, in accordance with WDO
15 3.105.01.H.I0.
16 33. The landscaping shall comply with the requirements ofWDO 3.106.
17 34. All required landscaped areas shall be permanently irrigated, in accordance with WDO
18 3.106.02.8.*
19 35. The property owner shall maintain all landscaping in good condition. Unhealthy and
20 dead plants shall be removed and replaced in conformance with the original landscape
21 plan, in accordance with WDO 3.106.02.E.*
22 36. The west side yard shall be planted with at least 133 plant units of landscaping material,
23 in accordance with WDO 3.106.03.B.*
24 37. An additional 73 plant units must be planted in the east side yard in order to meet the
25 standard ofWDO 3.106.03.8. The east side yard shall be planted with at least 270 plant
26 units oflandscaping material.
27 38. The front yard shall be planted with at least 123 plant units oflandscaping material, in
28 accordance with WDO 3.106.03.A.2.a.*
29 39. All unpaved land within the off street parking area, and within 20 feet of the paved edge
30 of off street parking and circulation improvements shall be landscaped in accordance
31 with WOO 3.106.03.C.1.*
32 40. The density of landscaping required in and adjacent to off street parking and circulation
33 facilities, excluding required trees, shall be one (1) plant unit per 20 square feet, in
34 accordance with WDO 3.106.03.C.2.*
* The development as proposed meets these conditions of approval. These conditions are
included to reiterate mandatory minimum standards required by the Woodburn
Development Ordinance or adopted by the Planning Commission.
I:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit B.doc Page 3 of 5
75
1 41. Trees shall be planted within and abutting off street parking facilities in a pattern that is
2 in proportion to the distribution of the parking spaces, in accordance with WOO
3 3.106.03.C.3.*
4 42. An additional 17 plant units shall be provided in the north common area to meet the
S standard of WOO 3.106.03.0. The north common area shall be planted with at least
6 145 plant units of landscaping material.
1 43. An additional 15 plant units shall be provided in the south common area to meet the
8 standard ofWDO 3.106.03.D. The south common area shall be planted with at least 138
9 plant units of landscaping material.
10 44. All shrubs and ground cover shall be sized so as to attain 80% of ground coverage
II within three years, in accordance with WOO 3.1 06.05.A. *
12 45. A six-inch concrete curb shall be provided between a landscaped area and a parking
13 area or access way. The applicant shall provide a six-inch concrete curb between the
14 landscaped areas and parking areas or access ways at the northernmost exterior parking
15 space and the southernmost exterior parking space, in accordance with WDO
16 3.106.05.C.
11 46. The property owner shall dedicate an additional 12 feet to right-of-way for East Lincoln
18 Street.
19 47. The property owner shall provide the street improvements required by the
20 Transportation System Plan for East Lincoln Street or obtain an exception to street right
21 of way and improvement requirements, in accordance with WDO 3.101.02.0.
:!2 48. The property owner shall execute a nonremonstrance agreement to participate in the
23 cost of reconstructing East Lincoln Street to the standards of the Transportation Systems
24 Plan when such reconstruction becomes timely.
2S 49. Required front and rear yards shall be included as common open space, in accordance
26 with the guideline ofWDO 3.107.05.B.1.b.*
21 50. The common area shall include at least one open space containing 2000 sq. ft., with a
28 minimum width of36 feet, in accordance with the guidelines of WOO
29 3.107 .05.B.l.c.2. *
30 51. The property owner shall provide 288 square feet of outdoor, or 96 square feet of indoor
31 recreation, meeting or education areas and facilities, to meet the guideline of WOO
32 3.107.05.B.l.c.3. Provision ofa basketball hoop at the north end of the driveway shall
33 satisfy this condition.
34 52. The property owner shall provide each dwelling unit on or within 5 feet of the finished
35 grade with 96 square feet of semi-enclosed, private open space, with no dimension less
36 than 6 feet, to meet the guidelines ofWDO 3.107.05.B.1.c.2.*
*
The development as proposed meets these conditions of approval. These conditions are
included to reiterate mandatory minimum standards required by the Woodburn
Development Ordinance or adopted by the Planning Commission.
I:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Comrnons\Final Order Exhibit B.doc Page 4 of 5
76
53. Ground level private open space shall be visually and physically separated from
2 common open space through the use of perimeter landscaping or fencing, to meet the
3 guidelines ofWDO 3.107.05.B.2.a.2.*
4 54. The property owner shall provide windows in rooms facing south on the southern
5 building, in accordance with the guideline ofWDO 3.107.05.C.l.f.
6 55. The buildings shall have no dimension greater than 150 feet, to meet the guideline of
7 WDO 3.107.05.C.1.a.*
8 56. Every two attached medium density residential dwelling units Ishall be offset by at least
9 4 feet in depth, to meet the guideline of the guideline ofWDO 3.107.05.C.1.b.*
10 57. Adjacent medium density residential buildings located within 28 feet ofa property line,
11 shall vary the setback at least 4 feet, to meet the guideline ofWDO 3.107.05.C.1.c.*
12 58. The ridge of a sloping roof, for a medium density residential building shall not exceed a
13 horizontal length of 100 feet, to meet the guideline ofWDO 3.107.05.C.1.d.*
14 59. The buildings shall incorporate a porch or recessed entry for each ground level dwelling
15 unit. Covered porches and entries shall average at least 30 feet square per unit, with no
16 dimension less than 6 feet, to meet the guideline ofWDO 3.107.05.C.1.e.*
17 60. Stair cases providing access above the first floor level shall not be visible from a street,
18 to meet the guideline ofWDO 3.107.05.C.1.g.*
19 61. The exterior finish for at least 90 percent of the facade shall be either siding, brick or
20 stucco. Plain concrete, corrugated metal, plywood and sheet press board shall not be
21 used as exterior finish material, to meet the guideline ofWDO 3.107.05.C.2.a.*
22 62. The roofing material shall be either composition shingles; clay or concrete tile; metal;
23 or cedar shingles or shakes. Composition shingles shall be architectural style with a
24 certified performance of at least 25 years, to meet the guideline ofWDO
25 3.107.05.C.2.b.*
26 63. The internal pedestrian system shall connect to other areas of the site, to other building
27 entrances and to adjacent streets, to meet the guideline ofWDO 3.107.05.C.3.a. *
28 64. The development should utilize paint or other exterior finish for at least 90 percent of
29 the facade that is either white, tinted with a minimum of 10 parts per 100 of white, or
30 shaded with a minimum of 10 parts per 100 of black or brown, in accordance with the
31 guideline ofWDO 3.107.05.C.2.a.
32 65. The property owner shall utilize either composition shingles; clay or concrete tile;
33 metal; or cedar shingles or shakes as a roofing material. Composition shingles shall be
34 architectural style with a certified performance of at least 25 years, in accordance with
35 the guidelines ofWDO 3.107.05.C.2.b.
* The development as proposed meets these conditions of approval. These conditions are
included to reiterate mandatory minimum standards required by the Woodburn
Development Ordinance or adopted by the Planning Commission.
I:\Community Development\Planning\2006\Design Review\DR 2006-17 V AR 2007-01 EXCP 2007-02
Lincoln Commons\Final Order Exhibit B.doc Page 5 of 5
77
E.
LINCOLN
STREET
_--.J
~
00
E.
UNCOlN
STREET
~~
LINCOLN COMMONS
(DRIVE AISLE WALLS AS REQUESTED BY VARIANCE)
END WALL FOR
DRIVEWAY VISION
TRIANGLE
I
54" HIGH ARCHITECTURAL WALL ON
TOP OF RETAINING WALL
i Ii"
DRIVE AISLE WEST WALL PROFILE
(FROM DRIVE AISLE AI\ID FACING WEST)
END WAll FOR
DRIVEWAY VISION
TRIANGLE
I
~:r,,::_
FINISHED GRADE
ALONG DRIVE AISLE
6' HEIGHT (WITH MIN.
.30~ WALL OPTION ON
TOP OF RETAINING WALL)
DRIVE AISLE EAST WALL PROFILE
(FROM DRIVE AISLE AND FACING EAST)
ATTACHMENT B
TOP OF RETAINING WAll
IS AT FINISHED GRADE
ON THE ADJACENT
PARCELS
END WALL FOR
DRIVEWAY VISION
TRIANGLE
r
TOP OF RETAINING WAlL
1$ AT FINISHED GRADE
ON THE ADJACENT
PARCELS
END WALL FOR
DRIVEWAY VISION
TRIANGLE
I
----:.-:..L
BREAK FOR
DRIVEWA FOR
EXISTING HOUSE
BREAK fOR
DRIVEWAY FOR
EXISTING HOUSE
'7.-? RE.C'D {;:r
OCT 1 9 2007
Exhibit C
Aerial photo of subject property. Wall required (except at vision clearance areas) by Table 2.1.7
is shown in solid red. Wall that is discretionary in Table 2.1.7, but required by the Commission,
is shown in dashed yellow.
80
ATTACHMENT D
APPEAL OF DR 2006-17 AND V AR 2007-01
I Findings: The flagpole portion of the parcel is the most visible portion of the property from the
2 public right-of-way. The height of a wall is measured from the grade of the flagpole driveway,
3 except in vision clearance areas. The height of a wall is governed by WDO 3.103.1 O.E within
4 vision clearance areas.
5 Findings: A 6-foot vinyl fence would deter access to the school site through the subject property
6 from the surrounding neighborhood. Landscaping along the west property line would also serve to
7 buffer the differing land uses.
8 Findings: A 6-foot vinyl fence would deter access into the adjoining housing project to the north.
9 Landscaping along much of the north property line would also serve to buffer the differing land
10 uses.
II Findings: A 6-foot vinyl fence would adequately separate the proposed multiple-family
12 development from the existing single-family dwellings on the abutting parcels to the south and east.
13 Landscaping along these property lines would also serve to buffer the differing land uses.
14 Finding: A 6-foot vinyl fence is available that incorporates two colors, as shown in the appellant's
15 presentation to the Council.
\6 Finding: An anti-graffiti coating is available for vinyl fencing, as mentioned in the appellant's
17 presentation to the Council.
18 Conclusion: Strict application ofthe requirement ofWDO 2.104.06.D.2.a for an architectural wall
19 abutting existing single-family dwellings is excessive in the instant case.
20 Conclusion: A requirement for an architectural wall abutting property zoned RM or P/SP is
2\ excessive in the instant case.
22 Conclusions: An architectural wall is appropriate along the flagpole portion of the parcel. A 6-foot
23 height from finished grade of the driveway is appropriate except in vision clearance areas.
24 Conclusions: A 6-foot vinyl fence incorporating two colors and an anti-graffiti coating is
25 appropriate along all property lines except the flagpole portion of the parcel.
81
/', "
llC
~~
....../;;:.:~:i;;~.~~.
~~,{ir]t,.; ......
WQ.QQ~'Q.~N
III : ~ r y ;' r II : t II I 8 j 'J
.
.
December 10, 2007
TO: Mayor and City Council through City Administrator
FROM:
Mary Tennant, City Recorder ~
SUBJECT: Minimum Wage Increase
RECOMMENDATION:
Council adopt the accompanying Council Bill which provides for an increase in
the hourly rate to meet minimum wage law requirements plus pay range/step
adjustments for related positions to maintain equity compensation between
classifications.
BACKGROUND:
Under the current State minimum wage law, the Bureau of Labor & Industries
Commissioner calculates the Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) in September
with hourly rate increases (rounded to the nearest five-cents) to be
implemented on January 1 sl of the following year. As a result of the
Commissioner's 2007 calculation and effective January 1, 2008, the minimum
wage will increase from $7.80 per hour to $7.95 per hour based on an inflation
rate of 1 .97%.
DISCUSSION:
The City has an hourly rate schedule for Part-time / Seasonal employees (Exhibit
A) with the first pay range level beginning with the minimum wage hourly rate
followed by 5% adjustments between steps. Under the City's Personnel Policy
manual. part-time employees are eligible for merit increases on either their
anniversary date or following completion of 1040 hours within the step,
whichever is longer. The majority of our part-time employees work less than 20
hours per week therefore it takes them one year or longer before they are
eligible for a merit increase. This schedule also provides for 5% increases
between pay range levels to compensate employees who have greater
responsibilities and/or lead worker responsibilities over other employees.
Agenda Item Review:
City Administrat
City Attorne
Finane
82
Mayor and City Cou ncH
December 10,2007
Page 2
.
.
FINANCIAL IMP ACT:
The total estimated financial impact for fiscal year 2007-08 is $4.420 ($3.833 in
wages and $587 in benefits) whereas annually, based on current year budget
projections of part-time hours, the financial impact is estimated at $8,840
($7,666 in wages and $1.174 in benefits). All of the positions affected by this
hourly rate increase are included in the General Fund budget for Library and
Park and Recreation programs. Funding to support these hourly rate
adjustments for the remainder of this fiscal year are included in the current year
General Fund budget appropriations.
83
COUNCIL BILL NO.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE COMPENSATION SCHEDULE FOR
CERTAIN PART-TIME HOURLY AND SEASONAL EMPLOYEES.
WHEREAS, the City Council is obligated per Section 11 of the Woodburn City
Charter to establish compensation for each City officer and employee; and
WHEREAS, the minimum wage paid to employees effective January 1 of each
year is established by the State of Oregon; and
WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes the need to adopt a hourly rate schedule
to maintain compliance with State law and maintain proper equity compensation between
c lassi tications; now, therefore,
THE CITY OF WOODBURN RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The hourly rate schedule for Part-time / Seasonal employees (Exhibit
A) is hereby adopted effective January 1,2008, a copy of the exhibit is attached for reference.
I ~ b \ ~OO 1-
Date
Approved as to Form: c-p) nAG
City Attorney
APPROVED
KATHRYN FIGLEY, MAYOR
Passed by the Council
Submitted to the Mayor
Approved by the Mayor
Filed in the office of the Recorder
ATTEST
Mary Tennant, Recorder
City of Woodburn, Oregon
Page I - COUNCIL BILL NO.
RESOLUTION NO.
84
Exhibit "A"
PART-TIME I SEASONAL EMPLOYEES
Effective January 1, 2008
CLASSIFICATION
STEP A
STEP B
STEP C
STEP D
STEP E
PS-l
Cashier 7.95
Li feguard
Recreation Aide
Office Assistant / Clerical Aide
Water Safety lnstructor Aide
Library Page
Park Maintenance Aide
8.35
8.77
9.21
9.68
PS-2
Head Lifeguard 8.35
Recreation Leader
Fitness Instructor
8.77
9.21
9.68
10.17
PS.3
Aquatics Center Clerk 8.77
Water Safety Instructor
Recreation Assistant
9.21
9.68
10.17
10.68
PS-4
Recreation Program Mgr. 9.21
9.68
10.17
10.68
11.22
PS-5 9.68
Special Recreation Pgnn Mgr
10.17
10.68
11.22
11.79
PS-6 10.17
Special Projects Manager
Aquatics Prgm Mgr
Lifeguard Supervisor
10.68
11.22
11.79
12.38
85
~.
W~N
J.cD"Dr./ed 1889
~~llD
.
.
December 10, 2007
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council through City Administrator
FROM:
Mary Tennant, City Recorder ~
SUBJECT: Position Upgrade: Municipal Court Clerk
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council authorize the upgrade of a Municipal
Court Clerk position from .5 FTE to .75 FTE.
BACKGROUND:
Since July 2004, authorized budget positions in the Municipal Court have been
2.6 FTE (full-time equivalent) consisting of our part-time Municipal Judge, full-time
Municipal Court Coordinator, full-time Municipal Court Clerk, and a part-time
Municipal Court Clerk. Court staff members are responsible for processing
citations issued by the Police Department, Traffic Violations Bureau, preparing
and maintaining court docket, and collecting outstanding fines.
DISCUSSION:
The Municipal Court office has experienced a significant increase in citations
processed due, in part, to the assignment of a fourth police officer to the Traffic
Enforcement Team in May 2007. During the budget process, Municipal Court
did not submit a request to increase its staffing allocation since citations
processed at that time were at a consistent level, which current staff members
could handle in a timely manner. Citations issued monthly, however, have
steadily increased resulting in a need for more staff time to complete the court
processing cycle. To illustrate this increase, in May 2007 citations processed
totaled 348 while the number of citations processed in October 2007 totaled 735
( 112% increase). With the increase in citations being processed, the number of
monetary transactions has also increased substantially demanding more staff
time to collect and process payments received. Monthly fine collection for
these same two months were $59,090 and $84,050 respectively.
Agenda Item Review: City Administrator
City Attorney
86
Honorable Mayor and City Council
December 10, 2007
Page 2
.
.
The Court has requested that the current part-time staff member working 19-
hours per week be increased to 30-hours per week to provide additional clerical
assistance in processing citations and collecting fines. With the increase in
hours, this position will move from a Non-Union Hourly position to an AFSCME
covered position and be eligible for pro-rated benefits in addition to an hourly
rate adjustment consistent with the AFSCME salary schedule.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The estimated financial impact for fiscal year 2007-08 is $14,413 ($8,060 in wages
and $6,535 in benefits). The annualized cost of the recommended action is
$24,459 ($13,615 in wages and $10,844 in benefits). Funding to support this
position upgrade was included in the Supplemental Budget adjustment
presented to your Council on November 26,2007, and included for approval on
your agenda for December 10,2007.
87
~
WOODBU~N
1.,.,,,,,,,,,4 '889
liE
A~'~
.
.
December 10, 2007
TO:
FROM:
Honorable Mayor and City Council through City "ist~r
Randy Rohman, Acting Public Works Director/'...y ~
SUBJECT:
Wastewater Facility Plan Consultant Agreement and Wastewater
Facility Plan Advisory Committee
RECOMMENDATION: By motion authorize:
· The City Administrator to sign the agreement for professional services
with CH2M Hill Inc. to prepare an updated facilities plan for the City's
wastewater treatment facilities.
· The Mayor to appoint a Wastewater Facility Plan Advisory Committee.
BACKGROUND: The current City of Woodburn Wastewater Facility Plan was
completed in 1995. The current wastewater facility plan calls for wastewater
treatment facility upgrades in two phases. The plan provided for Phase I facility
upgrades that would meet the City's needs through 2010. The planned Phase I
facilities were constructed and became operational in 2001. The plan called for
Phase II planning to accommodate increased flows and loadings due to
population increases and address new water quality regulations. New water
quality regulations for the Pudding River will be a significant factor in updates to
the City's current wastewater facility plan
Recently the City entered into a Mutual Agreement and Order (MAO) with the
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) that allows the City to
delay compliance with some DEQ requirements. The MAO ties temperature
compliance to the establishment and approval of the Pudding River Total
Maximum Daily Load (TMDL). The delay will allow the City through the facility
plan to more efficiently and cost effectively deal with temperature and other
new effluent limits that will be part of the TMDL limits for the Pudding River that
will be released no later than spring 2008.
Agenda Item Review: City Administrator
Finane
88
Honorable Mayor and City Council
December 10, 2007
Page 2
.
.
Phase II planning in the current facility plan and new regulatory requirements of
the MAO and soon to be released Pudding River TMDL requires an update of
the City's wastewater facility plan. The update to the wastewater facility plan is
to address the following major concerns:
. The current and future regulatory requirements affecting the Woodburn
facilities.
. The land use, transportation, and environmental impact requirements
associated with continued use of the existing facility.
. The condition and capacity of the existing collection system.
. Condition and capacity of treatment plant and natural treatment
systems.
. Recommended improvements to the sanitary collection, transmission, and
treatment systems to meet current and future service needs.
. A recommended capital improvements list and schedule.
. A sewer rate and sewer system development charge study establishing
mechanisms for funding capital improvements and operational
requirements.
. Development and support of a public outreach plan to explain analysis
and evaluation findings, and to address community concerns associated
with the proposed improvements.
. An implementation plan addressing the regulatory, financial, design, and
construction elements of the proposed plan.
The City received three responses to a request for proposal for a wastewater
facility plan update. After review by an evaluation committee and a selection
committee the proposal from CH2M Hill Inc. was selected as the proposal that
best satisfied the facility plan proposal evaluation criteria.
The facility plan proposal includes a Wastewater Facility Plan Advisory
Committee to participate in the facility plan update, review alternatives to
comply with emerging regulations and accommodate future growth, evaluate
rate and system development charges, and to report back to Council with
results and recommendations
DISCUSSION: The proposal from CH2M Hill provided the best interdisciplinary
team to accomplish the wastewater facility plan update requirements
established by the City. The development of the facility plan will be critical in
complying with the MAO and future regulatory requirements along with plant
and collection system upgrades needed to meet the growth needs of the City.
89
Honorable Mayor and City Council
December 10, 2007
Page 3
.
.
The City has negotiated a not to exceed cost of $698,576 for the facility plan
update. There are optional work tasks that are included with the agreement
that may be chosen by the City. Work on these optional tasks would require
that a contract amendment be negotiated and signed by the City
Administrator. One optional task is for enhanced public involvement effort if it is
determined to be required to fully inform City residents and sewer users of the
facility plan upgrade and the impacts of the plans implementation. Another
optional task is for additional modeling of smaller diameter pipes if needed to
fully analyze collection system capabilities. These costs would be in the later
stages of the planning process and will be discussed during the budget process
for the 2008-2009 budget when an additional funding would be approved.
CH2M Hill is familiar with the City's wastewater facilities and is well qualified to
accomplish the requested facility plan update. Staff recommends that Council
accept the proposal of CH2M Hill Inc. and authorize the City Administrator to
sign the attached professional services agreement for wastewater facility
planning consultant services.
The Wastewater Facility Plan Advisory Committee will guide the development of
the wastewater facility plan. The committee would be primarily composed of
citizens but will also have Marion County and Pudding River watershed
representation since the wastewater plant is located in the county and
wastewater plant effluent impacts the Pudding River. Staff recommends that
the Mayor appoint a Wastewater Facility Plan Advisory Committee to
participate in the facility plan development and to report back to Council with
results and recommendations.
FINANCIAL IMP ACT: The costs of the facility plan are included in the adopted
2007-2008 CIP budget.
90
PERSONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of the date first indicated on the
signature page, by and between the City of Woodburn, an Oregon municipal corporation
(hereinafter referred to as "CITY"), and CH2M HILL, Inc., a Florida corporation
(hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT").
WHEREAS, CITY needs certain professional consultant services; and
WHEREAS, CITY wants to engage CONSULTANT to provide these services by reason
of its qualifications and experience; and
WHEREAS, CONSULTANT has offered to provide the required services on the terms
and in the manner set forth herein,
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED as follows:
SECTION 1 - SCOPE OF SERVICES
The Scope of Work to be performed by CONSULTANT under this Agreement is
described in Exhibit A, which is attached to this Agreement. Additionally,
CONSULTANT's proposal in response to POTW Facility Plan Development Consultant
Services are incorporated by reference and are a part of this Agreement as if fully set
forth.
SECTION 2 - DUTIES OF CONSULTANT
A. The standard of care applicable to CONSULTANT's services will be the degree
of skill and diligence normally employed by professional engineers or consultants
performing the same or similar services at the time CONSULTANT's services are
performed. CONSULTANT will re-perform any services not meeting this standard
without compensation
B. CONSULTANT represents that it is qualified to furnish the services described in
this Agreement.
C. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for employing or engaging all persons
necessary to perform its services.
D. The contact person on the Project for CONSULTANT is designated as David
Green. CONSULTANT shall provide written notice to CITY if CONSULTANT
changes its contact person.
PERSONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
PAGE 1
91
SECTION 3 - DUTIES OF CITY
A. CITY shall provide CONSULTANT the pertinent information regarding CITY's
requirements for the Project.
B. CITY shall examine documents submitted by CONSULTANT and shall render
decisions promptly, to avoid unreasonable delay in the progress of
CONSULTANT'S work.
C. CITY certifies that sufficient funds are available and authorized for expenditure to
finance costs of this Agreement.
D. The contact person on the Project for CITY is designated as Randall Rohman.
CITY shall provide written notice to CONSULTANT if CITY changes its contact
person.
SECTION 4 - TERM
The services to be performed under this Agreement shall commence upon execution of
the Agreement by both parties and be completed on or before September 31,2009.
SECTION 5 - PAYMENT
Payment shall be made by CITY to CONSULTANT only for services rendered and upon
submission of a payment request and CITY approval of the work performed. In
consideration for the full performance of the services set forth in Exhibit A, CITY agrees
to pay CONSULTANT a fee on a time and expense basis not to exceed $698,576.00.
Compensation shall only for actual hours worked on the Project, at the rates specified in
Exhibit 8, and related direct expenses. CONSULTANT shall furnish with each bill for
services an itemized statement showing the amount of services devoted to the Project
by CONSULTANT as well as any agents or employees of CONSULTANT and any direct
expenses. CITY shall pay CONSULTANT net 30 days from the receipt of approved
invoice.
CONSULTANT has provided estimates for two additional tasks that can be selected by
the CITY at any time during the project. Work will not begin on these tasks until an
amendment to this agreement has been completed and signed by the CITY and
CONSULTANT.
Section 6 - Termination
Without limitation to such rights or remedies as CITY shall otherwise have by law, CITY
shall have the right to terminate this Agreement or suspend work on the Project for any
reason upon ten (10) days' written notice to CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT agrees to
cease all work under this Agreement upon receipt of said written notice.
PERSONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
PAGE 2
92
SECTION 7 - OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS
All documents prepared by CONSULTANT in the performance of this Agreement,
although instruments of professional service, are and shall be the property of CITY,
whether the Project for which they are made is executed or not.
SECTION 8 - CONFIDENTIALITY
All reports and documents prepared by CONSULTANT in connection with the
performance of this Agreement shall be considered as confidential by CONSULTANT
until they are released by CITY to the public. CONSULTANT shall not make any such
documents or information available to any individual or organization not employed by
CONSULTANT or CITY without the written consent of CITY before any such release.
SECTION 9 -INTEREST OF CONSULTANT
CONSULTANT covenants that it presently has no interest, and shall not acquire any
interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or
degree with the performance of the services under this Agreement.
SECTION 10 - CONSULTANT'S STATUS
It is expressly agreed that in the performance of the professional services required
under this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall at all times be considered an independent
contractor, under control of CITY as to the result of the work but not the means by which
the result is accomplished. Nothing herein shall be construed to make CONSULTANT
an agent or employee of CITY while providing services under this Agreement.
Section 11 - Indemnity
CONSULTANT agrees to hold harmless and indemnify CITY, its officers and employees
from and against any and all claims, loss, liability, damage, and expense arising from
the negligent, or claimed negligent, performance of this Agreement by CONSULTANT,
its officers or employees. CONSULTANT agrees to defend CITY, its officers or
employees against any such claims. This provision does not apply to claims, loss,
liability or damage or expense arising from the sole negligence, or willful misconduct, of
CITY.
Section 12 - Insurance
CONSULTANT shall provide and maintain:
A. Commercial General Liability Insurance, occurrence form, with a limit of
$1,000,000 for each occurrence.
PERSONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
PAGE 3
93
B. Automobile Liability Insurance, occurrence form, with a limit of $1,000,000 for
each occurrence. Such insurance shall include coverage for owned, hired, and
non-owned automobiles.
C. Workers Compensation in at least the minimum statutory limits.
D. All insurance shall:
1. Include CITY as an additional insured with respect to this Agreement and
the performance of services in this Agreement. The CITY will not be
required to be named as an additional insured for Workers Compensation
coverage.
2. Be primary with respect to any other insurance or self-insurance programs
of CITY.
3. Be evidenced, prior to commencement of services, by properly executed
policy endorsements in addition to a certificate of insurance provided to
CITY.
SECTION 13 - NONASSIGNABILlTY
Both parities recognize that this Agreement is for the personal services of
CONSULTANT and cannot be transferred, assigned, or subcontracted by
CONSULTANT without the prior written consent of CITY.
SECTION 14 - RELIANCE UPON PROFESSIONAL SKILL OF CONSULTANT
It is mutually understood and agreed by and between the parties hereto that
CONSULTANT is skilled in the professional calling necessary to perform the work
agreed to be done under this Agreement and that CITY relies upon the skill of
CONSULTANT to do and perform the work in the most skillful manner, and
CONSULTANT agrees to perform the work. The acceptance of CONSULTANT'S work
by CITY does not operate as a release of CONSULTANT from said obligation.
SECTION 15- WAIVERS
The waiver by either party of any breach or violation of any term, covenant, or condition
of this Agreement or of any provisions of any ordinance or law shall not be deemed to
be a waiver of such term, covenant, condition, ordinance or law or of any subsequent
breach or violation of same or of any other term, covenant, condition, ordinance or law
or of any subsequent breach or violation of the same or of any other term, condition,
PERSONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
PAGE 4
94
ordinance, or law. The subsequent acceptance by either party of any fee or other
money, which may become due hereunder shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any
preceding breach or violation by the other party of any term, covenant, or condition of
this Agreement of any applicable law or ordinance.
SECTION 16 - STATE PUBLIC CONTRACT PROVISIONS
All requirements of ORS Chapters 279, 279A, 279B, and 279C including but not limited
to the following, as applicable, are incorporated herein by reference.
A. If CONSULTANT fails, neglects or refuses to make prompt payment of any claim
for labor or services furnished by any person in connection with this Contract as
such claim becomes due, Agency may pay such claim to the person furnishing
the labor or services and charge the amount of the payment against funds due or
to become due CONSULTANT by reason of the Contract. The payment of a
claim in the manner authorized above shall not relieve the CONSULTANT or its
surety from its obligation with respect to any unpaid claims.
B. CONSULTANT and its subcontractors, if any, are subject to Oregon Workers'
Compensation Law, which requires all employers that employ subject workers
who work under this Contract in the State of Oregon to comply with ORS 656.017
and provide the required workers' compensation coverage, unless such
employers are exempt under ORS 656.126. CONSULTANT shall ensure that
each of its subcontractors, if any, complies with these requirements.
C. CONSULTANT shall, upon demand, furnish to the Agency, written proof of
workers' compensation insurance coverage. CONSULTANT is required to submit
written notice to the Agency thirty (30) days prior to cancellation of said
coverage.
D. CONSULTANT shall use recyclable products to the maximum extent
economically feasible in the performance of the contract.
E. CONSULTANT is engaged as an independent contractor and will be responsible
for any federal or state taxes applicable to any payments made under this
Contract.
F. CONSULTANT agrees and certifies that it is a corporation in good standing and
licensed to do business in the State of Oregon. CONSULTANT agrees and
certifies that it has complied and will continue to comply with all Oregon laws
relating to the performance of CONSULTANT's obligations under this Contract.
PERSONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
PAGE 5
95
G. CONSULTANT shall:
G.1 Make payment promptly, as due, to all persons supplying to the
CONSULTANT labor and material for the prosecution of the work provided
for in the contract documents;
G.2 Pay all contributions or amounts due to the State Accident Insurance Fund
incurred in the performance of this Contract;
G.3 Not permit any lien or claim to be filed or prosecuted against the Agency
on account of any labor or material furnished; and
G.4 Pay to the Department of Revenue all sums withheld from employees
pursuant to ORS 316.167.
H. The CONSULTANT shall promptly as due, make payment to any person, co-
partnership or association or corporation furnishing medical, surgical and hospital
care or other needed care and attention, incident to sickness or injury, to the
employee of such CONSULTANT, of all sums which the CONSULTANT agrees
to pay for such services and all moneys and sums which the CONSULTANT
collected or deducted from the wages of employees pursuant to any law, contract
or Agreement for the purpose of providing or paying for such service.
I. The CONSULTANT shall pay employees for overtime work performed under the
contract in accordance with ORS 653.010 to 653.261 and the Fair Labor
Standards Act of 1938 (29USC201 et. seq.).
J. An employer must give notice to employees who work on a contract for services
in writing, either at the time of hire or before commencement of work on the
contract, or by posting a notice in a location frequented by employees, of the
number of hours per day and days per week that the employees may be required
to work.
K. CONSULTANT will comply with 279.835 et seq. in the procurement of products
and services from a nonprofit agency for disabled individuals.
SECTION 17 - A TIORNEY FEes
In the event a suit or action is instituted to enforce any right guaranteed pursuant to this
Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to, in addition to the statutory costs and
disbursements, reasonable attorney fees to be fixed by the trial and appellate courts
respectively.
PERSONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
PAGE 6
96
SECTION 18 - NOTICES
All notices hereunder shall be given in writing and mailed, postage prepaid, addressed
as follows:
TO CITY:
TO CONSULTANT:
Randall Rohman
Public Works Program Manager
270 Montgomery Street
Woodburn, OR 97071
David Green
Vice President
2020 SW Forth Ave, Suite 300
Portland, OR 97201
SECTION 19 - AGREEMENT CONTAINS ALL UNDERSTANDINGS; AMENDMENT
This document represents the entire and integrated Agreement between CITY and
CONSULTANT and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and agreements,
either written or oral.
This document may be amended only by written instrument, signed by both CITY and
CONSULTANT
SECTION 20 - GOVERNING LAW
This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Oregon.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, CITY and CONSULTANT have executed this Agreement the
day and year written.
CITY OF WOODBURN:
CONSULTANT:
By:
By:
John C. Brown
Title: City Administrator
Title:
Date:
Date:
PERSONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
PAGE 7
97
EXHIBIT "A"
SCOPE OF WORK
98
City of Woodburn - Facilities Plan
SCOPE OF WORK AND ASSUMPTIONS
Task 1: Project Management and Coordination
Consultant shall work with City to set up a Project Development Team (PDT) consisting
of Consultant and appropriate sub-consultant staff, City staff, and DEQ staff as
appropriate. Consultant shall schedule, prepare for, attend, and document PDT meetings
and coordinate these activities with City and DEQ.
Consultant will prepare for and lead a chartering meeting of the PDT. The initial meeting
will define objectives and goals, define critical success factors, and develop criteria used
to evaluate system alternatives. The meeting will further serve to define the project
purpose, needs, approach, schedule, deliverables, and responsibilities of members of the
PDT. The Consultant will prepare chartering documentation and a project work plan,
including detailed project schedule showing all major tasks, PDT meetings, and review
milestones. The consultant shall update the schedule monthly throughout the duration of
the work. Monthly progress reports and progress billings shall be prepared in a format
approved by the City.
Consultant Project Management responsibilities include:
. Contract management
. Sub-consultant management
. Schedule, coordinate, and supervise project work.
. Maintain liaison and coordination with City, DEQ, and outside agencies.
. Prepare records of decisions.
. Prepare progress reviews.
. Monitor project budget.
. Prepare, maintain, and update project activity schedule.
. Provide timely responses to City and DEQ comments.
Assumptions:
. Assume 12 months of monthly narratives and invoicing.
· Assume bi-weekly coordination meetings with Owner's project manager
. Assume 12 month project duration.
Task 2: Study Area Characteristics
. Describe the study area location, physical environment including topography,
geology, soils, and climate.
· Collect and summarize land use information for the existing and future service
area boundaries
. Develop population projections for the planning period.
Assumptions:
· Assume study area characteristics described in the previous Facilities Plan and in
the recent Comp Plan will be utilized as the basis for this task.
99
Task 3: Collect Existing Data and Review Existing Conditions
· Collect historical treatment plant and water quality data, including calculation of
Pudding River flows and groundwater characterization for critical design periods.
Critical design periods shall include both winter ammonia and summer
temperature and ammonia discharge periods.
. Collect historical Woodburn WWTP effluent flows and water quality data
. Report updated biosolids production and characteristics.
. DefinelDescribe service area and existing facilities (including reuse facilities)
. Assess condition of existing collection system, treatment plant and reuse facilities.
· Conduct a high-level process and capacity analysis of the Woodburn Treatment
Plant to confirm existing capacity and sizing of Phase I and proposed Phase II
treatment. Identify system performance and deficiencies.
. Meet with plant staff to solicit input relative to capacity and existing performance.
· Prepare and present a technical memorandum summarizing the characteristics of
the existing collection system, treatment plant, and reuse system.
Assumptions:
· Condition assessment of the collection system will be based on information
provided by field staff, and existing maintenance records. For areas where
information is not available, condition will be interpolated based on age and
known condition of similar facilities
· Condition assessment of the POTW will be a high level assessment looking at
ability of major mechanical, electrical and structural components in light of 20-
year planning horizon. No testing will be performed as part of this evaluation.
Seismic condition will be based on age and general configuration rather than
evaluation of specific design components. Areas of concern will be noted for
further evaluation outside the scope of this work.
Task 4: Develop Projected Wastewater Flows and Loads
· Based on existing wastewater characteristics, land use, and population projections
establish flow and load projections.
. Define design flows and loadings.
. Establish existing per capita flow and load values, as well as diurnal and seasonal
peaking factors.
· Estimate future WWTP design discharge flows to outfalls and the natural
treatment systems for critical design periods.
· Prepare and present a technical memorandum summarizing the planning and
engineering criteria, assumptions, goals, and analysis to City staff
Task 5: Develop Regulatory and Treatment Requirements
. Water Quality Criteria
- Describe Willamette TMDL process and impact on Woodburn. Define current
regulatory picture and timing for Willamette Basin standards as well as
MollallalPudding River Sub Basin standards. Review water quality concerns
100
on the Pudding River including dissolved oxygen, turbidity, bacteria, iron,
manganese, arsenic, dieldrin, chlordane, and DDT.
- Define effluent discharge criteria and limitations.
- Provide a discussion of the need to protect beneficial uses of the Pudding
River. This shall include a discussion of impacts on threatened or endangered
species located in the watershed including aquatic life. Describe the impacts
any threatened or endangered species found in the watershed will have on the
City of Wood bum - POTW regulatory requirements.
· Effluent Reuse Criteria - Define current permit requirements and standards for
design of effluent reuse systems.
· Biosolids Criteria - Define current permit requirements, standards for design of
biosolids facilities and land application criteria.
· Prepare and present to City staff a technical memorandum summarizing the
regulatory criteria.
Task 6: Develop and Evaluate Treatment Alternatives
The Consultant will prepare and evaluate concepts for alternative treatment processes,
improvements, and upgrades to meet the projected flows, loads, and regulatory
requirements. Alternative concepts should:
· Build on previous work to establish success of existing processes and planned
expanSiOn.
. Identify potential modifications to increase efficiency, improve reliability, and
address repair issues. Evaluate treatment wetlands as an alternative, or
complement, to conventional treatment.
. Evaluate opportunities to maximize capacity of existing facilities with optimum
capital investment.
· Evaluate flow equalization opportunities as well as opportunities for blending of
treated flow streams to achieve effluent discharge requirements.
Subtasks include:
· Analyze process requirements and upgrades
- Develop a process model for the treatment facility, calibrate with existing
data, and identify any capacity discrepancies between the model and existing
rated capacities.
- Develop a preliminary mass balance based on the results of the model.
· . Brainstorm possible alternatives and screen those alternatives based on success
criteria above.
· Define and develop complete alternatives, combining treatment elements in the
most cost effective manner, while maintaining future flexibility
- . Analysis will address the following components:
o Liquid stream treatment
o Effluentfiltration
o Disinfection
o Solids stream treatment
o Biosolids management
101
o Effluent Reuse
o Satellite treatment facility
- Document the evaluation and estimate capital, operations, and maintenance
costs. Recommended to the City needed process upgrades.
· Address non-cost evaluation criteria such as reliability and operational
constraints. Identify regulatory, legal, and institutional requirements for each of
the alternatives.
. Develop planning level capital cost estimates.
. Develop operational and maintenance costs.
· Develop an implementation plan and present worth costs for each alternative.
· Develop technical memorandum documenting alternative development and
evaluation for each component and present to City staff.
Assumptions:
· Phase 2 as presented in 1995 Facility Plan, combined with recommendation from
Temp and Ammonia Evaluation, will be utilized as the base scenario, updated to
address new design criteria and cost escalation.
· An analysis of satellite facility alternatives will be performed with a focus on
technical viability and cost effectiveness. Further regulatory and discharge
analysis is not included in this scope, but rather could be performed subsequent to
this initial technical evaluation, but prior to completion of this Task.
· Three comprehensive alternatives (combining natural treatment systems with
conventional mechanical systems), including the base scenario, will be developed.
· Detailed evaluation will only be performed on screened alternatives.
Task 7: Develop and Evaluate Discharge and Reuse Alternatives
The Consultant will prepare and evaluate concepts for alternative discharge and reuse
processes, improvements, and expansions. Subtasks include:
· Develop and evaluate alternatives for effluent disposal or reuse using the existing
and currently undeveloped wastewater treatment plant property.
· Include an assessment of various land application techniques, including
agronomic-rate and high-rate irrigation, as well as an assessment of treatment
wetlands and subsurface discharge.
. Define and develop alternatives
- . Prepare a water and temperature balance for water reuse.
- . Identify the amount of water that could be fully utilized and not returned to
the river on a monthly basis
- . Assess ground water and surface water volumetric and water quality impacts
of each alternative.
- . Assess any required upgrades for the existing outfalls to comply with new
discharge permit.
· Address non-cost evaluation criteria such as reliability and operational
constraints. Identify regulatory, legal, and institutional requirements for each of
the alternatives.
· Develop planning level capital, operation, and maintenance cost estimates.
102
· Develop an implementation plan and present worth costs for each alternative.
· Develop a Planning Document of the recommended alternatives to meet the
requirements of the Pudding River temperature TMDL's. The document shall
include alternative development, evaluation, and alternative recommendation. The
document will be of Compliance Document quality for delivery to DEQ. The
document will fulfill the planning requirement of the City's MAO. The document
will be presented to City staff before the City deliveries the document to DEQ.
Assumptions:
· Revised document for DEQ submittal will be based on Evaluation of Temperature
and Ammonia Reduction Alternatives, July 14.
Task 8: Collection/J'ransmission System Mapping and Evaluation
The wastewater collection and transmission system has been under continual expansion
since its placement in service. Woodburn experiences some localized areas of concern
and needs to evaluate the long~term condition and capacity of the collection/transmission
system. In order to guide anticipated collection system investments, the system needs to
be mapped and an evaluation study prepared
The Consultant will prepare a Collection/Transmission System Map and Evaluation that
includes the following subtasks:
· Collect field location and data fields for existing collection system to include at a
minimum the following
- . Establish Horizontal coordinate (X& Y) and vertical elevation (Z) of each
Manhole.
- . Establish Horizontal coordinate (X& Y) and vertical elevation (Z) of pump
stations, horizontal coordinate (X& Y) location for force mains.
· One location will be measured for each pump station, exact
protocol to be determined in consultation with the City.
· Force main locations will be measured at the beginning and end of
the force main, and at intermediate node points only if there is a
surface manifestation of the force main.
- . Establish Horizontal coordinate (X& Y) location of flow metering stations.
- . Using Survey Grade GPS equipment and Survey methods a Horizontal
accuracy of 0.1 0 foot and vertical accuracy of 0.20 foot is obtainable. .
- . Establish pipe run, length, size and depth for collection system pipes 6"
diameter and larger.
- . Location of Manhole by description, such as in Street/Sidewalk, landscape
area.
- . Assign a Manhole identification number (unique to city basin identification)
- . Invert elevation of pipe entering manhole
- . Size of manhole and size of pipe entering manhole
- . Material type of manhole and pipe entering manhole
- . Identify condition based on a rating system.
103
. The data shall be brought into a GIS system compatible with the current version
of ESRI'S Arc GIS. Current city version is 9.2.
. Prepare a hydraulic model of the sanitary system. The consultant shall use a
commercially available, GIS-based hydraulic model compatible with the current
version of ESRI'S Arc GIS. Current city version is 9.2. developed as part of this
facility plan. The consultant will provide this model to Woodburn with training to
enable maintenance and effective operation.
. Define additional flow monitoring requirements and recommend data collection
necessary to calibrate the hydraulic model. Woodburn has some flow meters
available for this task. The Consultant will assist City in implementation of
monitoring program. Collect and evaluate data. Establish characteristics of
sanitary and base flow. Estimate III contributions.
. Using a GIS-based data model to evaluate existing and projected collection
system, including significant collectors, trunk and interceptor lines, and pump
stations. Identify deficiencies and capacity shortfalls. Include collection systems
outside the UGH, which feed into Woodburn system. Address CMOM and permit
requirements for satellite collection systems. Evaluate the information and
recommend improvements to the collection/transmission system. Prepare a capital
improvements list and cost estimates for the recommended improvements.
. Identify portions of the system with excessive III flows. Develop and compare
rough cost estimates for III reduction, conveyance, and treatment. Based on
results of III analysis, recommend steps to control and reduce III within the
system.
. Evaluate the City's Inflow Reduction Plan and recommend steps to implement the
Plan.
.. Based on collection system evaluation and III analysis, prioritize improvement
projects. Prepare planning level cost estimates (capital, O&M, and present worth)
for each project. Develop implementation schedule.
· Describe the collection/transmission system evaluation in a technical report that
includes, but is not limited to, condition, capacity, and recommended
improvements.
· Recommend and provide Asset Maintenance Management Software for the
wastewater collection system. The software shall be commercially available,
compatible with the current version of ESRI'S Arc GIS version 9.2 and Granite
XP Pipeline Inspection & Integration Software. The current data files will need to
migrate into the software. The current data is residing in "CHS" Maintenance
Management Information System Version 7.0 (Access based). The consultant
shall provide the software complete with existing city data integrated and training
to enable an effective operation.
Assumptions:
. TV inspection data for the 50% of the system that is televised will be merged with
collection system attribute data to estimate condition for entire system using a
rating system defined as a part of the project. No additional CCTV inspection will
be performed. A representative fraction of the TV inspection data will be selected
104
and viewed to assist with establishing system condition. Not all pipes will be
individually assessed.
. City will provide access to as-built plans and drawings, including O&M manuals,
pump curves, pump test data, and SCADA information for pump stations. No
pump station condition assessments for electrical or structural soundness or code
compliance will be performed.
. Manhole invert will be assumed equal to the lowest pipe invert exiting the
manhole.
· Manhole description and numbering methodology will be reviewed and approved
by City staff prior to commencing field work.
. Facility age will be generalized from interview with City staff and crayoned
polygons on the collection system map
. Significant amounts of information such as diameter, pipe material, inverts
(continuous slope) will be interpolated from neighboring elements when budget
limit is reached
. Data server needs can be met by Microsoft SQL Express (Desktop SQL)
. The system model will include approximately 500 pipe segments and manholes
including lines 10" and greater based on existing data from Autocad maps, the
CHS database and field data gathered for the project.
. It is assumed that training in this scope of work will consist of 2 2-hour sessions
at City offices to familiarize staff with model function and structure, and the
current and future build-out condition model files. Depending on past experience
and background, City staff may require additional training to become proficient in
hydraulic model operation and interpretation of results.
. Peak flow data will be generated based on a combination of historical and new
flow monitoring data collected during the 07-08 wet weather season. It is
expected that City staff will use 5-8 City owned monitors to collect and provide
flow data to the consultant for evaluation.
· Flow distribution in the collection system will be based on the monitoring data
associated with the pipelines contained within the monitoring basins. To create
efficiencies in existing system model development flow distribution upstream of
monitor locations will be based on length and diameter of the collection system as
opposed to land use data unless the City provides information for large
commercial and/or industrial flow contributors. This approach provides an
appropriate level of hydraulic modeling detail without extensive existing land use
data analysis particularly in areas served by the smaller diameter (6-10")
pipelines. Land use data WILL be used to estimate flow contributions from future
development areas.
. Flow contribution from collection systems outside the UGB will be incorporated
into the Woodburn system hydraulic model and estimated using flow monitoring
data and city staff knowledge. No collection system mapping or hydraulic pipe
modeling will be performed for collection systems outside the UGB/planning
area.
. System III will be evaluated by review of monitoring data collected as part of
hydraulic model development and calibration task. Resolution will be at the basin
and major sub-basin scale for identifying potential problem areas.
105
. Technical Report will be approximately 50 pages in length plus technical
appendixes, including 10-20 color figures. Technical Report will describe flow
monitoring methods and results, hydraulic model development and calibration,
condition assessment, capacity assessment for current and build-out conditions, III
evaluation and results, and recommended capital improvements. An executive
summary will be provided.
. One draft report (electronic copy) will be submitted for review and comment by
City staff. Once consolidated comments have been received, a final submittal of
the TR will be provided,S paper copies, electronic copy, and data CD containing
all GIS, database, modeling files, and worksheets. Information from the TR will
be incorporated into the Facilities Plan as required for DEQ approval. No other
formal submittal documents are anticipated for this task.
. Plant equipment items can import direct into selected CMMS with modest effort.
. The field data collection (survey) relies on 50% of underground information being
available from the CHS database (per the City's statement). Thus 50% of
manholes will have a full measurement including underground, and the remaining
50% will have the x,y.Z of the manhole cover recorded.
. The selection of a CMMS will be made jointly with City staff; we assume that
consensus can be reached within two half day workshops. The base fee includes
two concurrent licenses for a CMMS package. The City may wish to acquire
additional license seats.
Task 9: Land Use and Environmental Review
Consultant shall work with City staff to determine consistency with Comprehensive Land
Use Plans, as well as any land use permitting requirements for the collection and
treatment facilities. Attend discussions regarding the requirement for land use approval,
potential transportation improvements potentially imposed on the project, and any
potential aesthetic improvements necessary to mitigate the plant odors, noise, and
appearance.
Consultant shall prepare an Environmental Report meeting DEQ Facilities Plan
requirements. Subtasks include:
. Identify impact of proposed plant improvements and recommended reuse
facilities,
. Define triggers for different levels of environmental review,
. Document environmental concerns, including historic, cultural, archaeological,
socio-economic, or biological factors,
. Define and summarize proposed mitigation measures,
. Coordinate environmental work with DEQ, the Oregon Department of Fish and
Wildlife, and Oregon Department of State Lands (DSL), and other agencies as
needed.
Task 10: Rate and SDC Study
The goal of Task 10 is to establish a long-term funding plan, including SDC and rate
adjustments, that ensures adequate revenue to address the capital and (O&M) needs of
the system, and ensure equitable cost recovery. Consultant will evaluate the full array of
106
funding options available to the City for funding the system, including long term debt
funding options, and develop specific revenue streams related to rates and SDCs.
Consultant will work with the City and the CAC to develop a financial strategy,
including phasing capital projects and a rate structure to balance equity and other
objectives.
. Prepare budgetary cost estimates for preferred option (both capital, O&M, and
financial overhead costs)
. Prepare an initial phasing/project delivery plan.
. Prepare a financial model showing rate impacts created by new capital/operational
requirements. This model will be useable by Woodburn for future financial
planning. The City adopted interim user fees in 2007 after 12 years of no increase.
The Consultant will allocate the projected revenue requirements for the next 5
years to the relevant functional parameters for the utility and then allocate the
costs by parameter to customer classes. The functional parameters for the
wastewater system will include system flows, loads and customer services. The
allocation procedures will be performed in conformance with applicable federal
regulations and accepted cost-of-service principles.
. The City adopted the current system development charges on January 1, 2000.
Within the framework of Oregon SDC law, local governments have latitude in
selecting technical approaches that are consistent with the City's unique
circumstances, policies, and objectives. The Consultant will review the City's
existing SDC methodology, and identify other technical approaches used in the
industry and allowable under Oregon law. The Consultant will discuss the
advantages and disadvantages of the technical and policy options and how they
apply to Woodburn. The City and Consultant will jointly determine the
methodological approaches to be used in this study. Following selection of the
specific technical approaches, the Consultant will calculate the reimbursement
and improvement SDCs. The SDCs will reflect the full cost of growth as defined
by the selected technical approaches, and the 20-year schedule of improvements
from the Facility Plan.
. Consider alternative means for funding the operation and maintenance and capital
costs identified in the Facilities Plan. The funding options will include locally
generated sources, like rates, system development charges (SDCs), local
improvement districts, as well as any available external (i.e., state and federal)
funds. Debt funding options will be considered.
. Prepare and present the rate study to City staff.
Task 11: Public Involvement
Consultant shall assist the City staff and citizen volunteers in preparing materials and
making presentations to the public. Consultant shall assist City Staff in soliciting input
and gain public support for the plan. Consultant shall be prepared to attend and
participate in Citizen Advisory Committee meetings. The City of Woodburn, City
Council, may form a Wastewater Citizens Committee in place of a Technical Committee.
The Citizens Advisory Committee would then participate in the facility planning effort.
Subtasks will include:
107
. Assist in initial development and organization of Technical Committee or Citizens
Committee.
· Provide technical resources and attendance as appropriate for 10 Citizens
Committee meetings.
. Make presentations at two City Council meetings
· Prepare materials for and attend two open houses to present rate and facility plan
findings and recommendations.
· Provide content for general public newsletters on rate structure recommendations
for distribution with water/sewer bills.
. Prepare for and attend a minimum of twenty meetings that include either Citizen
Committee, Technical committee, open house, or City Council Meetings.
Assumptions:
· All meeting logistics, mailings, and outreach are coordinated by City.
· Attendance and preparation for meetings shall be performed to the limits of the
budget.
· Ten citizen committee meetings are attended by Public Outreach Lead and Project
Manager. Various technical resources attend six meetings.
· Two City Council meetings are attended by Public Outreach Lead and Project
Manager. One City Council meeting attended by financial Lead.
. Two Open Houses are attended by Public Outreach Lead, Project Manager and
Principal-in-Charge.
· Project Manager attendance at PDT meetings is covered under PM task.
· The project budget assumes no new materials are required for presentations
besides what is prepared for technical efforts.
· City will be responsible for translation for bi-lingual communications.
Task 12: Prepare draft Facilities Plan document
Consultant shall prepare a comprehensive draft and final Facilities Plan document that
incorporates all of the elements described below. This document will, at a minimum,
meet the requirements and intent of this project as well as comply with all regulatory
requirements related to such plans. Consultant will assist in filing and obtaining approval
of the plan with the Department of Environmental Quality. The following organization
and DEQ guidance documents should guide the facility Plan document:
1. Executive Summary
2. Introduction, Purpose, and Need
3. Study Area Characteristics
3.1 Study Area
3.2 Physical Environment
3.3 Socio-Economic Environment
3.4 Land Use Regulations
4. Existing Wastewater Facilities
4.1 Wastewater Conveyance System
4.2 Wastewater Treatment Plant
5. Wastewater Characteristics
5.1 Wastewater Volume
108
5.2 Wastewater Composition
5.3 Projected Wastewater Characteristics
6. Basis of Planning
6.1 Basis for Design
6.2 Basis for Cost Estimate
6.3 Water Quality Impact
6.4 Water Balance Analysis of any Wastewater Treatment Impoundments
6.5 Design Capacity of Conveyance System and Wastewater Treatment
Plant
7. Development and Evaluation of Alternatives
7.1 Conveyance System Alternatives
7.2 Wastewater Treatment Plant Liquid Stream Treatment Alternatives
7.3 Disinfection Alternatives
7.4 Effluent Disposal Alternatives
7.5 Biosolids Management
7.6 Development and Evaluation of Complete Alternatives
8. Rate Study
8.1 Estimated annual Operation, Maintenance and Replacement Costs of
the proposed system
8.2 Evaluation of Local Funding Resources
8.3 Evaluation of Federal and State Funding Resources
8.4 Recommended Rate Structure and Financing Strategy
9. Recommended Plan
9.1 Introduction
9.2 Financing Strategy
9.3 Implementation Schedule
10. Environmental Report
Based upon the preferred alternative, the Facilities Plan will be prepared with the
following information:
. A process diagram with unit process criteria
. A hydraulic grade line
. A proposed/updated site layout
. Preliminary details of significant process units and structures
. A preliminary Process and Instrumentation Diagram
. Phasing schedule for 20-year planning period
. A preliminary CIP
Assumptions:
. Six hard copies of the draft document are provided
. Two CDs of the electronic, camera-ready version are provided.
Task 13: Prepare final Facilities Plan document
109
Consultant scope will include compilation, printing, binding, and submittal of DRAFT
and final Wastewater Treatment Facilities Plan copies to DEQ. The Facilities Plan should
address City and DEQ comments in preparation of a final Facilities Plan.
Assumptions:
. Five hard copies of the final document are provided.
. Two CDs of the electronic, camera-ready version are provided.
B.) Project Deliverables:
A professional engineer, registered in the State of Oregon, shall direct the performance of
all engineering tasks. The professional providing direct supervision of the work shall
stamp all reports.
In addition to the technical memoranda listed in the scope of work, the Consultant shall
prepare the following deliverables:
. Meeting agenda and minutes
. Written responses to City comments on draft work products
. Written responses to DEQ comments on draft work
. Evaluation report with recommendations for POTW upgrades to comply with the
TMDL winter ammonia and temperature reduction requirements
. Environmental report for temperature reduction wetlands and subsurface
(hyporheic) discharge
City will provide the following:
. Copies of current design drawings, DEQ correspondence, and relevant data
. Daily monitoring reports from the treatment plant
. Previously collected Collection system GIS data
. AutoCAD base maps of existing collection system w/MH identification number
. Video inspection of collection system, not complete and some data is not current
. Database of existing collection system in CHS Maintenance Management
Information System format (Microsoft Access)
. Hardcopy as-built information on file for review
. Current and projected land use information
- Copies of topographic and property surveys that were previously conducted
- Necessary feedback and comments on draft work documents. The City
reserves the right to accept or reject all work products
110
Co) Ootional Tasks:
Task A: Additional Collection System Modeling
Having prepared the Hydraulic Model in the Base Scope of work for Task 8:
Collectionifransmission System Mapping and Evaluation above, CH2M HILL will
conduct the following additional work, using the same approach described above, but
including the 6" and 8" piping runs. Work will include:
. Incorporate the additional 6" and 8" pipes and manholes into the hydraulic model
of the sanitary system.
. Using the GIS-based data model to evaluate existing and projected collection
system, include the 6" and 8" piping in the evaluation and recommend
improvements to the collection/transmission system. Include the 6" and 8" capital
improvements list and cost estimates for the recommended improvements.
. Include the 6" and 8" piping in the list of prioritized improvement projects, and
prepare planning level cost estimates (capital, O&M, and present worth) for each
project. Include the 6" and 8" piping in the implementation schedule.
. Include the 6" and 8" piping in a technical report that includes, but is not limited
to, condition, capacity, and recommended improvements.
Assumptions:
. Same as above (Task 8: Collection/Transmission System Mapping and
Evaluation), except that work will include 6" and 8" piping.
Task B: Phase II Energy Study Effort
Evaluate and produce technical report for renewable resource stream (i.e. digester gas and
poplar reuse system), the potential energy value of the resource will be assessed and
quantified. This information will be applied to specific renewable energy development
project(s) as identified in Phase I of the planning effort currently under development. The
Phase II effort will determine if the Phase I selected technologies are feasible to construct
at this site, layout appropriate pilot studies, and define the pilot studies data gathering
efforts. The Phase II effort will define the most feasible location for the infrastructure and
pilots. Phase II efforts will also develop a conceptual layout, evaluate the environmental
impacts of the project and determine permitting requirements.
Assumptions:
. Assume two feasible alternatives are identified in Phase 1.
Task C: Enhanced Public Outreach
CH2M HILL will provide enhanced public outreach services, over and above those
outlined in the Base Scope. Current budget is developed as an allowance, with work
allocated up to the maximum, not to exceed amount. Work can include:
. Additional graphics support, development of new materials for Open House
events or other outreach work.
. Consultant responsibility for mailings, production of invitation lists, etc.
111
. Additional attendance at critical open house events, meetings, or council
sessions.
. Additional strategy support
Task D: Detailed Evaluation of Satellite Treatment Facility
Should the satellite treatment facility prove to be technically sound and cost effective in
the preliminary evaluation above (Task 6 - Develop and Evaluate Treatment
Alternatives), CH2M HILL will provide additional services to begin to address the
regulatory, environmental, reuse customer, and public acceptance components of the
evaluation. The current budget is developed as an allowance, with work allocated up to
the maximum, not to exceed amount. Work can include:
. Regulatory evaluation of possible NPDES permit, reuse acceptance by Oregon
DEQ and feasibility analysis from a regulatory standpoint.
. Conduct a market analysis for potential reuse customers - industrial, residential,
golf courses, etc.
. Evaluate possible environmental mitigation or restoration opportunities
associated with supplementing flows in nearby creeks, habitat enhancement,
constructed wetlands, etc.
. Further refine the cost analysis based on additional information and evaluations.
112
EXHIBIT "B"
COMPENSATION RATES
113
....
....
~
Icity of Woodburn. Fac:i1ities Plan I i !
1- j ~ 0 " ~ r f d l~ ]1 t J ~ i-
j ~ . ~ ll't ,
H II H l l ~ I ~ If Hi it........ ""'" T.... -
~ .... of ~ !j T.... T...... -
T'" T__ ~I ~ ...... Coot ....- - T_
- t j ! J j ~ - i~ t ~~ ~I ~" ! ~ -
.! ~ II ~ .. ....
----~-- --_. ~ -~~--- _.~- ~
2001 8IAng ,ale 62' .u. "5< "65 '0' .,-.:; -.,,;; .~ S22 $'" .... ~ $'''' "8 $1" ... $'3< $181 ,p' $11 $''''' Sl81 $11 '" $32 ,
,Core Proiec:t I I I I
, -~ 31' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. 360 <70 ... """. so 1S324 .... I m.,47
I
. .......... ..........- 8 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 .. 0 0 0 54 ..... so so I Sloe Sloe .,....
. ~ Do..... _ ~ .. 10 20 32 .. " , 0 12 .. 0 .. " 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,. . 280 $3$ 21' '62 ,
I
0 w........ fIIowa.... LMdI ,. 8 ,. 32 .. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 170 117 $0
. ...T_ . 0 " . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0 16 0 II 10 666 '04 136 712
I
. and EveIuMe T........... AIIerNU... .. 20 3' 54 ,.. 20 30 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 . '79 70 ... 1158
;
7 1n.....w.1If'd EV1IIuIlte DtKtw-.... ..... .......,ves . . 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o I 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 22 ..... $0 so S60 IIlll ......
I I I
--.-...........-; I "'0'" "'.000 I~ I....... ' .........
. CMMS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. '66 ... 295 9' 0 60S 2Q(l 7. 0 0 0 0 0 30 32 2070 .uoo
. LInd u.. _~..... 8 I 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,. 0 0 8 0 ,. 0 60 $1.16 so $0 i "20 "20 .......
,
10 .......... s.......... SluCIv "" I 0 0 ,. .. I 0 0 0 8 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 o I 0 11. 54 0 0 0 . 298 ""'547 S85 so $0 ... I......,.
, I
" ...... - 80 I "' 0 ,. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 32 0 .. ... "'087 131. so 1300 12.8" 1-'7QlI
I ,
" DnII: FecM.. .... .. ,. I. ,. .. 0 0 0 8 ,. 0 ,. 0 8 0 .. 0 . 0 0 8 . .. .. 2M .~ 627 so so I"""" ...... 1_...
,
,. --.... .. ,. " I. ,. 0 0 0 . " 0 8 0 0 0 I. 0 0 0 0 0 0 "" .. ,sa "'.... $0 $0 I.... .... 1__
_On !WI 110 "1 222 3llI 32 so 22 '20 ... ... 355 ,04 co ... ZlO ,. 21 ,.. .. co so ... ,.,. -. _0.
T.... Coot $37.092 ,~360: $36,690 SM7 .... .....000 -'
~'628j $37.679 i ".993 S?~ ".720 ~ $34.008 i ..,,~ 1$31,2" $17.510 fB,~' $100,672 S21,21~ 1~S5.347 $17,971 so.... ...~...... $22,218 S16.1~t4587 U61.962 --
----+-- .. -..- ... .. --+ t-- -- --- r-- t . .- -- f-.--... - f--. ---j----- ---- I-- I
,
'Optional Tasks ..i -1. I e---~- i !
- ..~- --+- - -- ~- -- - ---r-- , -
A , ..- . ,SO 2' 40, 1. 230 $27.021 $0 $0 $0 ..,.-
. .. 2' 601 60 .. ,sa $21.331 so $0 $0
,
C 20: 80. I 32 60 '8 .. so ... $43,312 $800 $0 $800 . .....112
I I
0 . . rHlmeot~ 20' 40. .. 24 . 8, .. .. .. 208 $31,_ $0 $0 $0 ....-
I
C;\Ooc:utnef'Uand~\dgrMnlWyOocurnentl.\U-.oL TIf1'1)Attact1m..-Itl\WoocIkIm]P_lOE 120407_mJ)12).xIll Budgft 121612007 8:<49AM 1
...~ ." .... .~ .'.\.. ~
~
WQQQ.ltVRN
tn,~rroraltd 1889
llF
~~
.
.
December 10, 2007
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: John C. Brown, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Appointment of Administrator Pro Tern
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council appoint Police Chief Scott Russell as
Administrator Pro Tem for the period of December 14, 2007 through January 1,
2008.
BACKGROUND:
City personnel policy "caps" the vacation leave an employee can accumulate
at two times (2x) total annual accrual. Employees accrue between 10 and 25
days of vacation per year, depending on length of service. Leave
accumulations may exceed the cap during the year, but must be spent down
to the cap by December 31 st each year. Represented employees forfeit any
accumulated leave that remains in excess of the cap on December 31 st. Non-
represented employees receive cash compensation for up to 40 hours in excess
of the cap; any remaining balance in excess of the cap after compensated
hours have been reduced from such an employee's vacation account are
forfeited. Departments do not budget for year-end vacation payouts;
managers are required to schedule vacation time for themselves or their
employees to assure leave caps are not exceeded.
DISCUSSION:
I accrue 15 days of vacation per year, and may accrue a maximum of 30 days
vacation in my leave account. Including 10 hours that will accrue for
December, I will have an accrued total of 40 days of vacation leave on
December 31 sf if I do not use vacation in the meantime. Like other City budgets,
the City Administrator's budget does not include funds for year-end vacation
payouts. For consistency with the policy applied to other city departments,
employees in my office who would otherwise exceed vacation leave accruals
Agenda Item Review: City Administrato
City A ttorne'l1
Finane fJ1LYl
115
Mayor and City Council
December 10, 2007
Page 2
.
.
are required to use excess vacation so it is not forfeited. To use my excess
vacation time, I will be out of the office from December 14, 2007 through
January 1, 2008. This is a good time to use vacation leave, as business slows
during this period because so many in other agencies and in the private sector
are also taking time off.
Pursuant to Section 21 (e) of the City Charter, the City Council appoints an
administrator pro tem when the Administrator is absent from the City. The Pro
Tem Administrator shall possess the powers and duties of the Administrator, but
may not appoint or remove a City officer or employee except with approval of
the majority of the Council.
FINANCIAL IMP ACT:
There is no financial impact associated with the recommended action.
116
..~.
W~N
.lJ/4~..1 L. IlG
r~~~
In(orpo,~,td 1889
.
.
December 10, 2007
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: John C. Brown, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Cancellation of December 24, 2007 Meeting
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council cancel the December 24, 2007 meeting.
BACKGROUND:
Pursuant to City Charter, the City Council is required to meet regularly, at least
once a month. The Council meets twice monthly, or more often, to conduct
City business. The Council occasionally cancels a meeting, due to holiday
schedules or lack of business.
DISCUSSION:
December 24th is a City holiday. Because your second meeting in December
falls on the holiday, it is recommended your Council cancel that meeting. This
action is consistent with the Council's past practice of canceling meetings that
fall on holidays, and meetings that would otherwise be held on the fourth
Monday in December.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no financial impact associated with the recommended action.
Agenda Item Review: City Administrator
City Attorney
Finane
117
~,. '~.' 4...'. .
,~ . fn. .
WOODBURN
13A
Jff(~r,a"lltd 1889
A~'~
.
.
December 10,2007
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council through City Administrator
FROM: Jim Allen. Community Development Director 9a
SUBJECT: Planning case DR 2007-11, on the property at 985 Lawson Avenue
(the property containing the existing Taco Bell restaurant)
RECOMMENDATION:
No action is recommended. This item is placed before the City Council for
informational purposes in compliance with the Woodburn Development
Ordinance. The City Council may call up this item for review if it desires.
BACKGROUND:
The applicant requested a Type II (Community Development Director decision)
Design Review for a 260 square foot drive-through espresso stand located on
the same lot as the Taco Bell restaurant on Lawson Avenue. The Director's
decision approved the project subject to conditions of approval.
DISCUSSION:
None.
FINANCIAL IMP ACT:
No public sector financial impact is anticipated.
Agenda Item Review: City \dministrator
City A'
fo
~ 1 \
-':ance&
118
15A
Dear ,
I am writing to urge your support for renewed funding to complete the Big Look project.
As you know, the W oodbum Mayor and City Council formally resolved both to oppose
Measure 37 and to support Measure 49. However, Measure 49 did not address many
fundamental problems with our land use system: the "one-size- fits-all" philosophy of
urban planning, the Kafka-esque process of periodic review, the underlying assumption
that local governments and their citizens are too venal or too stupid to make good
decisions affecting their own communities, and the widespread perception of unfair or
unequal treatment of property owners.
I have read the preliminary report of the Big Look committee, and it impressed me very
much. I found the group's willingness to look at different models used by different states,
and to use consultants who have expertise in how these models actually work in different
states, to be both refreshing and likely to lead to intelligent review of what is working,
what is not, and what appropriate legislative remedies might be. It seems at best ironic
and at worst offensive to see that the funding was pulled because the group was actually
doing the job it was charged to do, and that at least some of its recommendations are
likely to not be supportive of the status quo.
Among the excuses I have heard for failure to fund its continued progress during the last
legislative session, the one that I must comment on is that too much money has gone to
our of state consultants. Since the main in-state consultant appears to be the Fregonese
firm, which has played a major role in the development of the status quo and has profited
handsomely from it, I think it is absolutely mandatory to seek professional assistance
from other firms that have both expertise in other ways of doing things and no vested
interest in having them stay the way they are.
Thank you for all of the good work you do on behalf of our community, and thank you
for any support you can provide to bringing our land use system into the 21 st century.
Sincerely,
Kathy Figley
119
. ,
R,~6 rf
J1-!IO!o I
(1'12 pre,
Woodburn School District
Did you know that...
. The Woodburn Lions Club is providing vision screening in December for all K-5
students in the district?
. Academy of International Studies inducted nearly 40 10th-12th graders into its
newly formed National Honor Society Chapter on Thursday, November 29. The event
was well attended by students, parents, and siblings.
. Angelica Hernandez and Gladis Reyes-Pimentel have each been awarded a full (all
expense paid) four-year scholarship to George Fox University. Four Woodburn campus
students (3 from WMSf) were selected as finalists and from the final 20, 10
scholarships were awarded! This is a wonderful opportunity for two young women that
have worked so very hard throughout their high school career.
. There will be a secondary Literacy Summit, December 19, 2007 involving
administrators, teachers, and students to establish short, medium, and long-term goals
to increase literacy in all students grades 6-12.
. Hillyer's Mid City Ford Company will be hosting a fundraiser for the Woodburn School
District on Saturday, December 15th from 12 noon to 4 p.m. Our district can earn up to
$6,000 for School Family Community Partnership Grants. All you have to do is show up,
test drive a vehicle and fill-out a registration form. For each registration form received,
Ford Motor Company will donate $20. Grants will be provided to schools for School
Family Community Partnership activities or projects with the money raised. Hillyer's
has been a generous sponsor for various school events and activities throughout the
years. More details to come.
. The Woodburn School District is partnering with Love Santa, Inc. for their annual food
and toy drive. All schools will be collecting food items and between 20-25 students from
the AIS and Success are volunteering to participate in the toy drive at Wal-Mart
on December 15th. For more information on how you can help contact Vee Ott at
Vee.Ott@lci.woodburn.or.us
. Our next Community Forum will be held on Tuesday, February 26,2008 in the High
School Lectorium from 7 p.m. - 8 p.m.
. The District Title IA Parent Advisory Council will be hosting their Annual Family
Winter Celebration on Monday, December 17th at French Prairie Middle School from 6
p.m. - 9 p.m. There will be arts and crafts, pinatas, gift bags for kids and some light
refreshments. All are invited!
. Migrant Education will provide computer classes, literacy for adults in Spanish and
continue with the English As A Second Language classes in partnership with Chemeketa
Community College Woodburn Campus.
. Woodburn Arts and Communications Academy (WACA) presents the Wizard of Oz on
Thursday, December 13th and Friday, December 14th at 7:30 P.M. Tickets: $4.00
Adults, $2.00 Students. Please contact Katie Alpert at W.A.C.A. for more information