Agenda - 10/12/2009KATHRYN FIGLEY, MAYOR
C I TY O F IN O O D B U R N DICK PUGH, COUNCILOR WARD ~
.1. MEL SCNMIDT, COUNCILOR WARD I)
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PETER MCCALLUM, COUNCILOR WARD III
,JAMES COX, COUNCILOR WARD IV
A e FRANK LONERGAN, COUNCILOR WARD V
OCTOBER 12, LOO 7 ~' 7.00 P.N~• KRISTEN BERKEY, COUNCILOR WARD VI
CITY HAIL COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 270 MONTGOMERY STREET
1. CAII TO ORDER AND FLAG SALUTE
2. ROIL CAII
3. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND APPOINTMENTS
Announcements:
None
A~p_ointments:
None
4. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS
Proclamations:
None
Presentations:
A. Downtown Crime -Scott Russell, Chief of Police
B. Fiesta Mexicana -Jim Row, Community Services Director
5. COMMITTEE 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.
"Habra inter~retes aisponib~es Para aque~~as personas que no ~ja~~an Ing~es, previo acuerao. Comuniquese
a~ (So3y X80-2485."
October 12, 2009 Council Agenda Page i
8. CONSENT AGENDA -Items listed on the consent agenda are considered
routine and maybe adopted by one motion. Any item maybe removed
for discussion at the request of a Council member.
A. Woodburn City Council minutes of September 28, 2009 1
Recommended Action: Approve the minutes.
9. TABLED BUSINESS
None.
10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. lA 2009-01 - A legislative amendment to revise Planning 11
documents as proposed by the Draft Downtown Development
Plan Update.
11. GENERAL BUSINESS -Members of the public wishing to comment on items of
genera! 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 maybe limited by Mayoral prerogative.
A. Award of Construction Contract for the 2009 Inflow and 212
Infiltration (I&I) Removal Project.
Recommended Action: That the City Council award the
construction contract for the 2009 I&I Removal Project to Jeff
Kersey Construction Co. in the amount of $99,953.00.
B. Award of Construction Contract for the Mill Creek Greenway 214
Trail Project
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City
Council Award the construction contract for the Mill Creek
Greenway Trail Project to Canby Excavating in the amount of
$364,061.45.
12. PLANNING COMMISSION OR ADMINISTRATIVE LAND USE ACTIONS -These
are Planning Commission or Administrative Land Use actions that
maybe called up by the City Council.
A. Planning Commission approval of variance case #VAR 2009-01 220
at 190 Garfield Street, tax lot 051 W18AB1 i 600
October 12, 2009 Council Agenda Page ii
i 3. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
14. MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS
15. ADJOURNMENT
October 7 2, 2009 Council Agenda Page iii
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2009
TAPE
READING
0001 D_ ATE. COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CITY OF WOODBURN,
COUNTY OF MARION, STATE OF OREGON, SEPTEMBER 28, 2009.
CONVENED. The meeting convened at 7:00 p.m. with Mayor Figley presiding.
0015 ROLL CALL.
Mayor Figley Present
Councilor Cox Present
Councilor Lonergan Present
Councilor McCallum Present
Councilor Pugh Present
Councilor Schmidt Present
Ward VI Council Position is Vacant
Staff Present: City Administrator Derickson, Asst. City Attorney Stuart, ,Public Works
Director Brown, Community Development Director Hendryx, Acting Police Chief
Blevins, Interim Finance Director Shearer, Community Services Director Row, HR
Assistant Sprauer, City Recorder Tennant
0050 APPOINTMENTS:
A) Economic Development Committee:
Mayor Figley appointed Horst Raustein to serve on the Economic Development
Committee who was suggested by Councilor Pugh.
PUGH/COX... approve the Mayor's appointment of Horst Raustien to the Economic
Development Committee.
The motion passed unanimously.
Councilor McCallum requested that future appointments include background information
on the appointees.
0143 PRESENTATION: URBAN RENEWAL.
Economic & Development Services Director Hendryx presented background information
on the urban renewal district within the city and explained the need to review the plan in
the near future. Urban renewal is a tool used by governments to improve poorly
performing areas and the city's plan was intended to revitalize the historic core of the
downtown area and present a positive image, create a safe environment, provide a place
for business to thrive, and to fund projects in the downtown area and along Highways
99E & 214. The plan focuses on infrastructure improvements, primarily street
improvements. The Downtown Development Plan created a vision and established broad
Page 1-Council Meeting Minutes, September 2812009
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2009
TAPE
READING
goals that were used as the basis for the Urban Renewal Plan. The Downtown
Development Plan calls for specific improvements and specifies the projects that are
incorporated in the Urban Renewal Plan. Urban renewal is financed through tax
increment financing, in which a portion of property tax revenues from properties within
the urban renewal district are designated to support financing for improvements to the
area. Tax increments are used to repay municipal bonds and the debts of the urban
renewal agency, and to fund projects in the urban renewal plan. New taxes are not
imposed to fund urban renewal, Woodburn's Downtown Urban Renewal Plan does not
authorize any special assessments, and urban renewal should not affect the total amount
of tax revenue received by the school district. The urban renewal district will last twenty
years and the tax increment financing will also remain in place for twenty years or until
the bonds are paid off. The plan does not propose that the City use its condemnation
power or require property owners to sell or modify their property. The Urban Renewal
Plan was developed in 1997 and approved in 2001 with Council designated as Urban
Renewal Agency Board. In total, $29 million was identified and authorized for public
improvements over the twenty years and was broken down by program; streets totaled
$10,026,073; undergrounding $3,128,657; redevelopment $5,040,000; fire $1,135,000;
other $1,504,500; and administration $2,270,000. Ultimately, the Urban Renewal
Agency must consider the Downtown Development Plan and modify the Urban Renewal
Plan accordingly. It is important to periodically review the projects and financing, and
prioritize funding.
Mayor Figley thanked Economic & Development Services Director Hendryx for his
presentation on the City's Urban Renewal Plan.
1192 PRESENTATION: ODOT -TIGER GRANT.
Public Works Director Brown introduced ~D~T Project Leader Allan Fox and
complimented him on all the work he did to obtain the Transportation Investment
Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) Grant. Allan Fox will be speaking on the status
of the Interchange project and the adjustments made to the Transit Facility Plan based on
the input received from the August 31S` joint City CouncillPlanning Commission
Workshop.
Mr. Fox first explained that HB 2100 was not referred to the voters since insufficient
signatures were obtained to place the item on the ballot. The bill allocated $43 million to
the Woodburn Interchange Project but was conditioned on two consecutive quarters of
economic growth or the year 2011, whichever comes first. The TIGER Grant also
changed the project's final objective from a preliminary to a full set of plans. The
application was for $30 million. Fourteen hundred applications were received nationwide
far a total of $57 billion. The Oregon Transportation Commission endorsed ten
applications and five or six other application were submitted by cities on their own. He
Page 2 -Council Meeting Minutes, September 282 009
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2009
TAPE
READING
stated that more than half of the applications were highway or bridge projects and Oregon
will be lucky to receive one. They will announce the grant recipients in January. Mr. Fox
mentioned that one piece of good news is that Federal Highways had already contacted
him regarding an inquiry on the grant application. He reminded Council and staff that the
chances of receiving the grant are slim, but not withstanding, the project team has put
much effort into the application.
Mr. Fox stated that some issues began to arise at the last meeting in regards to aesthetics
on the interchange and transit facility. He explained that he is recommending that certain
percentage of the $8 million that Woodburn is contributing be set aside for Woodburn's
aesthetic upgrades, with ODOT's technical approval. Mr, Fox stated that he is planning
to hold individual meetings over a one to three day period with a team of designers and
engineers from the interchange project and business owners affected by the I-5
interchange project, to bring them up to date on project and discuss access to their
property. He stated that he would report the results at a future briefing with Council and
would have a general public meeting to discuss a draft traffic control plan. The Public
Involvement Pian is currently posted on the Woodburn Interchange website. ODOT is
also currently working on the design and right of way acquisition.
City Administrator Derickson inquired whether the City could begin to procure financing
for the bond sale before the conditions of the legislation are met.
Mr. Fox explained that the City must meet both conditions of the legislation before
preparing for the bond sale.
Councilor McCallum inquired of the timeline for the individual meetings with business
owners and thanked Mr. Fox for meeting with them one-on-one. He also stated that on a
recent trip to Washington DC he was amazed at the support for this project that was given
by the State's senator offices, in particular, Congressman Kurt Schrader.
Mr. Fox stated that the individual meetings will be scheduled for late October or early
November. One of the primary selection criteria for the TIGER Grant is whether the
community is an economically distressed area as defined by the 1966 Public Works Act,
which Woodburn is. The other selection criteria is whether the project could be
completed by the end of 2012, which cannot be done. He explained in the application,
however, that the funds could be obligated by 2012. Mr. Fox stated that although he
worked on the project schedule, he is unable to say how much the project can be
accelerated since there are a number of major unknowns, such as the extent of
underground utilities.
Mr. Fox updated Council and staff on the transit facility. The transit facility is officially a
part of the I-5 project which he explained worked to ODOT's advantage in the TIGER
Grant application, since it is an innovative, multi-modal project. The scope of the transit
facility intersection has been expanded to include interim improvements to the Evergreen
Street intersection which will most likely delay the project several months. Mr. Fox
stated that a cooperative improvement agreerneni is currently on hold until storm water
Page 3 -Council Meeting Minutes, September 28, 2009
3
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2009
TAPE
READING
research is completed but should be ready for the City Administrator's approval soon.
The Broughton to Park Avenue project is ongoing and a meeting with the environmental
regulators is scheduled for November. The traffic model update on traffic projections for
Highway 214 to just east of the intersection has been completed, and the basic alignment
has been well set by the design speed and constraints.
Councilor Cox asked for clarification of a potential 4{f).
Mr. Fox explained that 4{ fl is an environmental permit category concerning parks and
public properties that would require a mini environmental impact statement.
Councilor Cox expressed his appreciation to Mr. Fox for his outstanding communication
to the Council and staff.
Mayor Figley thanked Mr. Fox on behalf of the Council.
3200 BUSINESS FROM THE PUBLIC.
Peppi Kosikowski, Harrison Street, Woodburn. Mrs. Kosikowski spoke in regards to the
opening of 5`~ Street. She stated that she and her neighbors feel the City has been
discussing the opening of the street without talking to the property owners along the
street, and provided letters and petitions to the Council for their review and consideration.
3430 CONSENT AGENDA.
A}approve the Council workshop minutes of August 31, 2009;
B}approve the Council minutes of September 14, 2009;
C) accept the reports on Claims for the months of June, July, and August 2009; and
D}approve Carl Myers, Bar #75273, to serve as Pro-Tem Judge for a period of two years.
SCHMIDTILONERGAN...adopttbe consent agenda as presented. The motion passed
unanimously.
34bb COUNCIL BILL N0.2801-RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE CLEAN WATER
STATE REVOLVING FUND LOAN AGREEMENT N0. R98414 WITH THE
STATE OF OREGON.
Councilor McCallum introduced Council Bill No. 2801. Recorder Tennant read the bill
by title only since there were no objections from the Council.
City Administrator Derickson explained that expanding the loan will allow the City to
take advantage of very low interest rates but will require the City to increase its rates
9.5% to 1 b% in July 2010 to handle the debt services associated with the loan.
Councilor Cox stated that the City entered into an agreement with the State in 2007. He
explained that if the City did not come into compliance with the Clean Water Act the
consequences would be a lot worse.
Page 4 -Council Meeting Minutes, September 28, 2009
4
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2009
TAPE
READING
City Administrator Derickson stated that the Clean Water Act is an unfunded mandate
that is enforced upon the city and recommended moving forward with this amendment to
stay in compliance, but reminded Council that there will be financial consequences down
the road.
On roll call vote for final passage, the bill passed unanimously. Mayor Figley declared
Council Bill No. 2801 duly passed.
3973 COUNCIL BILL N0.2802 -RESOLUTION ENTERING INTO AGREEMENT
__._
'WITH THE OREGON BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT FOR A FORGIVABLE
LOAN UNDER THE STATE REVOLVING FUND LOAN AND THE AMERICAN
_ --
RECOVERYAND REINVESTMENT ACT OF 2009 FOR WATER SYSTEM
CONSOLIDATION PROJECT lProiect No. SZ9{llll.
Council Bill No. 2802 was introduced by Councilor McCallum. The bill was read by title
only since there were no objections from the Council.
Councilor Cox stated that no cost would be incurred by the City if this project is followed
under guidelines, and the City complies with its obligations,
On roll call vote for final passage, the bill passed unanimously. Mayor Figley declared
Council Bill No. 2802 duly passed.
4l 95 PROFESSIONAL- SERVICES CONTRACT AWARD MURRY SMITH &
ASSOCIATES FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING OF THE
WATER CONSOLIDATION PROJECT.
LONERGAN/MCCALLUM... That the City Council, acting in its capacity as the City
Contract Review Board, award the professional services contract for design and
construction engineering of the Water Consolidation Project to firm Murray Smith &
Associates for a fee of $465,856.00.
The motion passed unanimously.
4220 COUNCIL UPDATE ON MIDGE FLY PRESENCE IN WATER SUPPLY
SYSTEM AND CONTINUATION OF DIALOG ON NEED FOR
w
CHLORINATION.
Public Works Director Brown updated Council on the recent midge fly incident which
has created public concern. The City has taken the position to be fully straightforward
with the public and acknowledge that there is a problem. Currently, Public Works has
been flushing approximately 40-50 million gallons of water each year to keep the
presence of the midge fly to a minimum, and the electrical cost to pump the water is well
over $17,000 a year plus staff time. It is a big effort to keep the presence of midge fly in
Page 5 -Council Meeting Minutes, September 28, 2009
5
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2009
TAPE
READING
the water system to a minimum. He explained that the city has a very good water
treatment system and when the water leaves the treatment plant, it is disinfected, pure,
and virus free. The issue arises when the water is distributed through 98 miles of water
mains that are in various levels of condition. The treatment has no residual capacity once
it leaves the plant. The long term solution to eradicate the midge flies is to eliminate the
bio-film within the piping system, which is the food source for the midge fly. He stated
that he is promoting chlorination primarily for public health issues and secondarily for the
midge fly issue. As of now, the city is under no regulatory requirement to chlorinate.
Mayor Figley expressed her appreciation for the information that has been shared.
Councilor McCallum expressed concerns over adding anything to the water and
questioned what is in the works with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA} and
Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ).
Public Works Director Brown stated that the quality of groundwater is not what it used to
be. The EPA is looking at the Groundwater Rule as an issue associated with the bacterial
and viral contamination of groundwater. The EPA's understanding is that not
chlorinating groundwater does not provide sufficient protection. Currently, the City
removes mineral contamination through potassium permanganate, a very powerful and
effective oxidizer that does a great job at disinfecting as it removes the mineral content
from the water. Only chlorine provides residual capacity in the system. The EPA does
warn, however, about the byproducts created through the chlorination process.
Councilor Pugh inquired of the cost to have a chlorination system installed.
Public Works Director Brown stated that it would cost an estimated $700,000 to modify
the city's current system to allow for the ionization process.
Councilor Pugh suggested that the decision to chlorinate go to the voters since it is such a
big issue that affects the entire city. He would like the voters to be provided complete
information, which would include the cost and what exactly would be done.
Councilor McCallum stated that the voters elected them to their position to make the
difficult decisions and it is Council's responsibility to get feedback from their
constituents.
Councilor Pugh agreed with Councilor McCallum but also feels that there is a time when
a decision is Large enough that it should be given a more total and complete address.
Councilor McCallum stated that Council makes difficult decisions on a regular basis.
Council Pugh stated that this issue has a personal aspect as well, which is one of the main
reasons that he is leaning strongly towards allowing the public to express their feelings.
Councilor Lonergan stated that he is leaning towards making a decision without a vote.
The Council was elected to make diff cult decisions and be leaders. He asked Public
Works Director Brown if there were available construction funds to cover the cost of this
project and its maintenance.
Public Works Director Brown stated that there are funds in the reserve and construction
fund that would cover both the cost and maintenance. Currently, the City is expending a
Page b -Council Meeting Minutes, September 28, 2009
6
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2009
TAPE
READING
Tape 2
tremendous amount of staff time performing maintenance that would be reduced through
the chlorination process. There are some significant cost advantages to chlorination that
would buffer the increase in cost.
Councilor McCallum inquired of the timeframe for installation.
Public Works Director Brown stated that it would take approximately six months to put a
contract in place and approximately three months for construction activity.
Councilor Lonergan asked if there was cone-time super cleanout that we could try.
Public Works Director Brown stated that if the City decided to chlorinate, it would have
to super chlorinate to flush the system to rid it of the bio•film.
Councilor Cox stated that his inclination is not to proceed with chlorination. He believes
it is a Council decision and the public voted them in office to do the research and study
the issues in detail. The voters have the right to do a referendum if they disagree with
Council's decision. He believes chlorination is unnecessary and the expenditure of
$750,000 has not been justified. The ongoing cost of operation is unknown. He
reminded the Council that when the new treatment plan went into effect there was an
outbreak of a-coll. The consensus was that the outbreak was caused by the contractor
getting foreign material into the lines in the process of constructing the new system.
Once the system was flushed and the system was sanitized the problem disappeared and
has not happened again. There have been two primary instances with the midge fly, and
although they are not a public health threat, they are something the City wants to get rid
of. However, chlorination may not be the best way to eradicate the midge fly. One article
that Councilor Cox shared explained that chlorination is an ineffective method to remove
the midge fly larvae unless copper sulfate is also added.
Councilor Cox stated that midge fly larvae is quite resistant to chlorine treatment and
chlorine only destroys the habitat that they survive in. He explained the Iifecycle of the
midge fly and hypothesized that the city's repeated infestations are not due to procreation
in the pipes but due to an outside source where the midge flies are entering in from. The
midge flies may be entering through our reservoirs and treatment system due to
ineffective screening. He feels that staff should look more closely for other sources that
would prevent the midge flies from entering the system. He also stated that chlorination
adds a chemical to the water that some people have serious sensitivities to. The EPA and
Oregon Health Department do not require chlorination and the City should only
chlorinate if and when it is required. The city has a great water system and chlorination
maybe unnecessary. It is an expense that will ultimately result as a function of the water
rates.
Councilor Schmidt stated that he would prefer not to chlorinate although he is not
opposed. From his experience replacing portions of waterline and observing the bio-film,
he questioned how drinkable the water was that passed through the pipes. He also stated
that people with a chlorine allergy can install a system at their home that can remove the
Page 7 -Council Meeting Minutes, September 28, 2009
7
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2009
TAPE
READING
chlorine from their water and reminded Council how easy it is for an aquifer to become
contaminated. Although he would prefer not to chlorinate, he sees a benefit and would
vote to chlorinate.
Ob72 Councilor Lonergan stated that water is something that we do not mess with and
questioned the reasoning behind the City's belief that it should not chlorinate. He
expressed concern over contamination and requested more information on why we are
one of the few cities to not require chlorination.
Public Works Director Brown stated that the City has not done everything that it can do
as a city of 23,000 people to protect its water system. Woodburn is a large community
that faces illegal taps and the system is very vulnerable. Chlorination is an effective
buffer to protect against the human event, such as a-coli which has been found in our
system and has been flushed out. Staff acknowledges that there was a design problem
with the system, and although it has been corrected, believes it to be the initial source of
the midge fly, In his professional opinion, the City does not have a source identified that
would be creating this problem and believes the initial infestation most likely took place
in 2005. He explained that the midge flies are in the water system all the time and when
the population expands, there is just a greater level of detection. Senior Estates is now
facing turbidity issues because of the flushing and the substances in the pipes. The
northwest section of the community seems to have been hit the worst because the area's
predominant service line is concrete lined and allows bio-f lm to build onto it.
Councilor Schmidt informed the Council that there may also be wooden water lines being
used throughout the city.
Councilor McCallum stated that safe water is paramount but he does have a number of
questions dealing with the design. He expressed concern over the possibility of
contamination, the midge fly, and the costs associated with chlorination.
Public Works Director Brown stated that he is not an expert on this issue, but the pros
and cons to chlorination are well published and can be found on the EPA's website. He
also stated that he is very confidant that if there is another a-toll event in Woodburn, the
Department of Human Services will mandate the City to chlorinate since the City is
already on notice.
Mayor Figley stated that in general she is against additives but had changed her mind
after the a-soli outbreak in 2005. Not having the chlorination system available limited the
City's options in rectifying the problem and at that time, the consensus of the Council
was to let the system work as designed. The system has been working as designed and is
having recurrent midge fly infestations and an outbreak of crustaceans. As designed, the
system is too big to function without some level of residual protection and she stated that
she is concerned about being derelict in public safety.
Public works Director Brown stated that receiving second and third opinions is very
important since it deals with public health and is also a monetary decision. He can
arrange to bring in experts to speak with Council on both sides of the issue.
Page 8 -Council Meeting Minutes, September 28, 2009
8
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2009
TAPE
READING
There was discussion amongst Councilor McCallum and Councilor Schmidt in regards to
the landfill just north of Woodburn and its contamination.
1767 City Administrator Derickson stated that he will work with Public Works Director Brown
to address the issues brought up at this meeting and develop more information so Council
can continue this dialog in the following months.
Councilor Pugh asked staff to keep in mind that this is a personal issue as well and some
individuals have serious sensitivities to chlorine.
Mayor Figley stated that chemical sensitivity is a serious matter as is exposing the public
toe-soli.
Public Works Director Brown stated that staff has looked very closely at the de-
chlorinationconcept and is not disregarding civic concern.
Councilor Cox stated that the potassium permanganate that the City currently uses to
remove iron is also an effective disinfectant. The risk of contamination arises after the
water leaves the treatment plant and an outside contaminant is allowed to enter the
system. There is an honest concern for public health.
2019 CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT.
A) City Administrator Derickson introduced Christina Shearer as Interim Finance Director.
B) Captain Blevins presented Councilor Cox with a Police Academy Certificate of
Completion.
C) League of Oregon Cities Conference: Administrator Derickson will be attending on
October 1- 3, 2009. The City has been nominated for the Good Governance Award.
Mayor Figley and Councilor McCallum will also be in attendance.
D) Assistant City Administrator Stevens will be attending an advanced Spanish class and
will not be at council meetings over the next couple of months.
E) Administrator Derickson invited the public to view the City's updated website.
2307 MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS.
Councilor McCallum reiterated the good job that Mayor Figley & City Administrator
Derickson did spreading the word to federal legislators on the interchange project.
Councilor Cox inquired of the costs associated with the Mexican Fiesta.
City Administrator Derickson stated that the Police Department is currently calculating
straight time.
Mayor Figley stated that the Oregon Peace Officers Association will be honoring several
members of the Woodburn Police Department at their annual banquet. Nick Wilson will
be receiving a metal of honor and life saving award, and John Mikkola, Craig
Halupowski, and Rick Puente will be receiving medals of honor. Chief Scott Russell and
Captain Tom Tennant will honored with purple hearts.
Page 9 -Council Meeting Minutes, September 2$, 2009
9
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
September 28, 2009
TAPE
LEADING
2540 ADJOURNMENT.
_____
MCCALLUM/PUGH...meeting be adjourned. The motion passed unanimously.
The meeting adjourned at 9:12 p.m..
APPROVED
KATHRYN FIGLEY, MAYOR
ATTEST
Mary Tennant, Recorder
City of `Noodbum, Oregon
Page 10 -Council Meeting Minutes, September 28, 2009
10
x~w`~~+~~. ~ Department of Economic & Development Services
~~~ ~-~~ Planning Division
~~~~~~ 270 Montgomery Street, Woodburn, Oregon 9?071 • (503) 9$2-5246 • (503) 982-5244
~~~
LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENT
City Council Staff Report
LA 2009-O1 Legislative amendment revising the following documents as recommended by the
Woodburn Downtown Development Plan Update:
• Comprehensive Plan Map and text
• Woodburn Development Ordinance
• Transportation Systems Plan.
SUMMARY
A public hearing is scheduled before the City Council to consider legislative amendments to revise the
Comprehensive Plan's map and text, the Woodburn Development Ordinance, and the Transportation
Systems Plan with the proposed recommendations found in the Woodburn Downtown Development
Plan Update.
Staff recommends that Council not hold the scheduled public hearing; instead refer the matter back to
the Planning Commission.
However, Council can choose to open and conduct the public hearing, going forward to approve,
modify, or reject the proposed amendments. Additionally, Council may provide other direction as they
determine necessary.
Council should be aware that the Downtown Development Plan Update was funded through a grant.
The City received a similar grant to complete the Highway 99E Corridor Study, which stipulates
completion of the Downtown Development Plan Update by the end of December 2009. Failure to take
action on the Plan will jeopardize the Highway 99E Corridor Study grant award.
BACKGROUND & RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 24, 2009 to consider amendments to the
Comprehensive Plan's map and text, Woodburn Development Ordinance, and the Transportation
Systems Plan as recommended in the Woodburn Downtown Development Plan Update. Concerns
raised by Commissioners and the public lead to the Planning Commission voting to recommend that the
City Council reject the plan.
It appears that a misunderstanding occurred regarding the amount of time available to work through the
issues raised at the hearing. Confusion existed that the draft Downtown Development Plan Update was
the final product to be approved or denied; as opposed to a draft proposal that could be modified. The
Commission stated it was their desire to work through the Downtown Development Plan Update, page
by page, so that all of the concerns can be identified and resolved with public and Planning
Commissioners' input. It is the goal to forward a revised Plan that has been fully deliberated, modified
and approved by the Planning Commission.
11
Grant Process and timeline
Under TGM program, Woodburn was required to complete the Downtown Development Plan Update
and its adoption within the State biennium ending in June 2009. The State extended the deadline to
November 2009. The hearings schedule reflected this deadline. The City was awarded (in July) a
similar TGM grant to complete the Highway 99E Corridor Study. The award stipulated that Woodburn
complete the Downtown Development Plan Update by the end of December 2009. Failure to take action
on the Plan will jeopardize the Highway 99E Corridor Study grant award.
Staff Recommends
• The City Council to return the drafted Downtown Development Plan Update to the Planning
Commission for review and modification to address issues and concerns raised at the initial
public hearing. It is understood that this process will take time to complete and could jeopardize
funding for the 99E Highway Corridor Project.
• The City Council to direct the Planning Commission to keep their scope of review to the specific
proposed changes associated with land use. If quality of life issues (such as public safety, etc)
arise through this process, the Commission can forward those items to the City Council via a
separate memorandum. Quality of life issues should not be included in the Downtown
Development Plan Update.
• In this effort staff will further community outreach, partner with Chemeketa Community College
to reach out to the Latino community, downtown business owners, broader community members,
and the Historic'Woodburn Neighborhood Association in revising the Downtown Development
Plan Update.
DOWNTOWN TOWN DEVELOPMENT PLAN UPDATE
(The City Council adopted a Downtown Development Plan in 1998. The 1998 Downtown Development
Plan recommended a limited number of actions to return vibrancy to the downtown area and enhance
opportunities for downtown businesses. The 1998 Downtown Development Plan had a limited scope,
due to financial restrictions. In 2001, to fund a broader and more integrated program of commercial and
residential revitalization, the City Council formed an Urban Renewal District centered on the downtown
area. In January 2007, the City of Woodburn received a grant from the Oregon Transportation and
Growth Management (TGM} Program to help fund an update of the 1998 Downtown Development Plan.
This Plan will update the 1998 Downtown Development Plan and expand it to include more properties
within the Downtown Urban Renewal District, including those along Young Street (Figure l ).
The proposed Woodburn Downtown Development Plan Update and corresponding amendments to the
Comprehensive Plan, Woodburn Development Ordinance, and the Transportation Systems Plan was
prepared by the consultant team Otak, Leland Consulting Group and Kittelson Associates.
Goals & Vision
The plan provides development concepts, transportation improvement projects, strategic business
planning, a housing strategy for attracting new residents to downtown, and an implementation plan. In
order to provide guidance, the plan established three fundamental goals:
• Enhance Old Town as a "Healthy Heart" for Downtown. Old Town will provide opportunities to
live, work, shop and play in a clean, safe and attractive environment.
• Create a "Complete Downtown" with new development in the Gateway Subarea. Encourage
new development east of Front Street that is complementary to the retail, housing and streetscape
environment of Old Town.
12
Sustain a successful business community. Combine public and private efforts to achieve a
balanced mix of uses that include shopping, entertainment, restaurants, professional and
government services and housing.
Project Area
The plan area was divided into five subareas (Figure 2) which allowed analysis of unique land use
characteristics, key attractions, transportation, and parking issues to be addressed through the planning
effort.
1. Old Town (Subarea A) -Old Town is bounded by Oak and Harrison Streets and by Front and
Second Streets. Old Town features an eclectic mix of development and architectural styles.
Current downtown businesses are small and most are Latino-owned and operated.
2. Gateway Distract Subarea B) -This subarea is bounded by the rail line on the west and Mill
Creek on the east. Existing land uses include Chemeketa Community College, a number of
industrial employers, and religious institutions.
3. South Front Street Corridor (Subarea C) -The subarea is a narrow corridor within the project
area, connecting downtown to South Settlemier Avenue.
4. North Front Street Corridor (Subarea D} -North Front Street is a similarly narrow corridor with
planned improvements to Front Street as the primary transportation improvement connecting Old
Town to Highway 214.
5. Young„Street Corridor (Subarea E) -The Young Street Corridor is bounded by Mill Creek on the
west and Highway 99E on the east. It is more diverse in terms of Land uses and includes
commercial, industrial, residential, institutionaUpublic, and religious uses. Land uses for the
corridor are primarily low density residential with low rations of improvement value to land
values. This corridor has significant potential for residential, commercial, and mixed-use
redevelopment, along transportation improvements liking Old Town to Highway 99E.
Proposed Amendments
As part of the Downtown Development Plan Update, amendments to the Comprehensive Plan,
Comprehensive Plan Map, Woodburn Development Ordinance, and Transportation Systems Plan are
proposed.
Comprehensive Plan policies were added and revisions were made to two existing zoning districts, the
Downtown Development and Conservation (DDC) and Commercial General (CG) districts. The
revisions to the DDC zone emphasize the historic character and pedestrian-oriented architecture. The
revisions allow more flexibility for housing choices and established a building height limit. The
revisions to the CG zone, establishes a Gateway Sub district. The sub district will allow mixed use
development with a substantial housing component. (Figure 3}The proposed revisions also establish a
lower height limit and restrict industrial type uses. The redevelopment of the Gateway Sub district will
extend the sense of downtown across the railroad tracks.
The Downtown Development Plan identifies and develops a number of transportation improvements to
better integrate these improvements with the current TSP.
• Portions of Grant Street, Hayes Street, Harrison Street, and ls` Street have been identified as
candidates for modification to one-way streets within the Old Town Street grid.
• Two street design cross section standards were developed for the Old Town Commercial street
grid.
• TSP amendments to the cross-section of Young Street from Mill Creek to Front Street.
The Plan
13
The Woodburn Downtown Development Plan Update contains the following sections:
• Executive Summary
• Introduction
• Development Concepts
• Transportation Improvements
• Strategic Business Development Plan
• Housing Strategy
• Implementation Plan
Oregon Revised Statutes 197 requires amendments to the Comprehensive Plan to conform to the
Statewide Goals and Guidelines, Comprehensive Plan, the applicable regulations in the Woodburn
Development Ordinance, and the. The following provides the required analysis.
RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA: Woodburn Development Ordinance § [WDO 4.1 OI.Ob.E][WDO
4.101.09.A.3JCity of Woodburn Comprehensive Plan §Review, Revision, and Update pg 11 and
Policy B-1.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. Type V Procedural Requirements. Type V decisions involve legislative actions where the City
Council enacts or amends the City's land use regulations, comprehensive plan, zoning maps or
some other component of any of these documents where changes are such a size, diversity of
ownership or interest as to be legislative in nature under state law. Included are large scale
annexations, and adopting or amending the comprehensive plan text or the WDO. The Planning
Commission holds an initial public hearing on the proposal prior to making a recommendation to
the City Council. The City Council then holds a final de novo public hearing and makes the City's
final decision. Public notice is provided for all public hearings (Section 4.101.09). The City
Council's decision is the City's final decision and is appealable to LUBA within 21 days after it
becomes final. [WDO 4.101.06.EJ
Findin s: As part of the Downtown Development Plan Update amendments to the Comprehensive
Plan, the Woodburn Development Ordinance and the Transportation Systems Plan are the
proposed requiring a Type V decision. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on
September 24, 2009 and considered evidence and testimony regarding the adoption of the
Woodburn Downtown Development Plan Update which require amendments to the Woodburn
Comprehensive Plan and Map, the Woodburn Transportation Systems Plan (TSP) and the
Woodburn Development Ordinance zoning regulations of the DDC and CG zones located in
subject area. The City Council is scheduled to hold a final public hearing to consider the
recommendation of the Planning Commission and testimony regarding the identified text
amendments on October 12, 2009. A measure Sb notice was sent to all affected property owners
on September 2, 2009. Notice of the public hearing was published in the Woodburn Independent
newspaper on September 12 and September 16, 2009.
2. Type V Notification Requirements. At least 20 days before an initial evidentiary public hearing at
which a Type V decision is to be considered, the Director shall issue a public notice that conforms
to the requirements of this subsection and any applicable state statute. Notice shall be sent to
affected governmental entities, special districts, providers of urban services, the Oregon
Department of Transportation and any affected recognized neighborhood associations and any
party who has requested in writing such notice. [WDO 4.101.09.A.3]
Findin s: Measure Sb notices were sent to all affected property owners on September 2, 2009.
Notification of the public hearing and legislative amendment was published in the Woodburn
Independent Newspaper on September 12 and September 16, 2009.
14
Notification of the legislative amendment was provided to the Oregon Department of Land
Conservation and Development (DECD} on August 27, 2009.
All notification contained information regarding the time, date, and location of the pubic hearings,
the file number, the staff contact for questions or submission of testimony. All notification also
included a summary of the proposed text amendments. All notification documents provided
information regarding the public hearing procedures and how to review or obtain copies of the
documents to be considered. Notif cation requirements consistent with the provisions of the
Woodburn Development Ordinance and statutory requirements were met for this legislative
amendment to the Woodburn Development Ordinance.
3. Initiation of a Legislative Proposal: Type V Actions initiated by the Council shall be referred to
the Planning Commission for a public hearing and recommendation to the Council. The City
Council shall hold the final public hearing on a proposed legislative decision. [WDO 4.101.17)
Findings: The City Council accepted a grant from the State under the Transportation and Growth
Program in 2007. Acceptance of the grant initiated consideration of the Downtown Plan Update.
4. Comprehensive Plan Policy Consistency -Review, Revision and Update
A. Compliance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan;
Findin s: The Comprehensive Plan requires that any change it makes in the Plan is
consistent with other goals and policies established in the Plan. The proposed additions are
consistent are with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
Citizen Involvement Policies and Goals jComprehensive Goal BI~These goals and
policies state that the City of Woodburn seek to encourage citizen input at all phases
of the land use planning process and that Woodburn shall coordinate with affected
state agencies regarding proposed comprehensive plan and land use regulation
amendments. Participants helped identify the best qualities of Downtown and an
overall vision for the next 20 years. Open houses where conducted on January 21 and
June 3, 2009. Participants in the community workshops were asked to help identify
what they liked best about downtown and to suggest key design and development
themes. Stakeholder interviews were conducted with key business owners, property
owners, civic groups, and appointed/elected officials. The interviews affirmed the
same positive downtown features that were identified by the public. A stakeholder's
working group (SWG) was formed which met multiple times with the consultant team
to help set the right themes and long-term vision for downtown. The SWG provided
on-going review and input for the plan. A joint workshop was held on August 31,
2009 with the City Council and Planning Commission.
At the joint workshop the Historic Woodburn Neighborhood Association presented an
alternative downtown redevelopment plan which focused on two top priorities: less
crime and more clean up and preservation of authentic historic buildings. The goals of
the Downtown Development Plan Update and the alternative plan contain similar
goats of improving downtown Woodburn.
Notification of the open houses and workshop were sent to all property owners within
the notification area (Figure 4). Additional notification was sent to property owners
250 feet from the notification area. Notification and a copy of the text amendments
were provided to the DECD, consistent with this policy as documented in the record.
15
Residential Land Development and Housing Policies and Goals [Comprehensive Goal
D]_The proposed Downtown Development Plan recognizes that housing is an
integral component of a complete downtown. Increasing the supply of housing in
Downtown Woodburn, including both for sale and rental housing as well as market
rate and affordable projects will contribute to the overall health and vitality of
Downtown Woodburn. This strategy is consistent with this comprehensive planning
goal of the City to ensure that adequate housing for sectors of the community is
provided.
Commercial Land Development and Employment Policies and Goals jComprehensive
Goal F -The proposed addition ofPolicy F-1.10 establishes the Downtown Gateway
sub-district which supports Goal F-I by encouraging infill and redevelopment of
existing commercial areas within the community. Policy F• 1.5 states "It would be of
benefit to the entire City to have Woodburn's Downtown Design and Conservation
District an active, healthy commercial area. Policy F-1.8 states as a policy "Ensure
that existing commercial sites are used efficiently. Consider the potential for
redevelopment of existing commercial sites and modifications to zoning regulations
tha# intensify development to attract new investment. The proposed Gateway sub-
districtwill allow for mixed-use redevelopment. A broader range of housing choice
and higher densities can be integrated with new employment or commercial uses.
Transportation Goals and Policies [Comprehensive Goal H] -The goals and policies
within this section were amended as part of the 2005 Periodic Review package to be
consistent with the 2005 TSP. The purpose of the TSP is to guide the management and
development of appropriate transportation facilities in'Woodburn, incorporating the
community's vision, while remaining consistent with state, regional, and local plans.
The Downtown Development Plan Update includes a framework plan for
transportation improvements that focuses on pedestrian and bicycle circulation
improvements, parking improvements for Old Town and streetscape enhancement
concepts for three of the planning sub-districts. The Plan recommends converting
portions of Grant, Hayes, and Harrison Streets to one-way streets. The plan also
develops alternative cross section standards for the Old Town commercial streets and
for Young Street from Mill Creek to Front Street.
The proposed amendments were evaluated by the Public Works Department
(Attachment C), staff recommends that the TSP is amended adding the proposed street
cross sections but not making them street specific. The proposed street section would
add to the City's menu of transportation, providing flexibility in how streets are
constructed throughout the City. Particularly in the downtown where there are
narrower streets.
Downtown Design Policies and Goals [Comprehensive Goal Kl -The vision
statement was established in 1997 by downtown business and property owners, the
Downtown Woodburn Association and interested citizens. The proposed additions of
Goal K-7 and K-8 and the corresponding policies are consistent with the vision
statement established in the Comprehensive Plan. Proposed K-7.1 is included to allow
multi-family residential development in the downtown area. This aims to enliven the
downtown which is consistent with the vision statement established in the
16 6
Comprehensive Plan. Vision statement 6 in the Downtown Design element describes
Downtown as part of the City's oldest neighborhood. Businesses, government and
employment uses are linked to residential neighborhoods, educational facilities,
recreation opportunities and good transportation services. The proposed Goal K-8 and
its corresponding policies aim to preserve the historic character of downtown. The
proposal recommends development standards and guidelines to the DDC district that
enhance street environment by providing building and streetscape designs. The update
of the Downtown Development Plan meets Policy K-1.2 (g} requirement that the plan
is updated every 5 years.
B. Compliance with the various elements of the Comprehensive Plan;
Findin s: The proposed additions are also in compliance with various elements of the
Comprehensive Plan elements relating to enhancing the quality of life that are discussed
under citizen involvement, residential land, commercial land, transportation and downtown
design.
C. Compliance with Statewide Goals and guidelines;
Findin s: There are 19 state land use goals that have been adopted by the state legislature.
The applicable statewide planning goals are Goals 1, 2, 8,10 and 12. The remaining goals
are not applicable to update of the Downtown Development Plan and proposed additions to
the Comprehensive Plan.
Goal 1-Citizen Involvement: To develop a citizen involvement program that insures
the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process.
Findin :The project was guided by a project team, made up of the consultant team
and City Staff. Community outreach has been a key element of the planning process.
Participants helped identify the best qualities of downtown and an overall vision for
the next 20 years. Open houses where conducted on January 21 and June 3, 2009.
Stakeholder interviews were conducted with key business owners, property owners,
civic groups, and appointed/electedofficials. A stakeholder's working group was
formed which met multiple times with the consultant team to help set the right themes
and long-term vision for downtown. A joint workshop was held on August 31, 2009
with the City Council and Planning Commission. Notice of the open house and joint
workshop were sent to all property owners within the notification area (Figure 4).
Additional notification was sent to property owners 250 feet from the notification area.
Measure Sb notices were sent to all affected property owners on September 2, 2009.
Notif cation of the public hearing and legislative amendment was published in the
Woodburn Independent Newspaper on September 12 and September 16, 2009. The
draft Downtown Plan and corresponding amendments are located on the city's
website. These amendments are consistent with this goal
At the joint workshop the Historic Woodburn Neighborhood Association presented an
alternative downtown redevelopment plan which focused on two top priorities: less
crime and more clean up and preservation of authentic historic buildings.
Goal 2 -Land Use Planning: To establish a land use planning process and policy
framework as a basis for all decision and actions related to use of land and to assure an
adequate factual base far such decisions and actions.
17
Finding The City of Woodburn received a TGM grant to update the Woodburn
Downtown Development plan. The TGM program is a joint program of the Oregon
Department of Transportation (ODOT) and the Department of Land Conservation and
Development (DCLD) an as such the proposal has to meet the goals. The Woodburn
Downtown Development Plan Update and proposed amendments are consistent with
this goal.
Goal 9 -Economic Development: To provide adequate opportunities throughout the
state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of
Oregon's citizens.
Findings The proposed Goal K-7 is intended to enliven downtown through the
development of housing. The corresponding policy encourages housing in the
downtown area as an opportunity to promote greater activity in downtown and to
support the local business owners.
Goal 10 -- Ho,~: To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state.
Fin_Fin_ dingy: The proposed additions to the Comprehensive Plan allows for additional
housing to be built in the Downtown Area and the adjacent CG zoning district. The
establishment of the Downtown Gateway sub-district allows multi-family residential
development in an area that provides more consumers within an area of commercial
development. The proposed amendments allow for a variety of housing types in the
downtown area. Providing housing opportunities is consistent with this goal.
Goa112 -Transportation: To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic
transportation system.
Findin :The update to the Downtown Development Plan proposes amendments to the
Transportation Systems Plan (TSP) to better integrate and focus long-range planning
for Woodburn's downtown.
D. That there is a public need for the change;
Findin s: There is a significant public need for the update to the Woodburn Downtown
Development Plan. The Comprehensive Plan requires that the plan be updated every 5 years. The
last plan was prepared in 1998. This update is built on the previous visions from the 1998 Plan but
it refines some of the goals. New opportunities are identified and more detailed concepts and
implementation strategies have been provided.
E. That this land best suites that public need; and
Findings: The Comprehensive Plan sets as a vision statement that the Downtown is the center of
community life and that the Downtown is a place where a diverse community comes together to
work, shop, and play. The update to the Downtown Development Plan and the proposed additions
to the Comprehensive Plan is an opportunity to better serve the area.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
The Planning Commission and City Council received considerable public input at the joint
workshop. Among those quality of life issues raised during the workshop were crime reduction,
cleanup and preservation, traffic, noise, and problem rental properties. The Historic Woodburn
Neighborhood Association presented an alternative plan during the joint workshop. Extensive
18
input was directed towards quality of life issues. While some issues raised are associated with
Comprehensive Plan policies andlor land use standards (historic preservation, design standards),
others (crime, noise} are not typically associated with Plan or text amendments. Staff agrees that
most of these issues are best addressed separately and outside the land use process, such as using
Police programs to address crime for example. The Community Development Department's
response to some of the specific issues raised by the Historic Downtown Association is as follows:
1. Hei t Limits: The draft Downtown Development Plan Update and WDO amendments propose
a maximum building height. Currently there is no restriction on height in the DDC zone. (WDO
2.107.OS.B). In the existing CG zone, the maximum height of buildings shall not exceed 70 feet.
The draft Downtown Development Plan Update proposes a maximum height of SO feet or four
stories, whichever is less, in the Downtown Gateway sub-district.
2. Cleanup & Preservation: The WDO establishes specific design standards for the downtown and
the adjacent Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD). These existing standards
guide redevelopment within the area. Amendments outlined in the Downtown Development
Plan Update further historic preservation through the establishment of specific guidelines for
Downtown Development and Conservation District (DDC). Current guidelines are limited and
do not establish minimum design standards intended towards preserving the downtown character.
The Plan does not address "cleaning•up"downtown since it is not relevant to the Comprehensive
Plan or Woodburn Development Ordinance.
3. Traffic Issues: The Downtown Development Plan Update does not recommend any land use
decisions that would significantly increase downtown traffic beyond what the capacity of the
existing system can handle. The strategy for addressing the traff c needs of downtown is to
disperse traffic and enhance the efficiency in which the existing transportation moves traffic.
The emphasis within the Plan to make the downtown area more friendly for alternative means of
transportation, such as pedestrian, bicycle, and transit reduce vehicle trips and provide calming
tendencies for vehicular traffic that does flow through the area.
The concept of using one-way streets to provide diagonal parking and dedicated bicycle routes
was identified as a method for increasing the number of downtown parking spaces (typically a
20% increase in parking stalls) and easing the effort for on-street parking. Contrary to the
position taken by the Historic Neighborhood Plan, studies have shown one-way streets do not
increase traffic speeds and actually provide a traffic calming affect.
It is important to know that the Plan suggests projects that may enhance the downtown area and
should be considered within the City's capital improvement program. Any specific street
improvement project included in the City's capital improvement program would include a
focused public involvement process. It is during this public involvement process that design
alternatives are evaluated and the best project specific alternative is selected.
There is a difference of opinion between the Downtown Development Plan Update and the
Historic Neighborhood Plan with regard to traffic and its impact on the community. Not all
traffic congestion is bad. There is not a healthy downtown area on earth that does not experience
traffic congestion. Traffic congestion is an indicator that people desire to be downtown to shop,
eat, and live. Significant increases in traffic passing through the adjoining neighborhood should
be avoided by dispersing the traffic through alternate routes and the promotion of other modes of
transportation.
19
4. Problem Rental Properties: The Downtown Development Plan Update does not specifically
address problem rental properties since it is not relevant to the Comprehensive Plan or
Woodburn Development Ordinance. This issue was recently addressed by the City Council's
passage in 2008 of a rental Housing Ordinance (see attached materials}.
5. Land Use Restrictions: The draft Downtown Development Plan Update discourages
incompatible Light Industrial and Manufacturing activities in the Plan area. Existing business,
which become `non-conforming" through adoption of the Plan recommendations are allowed to
continue to operate, however expansion to those businesses are prohibited. Likewise, should a
"non-conforming" business close operation beyond b months or should they be destroyed by fire,
they would be required to relocate to an area zoned accordingly. The proposed amendments
allow businesses to continue to operate until they relocate.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment "A" Comprehensive Plan -Proposed Text Amendments
Attachment "B" Woodburn Development Ordinance -Proposed Text Amendments
Attachment "C" Public Works Director Comments to the proposed TSP amendments
Attachment "D" Historic Woodburn Neighborhood Association's -The Old Settlemier District Plan
(Distributed to the City Council in August 2009)
Exhibit "A" Woodburn Downtown Development Plan Update (Distributed to the Planning
Commission in August 2009)
Figure "I" Downtown Plan Area
Figure "Z" Downtown Plan Subareas
Figure " 3" Zoning Designations -Downtown Development Plan Update
Figure "4" NotificationArea -Downtown Development Plan Update
10
20
Ci of Woodburn ~~ ~~~M~ ~N~'
Downtown Development Plan Update s(:."~'`~ '~'''~'~~''
Downtown Plan Subareas
- Crock ®Woodbucn Downtown Plan Subareas Figure 1
\'L~tland .1 Old Town
I~N1 l''~~ar I~I~xxlrlain B Gateway District ~~
C ticxrth Fmnt Street Corridor ~ ~
Potential Gateway Treatments D North Front Street Corridor ;
~ I~'M~M'
E young Street Corridcar ~,sw~..a~
t~a:,.w~c~~
I:ut.M.r d:.b.x:+trr
4
Ciry of Woodburn
21
tiG ~ TaR MAYANNADR GOaSECAEEK
S~~r ~ ~
oQ:. ~...._.... ....._ ............... ..._......... z .._. _ ....,. ~ ~~
a
0 tib ~ ~ ~ oeti
~} ~ ~, a ~ „~~ Gal
C EG D+VR Fyy- iC ~ c«+M
_. S91 ~ d w '
- 1,91 R 4, Q l"
0 aY ~
~1
k~
~ w.
cc.. a+
u.
w
N
a s F
,~ ~reenr+e
a
a w ~ tis ~y Rsr ~ F~ ~
Gnu
Srxa ~ ~,~ G~
sr ? ~ ., y~ •.
~ ~ z W LINCOLN ST
~ w o ,V,,
"i
s`
r" KOTKAST
_.
~'
}
N h
U!
g d
ti ,~
W '~.
~ y ~ LinG~
~ x ~ ti~
! GJ
T ..~' ~
I Nom.
U
w ~vES sr
-+ ,
~',~b `Sdnd
_ ~ , ~ ti
r' h '~
~ y'' M
~~ R~S~ .
.
~ c
~ N ,,
~ ,
~
(EL ,
~ o
DST p~sry„ ti f~, r ~ ~Q Sl.tukt
''`~- ~ fir '~~ ~s t~
~ ~
r
~
o s SANTIS ~
NrNrrrr.•rw•rrr.r ~ ,1 ~ ~j•~
t A ~~4H
~
-~
! }.
e) ~ m
~ •' Q'
~H ; ~',
~4,p -~t~ c~
f~
W
O
a
~
,~ r
1 ,'
,/
? ~ c ~„~,,
1iRS schod ~ *~
M r ~, ~ " ~`'`
o ~ s r+o+~
ror ,1 ~
4 ~;;,; ~~
~~7wrps 3" r
~ a ~,.,;~:,~ s
' / ~r t' ,'~ bra 'I4 ~tS '~
~ J
'~ Y ~ / ° ~
3 ~ ~ ~'
,`~."
;,: ,,A b-
y .,~;.
,~, ____._ _ -- Q d' r
..._.
'1~ ~- ... .. W
.. .. _. ..
? .'~ W
i F ~
~ ` vJ
t ~~ ra ~
RYE ST ~, ~p p R~
_....._.. 8tb A'S
,, ~"lro c
9ARLEY ST ~ h
s $r
OATS ST W
k
WHEAT ST q yti
~_.----- Z p ~1
l,egcnd Q [,1Nma llhaa Ceti 11owiM'
~~a y~~en nrcc pq PaaPa~ IhWn (M~m~h {Mw~1'
,,,.. ,.r Fru+r~f
.w»lbzr*oyNn1)v'u~hrr..MyorAtla~ ~ Fr~Wakslkpat"xM
,,... (\ryf.itMin '~C~' 14~a (p9M~ lliriWa
~.-- Iladn'rl ~pym7i~xkAt 1r4 Mar prtt~MklahMeP q.?I.1
. ~ecw6 ~xeAcd 5-~46.1'Id D~
ilflai~lr'MUq~u,nvrr~.aAaddKr_~_ '"
_.,..,_ Scrod
:'
,, .
~•
~.....:.
J
i
I /'~,
ti
0 ~ ;'
h J
"~fi'° ~~ (~~ x w
~~ 0 ti. \ .~ ~°°a
;,~ i ~/ ~
"",~ s ov
,. ~ A 4 ~ ~G ST
~~ Cl _ .*~, ~..
~ ~ ~
`~tAgk Um~ ., F~•q ~`~ ~
sr r ~t , ~,_., HD
p Tf y ' `•,'~ 4 sr
gY,yF ~'`., h 4a' ~.
sr i ~ ~..,t U
A ,.tip;, ~
~" t~
< ,~,
f ~ ~~
ahST y ~ ~ ~
.'.,t' Q
q ,., rC
GjA' W ~ +Z
~ z 3 ~' r
ti
~ F~ f
ALEXANDRA
?FFLER AV
1RbCAST
~~
~7
N
Q YYIILIAMSAV ~
a ~
~ 4~
man- ~, NCOLN ST ?'
~ ~
a
m AIGKINLEY ST
Nf~ •------._..... _...__...__...-...... y
kaNM
~......_._.~ ..._.. ~BU1NE ST
. g ~:'~y
~ ~' ; ~
z.~'~
HN ~ 4
~ as soN sT
a FISCDSr ~.
W W W '!~
J V
~~:~
Q y ~dSp
a ~ '~
~'`~: s m
~~ T ~ _ -~e. sr
~rJ
Fj
MKt>n^
YaAi
Careci~
F~a1h
,~° ' .
~:' y4
~'°
~ 0~'
it .~ 2~ y
>~ • h~
~~
~,'E.
,~ sr c~
4~p ~~ kP
~,st . i~
• ,• ,
~~~ tlf~ P
''
M t ~
,, ,.
o r ~
`~ '~ r
'~ a °~sr
,~;.a .w.. , 1
_ FIGURE
~ wrt
,.
1'' ~~ `~ PISP _-~.~-, ' ~ MN..~ y Y. ~ ~, ...
~ iC7. • M
u,
s
~ +` T ~rf w , `Z+~, .~
1 PISP. ~~0' ~ - `' ~ r ~~
a ~...,..
~.. ~ i ~$" `~ . `~~ ~~ ~~~ f a ~, 1 PISP
.'
. ' 3'~ ; ~ h r ~ ~ r...r, ,',,~,
} , ,~
. ~ `v
i
y r!" .. .
r r ! ~a~ ~l•\Q/1 ~ ! • iA i
•-• !t +~'
`~ . , • ~ ~'~~ hj1/jt ,PISP
;,
SRS;, ~.,r. ,. ~ '' ..~,~ .. .:..~„~, .
ri~ j:~:"ir4-r. ~ 4 ,i
J - .~ ,a . ., ,,• ,
,~. ~. .
City of Woodburn - Dowatowa Development P[aa Update Zoning Districts
_~
'"'"' City Limits ~_.__j RS • Single Family Residental
-..._...' Streams ~~%/~ RSN -Nodal Single Family Residental
:r..:. , .,..
'''"~''~ Railroad ~`~~`'~"`'~~' R15 -Retirement Community Single Family Residential
"'^" Downtown Project Area - RM -Medium Density Residential
~"'~' Gateway Area Boundary - RMI~' -Nodal Medium Density Residental
Gateway Subdistrict ~ CO - Commercial Office
~~~~~~~ - CG -Commerical General
~,_„_,i FEMA l00 year Flood Plain
r.,...
~~~~ ~ ~~ ~'~~'~ Significant Wetlands Overlay District DDC -Downtown Development and Conservation
Other Wetlands ~ IP -Industrial Park
k ~ n ~ L
.... ~ w X64 !.*:.
i;_~ Riparian Corridor & Wetlands Overlay District (RCWOD) ~"~~:~'~s ~- ~~ tL -Light Industrial
s
~~ Assessor T'axlots ~ PISP -Public and Semi-Public o zsa sco t.aao
_._.....
... .
. ,Feet
Disclaimer: This map is a ynphic rcpesen~uion, wing tie most turt+eM infortrulion a-ailable. Howe-•er, ~~ should nor tx ours+~ acwr~e r~r scaling. Public Works [kpartment - Engineerinb DivisionlG IS
23
v.., ,
h;~' ~ ~:; ,~, ,_ .. PISP ~~
., l ''~ ' ;~ ~,
.1 _ '•
., ~ : ~ ,,,.~.: , . ::: .. co
~~ .,~~ :,.~ •. IL
•~.
y. ! !r .~t
T!•; ri.s V o
- ., •y'; .
- PISP r ~ •,:
,.. ~ , ~ .:.,c .. . .
0
'. ~ . , _..
,
{ ~ '~ ~ P P
{ !S
RS ~ ~ ~: - `~. PISP
.,
' ~~, _ _
.~; ~:
y'r~ RS ~ .
't.: .,F~ r' -...... -...rte' i1.' ' .. ~ ' .•~ i' ,.
RS ... w,. yet V' ~ •{.•..:
.. fit„ ~:~~ ~ f !•/.•Y' ~~,f~. ~/•;. '
.. _ .... s ~it ~ : ~ 1 r ~ ,.k t:.a
- ; -~ .y . ._~ . : r... RS .
t ~ ~~~
R~ ~ .. , ;~.,. ~ . •• .
.~
PISP
r • 'e ~.~~; 'y' 'f' ~
. R
., o , -.., - .. R
.~ ~ ;.,
b:d ~ ~ ~f:':a. 1U -
`;~,,,~1. ,., ~~
.. .1 . • • .. (,1 .. ~ t L~,
~1~ .::t:; ~ .~~a..
~C T ~I
- ~ ~ ~~~ PISP
t~ ,, .. ,~. .. ...
. ,~
- •~ ~ . ~ R
f ~,
PISP .-~a~'
:•~~ _ _ . _ ; :. RM
... ~ ~ - , . .., L y
_ ~ -, : ti.
'}f•~ •~: ~ ~ •~ i of Woodburn
p ~. ~;'. ~ - Cty
IS ~~
:~ ~ .. ~ ~~
%~' ~. - - Downtown Develo ment Plan
P ~ ~ p
~~ r '•'~t; • Notificati n A a Ma
. R •~ ' t. .r ,. 6
~ Le end
r :~ ~ 0
r • •~•.
.,*• •~..
. ti . V RS -.' City Limits
;, • ~t ~ ',, ~ C `ti';` ~~ - _~. streams x' t:
f l
j ~ ~., ~ s
,• .. '1: y ~-GtgeWa At~a Bounday
y ...,
"4 ; ' • .. Q WIi Notilication Area
f ,... ~~ -~ RS - ,
• "' CG~ :30 QUP Notitiretiuo Area
. .. r. 1 a
RS 'l' C
l; ;... ~ ., OCutra~t LrbanGroNth Boumfary
• ~ f ¢ ; .Pro ed Urbaa Gmuth HuuuJary
t Quw-~ ~
+ ' ~ • ` , ~ Assessor Ta, lots
.. ~ ~,
:'
_ a~~ ~ . , U ?30 46G 920fres
• ~. _r~ RS
-. .. - lkxlrwar 1'lut uup u a gru~lua tgnxwatwwi, uaiy;
. Yk uratl aurta,a iufwutwu ar~pk. Wiwarar, N ilwwMl
. .. ••, w~llkuwarlatul aarac C,~ k~i~.
... IL .
,__.., .~,..::: `., . Public Wnrls Ik atuuCttl
' - u~ n r rt Engit~nng UivisioNGIS
_ f' ~ ure 4 ~~ ~w~ U.dc: s • ,~dk, tr. ~tLL~,
~l~~gl~- • Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
F. Commercial Land Development and Employment
Goal
F-1. Encourage infip and redevelopment of existing commercial areas
within the community, as well as nodal neighborhood centers, to
meet future commercial development needs.
F- l . i The City should at all times have sufficient land to accommodate the
retail needs of the City and the surrounding market area while
encouraging commercial infill and redevelopment. The City presently
has five major commercial areas: 99E, 1-5 Interchange, the downtown
area, the Parr Road Nodal Commercial area, and the 2141211199E four
corners intersection area. No new areas should be established.
F-1.2 Lands for high traffic generating uses shopping centers, malls,
restaurants, etc.) should be located on well improved arterials. The uses
should provide the necessary traffic control devices needed to ameliorate
their impact on the arterial streets.
F-1.3 Strip zoning should be discouraged as a most unproductive form of
commercial land development. Strip zoning is characterized by the use
of small parcels of less than one acre, with lot depths of less than 150
feet and parcels containing multiple driveway access points. Whenever
possible, the City should encourage or require commercial developments
which are designed to allow pedestrians to shop without relying on the
private automobile to go from shop to shop. Therefore, acreage site lots
should be encouraged to develop "mall type" developments that allow a
one stop and shop opportunity. Commercial developments or
commercial development patterns that require the use of the private
automobile shall be discouraged.
F-1.4 Architectural design of commercial areas should be attractive with a
spacious feeling and enough landscaping to reduce the visual impact of
large expanses of asphalt parking areas. Nodal commercial areas should
be neighborhood and pedestrian oriented, with parking to the rear or side
of commercial buildings, and with pedestrian connections to neighboring
residential areas.
F-1.5 It would be of benefit to the entire City to have Woodburn's Downtown
Design and Conservation District an active, healthy commercial area.
•I-
2~ ATTACHMENT A
~xe~gi}- -Deleted Text Section
BotdliJndertine -Proposed Text Change
Downtown redevelopment should be emphasized and the City should
encourage property owners to form a local improvement district to help
finance downtown improvements. Urban renewal funds may also be
used to fund planned improvements.
F-1.b Commercial office and other Iow traffic generating commercial retail
uses can be located on collectors ar in close proximity to residential
areas if care in architecture and site planning is exercised. The City
should ensure by proper regulations that any commercial uses located
close to residential areas have the proper architectural and landscaping
buffer zones.
F-1.7 The Downtown Goals and Policies are included in Section K of the Plan
and are intended as general guidelines to help the City and its residents
reshape the downtown into a vital part of the community. Generally,
development goals are broken into four categories, short-term goals,
intermediate term goals, long-term goals, and continual goals.
Whenever development is proposed within the CBD these goals should
be reviewed and applied as necessary so as to maintain balance and
uniformity over time. Although not part of the Downtown Plan or
Woodburn Comprehensive Plan, Urban Renewal funding can help to
realize the goals and policies embodied in these land use plans.
F-1.8 Ensure that existing commercial sites are used efficiently. Consider the
potential for redevelopment of existing commercial sites and
modifications to zoning regulations that intensify development to amact
new investment.
F-1.9 Adopt a new NNC (Nodal Neighborhood Commercial} District, to be
applied in two Nodal Development Overlays:
(a} Near the intersection of Parr Road and the Evergreen Road extension
(approximately 1 o acres); and
(b) At the north boundary of the UG$ along Boones Ferry Road, north
of the Mill Creek tributary (2-S acres).
F-1.10 The Downtown Gateway sub-district of the CG zonin¢ district is an
area which extends eastward from Hi hway 99E towards downtown.
Special use provisions within the sub-district shall allow multi-family
residential development either as a stand-alone use or as part of a
vertical miJCed use project. The intent of allowin¢ multi-family
residential develo went in this area is to provide more consumers
twin within an area of commercial development and to provide 24-
hour a day life into the eastern entrance to the downtown.
-2-
26
S~~a~gh- -Deleted Text Section
BoldlUnderli~ae -Proposed Text Change
K. Downtown Design
Vision Statements
During 199?, City officials, downtown business and property owners, Downtown
Woodburn Association and interested citizens developed vision statements for the
character and future revitalization of the Downtown. These vision statements
shall be recognized by the City as the overall expression of the Downtown's
future.
1. IMAGE OF DOWNTOWN: Downtown projects a positive image, one of
progress and prosperity. Downtown improvements have been visible and
well publicized. Downtown's image consists of a combination of
elements -physical appearance, and a look, and feel that it is thriving,
safe, and vital.
2. SAFETY: Downtown is a safe, secure place for customers, employees,
and the general public. Safety and security are assured by volunteer
efforts, and by physical improvements such as lighting which provides a
sense of security.
3. SOCIAL: Downtown is a place where a diverse community comes
together to work, shop, and play. It is a mirror of the community, the
community's "living room". All persons in the community feel welcome,
and a part of, their downtown.
4, BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT: Downtown is a thriving environment for a
variety of businesses. The area contains a good mix of types of
businesses, a good overall marketing program is in place, and businesses
provide friendly, reliable customer service and convenient hours of
operation. Individual businesses are clean, attractive and present a good
physical appearance.
5. ATTRACTORS: Downtown is the center of community life, and serves
as a focus to define the community's historic and cultural heritage. A
community market brings all of the City's diverse communities together
every week. Downtown's architecture, the aquatic center and unique
businesses serve as a regional attractor. In addition, downtown offers
events and opportunities that draw people together to mingle, learn, and
enjoy.
6. NEIGHBORHOOD: Downtown is a part of the City's oldest
neighborhood. Businesses, government and employment uses are linked
to residential neighborhoods, educational facilities, recreation
opportunities and good transportation services. Throughout this central
neighborhood, both renovation and new development respect the history
and traditions of the community.
-3-
27
S~ic~et~eagh- -Deleted Text Section
Botd/Underline -Proposed Text Change
~. TRANSPORTATION: Downtown is easily accessible via the local street
system, public transportation, and other alternate modes of transportation.
Special transportation facilities improve circulation patterns within the
downtown, and provide links between downtown and key events and
places.
S. PARKING: while it is not appropriate to provide downtown parking at
the same level as found in shopping centers, good utilization and
management of the existing supply of downtown parking has been
accomplished.
9. IMPLEMENTATION: Implementing the vision for downtown has
involved both private and public investments. Investments are made in the
managemeni structure for downtown, and in capital improvements to
improve the physical elements of downtown. Planning for these
investments, and examining options to pay for them is an on-going process
involving the City, Woodburn Downtown Association, property and
business owners.
•4-
28
S~i~etl~eag~- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
Short Term Goals and Policies
K-1. Rehabilitation and Financing of the Downtown Development
Conservation District (DDCD}
fit s
K- l . l Because of the decline in both business and industry downtown, many
buildings have been abandoned and stand in a state of serious disrepair.
It is important in the short term that these undesirable, unsafe structures
be condemned and demolished if repair and maintenance is not practical,
Many buildings have been altered without regard to their surroundings,
succumbing to short-term fads, leaving the buildings quickly looking out
of date and incongruent. It is recommended that a system for removing
selective building elements, cleaning, maintaining, painting, and adding
selective elements be initiated.
K-1.2 Encourage a balanced financing plan to assist property owners in the
repair and rehabilitation of structures. The Plan may include
establishment of the following:
(a) Support and encourage an effective urban renewal district.
(b) Provide on-going investments in downtown improvements.
(c) Economic Improvement District - a designated area, within which all
properties are taxed at a set rate applied to the value of the property
with the tax monies used in a revolving loan fund for building
maintenance, and improvement.
(d} Local, State, & National Historic District - a designated district
within which resources, and properties are inventoried and identified
for historic preservation.
(e) Establish a "SOl C-3n tax exempt organization for the purpose of
qualifying for grants.
(fl Adopt a Downtown Development Plan and funding strategy for
Downtown improvements. Capital improvements shall be designed
and constructed to be in harmony with the concepts portrayed in the
Woodburn Downtown Development Plan,1997.
-S-
29
Fet#~eagh- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
fig) Update the Downtown Development Plan at least every five years,
and involve the Woodburn Downtown Association, property and
business owners in the update process.
Goal
___._
K-2. Improve Citizen Involvement in the DDCD.
Poi ' s
K-2.1 Maintain and support the organization of a downtown business watch
group, where property owners can assist police in eliminating
undesirable, illegal behavior in the DDCD.
K-2.2 Business owners should encourage the involvement and education of
their employees in downtown activities.
K-2.3 The City shall oversee all development and ensure general conformance
with this document.
Goal
K-3. Improve Open Space Within the DDCD,
li i s
K-3.1 Introduce new plant materials to the Downtown Design and
Conservation District, including: ground cover; shrubs; and trees. A
program to introduce new plant materials would enhance the appearance
of the entire downtown. Partacipation on the part of both the City and the
downtown merchants will be needed to see these projects through to a
reasonable conclusion.
K-3.2 Design a set of uniform sign graphics for the DDCD. Using control in
developing street graphics provides balance and facilitates easy, pleasant
communication between people and their environment. Points of
consideration would include: Area of sign, placement, symbols used,
extent of illumination, colors, etc.
K-3.3 Construct a central downtown plaza or square to serve as a public
meeting place and center for cultural activities.
-6-
30
~i{~e##~e~g~i- -Deleted Text Section
Botd/Underline -Proposed Text Change
Infermediate Term Goals and Policies
K•4, Improve Pattern of Circulation Within the DDCD.
Polio s
K-4.1 Evaluate alternative circulation patterns for traffic flow. Patterns of
pedestrian circulation improved through the repair and/or replacement of
sidewalks. A means of providing a sense of place within the downtown
accomplished by replacing damaged sections of sidewalk with a
decorative brick like pattern of surfacing. Pedestrian safety increased by
carrying this surfacing pattern across the streets at each intersection
thereby creating a different color and texture over which the automobiles
travel.
K-4.2 Improve vehicular and safety access into and out of Downtown by
improving North and South Front Streets.
K-4.3 Curb ramps should be encouraged at aII intersections. improved
wheelchair facilities throughout the CBD will provide access to a more
diverse cross section of the City's population.
K-4.4 Efforts should continue to evaluate the feasibility of bicycle paths
linking the CBD with City schools and parks.
K•5. Improve Utilifies and Landscaping within the DDCD.
P liti s
K-S.1 Plans for capital improvement should include a schedule for replacement
of overhead power and telephone lines with underground utilities.
K-~.2 Without an adequate system of underground irrigation within the
DDCD, plans for landscaping not be as successful. The City will include
in its Capital Improvement Programs plans to improve underground
irrigation systems along streets and at intersections throughout the
DDCD.
K-5.3 Street lighting can be both ornamental and useful in making the
cluwntow~i safe and attractive. Coopcration from both private and public
interests can result in a street lighting plan that both serves a utility and
attracts people to shop in and enjoy the downtown.
.~_
31
icet#~engh- -Deleted Text Section
BoldlUnderline -Proposed Text Change
K-5.4 Because of the costs involved in utility and landscaping improvements
and the need to maintain genera! uniformity in designing improvements
such as landscaping and street lighting, the Woodburn Urban Renewal
Agency in cooperation with the City should develop a schedule for
improvement that phases development.
Long Range and Continuous Goals
K-6. Attract Business to the DDCD.
Pol`
K-6.1 To succeed, the DDCD should function in four ways:
(a} As a center for small cottage industry, where goods are produced on
a small scale far sale on both a local retail and a regional wholesale
level;
(b) As a neighborhood shopping center with retail stores, restaurants,
o#~ces and services;
(c) As a City-wide hub with government and public buildings, arts and
entertainment centers; and
(d) As a regional and statewide center that celebrates cultural diversity
and offers opportunities for education and tourism.
K-6.2 Complete alley improvements and implement Urban Renewal Plan.
Goal
K•7 Ealiven the downtown through encouraging the development of
housing in the downtown.
Policies
._____
K•7.1 In order to promote greater activity in downtown and to support the
businesses that are located there, the DDC district will allow for
muIti•family residential develo meet in the downtown are, a_, either
freestanding or as part of a vertical mixed•use, dev_eIo ),~ment_ In
addition, attached single-family dwellings shall be permitted at a net
density of 12 to 16 dwelling units per acre.
_.~
Goal
___.
K•8 In order to protect the historic character of the downtown area and
to_pr_o_m_ote, sto,,,_ refront retail and service development, site and
building design standards andd ~uuidel_, ines_reflective of downtown
-8-
32
S~r~e~- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
Woodburn's most vigorous period (1880-1950) shall guide new
development within the downtown area.
Policies
-~--
K-8.1 The development standards and guidelines for the DDC district
shall also encourage an enhanced street environment by providing
building and streetscape designs of interest to pedestrians, such as
locating buildings close to the street with parking areas behind or
next to the building, limiting blank walls adiacent to the street, and
requiring views into active areas of retail spaces.
K-8.2 1'he DDC district development standards shall include a maximum
height restriction of 40-feet or three stories -whichever is less,
consistent with the long-term pattern of development in downtown
Woodburn.
K-8,3 Building heights of two stories or greater are encouraged in the
DDC district.
Neighborhood Conservation Gverlay District Goals and
Policies
Goal
K_9 Preserve, to the greatest extent practical, the architectural integrity
of Woodburn's "older" (1890-1940) neighborhoods.
Policies
KK 91 Identify residential neighborhoods that contain dwellings built between
1890-1940, which represents that period of time the DDCD was
developing.
K,,, -9.2 Encourage those areas that
neighborhoods (1890-1940)
conservation overlay district,
are determined to be the City's older
to implement the neighborhood
K_ Seek funding sources to assist homeowners in rehabilitation efforts that
implement overlay conservation districts standards.
.g.
33
S~rre~k- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Und~cline -Proposed Text Change
Summary of Zoning Revisions
zoning revisions are proposed for the DDC Downtown Development and Conservation zone and
the CG Commercial General Zone. For the CG zone a new Gateway Subdistrict was created, The
subdistrict wilt allow mixed use development with a substantial housing component Over time, the
new zoning may gradually phase out those light industrial and manufacturing uses that typically
would be incompatible with mixed use development. The redevelopment of the Gateway Subdistrict
will extend the sense of downtown across the railroad tracks.
CG -Gateway Subdistrict
New Uses Encouraged and Allowed
Housing types that include multi-family, duplexes and single-family attached.
Management and corporate offices,
Uses Discouraged and Not Allowed
Incompatible light industrial and manufacturing uses such as metal product fabrication and furniture
manufacturing, land extensive uses such as outdoor storage lots and land extensive uses for long-
term outdoor parking for non-customer uses such as bus facilities and R~' lots.
Additional Key Eiemenu
• Building height limit of 50 feet or four stories.
DDC Zoning District
Revisions to the DDC zone emphasized historic character and pedestrian-oriented architecture. The
revisions allow more flexibility for housing choices and establish a building height limit. The
revisions will guide the design of buildings constructed in the DDC zoning district to ensure that,
through appropriate use of arcades, windows, building orientation, and architectural details, new
structures and alterations of existing structures are physically and visually compatible with other
buildings within the downtown business district.
New Uses Encouraged and Allowed
Multi-family and single-family attached housing, management and corporate offices.
Architectural Design Standards and Guidelines Updates
The purpose of these updates is to guide the design of buildings constructed in the DDC zoning
district to ensure that, through appropriate use of arcades, windows, building orientation, and
architectural details, new structures and alterations of existing structures are physically and visually
compatible with other buildings within the downtown business district.
`1"34
ATTACHME(VT B
-Deleted Text Section
~-Proposed Text Change
Key Elements
• Building height limit of 4U feet or thxee stozies.
• Development standards and guidelines to preserve the historic character and scale of 41d Town.
Zoning Revisions
The draft zoning updates show suggested n~wladded text as underlined and suggested text to be
removed as strikethrough {~l~eh},
2.101.02 Zoning Districts
The City of Woodburn shall be divided into the following zoning districts:
A. Residential Single Family (RS).
B. Retirement Community Single Family Residential (RtS}.
C. Medium Density Residential (RM).
D. Commercial General ~CG}.
E. Downtown Development and Conservation ~DDC}.
F. Nodal Neighborhood Commercial (NNC)
G. Industrial Park (IP}.
H. Light Industrial (IL).
I. Public and Semi-Public ~/SP}.
J. Neighborhood Conservation C-verlay District (NCOD).
K. Riparian Corridor and Wetlands Gverlay District (RCWOD)
L. Southwest Industrial Reserve District (SWIR}
M. Nodal Districts
1. Nodal Single Family Residential {RSN)
2. Nodal Multi-Family Residential (RMN)
-2-35
~~~- -Deleted Text Section
~i Underline -- Proposed Text Change
2.106 Commercial General (CG)
Commercial districts are centers of business and civic life. The General Commercial District
regulations apply to those cornrnercial areas outside ox adjacent to the central business area. The
General Commercial district is intended to:
A. Promote efficient us, e,~nd a~~l urban services:
B. Accommodate automobile-oryented and automobile-dependent uses:
C. Us_ ~aroariate design standar~.s to wide the a ve~ance and function ~~y of ale loa~ment
str~;
D. Provide for visitor a~commodati4ns and services;
E. Create a mixture of land uses that encourag~~emoiov~men,.,=n~ hou ,g oDtlons in close
broximi to o_,ne an_ other;
F. Provide connections to and a~,~Qr Priate transitions betw~ een residential areas and commercial
areas:
G. Allow and encour~e residential development in the Downtown Gateway su ' trict as a
com lei use to commercial uses dis____m'ct_and~d,~a~ent Downtown area:
H. Restrict land exten,~ive co e,_ rcial, stozage and industrial uses in the Downtown Gatewa____7v.~u_b
'strict,
2.106.01 Permitted Uses
The following uses, when developed under the applicable development standards of the
WDO, are permitted in the CG zone.
A. Residential (allowed either in conjunction with a pezmitted use or as a stand alone use.)
1. One dwelling unit in conjunction with a commercial use.
2. Multialer famil~,dwelling~,~r~ntal or condominium) orq,~gct at a net density of between 1~ nd
32 dwelling units Per aCre~e permitted in the Downtown Gateway su -strict. ulti~le-
f dw llin are ub' t e e i s a th r d l m
of Section 2.104 unless tie mu1~'alc-fan~ilv_dwellir~s are built as Dart of a vertical mixed use
d ve ment.
3. Multiale-fami ly dwe ' ire, ntal r condo~ nc,; r~'um~ built as ~a tr of a ve~~ cal mixed use
development at a m,
ximum
~
ne
t density of 32 dwelling units aer acre are aermit ed in the
Downtown G • ~
`
,
•
atewa sT'~ ct. Mu1tiPl~ ~ntily dwellings lri a vertical mixed use
-3-36
~k~~l~- • Deleted Text Section
Bold/ nder~e -Proposed Text Change
n v
the CG district.
4. le-f en i f 1 4 w
permitted in the Down~pwp~,~~w~y sub-district
B. Special Trade Contractors. In the Gatewan sub-district the folly ~n~ ,~~e~ err ~ ~W~~, when
1 '
e a w '
Luc- h a re~tric
1. Plumbing, heating and air-conditioning contractors. (235110)
2. Paper and wall roving contractors. (235210)
3. Masonry, drywall, insulation and tile. (2354}
4. Floor laying contractors. (235520}
5. Roofing, siding, and sheet metal construction contractors (235610) entirely within a building.
6. Glass and glazing contractors. (235920}
7. Building equipment and other machinery installation contractors. (235950}
$. Ornamental ironwork contracting. (235990)
C. Fabricated metal products manufacturing e. xcep,~~eGat~~,ub-dis
1. Fabricated metal product manufacturing (332) entirely within a building.
D. Furniture and Related Products Manufacturing, exce ~i v
1. Household and institutional furniture and kitchen cabinet manufacturing (33?1} entirely
within a building.
E. Retail Trade
1. Automotive parts (44131) without installation.
2. Furniture and home furnishings. (442)
3. Electronics and appliance stores. (443)
4. Building materials and garden equipment and supplies. (444} with all outdoor storage and
display enclosed by a 7' masonry wall. No outdoor storage is allowed in the Gateway sub-
district.
5. Food and beverage stores. (445)
-4- 37
S~rilfetl3ra~gh- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
6. Health and personal caxe stores. (446)
7. Clothing and accessory stores. (44$}
8. Sporting goods, hobby, book and music stoxes. (451}
9. General merchandise stores. (452)
10. Misc. retail (453) EXCEPT used merchandise stores (4533), other than antique shops, and
EXCEPT manufactured (mobile) home dealers. (45393}
F. Transportation & VOarehousing
1. Postal service. (491}
G. Information
1. Publishing. (511}
2. Motion picture theaters (512131} EXCEPT drive-ins.
3. Radio and TV. (5131)
4. Cable networks. (5132}
5. Telecommunications. (5133} EXCEPT telecommunication facilities subject to Section
2.204.03.
6. Information and data processing. (514}
[Section 2.106.01.H as amended by Ordinance No. 2423, §7, effective on July 28, 2007.]
H. Finance and Insurance
1. Finance and insurance (52) EXCEPT pawn shops (522298) and check cashing, pay day loan
and cash transfer establishments [other than banks] as a predominant, ancillary, or requixed
supporting use. [Section 2.106.01.H.1 as amended by Ordinance No. 23$3, §16, passed
March 16, 2005.]
[Section 2.106.O1.I.2 and 2.106.01.I.3 as amended by Ordinance No. 2423, §4, effective
on July 28, 2007.)
I. Real Estate and Rental and Leasing
1. Real estate. (531)
2. Video tape and disc rental. (532230)
3. General rental centers (532310) with all outdoor storage and display on a paved surface.
'5'38
S~k+e~rre~gl~- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Uade line -Proposed Text Change
J. Professional, Scientific & Technical Services
1. Legal services. (5411)
2. Accounting. (5412}
3. Architects and engineers. (5413)
4. Speaalized design services. (5414)
5. Computer system design. (5415)
6. Management consulting. (541 G}
7. Advertising. (5418)
8. Other professional services (5419) EXCEPT veterinary service contained entirely within a
building. (541940)
K. Administrative & Support Services
1. Adrrunistrative and support services (5G1) INCLUDING employment, travel and
investigation.
2. Management and corporate4f~f,~es j5511
L. Educational Service
1. Business schools. (G114)
2. Technical and trade schools. (6115}
M. Health Care and Social Services
1. Ambulatory health services (621) EXCEPT ambulance service. (62191)
2. Social assistance (G24) INCLUDING child day care services.
N. Arts, Entertainment and Recreation
1. Performing arts and spectator sports. (111}
2. Museums and historic sites (712} EXCEPT zoos. (712130}
3. Fitness and recreational sports. (11391)
4. Bowlinng centers. (71395}
5. Other amusements INCLUDING ballrooms. (713990)
-G-39
S~~gh- -Deleted Text Section
Bo1dlUnde~line -Proposed Text Change
0. Accommodation & Food Service
1. Hotels (EXCEPT casino hotels) and motels. (12111)
2. Bed-and-breakfast inns. (721191)
3. Food service and drinking places (722) EXCEPT mobile food service.
P. Othex Services
1. Electronic and precision equipment repair. (8112}
2. Electric motor repair entirely within a building.
3. Reupholsterq and furniture repair. (81142)
4. Leather repair. (81143)
S. Personal care services (8121) INCLUDING barber shops and beauty salons.
6. Funeral homes. (812210}
7. Dry cleaning and laundxy service (8123) EXCEPT linen supply.(81233)
$. Photo finishing. (81292}
9. Parking lots and garages (81293} EXCEPT extended vehicle storage.(4939190)
10. All other personal services (812990) INCLUDING bail bonding and consumer buying
services.
11. Religious, civic and social organizations. (813)
Q. Public Administration
1. Public administration. (92)
R. Streets & Utilities
1. Rights of way and easements and the improvements therein for stxeers, water, sanitary sewer,
gas, oil, electric and communication lines and for storm water facilities and for pump
stations.
2,106.02 Special Permitted Uses
The following uses, when developed under the applicable development standards of the WDO
including the special development standards of Section 2.2Q3, are permitted in the CG zone.
'7'40
-Deleted Text Section
Bald/tl'nsl._exlin~-Proposed Text Change
A. Agricultural practices without livestock,~xcent in the Gatewav sub-di-strict. subject to Section
2.2o3.a2.
B. Complementary residential uses subject to Section 2.203.06.
C. Delivery services subject to Section 2.203.08.
D. Faalities during construction subject to Section 2.203.10.
E. Temporary outdoor marketing and special events subject to Sectioa 2.203.19.
2.106.03 Condit~ona~ Uses
The following uses may be permitted in the CG zone subject to the applicable development
standards of the WDD and the conditions of conditional use approval:
A. Retail Trade
1. Motor vehicle and parts dealers (44I) EXCEPT automotive parts without installation.
Z. Tractor and heavy equipment dealers, except in the Gateway~ub-district.
3. Gasoline stations. (447}
4. Used merchandise stores, other than antique shops. (4533)
5. Manufactured (mobile} home dealers,-~~c_ept in the Gateway sub-district. (453930)
B. B. Transportation & Warehousing
1. Urban transit system. (48511}
2. Interurban and rural transit" (4852)
3. Taxi service. (48531)
4. Lunousine service, except in the Gatewav sub -district. (4853)
5. School transportation, except in the G=av~, sub-district. (4854)
6. Charter bus service, except in the Gatewav su b-district. (4859}
7. Special needs transportation~,excent in the G ateway sub-district. (485991)
8. Motor vehicle towing, exopnt ~n the Gateway ~ub-district. (48841}
9. Self and mini-storage. except in the Gateway sub-district.
-8-41
5~~~- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
C. Finance and Insurance
1. Pawn shops. (52229$}
2. Check cashing, pay day loans and cash transfer establishments, other than banks.
D. Professional, Scientific and Technical Services
1. Saentific research and development. (541 ~
2. Veterinary service. (541940)
E. Health Care and Social Services
1. Ambulance service. (62191}
F. Accommodations and Food Service
1. Recreational vehicle parks,~excent~ a Ga. tew_a~r sub-district. (7212)
G. Other Services
1. Automotive maintenance. (8111}
2. Commercial and industrial equipment repair exce t~th_~Gatewav sub-district.. (8113)
3. Home goods repair EXCEPT upholstery (81142} and leather repair (81143). (8114}
4. Linen supply. (81233}
H. Government and public utility buildings and structures EXCEPT uses permitted in Section
2.106.01 and telecommunications facilities subject to Section 2.204.03.
2.10b.04 Accessory Uses
The following uses are permitted as accessory uses subject to Sections 2.202 and 2.203.
A. Fence or free standing wall.
2.106.05 Dimensional Standards
The following dimensional standards shall be the minimum requirements for all development in the
CG zone.
A. Lot Standards.
-~-42
S~l~et~rra~~s- - Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
Lots in a CG zone shall comply with the applicable standards of Table 2.1.10.
TABLE 2. I.10 Lot Standards for Uses in a CG Zone
In a CG zone the Iot~area for a non-residential use shall be adequate to contain all structures within
the required setbacks. There shall be no minimum width or depth.
B. Building Height.
The maximum height of buildings shall not exceed 70 feet; and 50 feet or four ~ wlu= er
~, less,_ owntown Gateway subdistrict. EXCEPT chimneys, spires, domes, flag poles and
other features not used for human habitation EXCEPT telecommunication facilities), shall not
exceed 100 feet.
C. Setback and Buffer Improvement Standards.
1. Minimum Front Setback and Setback Abutting a Street [Section 2.106.OS.C.1 as amended by
Ordinance No. 2446, §11, passed on September 10, 2008.]:
a. Dimensions:
1} The minimum setback abutting a street shall be 15 feet plus any Special Setback,
Section 3.103.05.
[Section 2.106.05.C.1.a.2 repealed by Ordinance No. 2383, `17, passed March 16, 2005.E
b. Off Street Parking and Maneuvering.
1) Off street parking and storage shall be prohibited within a required yard or special
setback EXCEPT for parking and storage adjacent to a wall. [Section
2.106.05.C.1.b.1 as amended by Ordinance No. 2383, X18, passed March 16, 2005.]
2) The distance between the sidewalk on a public street and a loading dock shall be
sized to preclude vehicles using the dock from projecting over the sidewalk.
c. Clear Vision Area: Fences, walls, landscaping and signs shall be subject to clear vision
area standards, Section 3.103.10.
d. Vehicular Access: Permitted in conformance with Section 3.104.
2. Minimum Interior Side and Rear Setbacks [Section 2.106.05.C.2 as amended by Ordinance
No. 2446, §11, passed on September 10, 200$.]:
a. Development in a CG zone shall be subject to the setback and buffer requirements of
Table 2.1.11.
-10 -43
~ilfet~re~gl!- -Deleted Text Section
1~1d/Underline -Proposed Text Change
TABLE 2.1.1 I Interior Yard and Buffer Standards for CG Zones
Abutting Property Landscaping VYall Interior Setback
RS, R1S, or RM zone There is no buffer yard Solid brick or 10 ft.
landscaping architectural
requirement for an wall with anti-graffiti
interior yard abutting a surface, no less than 6
buffer wall. feet or
greater than 7 feet in
height.
CO, CG, DDC, There is no buffer yard Alternative A: Alternative A:
NNC, P/SP, IP, landscaping
S1~IR or IL zone requirement for Wall requirements shall 5 ft.
an interior yard be
abutting a buffer wall. determined in
conjunction
with the applicable
Design
Review process.
Alternative B: Alternative B:
No wall required. Zero setback abutting
a building wall.
(Table 2.1.11 as amended by Ordinance 2391, §3, acknowledged on December 22, 2006.E
3. All primary buildings and structures, EXCEPT those described in Section 2.106.OS.C.1, shall
be subject to the architectural guideliaes of Section 3.101.06.
D. Signs.
Signs shall be subject to Section 3.110. [Section 2.106.ObD as amended by Ordinance No. 2359,
§7, passed March 22, 2004.)
E. Landscaping and Sidewall~s.
1. The street frontage of a subject property shall be improved with either property line
sidewalks. The minimum building setback from a private access easement shall be 5 feet.
Z. Off street parking, Maneuvering and Storage: Off street parking and storage shall be
prohibited within a required setback EXCEPT for parking and storage adjacent to a wall.
(Section 2.106.OS.C.2.c as amended by Ordinance No. 2383, §19, passed March 16, 2005.]
3. Clear Vision Area; Fences, walls, landscaping and signs shall be subject to clear vision area
standards, Section 3.103.10.
-11-44
~l~ren~k- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
4. Vehicular Access: Permitted in conformance with Woodburn Access Management
Ordinance and Section 3.104.
2.106.06 Development Standards
All development in the CG zone shall comply with the applicable provisions of the WDO. The
following standards specifically apply to uses in the CG zone.
A. Off Street Parking.
Off street parking shall be subject to the standards of Section 2.106.05 and Sectioa 3.105.
B. Setbacks and Lots, Generally.
Setbacks and Tots shall be subject to Section 3.103.
C. Architectural Design Guidelines.
1. Multiple density residential buildings shall be subject to the design standards or guidelines of
Section 3.107.05.
2. All primary buildings and structures, EXCEPT those described in Section 2.106.05.C.1, shall
be sub ject to the architectural guidelines of Section 3.107.06.
D. Signs.
Signs shall be subject to Section 3. i 10. [Section 2.106.06D as amended by Ordinance No. 2359,
§7, passed March 22, 2004.E
E. Landscaping and Sidewallis.
1. The street frontage of a subject property shall be improved with either property line
sidewalks and street trees or curb line sidewalks. The improvement shall be determined at
the time of subdivision, PUD or design review as applicable. Sidewalks and trees shall be
installed by the property owner to the standards of Section 3.101 and 3.106.
2. The subject property shall be landscaped to the standards of Section 3.106.
3. Common refuse collection facilities shall be screened on all sides by an architectural block
wall and solid gate, both with an anti-graffiti surface, a minimum of six feet and a maximum
of seven feet in height.
F. Property Disposition.
All uses shall be established and conducted on lots of record, as defined by Section 1.102 and
developed to the public facility and access standards of Sections 3.101, 3.102 and 3.104.
12 45
S~ce~ra~gk- -Deleted Text Section
Bold., /Under, line-Proposed Text Change
1. New lots of record shall be subject to the following standards and procedures:
a. Partitions, Section 3.108;
b. Subdivisions, Section 3.108; or
c. Planned Unit Development Section 3.109.
2. Alteration of the property lines of existing lots of record shall be subject to the applicable
following standards and procedures:
a. Property Line Adjustment, Section 5.101.07.
b. Replatting, Section 3.108.
c. Vacation, applicable Oregon Revised Statutes.
2.107 Downtown Development and Conservation (DDC)
The Downtown Development and Conservation District regulations apply to the central business
area The district is intended as Woo bum's center of vital retail activit; .services. entertainment.
~~~,cin~ mixed use civic buildings and uublic sflaces The historic character of the~dow_ntov~toget er
vvt'th its_pedestrian oriented architecture, Teets a nun blic sp,,~s, define the district.
A. The Downtown Development a~ Conservation District is intended t4
B. Promote efficient use of land and urban services;
C. Create a mixture of land uses that encourages em lovment and housing nations in close
pro ~ lty to,_, One n,Q,
D. Provide formal and informs communit~Qathering places and opportunities for socialization (i e ,
along an active street front):
E. Fncoura-ge~~gdes 'an-oriented development:
F, ~ ~ 'stinct storefront character in the Downtown Development and Conservation District;
G. Provide connections to and spurn ria.te transitions between nearb~.residential areas a,_
wnt
H. i~~lem_ ent desi standards and guideline th t maintain and enhance e Citv's historic
'tec ure.
2.107.01 Permitted Uses
The following uses, when developed under the applicable development standards of the
WDO, are permitted in the DDC zone.
-13 -46
S~e~- -Deleted Text Section
~~ld,,,(Und._erline --Proposed Text Change
A. Residential
1. One dwelling unit in conjunction with a commercial use.
2. Mula le-family dwellings above Around floor corramercial uses or other ne~nitted uses.
3. Diu. tiple fanuly dwelling units+ INCLUDING auartment how
4. ~ Attached sin le-f ' y dwellings at a net d nsit~of 12 to 1 G dwelling_un~ts oc,~ cre.
B. Retail Trade
1. Bakeries. (31181}
2. Printing and related support activities (323}
3. Furniture and home furnishing stores {442) INCLUDING:
a. Floor coverings and installation stores. (44221)
b. Window treatment and installation stores. {442291}
c. Used furniture stores. (45331}
4. Electronics and appliance stores and repair {44310) INCLUDING:
a. Camera shops. {44313}
b. Radio and TAT stores. (443112}
c. Sewing machines stores. (443111}
5. Building material and garden equipment dealers {4441}LIMITED
T0:
a. Paint, wallpaper, and interior decorating stores. (444120)
b. Hardware stores. {44413)
c. Light fixture stores. (444190}
G. Garden supply store. {44422}
7. Food and beverage stores LIMITED T0:
a. Delicatessen stores.
b. Meat markets. (44521)
c. Fish markets LIMITED TO sales only. (44522}
8. Other specialty stores (44529} LIMITED T0:
a. Candy, nut, confectionery stores.1445292)
-14 - 47
8~k~~r -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
b. Dairy products stores LIMITED TO sales only. (44529)
9. Health and personal care stores LIMITED T0:
a. Drug stores. (44611)
b. Optical goods stores. (44613}
c. Health food stores. (446191)
d. Hearing aid stores. (446199)
10. Clothing and clothing accessories (448) LIMITED T0:
a. Clothing stores. (44810)
b. Dressmaker and tailor shops.
c. Fumers and fur shops. (44819)
d. Jewelry, watch, and clock stores. (44815 &44831}
e. Shoe stores. (44823)
f. Luggage stores. (44832}
11. Sporting goods stores (445111} INCLUDING:
a. Bicycle shops. (445111}
b. Gunsmiths and repair. (45111)
12. Hobby, toy, and game stores (45112) LIMITED T0:
a. Hobby shops. (45112)
b. Toy stores. (45112)
13. Sewing, needlework and piece goods stores. (45113)
14. Music, piano, and musical instrument stores. (45114}
15. Record and CD stores. {45122}
16. Book stores. (4523)
17. Department stores. (45211)
18.Other general merchandise stores (4529) INCLUDING variety stores. {45299)
19. Miscellaneous store retailers. {453)
a. Antique shops.
b. Artists supply stores. {453998)
c. Business machines, typewriters and repair. {453210)
d. Florist shops. (45311)
-15 48
Se~k~~re- -Deleted Text Section
bald/Underline -Proposed Text Change
e. Gift, novelty, souvenir shops. (45322)
f. Greeting card stores. (45322)
g. Mail order house. (45411)
h. Orthopedic and artificial limb stores.
i. Pet stores. (45391)
j. Stationery stares. (45321}
k. Used merchandise stores. (45331)
C. Transportation & Warehousing
1. Support Activities for Rail Transportation (488210)
2. Postal service. (491)
D. Information
1. Newspaper, periodical, and book publishing. (5111)
2. And T'tr studios and offices (5131) EXCEPT antennae and towers.
3. Cable networks. (5132)
4. Telecommunications (5133} EXCEPT telecommunication facilities subject to Section
2.204.03.
5. Information & data processing. (514)
E. Finance and Insurance
1, Finance and insurance (52} EXCEPT check cashing, pay day loan and cash transfer
establishments [other than banks] as a predominant, ancillary, or required supporting use.
F. Real Estate and Rental and Leasing
1. Real estate. (531)
2. Rental & leasing, without outdoor display or storage. (532)
G. Professional, Scientific & Technical Services
1. Legal services. (5411}
2. Accounting. (5412)
3. Architects and engineers. (5413}
4. Specialized design services (5414} INCLUDING interior design services.
5. Computer system design. (5415)
6. Management consulting. (5416)
7. Advertising. (5418)
8. Other professional services (5419), EXCEPT veterinary service (541940} not contained in a
building.
H. Administrative & Support Services
1. Administrative and facilities support services. {5611 and 5612)
-16.49
8~~~g1~ -Deleted Text Section
Bold/U~derli~e -Proposed Text Change
2. Employment services. (5613)
3. Business support services INCLUDING copy shops. (5614)
4. Travel and tour agenaes. (5615)
5. Investigation and security services. (5616)
6. Services to buildings and dwellings (5617), offices only.
7. Management and corporate offices (5511
8. Other support services. (56199)
I. Educational Service
1. Educational services (611) both public and private, LIMITED T0.
a. Elementary and secondary schools. (6111)
b. Community college. (6112)
c. Business schools. (6114)
d. Technical and trade schools. (6115}
J. Health Care & Social Services
1. Ambulatory health care (621) EXCEPT Ambulance service. (62191)
2. Social services (624) INCLUDING child day care services.
I~. Arts, Entertainment & Recreation
1. Museums and historic sites (712) EXCEPT zoos (712130).
2. Fitness and recreational sports (71394). (Section 2.107.01.I{.2 as amended by Ordinance No.
23 83, §20, passed March 16, 2005.]
3. Community center.
4. Taxidermists. (71151)
[Section 2.107.O1.L.3 as arnended by Ordinance No. 2423, §2, effective on July 28,
2007.]
L. Accommodation & Food Service
1. Hotels (EXCEPT casino hotels) and motels. (72111)
2. Bed and breakfast inns. (21191)
3. Food service and drinking places (722} EXCEPT food contractors (72231) and mobile
food service.
M. Other Services
1. Personal care services (8121) INCLUDING:
a. Barber shops. (812111)
b. Beauty shops. (812112}
2. Funeral home. (812210)
3. Laundry, self service. (81231}
4. Dry cleaning, self service. (81231)
-1?-50
8~:~e~r• -Deleted Text Section
$old /Undet~~e -Proposed Text Change
5. Phota finishing. (81292)
6. Parking lots and garages (81293) EXCEPT extended vehicle storage. (493190}
7. All Other Personal Services (81299) INCLUDING bail bonding and consumer buying
services.
8. Religious, civic, professional and sinular organizations. (813)
N. Public Administration
1. Public administration (92} INCLUDING government offices, courts, and police and fire
stations.
0. Streets and Utilities
1. Rights of way and easements and the improvements therein for streets, water, sanitary sewer,
gas, oil, electric and communication lines and for~storm water faalities and for pump
stations.
2.107.02 Special Permitted Uses
The following uses, when developed under the app}icable development standards of the UUDO
including the special development standards of Section 2.203, are permitted in the DDC zone:
A. Complementary residential use subject to Section 2.203.06.
B. Craft industries subject to Section 2.203.07.
C. Delivery services subject to Section 2.203.08.
D. Facilities during construction subject to Section 2.203.10.
E. Temporary outdoor marketing and special events subject to Section2.203.19.
2.10?.03 Conditional Uses
The following uses may be permitted subject to obtaining conditional use approval:
A. {}Nursing care facilities. (6231)
B. {}Assisted care facilities. (62331)
C. {}Grocery store, food market, food store. (44511)
D, {B}Gasoline stations (44719) INCLUDING repair services.
-18-51
S~rik~ -Deleted Text Section
Boldl ,~derline -Proposed Text Change
E. {}Wine shops.
F. {fr}Government and public utility buildings and structures EXCEPT uses permitted in
Section 2.107.41 and teleconununications facilities subject to Section 2.204.03.
2.107.04 Accessory Uses
The following uses are permitted as accessory uses subject to Sections 2.202 and 2.203.
A. Fence or free standing wall.
2.107.05 Dimensional Standards
The following dimensional standards shall be the minimum requirements for all development in the
DDC zone.
A. Lot Standards.
Lots in a DDC zone shall comply with the applicable standards o f Table 2.1,1 Z.
TABLE 2.1, 12 Lot Standards in a DDC Zone
In a DDC zone the lot area shall be adequate to contain all structures within the required
setbacks. There shall be no minimum width or depth.
B. Building Height.
iVlaximum building h-, e~ht is 40 fee or three s~Qries,whichever is Less,
C. Setback and Buffer Standards.
Setback and buffers are subject to the DDC design guidelines of Section
3.107.07.
2.~07.Ob Development Standards and Guidelines
All development in the DDC zone shall comply with the applicable provisions of the
WDO. Where the standards of the DDC zone and the WDO differ, the standards of the
DDC shall prevail. Standards listed in this ection as "shall" are mandator~v, standards. Guidelines
which state "should" or "encou~aeed" are not mandatoz:,.bu_ t are co idere_, d desirable b~„the CitX;
A. ose•
1. The pumose of these development standar,~s '~s to guide the design of builclin~s constructed
in_t~lie DDC zoning,district to ensure that throu ~ ~ riate use offacade~,,win_ doors,
building orientation, and arclu_,: tectural detail, new s,~ es and alteration,~Qf exist~~
structures are oh, siY,;cal~ Iv and cn wally compatible with other ~uildin~s within the downtown
business district. The majori~ of the existing buildi gain downtown Woodburn reflect
c 'te I re urin lit nd earl twentie ce
It is the desire of the Ci to have buildingconform to architectural stiles of this era. The
-19 -52
S~lxe- • Deleted Text Section
Bold /Underline -Proposed Text Change
~~~n standards are intended to further define those characteristics that cau_ se_building~t_o
look like they w~~,ns~c~, dg during ;~oeriod.
2. These standards are intended to encourage good quality desi~b 1 i F construction.
enhance sleet safety, as dT,rovide a comfortable street environment_b ro 'dingy atures of
interest to „pg~e.~' fans, GoQ results in boil ' s~at.~,visual harmony with
~g~,, leadin¢ to a downtown that is attractive, interesting. active, and safe. These
4 ~ai'ti , i~~contribute to the c cation of a downtow~ n cord which facilitates easv
pedestrian movement and establishment of a rich ' tore of uses,
~ ab' '
1. The provisions of this ordinance shall apply to the following activities within the DDC:
a. All new building construction;
~ Any exterior building or site modification that requires a building permit; and,
~ All new signage.
2. This ordinance shall not apply to the following activities or uses:
a. Maintenance of the exterior of an existing structure, such as re-roofing, re-siding, or
repainting where sirnilar materials and colors are used that comply with this ordinance;
b. Interior remodeling; and,
c. Single-family detached housing.
3. This ordinance shall apply only to those portions of a building or sign that are proposed for
construction or modification and shall not extend to other elements of the building or sign
that may be out of compliance with the requirements of this ordinance ~i.e., a permit to
replace a single window shall not require that all other windows on the building that may be
out of compliance with this ordinance to be replaced, unless such action is initiated by the
property owner). However, if a building should be destroyed due to foe, accident, or an act
of God, the new or replacement structure shall be rebuilt to conform to the requirements of
this ordinance.
4. ~t the time of application a applica~r t shall choose whether the review of new resides~tial
~~ be conducted as a Tune I review following the procedures of Section 5.101.01
or as a Type Il or III review follo_win~the_pro~c_edu~gs of Section 5.102.02 or 5.103.02.
~ eCD, tAding on Qoor area.
C. {}Off Street Parking.
All parking and access standards of Sections 3.104 and 3.105 shall apply EXCEPT that there
shall be no required parking ratio for n - ~ uses nd r id n ' uar+ts above t
floor commercial uses in the DDC zone.
~ fB}Design Guidelines or Standards.
20
53
~t~re~h- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/ nderline -Proposed Text Change
1. Multiple density residential buildings shall be subject to the design standards or guidelines of
Section 3.107.05 e~c ec~t for buildings which mix resid ntial uses with non-residential uses.
2. All development, EXCEPT for_ existi~~ detached sin lgg fa~il~,ho~mes and that described in
Section 2.107.B.1, shall be subject to the DDC zone architectural design guidelines and
standards of Section 3.101.07 an,_d the s ndards listed be ow. Single-family homes that are
used Qr businesses or home occupations ~e n., of exe~r,~Ut frQ,~n c_ omnlian~th these
' elin an vis' n o do ha 1 t n c lion
restorations, and r= els. Rest_ lions shall be defined as all exterior renairs,,renlac,~ment
of materials. alterations or changes. including reroofing._p_~nt~ig, window. and sign
~eplac,~,_emen, etc.
a. Standards. Standards for new construction sha xeauire builders to conform to the
architectural form of Woodbum's historic period (1880s ou hg 1940s~As~uch new
~onsuuction shall conform to the following standard,~listed below. Throu hod tit the
standaxds.eeference i~nade to Woodburn'~histo_ rie nreriod, the 18$Os through 1940s,
and to buildings whiehw 'srolav cha~acterisstics of that period. The fo____llowin~ lt:~t of
boil ' is provided a~ as r~~ 'de to ose buildin~w_ h_~ch dis~~r ch~acteristics
inten~ded_~,y the standards. The list ~ a guide only -- other b.~gs may be used to
demonstrate the reauire~ elements and/or the basis for visua~,comuati ility.
b. ExlesQf histo,~ic storefront buitd~~n~s for detem~ning_corn_.,natib~wi,~th standards:
Association Building on Front S eet between Garf eld and Hayes.
Ulmer Building on_„_ Front Stxeet on the comer f Front Street and Arthur.
1. Site Develo mp,~ne t.
a. Buitd_ing fr_ opts nd entrances shall be oriented toward the street, Buildings with
frontages on two or mo__- re str~,ets shall be oriented to at_least one street.
Building facades should b set at the prop=. erty edg~along~th_e sidewalk. A setback of up
,~~~en f., eet is Witted when oc-,c_unied by pedestrian timeunti'e_s le g~a, outdoor
seating. Buildings with frontages on_rivoQr more streets should be set at the property
edge on at least Qnestreet.
2. Bin e.
a. The overall size and p
roPortion of new structure hall b e con~nan~ ~th the scale of
ne ,=,
ar,; tadidon 1 storefront buil dings constructed durin g the historic oeriod 'This
sta be m
et by ei~ d
n and ma~ esigping the buildin 's s ize ands ropor 'ons to be similar
tQ ,
_____
~om~arable historics,~u~tures in the downtown or b„ y thl, design of the facade so
gha t it breaks a largex mass into s maller units that are sim azable_hts- toric
ilar to cornp,
stn
b. If ~ctur~s•
practica ngw b
_
din~ shoul
d have the same floor he ~
ight as adjoining~buildin~
cas
~
Th ,
._
e ere is ever a desixe to link the storefronts.
shall
e relationship between a height and width of the main facade Qf th~ g
,
be
_ ,.'sib_Iy compatible with adio_in
vl in~ or~.,near_b~b, u~i' tli_n,gs am,
of the historic period or style.
~~ 54
~e~- • Deleted Text Section
Bol~lU,~ierline -Proposed Text Change
A with subsection ~2~(~ f~l 'spec 'or~,,~ ndard y,~~„r,~gt_rhr~uQh ether similar
height and wid , or ou h design eI_ emen;s tha ~~, 'de v' ual c~an~n,,,~y with„___the
hei ht and~~width ofa~jjoinin~ or ne ~ ~ butl..~,,din~of the historic period
Buil~ ding H~ c•
~; New buil din o f at lea n,~y, ~s,~orie~, g~re-~~r~,;~.
~ c .1 f
and no„~ ore___t han 40 f
_ e
ec~ maximum height.
~~~id.
~ All new buildings should maxue lg~ fr_ on_taoe a,_ much as is racticable,
~ New buildings w~iose street frontage is more than 50, feet wide shall >~
oo~vey,a sg~e division thrQu~h the use of ~~as~ers~windows and door Q~,gn~g~,
recessed entries, off sets o_._r o_ther,~ 'tectural dom.
~; Ito. fronts.
c. Pr' a en~tran~e~ shal be oriente d to
~e_stree,_ t; Corne r b
~gs,~ h have~omer
en~raa~es, or s hall urovide,at 1+~t, ,
o_n,~„en ce ,
20
feet af~ ~ street corner or a
d. ~4m~.j a.
~ inner win
dows of multi-story ,
b__
uildin~s shall use t
nulti•oane dQ
ubl
hun
P~ash
g;
windows or th
The relationsh
e equivalent style.
ip betwe~,n s+ olid w,~ _
and window and d .
oor
enin~
on ,
.,
,
s o~e
sn facade
be visuall y compatible with g„or nearby st ,
~
ructures from .
the ' toric period
f ors e. ,j~g~.
a,~~q~„iniately
Th,_ a zelaaons ~, first floor st refro
2 feet ab ve~rade t
'~ of width and„h' nts should ~ abou,_ t
o a,~,p or_ ximately 10 f
t of window and do 80,~grcent gl
,
eet above~
or ope~pP as
from
,de.
sh 1~e visually
g: ~ ' le wi
Blank walls, w ~,adjoi„i or nearb
alls witho___ut window y uildin~},~om the
qr door openia4 ,
a~ historic peri
~
~~~ermit od or style.
t~d alon
~ublic
~. strr..eets.
Windows and
doorways shall not b ,
e cove
,red ovgr with „
raper, ~d ~„
s
or cardb
oard
excc~lurin~ rimes f eon uct~on ,_,_
or,~ o~n„_delino
~d ,_
r
sh be limited to a aeriod of 1
~
i. days,, unless a
Doors shall ma extension is Q~~e_
tch ~e materials , e ,
g~ran~v the ci
si~n. and
~ha,
ra~te~ro managed,
f the dis Ia.p ,
window f~~arnin
~
~:
Architectural f
eatures such aa~~W~ ,
_
gs, windows, co '
es, etc , shall ,
,
be orovid~cl at the
second floor to dif~'er~ntiate the sto ee,_ front from the u ~e levels of the bui~din
~ to add
visual interest, and to allow the stor efront to func 'on as the ba~
e ff
or ~
thnre~t ofdie
.
.,
~: ~cade Ma~erial____ s a=: e,~, x ,tore,
a. Th_~ tcrial~ an.. dt~xtu~e of the faca~e,~h,,,all be comu~atibl__e with thos_ a o,~„~uildin~Qs
constructed during tie, historicperiod.
"2235
- Deleted Text Section
$old/Underlt'ne -Proposed Text Change
~; Permitted exterior facade materials include: brick, cas~ t uon, ~,elativel~narrow horizontal
wood ox so si ' ,and stucco Plywood siding, T- 11 a„~ vertic board and
batt_ en are ~ ohibited.
,~ Exposed concrete block facadesacing th__e street are not allowed. Soh face or scored-
faceblock may b,_, a used in m ~,uantitie fs or foundations or other non-dominant
few
d. .All main facade rnat, erals shall be painted (exr~en-trick, for which tiaintin~ is otitio~all ,
e. Metal si ins shall not be - e as a buil~~ material on the facade facing a street.
dow .
a. Windows which allow views to the interior actioi~ o~ display areas are encouraged.
Windows shall include sills at the bottom and pediments at die top. Glass curtain walls.
reflective glass, and a~,n' ,,, e~d„o~ r~~,~,~d s sh not be used on the first floor.
~; ~xound Floor Windows. All new buildin~s~m, ust provide ground floor windows along
a iacent str_, eet~is~,,hts_o~ wa ~.
,1,~ Re cwt d window areas must be either windows that allow views into worl,area~
o lo,~bies,, edestran entrances, or clispl~~~ ws.
,2~ Rea =ed windows must have a sill ao more than fo, ~ feet a_lZov~ ade. Where
interior floor level~,nrohibit such ~laceme t. the sill must be raised to allow it to
b~ no more than two feet above the finished_floor level, up to a maximum sill height
of six feet abov
~ Glass curtain wj~dow~,are_no_t pe 'tted.
Da_._.rkly tinted windows and mirrored windows that block twaway v~si~ility are
tirohibite, d as rg,~d floor windows ~~treet facades.
A~,,,y wall that faces a pui~Tt_c n~ht-of-way crust contain at least. ~0,%of th-, a ground
floor wall area in displayareas, win_dow_ s, or doorway Blank walls axe ' ited.
c. ~ e~loo_r Window Standards.
~ Mass area dimensions shall not exceed 5-feet ~ 7-feet_,~'The lop est dime.~ion mav~
betaken ei er h~o 'xontall~ or vexticall~;)
~, Windows must have trim ~r molding at least two inches wide around their
e' r
~ At leas half of all t,~,e win~do_w area in upper floors_must be made uo of glass~anes
witl~dimg~s,~ns,no greater than 2-fee by 3-feet.
8. c fs.
a. Main fa ade roofs R wer than a 6.12 pis tchl shall be cgncealed beha~id a sau~_r
~tep~edet. Flat roofs are ,~g~ni~ted be ~ a o,~ ara~et.
b. All HVAC system~lor~ted on to, t~. of a roof shall be located and-f or screened so that they
are not visible from the street, Dish-stile antennas shall be located and/or screened so
that th.~v are not visible from the sheet. All screening material shall be natural an~ d shall
~e compatibl___e with the facade of the front of the buiidin~.
- 23 -56
~~e;~reegh- -Deleted Text Section
Bald/Undetlir~e -Proposed Text Change
~, New roofs on existing build~n~s, or on ad,. dition~t~ e~~ buildings. shall match the
Hitch and form Q~the n ' al roof.
,~ 5,hed_ro f~ a_re,=oertnitted on one-,~torr rear additions.
,~ ~ack• 't or internally illuminated ro fg s ~e orr o~bi~ed.
9 ~ ~~ and CanQ i .
~ Tlig, use of awnings o~r,~~opies over sidewall~s i~eaura~ed
b. Aw ' gs sh xtend.- o~om tie ~uild[r~a fi,~,~,~, coy r al',j~,~~.~w_4 d_,.,~ Vie,
~.dgwalk unles it is shown that such a distance wih int rfere with existing ee , oo les.
etc., toy ro_'de cedes ' n protection from the elements.
e. Awnings shall bg fla„_,t o=~in~. Awning~•shall+be_rn-ade o__. f rn_etal. wood,, canva , o~
~~m;hr materials Rounded bubble or brla~ec awnia~s are ti 'bited, ~u,,,•._,,,lly g zed
awl arg not ~etmitted•
d. Awnin~se shall, fi vv~'thin the window bays (ei. ~gr_above th main glass or,the transom
lighl,~ o as ~ to obscure or di,~tract fro si,..e~u,'hc~t architectuual features.
~: ~~color of the awning shall be compatible with its attached bu, il „ding.
f dw„wnings s nit be in ~rna~iy illuniina~ted. Howeve~,,j~g~ting w~hic~ is_ u~~nded to
prov_ 'de illumination to thg sidewalk and sig~gg~s.~er ' e .
~ _A_wnings~ s all,~era m~mu_,_m Qf egg t feet ab~ a sid w l,~k.
h. where f asib~e__ awr~n¢s~ shall be ~c~d at tl~e~ame height as ose on adjacent buildings
~n order to maintain a consistent horizontal, rhythm a--1Qng~,,the sheet f ont.
1. r.
a. The ,~g,~o_ fsb Eck walls is oerrnitted.
~ ub e r ued t d d e e' e. '
Q~ne_, on colors are prohibited.
c. iff h b used t o d hi hli ht o r
~~g f-
11. ~ es'
a. ~, nc~ing shall not o~lite~r_a~e street and sidewalk views of sienage or architectural
~eat~res on historic building:
12. P .
a, Parkin~,are,~s shall not be located, betw,~en a €ront of building d ~e street.
b. ~, a s'de narking lots shall be het back a ' ' um of 5-fee fr_o~°ub •c sidewalk.
~; Par ' g,~reas~c,~re at l0~snaces shall be c 'v,~ded by landscaped areas or
walkways- o by ate} ' ding osg~Quo of buildings.
~ Parking lot landscatiing,shall consist of a minimum of 10~percent~g to,_ tail aark~in_g
~xeay L o f o~g tree for ~v~ t 0„~king s~ac~, shall b~rQvided.
e. Knee walls are reau~r~_ ' ed to,~~g~ s~tee.~ s' a ~l ' lots. Knee walls shall not exceed
~hxee feet in height and shall be construe ed with masonry Alum 'vely. a c_ mbin~~ion
- 24 57
S~~e~ran~h- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
of a waU or fence and landscapine may be ~ ro, v d if rheK v' a an effective bu fer
and low-level screen of thew,' gar
13. Drive through businesses
a. Drive through businesses are not pew-rmitted
E. {E}Signs.
Signs shall be subject to Section 3.110. [Section 2.107.06C as amended by Ordinance No. 2359,
§8, passed March 22, 2004.E
Landscaping is subject t~DDC zone architectural desi ng_,guidelines hand s___ tandards~ of
Section 3.107.0?.
~; External Storage of Merchandise. The, external storage of merchan~~e a`d/or material ' ec,~tly
or indirectly relate to a business, is herebv~o, rohib'ted within the DDC~'smct~
~l Outdoor Disalays of Merchandise Outd_,_oor displays of merchandise are pernutted durin~~
business hours only and shall not excced ten percent of the total retail sales area Disnlav,, s of
merchandise on public sidewalks may nod re,_,- d_e usable wa____ll~ing area widths to less then six feet
Z. Outdoor Eating Areas. Outdoor dining areas are encouraged, and are oe i '~ d n oublic
sidewalks Outdoor food vending c,~~,~er~tr ',fed E~,-„g,ar as and/or vending carts may not
reduce usable walking area widths o public sidewalks to less then six feet,
~: M u f n-a v w s re r entin ci area' ul
heritage _lust_ oric evens are en ours ed, as we ~ a he use of artistic wall m urals. A wall mural
is~x pression of oublic art painted ~irectiy on th e exterior of a b~ cg
~r Qn a backin~~iat is
affixed t
The Citt
,, o the building rid is sanc~n
'~~.
t dis
,,_ cou~rages tl~e oaintin~ of m ed ley t, ~e„pro
urals on the „
r , wrier
actual surface o_f~ buil
~
g
u 'stead
encour gel that murals be oainte„r_d on bo ds or ce ,
_~ panels attached to a „
b
g w~l
l~si
'~ can help avoid problems down the roa d with needi ng.to strip s ndblast or
p ,
,
r~sure wash brick
4 walls to remove a mural. The use of ap plied panels ,
a„~so will allow„~uick removal of the panel for
~!, restoration when a mural has been tag ged wi ffiti.
1. A.~ign.p armit is not re~~,,ted_ for a wa ll ~nu~al.
2. a mural are n t rmitted n t w c them ' n to e
~~
3. $ :
e ' lied and
' e in an area si ace
are_. a of 8 0 per cent of the exterior w ~ fit three stories upon ~ w_ a114r facade
where th e mural sign is lo" ca ted
4. Morals may not be used for anv f..,,~rm of co ercial advertising car n blipinformation or
solicitati on of any kind. A mural shall be cons= eyed a wall sign if it contains words, lQ,gos
- 25 -58
~~ -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
trademarks or ~c redresentations of any erso tirod ct or service that identify or
~~vertise a business.
5. Un,T to 0 uer cent of the wall m> area. at the lowest border of a mural. naay be utilize as
an acknowledgement recognizing the sponsor of,_the oral or for a si~na,= bv, th,~e, m~u~
a+~st 1"he des' ated area for the acknow~e went or si afore mus„ t notexce-_ed a
maximum area of 6 square feet.
~ {}Property Disposition.
All uses shall be established and conducted on lots of record, as defined by Section 1.102 and
developed to the public facility and access standards of Sections 3.101, 3.102 and 3.104.
1. New lots of record shall be subject to the following standards and procedures;
a. Partitions, Section 3.108;
b. Subdivisions, Section 3.10$; or
c. Planned Unit Development Section 3.109.
2. Alteration of the property lines of existing lots of record shall be subject to the applicable
following standards and proceduxes:
a. Property Line Adjustment, Section 5.101.07.
b. Replatting, Section 3.10$.
c. Vacation, applicable Oregon Revised Statutes.
3.10? Aurchitectural Design Gwidelines and Standards
A. ~~
~ The p~u ose of these architectural desguidelines and star is to 'de a desi~of
b dins constructed in the City of Woodburn to ensure that, thr_gl~aopro 'ate~g
orientati n landsc~oe_des'~an=~hitectural details, new structures and alterations of
gxisting structures are~hy,~icall~a d ~n_llv co tiatible with other bu'ldin~ 'the city.
2. These standards are intende to encourage goo d aua 'ro des' in new b~ 'ding construction.
enhance stx~et s- afetX, and provide a cornfortabl~stre~t environment by providing features Qf
interest to tzedes ' ns. Good d~ results in b ' ' ghat are in visual hazrno_nv vvt_._th
nearby buildings lea ' c'ty i a fictive. interesting; active. and safe.
- 2G -59
S~eel~~- -Deleted Text Section
~o1d~Underline --Proposed Text Change
3.107.01 Dwellings EXEMPT from Architectural Design Standards and
Guidelines
The following dwellings shall be EXEMPT from the provisions of Section 3.107;
A. Any single family or duplex dwelling (site built dwelling, manufactured dwelling or manufactured
home} that exists, or is subject to a building permit that has been issued prior to WDO,
EXCEPT such dwellings located within the Neighborhood Conservation Qverlay ~NCOD).
B. All new dwellings sited in Manufactured Dwelling Parks containing more than 3 acres.
3.107.02 Design Standards for Manufactured Homes Sited in Manufactured
Dwelling
Parks of 1 to 3 Acres
NOT INCLG'DED IIV THIS COPY
3.107.05 Guidelines and Standards for Medium Density Residenrial Buildings
A. Applicability.
Pursuant to Section 1.102, "Medium Density Residential Building" means any building where the
predominant use is multiple family, nursing care or assisted care residential. At the time of
application, the applicant shall choose whether the review will be conducted as a Type I review
Following the procedures of Section S.101.01 or as a Type II or III review following the applicable
procedures of Section 5.102.02 or 5.103.02, depending on floor area. [Section 3.107.OS.A is amended
by Ordinance 2423, §2$, effective on July 28, 2007.]
1. For a Type I review, the criteria of Section 3.107.05.B shall be read as "shall" and shall be
applied as standards.
2. For a Type II or III review, the criteria Section 3.107.05.B shall be read as "should" and shall
be applied as guidelines.
B. Open Space Guidelines and Standards.
1. Common Open Space and Facilities.
a. Common open space and facilities consist of the site area aad facilities not devoted to
dwellings, parking, streets, driveways or storage areas that are available for use by all
residents of a development.
b. Required yard setbacks should f shall be included as common open space.
- 27 -GO
S'~~e~h- -Deleted Text Section
Bold /Underline -Proposed Text Change
C. Open Space and Facility Design Guidelines and Standards.
1. A minimum of 30 percent of the net site area of each medium density residential
development should/shall be permanently designated for use as common open space and
facilities.
2. The common area should/shall include at least one open space containing 2000 sq. ft., with
a nvnimum width of 3G feet.
3. Recreation Areas and Facilities. Facilities to accommodate children's and/or adult recreation,
meeting or education activities should/shall be provided at a ratio of 36 sq. f~ of outdoor, or
12 sq. ft. of indoor, common area per dwelling unit or living unit. The minimum improved
common area for this purpose should/shall be 720 square feet of outdoor or 240 sq, ft.
indoor space. The space for such improvements may be counted as part of the common area
required by Section 3.101.05.B.1.c.2). at a 1:1 ratio for outdoor space and 3:1 ratio for indoor
space.
D. Private C-pen Space.
1. Ground Level Courtyard
a. Medium density dwelling units sited on the finished grade, or within 5 feet of the
finished grade, should/shall have 96 square feet ofsemi-enclosed, private open space,
with no dimension less than 6 feet.
b. Ground Level private open space should/shall be visually and physically separated from
common open space through the use of perimeter landscaping or fencing.
E. Balcony
1. Medium density dwelling units sited more than 5 feet from the finished grade (a balcony)
should/shall have 48 square feet of private open space, with no dimension less than 6 feet
F. Axchitectural Design Guidelines and Standards.
1. Building Mass and Facade.
a. Medium density residential buildings should/shall have no dimension greater than 150
feet.
b. Every two attached medium density residential dwelling units should/shall be offset by
at least 4 feet in depth.
c. Adjacent medium density residential buildings located within 28 feet of a property line,
should/shall vary the setback at least 4 feet,
d. A flat roof, or the ridge of a sloping roof, for a medium density residential building
should/shall not exceed a horizontal length of 100 feet without providing a difference in
elevation of at Ieast 4 feet.
e. Medium density residential buildings should/shall incorporate a porch or recessed entry
for each ground level dwelling unit Covered porches and entries should average at least
30 feet square per unit, with no dimension less than G feet.
f. All habitable rooms, except bath rooms, facing a required front yard should/shall
incorporate windows.
- 28 -61
S~l~l~r~- -Deleted Text Section
bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
g. Stair cases providing access above the first floor level should/shall not be visible from a
street.
2. Building Materials, Texture and Color.
a. The exterior finish for at least 90 percent of the facade should/shall be:
1) Either siding, brick or stucco. Alain concrete, corrugated metal, plywood and sheet
press board should/shall not be used as exterior fuush material; and
2) Either white, tinted with a minimum of 10 parts per 100 of white, or shaded with a
minimum of 10 parts per 100 of black or brown. Flouresceat, "day-glo," or any
siriular bright color should/shall not be used on the facade.
b. The roofing material for medium density dwellings should/shall be either composition
shingles; clay or concrete tile; metal; or cedar shingles or shakes. Composition shingles
should/shall be architectural style with a certified performance of at least 25 years.
3. Pedestrian Circulation.
a. Connection with Buildings and Streets. The internal pedestrian system in medium
density residential developments should/shall connect to other areas of the site, to other
building entrances and to adjacent streets.
b. When a residential building is sited within 24 feet of a street right of way, the building
should/shall contain entrances directly accessible from the street.
4. Parking. Fifty percent of the required parking should/shall be covered by garages.
5. Buffer Wall. A solid brick or architectural wall with anti-graffiti surface, no less than G feet or
greater than 7 feet in height, should/shall be constructed on the perimeter property line of
the development where the abutting use is commeraal or industrial and no comparable
buffer exists.
G. Sidewalk Location and Stxeet Trees. Sidewalks should/shall be located at the property line
along streets with street trees, Section 3.10G. [Section 3,107.OS.C as amended by Ordinance
No. 2383, X47, passed March 1 G, 2005.]
3.107.06 Guidelines and Standards for Non-Residential Structures in RS, R1S,
RM,
CO, CG and P/SP Zones
A. Applicability.
The following design guidelines shall be applicable to all non-residential structures and buildings in
the RS, R1S, RM, CO, CG and P zones.
- 29.62
S'~tlce~re~l:- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Undgrlirte -Proposed Text Change
B. Architectural Design Guidelines.
1. Mass & Bulk Articularron Guidelines.
a. Building facades visible from streets and public parking areas should be articulated in
ordex to avoid the appearance of box-like structures with unbroken wall surfaces.
b. The appearance of exterior walls should be enhanced by incorporating three dimensional
design features, including the following:
1) Public doorways and/or passage ways through the budding.
2) Wall offsets and/or projections.
3) Variation in building materials and/or textures.
4} Arcades, awnings, canopies and/or porches.
2. Materials and Textures Guidelines.
a. Building exteriors should exhibit finishes and textures that reduce the visual monotony
of bulky structures and large structural spaces; enhance visual interest of wall surfaces
and harmonize with the structural design.
b. The appearance of exterior surfaces should be enhanced by incorporating the following:
1)At least 30% of the wall surface abutting a street should be glass.
~a) All walls visible from a street or public parking area should be surfaced with
wood, brick, stone, designex block, or stucco or with siding that has the
appearance of wood lap siding.
(b) The use of plain concrete, plain concrete block, corrugated metal, plywood, T-
111 and sheet composite siding as exterior finish materials for walls visible from
a street or parking area should be avoided.
~c} The color of at least 90 percent of the wall, roof and awning surface visible from
a street or public parking area should be an "earth tone" color containing 10
parts or more of brown or a "tinted" color containing 10 parts or more white.
Flourescent, "day-glo," or any similar bright color should not be used on the
building exterior.
3. Multi-planed Roof Guidelines.
a. The roof line at the top of a strucuuee should establish a distinctive top to the building.
b. The roof line should not be flat or hold the same roof line over extended distances.
Rather the roof line should incorporate variations, such as:
1) offsets and/or jogs in the plane of the roof.
2) Changes in the height of the exterior wall for flat roof builclings, including parapet
walls with variations in elevation and/or cornices.
4. Roof Mounted Equipment Guidelines. All roof mounted equipment, EXCEPT solar
collectors, should be screened from view from streets abutting the building site by:
-303
S~l~e~reet~r• -Deleted Text Section
BQid/Underline -Proposed Text Change
a. Locating roof mounted equipment below the highest vertical element of the building; or
b. Screening roof top equipment using materials of the same character as the structure's
basic materials.
5. Weather Protection Guidelines. All building faces abutting a street or a public parking area
should provide weather protection for pedestrians. Features to provide this protection
should include:
a. A continuous wallcway at least 8 feet wide along the face of the building utilizing a roof
overhang, arcade, awnings and/or canopies.
b. Awnings and canopies that incorporate the following design features:
1) Angled ox curved surfaces facing a street or parking area.
2) A covering of canvas, treated canvas, awning fabric, or matte fuush vinyl.
3} A constant color and pattern scheme for all buildings within the same development.
4) No internal back lighting.
6. Landscaping and Screening Guidelines. The landscaping required by the standards of the
WDO should be augmented to address site specific visual impacts of abutting uses and the
visual character of the surrounding area.
1. Design Character Guidelines. Standardized or characteristic corporate and franchise design
elements should be refined to reduce domination of the visual environment by corporate
icons.
8. Buffer Wall. A solid brick or architectural wall with anti•graffiti surface, no less than G feet or
greater than 7 feet in height
a. Should be constructed on the perimeter property line of nonresidential development to
mitigate adverse visual, noise and/or light impacts on the abutting use when no
comparable buffer exists, and
b. Shall be constructed where the standards of the underlying zone require such a wall for a
non•residendal use in, or abutting, a RS, R1S, or RM zoning district.
9. Sidewalk Location and Street Trees. Sidewalks should be located at the property line along
streets with street trees, Section 3.10U.
10. Solar Access Protection. Obstruction of existing solar collectors on abutting properties by
site development should be mitigated.
C. Site and Building Access Guidelines.
1. Access to and from the site and circulation within the site should separate facilities for cars,
trucks and transit from those for bicycles and pedestrians.
2. Site access in compliance with Section 3.1 ~4 should be augmented by the following
considerations:
- 31 ~~
~riltet~ret~13- -Deleted Text Section
Bold Underline- Proposed Text Change
a. Vehicle Access.
1) Vehicle access points should be identified by accentuated landscaped areas, by
entrance throats designed to control access from abutting parking and by monument
type entrance signs.
2) New parking lots abutting major streets should connect internally with the parking
lots of abutting commercial uses or land zoned for commercial use.
- 32 65
St~e~• -Deleted Text Section
~ol~f Underline -Proposed Text Change
b. Pedestrian Access and Circulation.
1} The buildings should be linked to the sidewalks on abutting streets by internal
pedestrian ways. Such pedestrian ways should be either raised or delineated by
distinctive pavers.
2} Parking areas should be designed in multiples of no more than SO spaces separated
by landscaped buffers or raised pedestrian ways in order to tnuiimize negative visual
impacts associated with expansive parking.
D. Building Location Guidelines. (Section 3.107.06.D as amended by Ordinance No. 2383, §48,
passed March 1 ~, 2005.j
1. Within the prescribed setbacks, building location and orientation should compliment
abutting uses and development patterns.
2. The maxitnum yard abutting a street should be 150 feet.
E. Parking Location Guidelines.
Off street parking between the architectural front of a building and the setback line abutting street
shouted be limited to a depth of not more than 130 feet.
F. Design Standards.
1. Outdoor Storage Standards. Outdoor storage, when permitted, shall be screened from the
view of abutting streets by a solid brick or architectural block wall not less than 6, nor more
than 9 feet in height.
2. Outdoor Lighting Standards. All outdoor lighting shall be designed so that:
a. Parking areas are evenly illuminated at ground level atone foot candle;
b. Entrance and loading areas are illuminated at ground level of two foot candles;
c. Illunvnation does not shine or reflect into any adjacent residentially zoned or used
property; and Lighting does not cast a glare onto moving vehicles on any public street.
3.10?,07 Design Gwidelines and Standards for the DDC and NNC Zones
(Section 3.107.07 as amended by Ordinance No. 2391, ~3, acknowledged on December 22, 2006.]
A. Applicability and Procedure.
The following guidelines and standards shall be applicable to the Downtown Development and
Conservation (DDC} and Nodal Neighborhood Commercial (NNC) zones. The Woodburn
Downtown Association (WDA} shall be notified as an interested party in conjunction with design
review within the DDC zone.
B. Design Guidelines for New Development.
-33-66
S~rilt~~rrae~r -Deleted Text Section
Bold /Underline -Proposed Text Change
1. Site Design Guidelines, All new development should comply with the following site design
guidelines.
a. Building placement. Buildings should occupy a minimum of 50 percent of all street
frontages along public streets. Buildings should be located at public street intersections.
b. $uilding setback. The minimum setback from a public street right of way maybe 0 feet,
the maximum building setback should be 10 feet.
c. Front setback and setback abutting a street design. Landscaping, an arcade, or a hard-
surfacedexpansion of the pedestrian path should be provided between a structure and a
public street
1) Setbacks abutting a street should be 5 feet in depth or equal to the building setback,
whichever is greater. The setback should be landscaped at a planting density of five
(5) planting units per 20 square feet to the street tree standards of Table 3.1.5.
2) Setbacks abutting an alleyway should be landscaped to the street tree standards of
Section 3.106.03.A.1.
3) Hard-surfaced areas should be constructed with scored concrete or modular paving
material.
4) Benches and other street furnishings shall be encouraged.
d. Walkway connection to building entrances. A wallcway connection should connect a
building entrance and a public street. This walkway should be at least six (6) feet wide
and be paved with scored concrete oz modular paving materiaals. Building entrances at
corners near a public street intersection shall be encouraged.
e. Parking Location and landscape design. Parking for buildings or phases adjacent to public
street rights of way should be located to the side or rear of newly constructed buildings.
When located abutting a street, off street parking should be limited to 50 percent of the
street frontage. Setbacks abutting a street should be 5 feet in depth or equal to the
building setback, whichever is greater. The setback should be landscaped at a planting
density of five (5) planting units per 20 square feet to the street tree standards of Section
3.10G.03.A.1.
f. Interior side and rear yards setbacks should be landscaped to the street tree standards of
Section 3.106.03.A.1.b.
g. Any open area not used for building space should be landscaped incompliance with
WD4 standards and guidelines.
2. New Building Architectural Design Guidelines and Standards.
a. Applicability.
1) All non-residential buildings shall comply with the following design guidelines (read
as "should").
2) At the tune of application, the applicant shall choose whether the review of new
residential buildings shall be conducted as a Type I review following the procedures
- 34 -67
~r~ec~- -Deleted Text Section
$Qld l Underling- Proposed Text Change
of Section 5.101.01 or as a Type II or III review following the procedures of Section
5.102.02 or 5.103.02, depending on floor area.
(a) For a Type I review, the criteria of Section 3.107.04.B shall be read as "shall" and
shall be applied as standards.
(b) For a Type II or III review, the criteria Section 3.107.04.E shall be read as
"should" and shall be applied as guidelines.
b. Architectural Design Guidelines and Standards.
1) Ground floor window. Ail street-facing building elevations that are set back 10 feet
or less from a public street should include a minimum of 50 percent of the ground
floor wall area with windows, display areas or doorway openings. The ground floor
wall area shall be measured from three feet above grade to nine feet above grade the
entire width of the street-facing elevation. The ground floor window requirement
should be met within the ground floor wall area and for glass doorway openings to
the ground level. Up to 50 percent of the required ground floor window area on a
particular street-facing building elevation may be met on an adjoining building
elevation when the adjoining elevation is also street-facing and setback 10 feet or
less.
2) Building facades. No building facade should/shall extend for more than 300 feet
without a pedestrian connection between or through the building. Facades that face a
public street should/shall extend no more than 50 feet without providing at least one
of the following features;
(a} A variation in building material;
(b) A building off-set of at least 1 foot;
(c) A wall area that is entirely separated from other wall areas by a projection, such
as an arcade; or
(d} By other design features that reflect the building's structural system.
3) Weather protection. Weather protection for pedestrians, such as awnings, canopies
and arcades should/shall be provided at building entrances. Weather protection shall
be encouraged along building frontages abutting a public sidewalk or shard-surfaced
expansion of a sidewalk, and along building frontages between a building entrance
and a public street or access way. Awnings and canopies should/shall not be back lit.
4) Building materials. Corrugated metal, plywood, sheet press board or vinyl siding
should/shall not be used as exterior finish material. Plain concrete block and plain
concrete should/shall not be used as exterior fuush material EXCEPT as a
foundation material where the foundation material should/shall not be revealed for
more than 2 feet.
5) Roofs and roof lines. EXCEPT in the case of a building entrance feature, roofs
should/shall be designed as an extension of the primary materials used for the
- 35 58
~ril~re~~r -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
building and should respect the building's structural system and architectural style.
False fronts and false roofs should/shall not be used.
G} Roof mounted equipment All roofmounted equipment should /shall be screened
from view from adjacent public streets. Satellite dishes and other communication
equipment should/shall be set back or positioned on a roof so that exposure from
adjacent public streets is minimized. Solar heating panels shall/shall be exempt from
this guideline.
C. Architectural Design Guidelines for the Exterior Alteration of Existing Buildings
1. General Scope. An application for exterior alteration of an existing building should be
approved if the change or the treatment proposed is determined to be harmonious and
compatible with the appearance and character of the building and should not be approved if
found to be detrimental to or otherwise adversely affecting the azchitectural significance,
integrity, historic appearance, or historic value of the building.
2. Design Guidelines. The following guidelines shall apply to the exterior alterations to existing
buildings:
a. Retention of original construction. So far as possible, all original exterior materials and
details should be preserved or reproduced to match the original.
b. Height. Additional stories maybe added to buildings provided that:
1) The added height complies with requirements of the state Building Code; and
Z} The added height does not alter the traditional scale and proportions of the building
style; and
3) The added height is visually compatible with adjacent buildings.
c. Bulk. Horizontal additions may be added to buildings provided that:
1) The building of the addition does not exceed that which was traditional for the
building style; and
2) The addition maintains the traditional scale and proportion of the building; and
3) The addition is visually compatible with adjacent buildings.
d. Visual Integrity of Structure. The lines of columns, piers, spandrels, and other primary
structural elements should be maintained so far as practicable.
e. Scale and Proportion. The scale and proportion of altered or added building elements,
the relationship of voids to solid (windows to wall} should be visually compatible with
the traditional architectural character of the building.
Material, Color and Texture. The materials, colors and textures used in the alteration or
addition should be fully compatible with the traditional architectural character of the
historic building, In general colors should be emphasized as follows: darker colors for
window sashes; medium for building; and lightest far window trim and detailing.
3G 69
~~ri#e~~rer~- -Deleted Text Section
Bo1dlUnderline -Proposed Text Change
g. Lighting and Other Appurtenances. Exterior lighting and other appurtenances, such as
walls, fences, awnings, and landscaping should be visually compatible with the traditional
architectural character of the building.
- 37 -70
S~~e~~- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
Downtown Commercial
Square ar
'Stepped
~~~~
Upper Story , . 11w~gs e ,
t~sidendal
~ Wra~the( tectio+~ c
`
~
_
~..~
~'~Vw~ .5
1
1
t'^~`
,~ .~ 0 ~
Zero B~ald~m~f.ine
~Un~cceptable Rehabilitation, Restoration, & Preservation
Remodel is not
sensitive to original
~ ~
ildi
d
l
d b
R architectural details.
n ~
e
t-
emo
e
9 y
facade does not match
original mater~ls.
i
i 4 ~ ,~~
. , ,, t
._
Windows do not Horimntal character f remodel doesn't match
corer SO.904b of vertical character of original upper stories.
ston>front area
3$'71
S~~e~ra~g~- -Deleted Text Section
Bol¢/Underline -Proposed Text Change
5.102 Type II Application Requirements
5.102.02 Design Review for All Structures LESS THAN 1000/2000 Sq. Ft.
A. Purpose. The purpose of Type II design review is to insure compliance with all applicable site
development standards and architectural design guidelines of Section 3.1 and other standards of
thethe-for:
1. All new structures LESS THAN 1000 sq. ft. of gross floor area in the RS,
R1S, RM, CO, CG, DDC, NNC, and P/SP zones, all new structures or additions LESS
THAN 2000 square feet of gross floor area in the IP, IL, and SWIR zones, and single family
and duplex dwellings in the NCOD, but EXCLUDING structures subject to TYPE I
Design Review.
2. Any change in use that results in a greater parking requirement.
B. Application Requirements. An application shall include a completed City application form, filing
fee, deeds, notification area map and labels, written narrative statement regarding compliance
with criteria, location map and the following additional exhibits:
1. Street and Utilities Plan, as applicable;
2. Site Design Plan;
3. Grading Plan; and
4. Architectural drawings (plan view and elevations) [a~~~~rd}. Materials
sample board -optional at Planning Director's discretion.
Criteria. The applicable guidelines and standards of Section 3.1 shall apply and other applicable
sections of the WDO.
- 39 - 72
IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF WOODBURN, OREGON
LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENT 2009-01 ) FINAL ORDER
WHEREAS, the City received a grant from the Oregon Transportation and
Growth Management Program to help fund an update of the 1998 Downtown
Development Plan, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission participated in a joint workshop with the
City Council on August 31, 2009, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on September
24, 2009 and considered the wri#ten and oral testimony presented by staff and other
interested persons, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission closed the hearing, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission moved to recommend that the City
Council deny the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Map and Text,
VUoodbum Development Ordinance, and the Transportation Systems Plan and
instructed staff to prepare a final order to substantiate the Commission's decision.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED BY THE COMMISSION:
The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council deny the draft
revisions as contained in Exhibit "B", based on the findings contained in Exhibit "A",
which are attached hereto and by reference incorporated herein.
~.
~` r / ~; r
~ ,~ C' ~ ~ Date: c- ~~ ~=~
Approved.
Ellen Bandelow, Chairperson
I:ICommunity DevelopmentlPlanninglDowntovm Plan UpdatelLand Use ApplicationlPC Final Order !.A 09-01.doc
73
1NOOD8URN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
September 24, 2009
CONVENED The Planning Commission met in a regular session at 7:40 p.m. in City Hall Council
Chambers with Chairperson Bandelow presiding.
Chairperson Bandelow read a statement ou~ining the process for the Planning Commission's meeting,
establishing time limits for persons and groups who wanted to speak before the Commission on any
matter scheduled this everting..
Chairperson Bandelow announced that the agenda was available at the back of the room. The
Commission would consider cases one at a time according to the order I'~sted in the agenda. The
Commission would follow the hearing procedure outlined on the public hearing procedure board. All
persons wishing to speak were requested to come to the podium and give their name and address. Any
individuals speaking from other than the podium would not be recognized.
Commissioner Jennings led the salute to the flag.
ROLL CALL
Chairperson Bandelow Present
Vice Chairperson Vancil Present
Commissioner Grosjacques Present
Commissioner Grigorieff Present
Commissioner Hutchison Present
Commissioner Jennings Present
Commissioner Kenagy Present
Staff Present: Terris Stevens
Jim Hendryx
Dan Brown
Jon Stuart
Natalie Labossiere
Nadia Seledkov
Assistant City Administrator
Economic S Development Services Director
Public Works Director
Assistant City Att~ney
Senior Planner
Administrative Assistant
ITEMS FOR ACTION
A. Final Order• Variance 2009.01, City of Woodbum, applicant
Commissioner Jennings made a motion to approve variance 2009-01.
Commissioner Grosia, cpue_s seconded the motion. No Commissioners were op~sed, and the
motion carried.
PUBLIC HEARING
A. Type V• Legislative Amendment• LA 2009.01-City of Woodburn
A legislative amendment to revise the Comprehensive Plan map and text, the Woodburn
Development Ordinance, and the Transportation Systems Plan with the proposed
recommendations found in the Woodburn Downtown Oevelopment Plan update.
STAFF REPORT
Economic S Development Services Director Jim Hendryx presented the information regarding the
Legislative Amendments with apower-point presentation on the Update of the 1998 Downtown
Development Plan and proposed revisions. Proposed amendments include: the Comprehensive Plan
Page 1 of 9
Planning Cornrnission A~teeling - Septe-nber24, 2009
74
text, Comprehensive Plan map, Transportation Systems Plan, and Woodbum Development Ordinance.
Hem went over how the land use process works, explaining that the public hearing follows the State of
Oregon statutes. Oregon Law (ORS 191.610) governs proposals to amend a local government's
acknowledged Comprehensive Plan or land use regulation, or to adopt a new land use regulation. The
law requires the Planning Commission to hold at least one public hearing before recommending action on
a legislative proposal
Hendr spoke about the Comprehensive Plan calling for an update to the Downtown Pian every 5 years.
In 2001, to fund a broader program of commercial and residential revitalization, the City Council formed
an urban renewal district centerorl on the downtown area. In 2006 the City received a grant from the
Oregon Transportation and Growth Management Program to help fund an update of the 1998 Plan. The
process included several groups arxi procedures to formulate the best development of the plan. The
Stakehc~der Working Group guided the development, public invdvement shaped the fan, civic and
business grasps were contacted as community outreach, and open houses and a joint Planning
CommissionlCityCouncilworkshopwas held. The key aspects of the Downtown Development Plan
Update include: the Comprehensive Plan and Development Ordinance amendments, a Strategic
Business Plan, an Implementation plan, and public hearings before Planning Commission and City
Council. The City Council is the deasion-making body on the plan.
Hend spoke about the downtown design and proposed zoning revisions in the proposed Woodburn
Development Ordinance amendment. Zoning revisions are propped for the CG and DDC zone. The CG
zone would be modified to create a Gateway Sub-district that would allow multi-family dwellings,
duplexes, single-family attached dwellings, and management and corporate offices. Incompatible light
industrial and manufacturing uses would be discouraged and not allowed to expand. The DDC zone
would have revisions to emphasize historic character and ~destrian-ai~ted architecture. The revisions
would allow more flexibility for housing choices and establish a building height limit. There currently isn't
a height limit downtown.
Hen~,,dr xx spoke about the Transportation Systems Plan am~dment; it identified a number of
improvements to better integrate the downtown. Portions of Grant, Hayes, Harrison, and 1 st Street would
convert to one-way streets. Also, two raw street design cross sections standards were developed.
Young Street would be esta~ished as a gateway candor, and improvement standards were developed.
Hen spoke about additional features that are included in the proposed update: it establishes an
implementation plan that identifies the key actions to achieve the vision and goals for downtown; it
includes a Strategic Business Development Plan that analyzes market opportunities and constraints for
downtown Woodburn; and it includes a Fusing Strategy tha# provides an overview of urban housing
trends and a housing demand forecast in downtown during the next 20 years. It also includes a
framework for transportation improvements that focuses on pedestrian improvements, streetscape
enhancements, and parking improvements for "Old Town" and streetscape enhancement concepts for
Young Street.
Hend spoke about the process of the proposed amendment at the public hearing, which gives the
public the opportunity to comment and give input on the proposed plan, then allows the Planning
Commission an opportunity for consideration of testimony. If necessary the Planning Commission may
continue the hearing and makes recommendation to the City Council. The Planning Commission can
recommend approval of the Downtown Development Plan'as-is', with modifications, or forego any action
on the Plan. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the amendments with
modifications.
Vice Chairperson Vancil questioned whether the Commission could recommend rejecting it outright.
Hendryx responded yes; then it would go to the City Council as being rejected. The other alternative
would be to consider a continuance on the matter.
Page 2 of 9
Planning Commission Meeting - September24, 2009
l5
Commissioner Jennings stated that the map in the staff report was incorrect, and asked if a corrected one
be included in the public record.
Hendr noted that the map had formatting problems and that the correct map was part of the record.
Commi~ione_ r HutchinQS asked if particular manufacturing in the proposed CG subdistrict would be not
allowed.
Hend~ replied that in the future, in the CG Zone, new manufacturing will not be allowed; the existing
businesses would be grandfathered in. Hendryx went on to explain ordinance provisions for non-
conforming uses.
Commissioner Jennings questioned the verbiage with regard to signslmurals; why are they allowed but
discouraged.
Hend~ replied that currently they aren't allowed at all; in the future they would be allowed but may not
be appropriate for all areas.
Vic,=Chairperson Vancil noted that the plan includes parking improvements but he didn't see any
increases, was it a matter of perception.
Hend yx clarified that there would be a net increase, but very smal{.
Chairperson Bandelow invited testimony from the audience; and requested proponents of the proposal to
testify first.
Don Judson, 2815 Hazelnut Drive, stated that he is a member of the Woodbum Chamber of Commerce.
He stated that he approved of the good work done on the plan and liked the idea of creating a healthy
heart with the downtown. He said that it should include the east side across the railroad also to create a
un~ed downtown district. He mentioned that he went to the Historic Woodburn Neighborhoods
Association meeting and agrees with and applauds their vision for a vitalized downtown. He does,
however, have some disagreement that all buildings in downtown need to be preserved. It makes sense
to build new buildings instead of repairing excessively deteriorated buildings if it would be less expensive
to build new ones. Developers would be leery of getting involved in projects that held such strict
requirements. The Pearl District of Pordand would be a good example of how multi-family housing would
work along with commercial zoning; the+~ affordable housing percentage there is at 22%. He wouldn't like
to see a restriction on height as it's easier to build up rather than out in the limited space available. He
said that even if it's estimated that 3,000 people per month are moving into the area that may be an
overstatement. Developers follow the market; right now the property prices are cheap; if there were
incentives for developers, they would come. He had some things to say about traffic too; truck traffic can
be limited, angled parking would help, limiting one way streets to 1~, Harrison, Grani, and Hayes would
be good. The Chamber of Commerce is ready to implement changes.
Bruce Thomas, 795 Corby Street stated he was glad to see so much interest by the public. Neighbors
should be invited for input.
Ruth Herman-Wells, the Historic Woodburn Neighborhoods Association spokeswoman, presented her
presentation of the packet that was submitted for the public record. She asked the audience to follow
along with her on a 24-hour watch of the neighborhood. The Historic Woodbum Neighborhoods
Association had asked the City to reduce crime and clean up and the response was no, and that it wasn't
relevant.
Vice Chaimerson Vancil stated that the Planning Commission can talk about height restrictions, and land
use issues, but have no power to police the city. Recommendations for changes to the plan could be
Page 3 of 9
Planning Commission Meeting - Septernber24, 2009
l6
made addressing it.
Ruth Herman-Wells replied that changes could be made to pages 44.48 of the proposed Downtown
Development Plan Update to address crime and deanup more, so funds can be allocated for this.
Commissioner Jennings questioned that if the plan addresses crime, why is there an objection.
Ruth Herman-Wells replied that it was too general and should be more specific. The Association wouldn't
like to see more high density housing and traffic. Businesses shouldn't be replaced with housing. Traffic
should bypass resident~l areas, as nobody goes to downtown except to canmute through the area.
Noise reduction is important. Prodem rentals should be reduced so that no housing that allows 20-40
people could exist. The assoaation wants the Planning Commission to postpone approval of the plan
until the plan is redone with their recommendations.
Commissioner Kenagv agreed that noise reduction would be good.
Vice Chairoerson Vancil stated that instead of redeveloping, making it more livable would be an option.
Ruth Herman•Wells reiterated that crime reduction and deanup should be a priority.
Vice Chairoerson_ Vancil asked if those changes were made would the Association agree then?
Ruth Herman-Wells replied that they were loser to the original 1 ~8 Plan because nuances of land use
are critical to the future of the city. Crime and deanup are their main conc~mms.
Commissioner Jennings requested darification, asking if they wanted the bulk of recommendations to be
like 1998 plan and adding association's recommendations tothat.
Ruth Herman•Wells replied yes.
Pegpi Kosikowski, 611 Harrison Street, said she wanted to discuss opposition to 5~' Street re-opening.
Chairperson Bandelow stated that this wasn't the time to bring that up; now was the time to comment on
the Downtown Plan.
Peoni Kosikowski withdrew her statement.
Dural Craw, Historic Woodburn Neighborhoods Association Chairman,167 N. Sedlemeir Street,
expressed his opposition to the Downtown Development Plan Update by saying that it was totally
dependant on great developers a magical benevolence to avoid failure of downtown. Theme should be
more emphasis on facade improvements.
Kav M, 58fi Settiemeir Street, spoke about her dissatisfaction with the consultants that were
outsourced to create the update; from limited infarmation come limited results. Good studies are needed
to provide good facts. There was no clear understanding in it why changes #o the original plan were
done. What started as a re-development plan ended upbeing acookie-cutter plan. The consultants
compared the cities of Seattle and Boise to our tiny town. Facts were in error, and not ail elements were
explored.
Eric Center, 234 S. Sehlemeir StreeE, 30 year resident, expressed his opposition to the plan. He
proposed that the City have a "fire sale" and to burn down the existing old buildings and put in a grade
school, high school, or a college like Western Oregon State College in Monmouth; thereby bringing in
money to spend locally. There will always be a need for education and it will revive the downtown.
Shelly Robinson, 410 Montgomery Street, spoke of her opposition to the plan. She spoke of being a
Page 4 of 9
Planning Commission Meeting - Septemberl4, 2IX19
7l
jogger and how she feels afraid when she jogs through the downtown area. The loitering, bars on the
windows, and graffiti are scary. There needs to be a respect for the downtown and its buildings. She
thought there should be an effort to bring in a bookstore, a cafe to bring young people in, and a movie
theatre. She said her kids are afraid to go downtown without an adult; she always has to go with them.
Chas, irQer Ba_, Below noted that as a jogger she thought the uneven quality of the sidewalks was a
bigger danger than anything else.
Casey Robles, 951 N. 5~' Street, 30 year resident, said that she avoids the downtown area and tells her
13 year old son to avoid it also because she feels it is dangerous. She offered to show anyone who
would like to see her neighborhood by walking through it after dark. Safety is an issue; she wants to see
cleanup at the top of the list of priorities.
Vic_ ai rson Va,,,,ncil clarified that by cleanup she meant livability.
Commissioner Jennings stated that the Planning Commission could address land use decisions only.
Sheleen Milburn, 330 S. Settlemeir Street, expressed opposition to the plan; stating that this was the only
forum available to speak by the public. She wanted to talk about code, livability, crime issues; if these
aren't addressed nobody will want to step forth into this town. She felt that the consultants had their plan
already prepared and printed before they even took in any suggestions by the public, She wants more
policinglsecurity before anyone does anything else. She also doesn't allow her kids to go to downtown.
Sta__ n Tngp,182 S. Settlemeir Street, expressed opposition to the plan; asking if there was something that
could be added to the plan to address policing and security.
ChairQer_ s _on Bandel~ox+ responded that the strength has to come from the community; strong language
needs to be added in written form so that fellow-up can happen.
Sta_ n Trapp added that he thought property owners need to be held responsible for security of their
properties and buildings. Police won't even come out to fill oui a report to address complaints,
Dogmar Kinuue, 586 Grant Street, expressed opposition to the plan; stating that Woodburn wasn't ready
for high density housing in downtown and there were more changes that needed to be made to the plan.
Bruce Thomas, 795 Corby Street, expressed support for the proposed update; stating that the original
Downtown Development Plan of 1998 was started by 40 citizens at Lupita's Restaurant and as a result
there have been changes. It has been s0 years since concrete was poured in downtown. As a result
homeowner's pride surfaced; people cleaned up their properties. Livability is an issue and citizen
involy®ment drives what happens in the future. What we talk about today won't happen for 10 years.
Commissioner J_ing-s stated that we should get nd of the consultants and instead organize 40 local
people together and make the changes that are needed.
Kav McKewen, 54 Smith Drive, expressed opposition to the plan; stating that safety is an issue. A
complaint regarding loitering was made but it didn't go anywhere.
Terri leman,192 Young Street business owner, expressed opposition to the plan; stating that the
proposed Industrial Zone changes to include housing overlays would affect family-run businesses that
have been strong supporters of the aty and have provided many jobs. That would greatly affect those
businesses that have poured their hearts into downtown, and are committed to Woodburn. After all that
time spent building up their business; now they wouldn't be able to sell the business if the proposed
changes go into effect. That takes away their retirement money; the businesses are their retirements.
Grandfathering doesn't work for them because it takes away their retirement. Cleaning up the property
area is acceptable, but property owners need a reason to rise to the occasion. Anything would be better
Page 5 of 9
Planning Commission Meeting - Septern6er24, 2009
78
than what is at downtown now.
Richard, L__owerv, 479 5=h Street, stated that the hearing should be continued; even if the propped plan is
tossed, the money was well spent in causing discussion.
Ch_,_ ai=rson 8an~delow_, asked if there were any more questions or testimony.
There were none.
Assi_,=nt Cif Att mev Stuart stated that the Planning Commission had the discretion to continue the
hearing while closing the public testimony portion of the hearing if they chose.
Chairperson Bandelow closed the public testimony portion of the heating.
Co_mmissiQr~e,,,, r= inns commented that he liked the Public Vllorks written testimony regarding one-way
streets, then said he was unsure why there was wasted verbiage about wall murals on page 25. Then he
noted that the plan is so expensive that it won't happen in 5-10 years.
V, Chairoerson Vancil added that it wouldn't happen in 25 years.
Commissioner J~ stated that we can't afford this; we need to get the talented locals, not
consultants, to do it. We can do better.
Commissioner Hutchison stated that he had questions about the rezoning of districts; particularly the CG
zones.
Vi,~e Chairperson Vancil noted that in the overlay tone, going from no housing to high density housing
was extreme.
HeHe=dr,~x stated that the proposal would be allowing 12 units per acre; it could say no housing, or limit how
much would be allowed. Currency GG zone doesn't allow housing at all.
Commissioner Jennings stated that there were lots of ramifications that were unknown.
Hen responded that modifications could be made if the Commission chose to; that is part of the land
use process.
ChairQersorr Bandelvw noted that historically businesses had residences above them.
Commissioner Hutchison questioned if funding could be increased to include law enforcement.
Comm„_ issioner J,~„_enninos noted that on page 47, the fan asks for three independent studies at $25,000
each to be done; totaling $75,000; which is a big expenditure.
Char, irperson Ban__ Below questioned whether that was called for in the 1998 Plan or in the proposed update
as this wasn't underlined in the update.
Commissioner Jennings stated that he wasn't sure if this was in the original plan.
Hendry stated that as this was all to be typically funded from urban renewal moneys and part of it was to
go toward marketing, loans and grants. Police and code enforcement, on the other hand, come from the
general fund. The City could help a developer with a feasibility study.
Vice Chairc~eerson_ Vancil stated that this was precisely what he thinks is wrong with the plan,
Page 6 of 9
Planning Commission Meeting - September24, 20Q9
79
Commissioner Jenninas stated that in the update if you follow the proposed plan, millions of dollars would
be tallied; we can't afford it.
Senior Planner t.abossiere stated that it was a summary of what was proposed in Appendix A.
Commissioner Jennings clarified that it was new and we can't affad it.
Hendr stated it was confusing to follow along but as outlined in the staff report earlier the chain of the
process would go on to the City Council and then to the Urban Renewal Agency.
Commissioner Jenn nps stated that there was reference to the former City Hall Building being a symbol of
Woodburn and we should fix it. It doesn't cite the fact that it was a condemned building for public use and
that because of the building codes when it was built it would be too expensive to retrofit it to meet
earthquake cues.
Vic__e Chairperson Vancil agreetf that it would be too expensive to retrofit the former City Hafl Building to
meet current earthquake codes.
Commissioner Jenninas stated that all of those things are in this proposed plan and he didn't know how
they would be expected to deal with them all in just one night. If we had to go over the plan to make the
changes that needed to be done line by line, it would take longer than one night and it still would not be
completely discussed.
Vice Chairperson Vancil added that there needed to be more changes to the plan.
C_ issioner Jenninas agreed and recommended that a workshop was needed to work out the
problems in the proposed plan update and come up with a document the Commission could live with.
Chairoerson Bandelow stated that she understood that the money just wasn't there; consultant fees were
unacceptable.
Hendr,~x stated that there would be urban renewal money available as the community developed,
Vice Chair erson Vanci! questioned whether any of that money from urban renewal could be used far
code enforcement and public safety issues; if that was legal.
Director Hendrnc stated that it would have to be discussed with legal counsel.
Assistant ity,„Attorney Stuart stated that it would have to be looked at but it was unlikely that Urban
Renewal Funds could be put toward this.
Vice Chairperson Vancil stated that livability is the biggest issue before any recommendationswere to be
made on the Downtown Development Plan Update.
Chairperson Bandelow stated that it was 9:30 and there was still so much to go over.
Commissioner Gr(aorie_ff, stated that zoning in the CG zone should stay as it is. The number one concern
should be citizen safety; businesses won't come without it. Who would want to buy a house next to the
railroad?
Commissioner Grosiacaues noted that the CG zone overlay changes were a concern for the current
businesses to be impacted. That needs to be addressed.
Commissioner Kenaav stated that crime is the number one issue; suggesting a workshop to make the
plan work. The plan needs to incorporate the historic society's suggestions.
Page 7 of 9
Panning Commission Meeting - September24, 2009
ao
There was general discussion among the Commissioners.
Chairperson Bandelow questioned whether there should be another meeting to discuss whether the plan
should be continued or thrown out and started over.
Commissioner Jennings suggested that it be forwarded to City Council with a recommendation of denial
and a recommendation to form a citizen task force to look at this problem and get it res~ved.
Commissioner Jennings made a motion to forward the Woodburn Downtown Development Plan Update
for the City of Woodbum and the Dream of Our Historic Downtown -the Old Settlemier District fan;
along with the recommendations of the Public Works Director, with a recommendati~ of denial and that
the Mayor appoint a citizens task force to work in conjunction with Hendryx to rewrite the Downtown
Development Plan Update.
Commissioner Grosjacp~es seconded the motion.
Hen r suggested that the Commission could form a sutxommittee to wok on redraftir~ the plan.
Assistant City Attornev Stuart stated that they could choose to not recommend specific parts of the plan.
They are asked to approve land use components of the plan with amendments or not. He recommends
that they put it to a vote or amend the motion.
Chairperson Bandelow asked for a recap of the motion.
Commissioner Je, n_nin,_ps stated that he would like to amend the motion that the Planning Commission
encourages the City Council to pass the Public Works recommendation; just the transportation portion of
the plan.
There was general discussion among the Commissiaiers.
Commissioner Jennings stated that he withdrew his amendment to the motion
Chairperson Bandelow requested a roll call of the Planning Commission for a recommendation of denial
of the entire planned Update.
ROLL CALL
Chairperson Bandelow Yes
Vice Chairperson Vancil Yes
Commissioner Grosjacques Yes
Commissioner Grigorie~f Yes
Commissioner Hutchison Yes
Commissioner Jennings Yes
Commissioner Kenagy Yes
There was general discussion of what would happen with the update now that it was voted out.
Commissioner Grosjacques made a motion to put together a committee that works together with the
community and chamber and make all three of these plans come together and go back to the Council
with our recommendations from there.
Commissioner Jennings stated that the Commission couldn't form a committee; that only the Mayor could
recommend that the City create a task force.
Assistant City Attorney Stuart clarified that through this motion the Planning Commission wasn't trying to
Page 8 of 9
Planning Commission Meeting - Septernber24, 2009
81
farm a committee or body but recommend to the Council that the City form one.
Commissioner Kenagv seconded the motion.
Chairperson Bandelow clarified that the motion is to ask the Mayor to form a task force to work on
bringing all three of these plans together as Commissioner Grosiacgues stated in his motion and that the
Commission recommended that the Council 9o along with the Mayor's recommendation.
Chairperson Bande, low asked for a vote. The motion carried on a voice vote.
Chairperson Bandelow called a five minute recess.
Chairperson Bandelow reconvened the meeting for the next item on the agenda.
REPORTS
____._
A. Planning Project Tracking Sheet-September 14, 2009
B. Planning Activity Report: July 16, 2009-September 14, 2009
C. Building Activity for July 2009, and August 2009
Vice Chairperson Vancil asked where the large dollar amount was from in the building activity report.
Hendr replied that it was from remodeling and tenant improvements in the company stores.
Commissioner Jennings asked what denied final meant from the planning activity report.
Hen~dr xx replied that it meant the business application was died for code zoning issues. They could
reapply if they chose to and if the type was acceptable in the zone then it may be approved. An exam~e
of denied Type I applications are people wanting to have a restaurant at their home; catering services to a
restaurant would be allowed, having a restaurant wouldn't.
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Jennings moved to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Hutchi on seconded the motion,
which caned unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 10pm.
APPROVED
ATTEST
Ellen Bandelow, CHAIRPERSON
Date
Jim Hendryx
Economic ~ Development Services Director
City of Woodburn, Oregon
Date
Page 9 of 9
Planning Commission Meeting - September24, 2009
82
~'' ~~~~ Community Develo meat De artment
~~ p p
`' • ~ ^ a
4'.. ,4'..~~. '
(~ j~ j ~ Pianning Dlvlslon
~1 ~,~J~'V ~ 270 Montgomery Street, Woodburn, Oregon 97071 • (503) 982-S24b ~ 503 982-5244
c- ( )
.,~.
LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENT
STAFF REPORT
Planning Commission
A lication T e T e V- Le islative Amendment
A lication Number LA 2009-O1
Project Description A legislative amendment to revise the Comprehensive Plan Map
and text, the Woodburn Development Ordinance, and the
Transportation Systems Plan with the proposed
recommendations found in the Woodburn Downtown
Develo meat Plan U date.
A licantlRe resentative Ci of Woodburn
Planner Assi ned Natalie Labassiere
A lication Received Au ust 24, 2009
A lication Com fete Au ust 24, 2009
Date of Staff Re ort Se tember 8, 2009
Date of Hearin Se tember 24, 2009
120-Da Deadline Le islative Amendments not sub'ect to 120-da time limit
BACKGROUND 8t PROPOSAL -The City Council adopted a Downtown Development PIan in 1998. The
1998 Downtown Development Plan recommended a limited number of actions to return vibrancy to the
downtown area and enhance opportunities for downtown businesses. The 1998 Downtown Development
Plan had a limited scope, due to financial restrictions. In 2001, to fund a broader, more integrated
program of commercial and residential revitalization, the City Council formed an urban renewal district
centered on the downtown area. In January 2007 the City of Woodburn received a grant from the
Oregon Transportation and Growth Management Program to help fund an update of the 1998 Downtown
Development Plan. This Plan will update the 1998 Downtown Development Plan and expand it to
include more properties within the Downtown Urban Renewal District, including those along Young
Street (Figure 1 }.
The proposed Woodburn Downtown Development Plan Update and corresponding amendments to the
Comprehensive Plan, Woodburn Development Ordinance, and the Transportation Systems Plan was
prepared by the consultant team Otak, Leland Consulting Group and Kittelson Associates.
Goals ~ Vision
The plan provides development concepts, transportation improvement projects, strategic business
planning, a housing strategy for attracting new residents to downtown, and an implementation plan. In
order to provide guidance, the plan established three fundamental goals:
Enhance Old Town as a "Healthy H,_ earl" for Downtown. Old Town will provide opportunities to
live, work, shop and play in a clean, safe and attractive environment.
83
• Create a "Complete Downtown" with new development in the Gateway Subarea, Encourage new
development east of Front Street that is complementary to the retail, housing and streetscape
environment of Old Town.
• Sustain a successful business community. Combine public and private efforts to achieve a
balanced mix of uses that include shopping, entertainment, restaurants, professional and
government services and housing,
Project Area
The plan area was divided into five subareas (Figure 2}which allowed analysis of unique land use
characteristics, key attractions, transportation, and parking issues to be addressed through the planning
effort.
1, Old Town Subarea A~ -Old Town is bounded by Oak and Harrison Streets and by Front and
Second Streets. Old Town features an eclectic mix of development and architectural styles.
Current downtown businesses are small and most are Latino-owned and operated.
2. Gateway District (Subarea B) -This subarea is bounded by the rail line on the west and Mill
Creek on the east. Existing land uses include Chemeketa Community College, a number of
industrial employers, and religious institutions.
3. South Front Street Comdor (Subarea C~--The subarea is a narrow corridor within the project
area, connecting downtown to South Settlemier Avenue.
4. North Front Street Corridor Subarea D) -North Front Street is a similarly narrow corridor with
planned improvements to Front Street as the primary transportation improvement connecting Old
Town to Highway 214.
5. Your Street Corridor,~Suba_ rea E) -The Young Street Corridor is bounded by Mill Creek on the
west and Highway 99E on the east. It is more diverse in terms of land uses and includes
commercial, industrial, residential, institutionaUpublic, and religious uses. Land uses for the
corridor are primarily low density residential with low rations of improvement value to land
values. This corridor has significant potential for residential, commercial, and mixed-use
redevelopment, along transportation improvements liking Old Town to Highway 99E.
Proposed Amendments
As part of the Downtown Development Plan Update, amendments to the Comprehensive Plan,
Comprehensive Plan Map, Woodburn Development Ordinance, and Transportation Systems Plan are
proposed.
Comprehensive Plan policies were added and revisions were made to two existing zoning districts, the
Downtown Development and Conservation (DDC}and Cammercial General (CG) districts. The
revisions to the DDC zone emphasize the historic character and pedestrian-oriented architecture. The
revisions allow more flexibility for housing choices and established a building height limit. The
revisions to the CG zone, establishes a Gateway Sub district. The sub district will allow mixed use
development with a substantial housing component. (Figure 3) The proposed revisions also establish a
lower height limit and restrict industrial type uses. The redevelopment of the Gateway Sub district will
extend the sense of downtown across the railroad tracks.
The Downtown Development Plan identifies and develops a number of transportation improvements to
better integrate these improvements with the current TSP.
• Portions of Grant Street, Hayes Street, Harrison Street, and 1St Street have been identified as
candidates for modification to one-way streets within the Old Town Street grid.
• Two street design cross section standards were developed for the Old Town Commercial street
grid.
84
• TSP amendments to the cross-section of Young Street from Mill Creek to Front Street.
The Plan
The Woodburn Downtown Development Plan Update contains the following sections:
• Executive Summary
• Introduction
• Development Concepts
• Transportation Improvements
• Strategic Business Development Plan
• Housing Strategy
• Implementation Plan
RECOMMENDATION -The Planning Commission has the option of approving the Downtown
Development Plan Update as-is ,approve with modifications based on public input or other
information, or forego any action on the Plan.
Staff recommends that after considering public testimony the Planning Commission recommends
approval of the Downtown Development Plan with modifications to City Council.
Oregon Revised Statutes I97 requires amendments to the Comprehensive Plan to conform to the
Statewide Goals and Guidelines, Comprehensive Plan, the applicable regulations in the Woodburn
Development Ordinance, and the. The following provides the required analysis.
RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA: Woodburn Development Ordinance § [WDO 4.101.06.E][WDO
4.101.09.A.3]City of Woodburn Comprehensive Plan §Review, Revision, and Update pg 11 and
Policy B-l.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. Tvue V Procedural Requirements. Type V decisions involve legislative actions where the City
Council enacts or amends the City's land use regulations, comprehensive plan, zoning maps or
some other component of any of these documents where changes are such a size, diversity of
ownership or interest as to be legislative in nature under state law. Included are large scale
annexations, and adopting or amending the comprehensive plan text or the WDO. The Planning
Commission holds an initial public hearing on the proposal prior to making a recommendation to
the City Council. The Ciiy Council then holds a final de novo public hearing and makes the City's
final decision. Public notice is provided for all public hearings (Section 4.101.09). The City
Council's decision is the City's final decision and is appealable to LUBA within 21 days after it
becomes final. (WD4 4.1O1.~b.E]
Findin s: As part of the Downtown Development Plan Update amendments to the Comprehensive
Plan, the Woodburn Development Ordinance and the Transportation Systems Plan are the
proposed requiring a Type V decision. The Planning Commission is scheduled to conduct an
initial public hearing on September 24, 2009 and consider evidence and testimony regarding the
adoption of the Vl~oodburn Downtown Development Plan Update which require amendments to
the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan and Map, the Woodburn Transportation Systems Plan (TSP}
and the Woodburn Development Ordinance zoning regulations of the DDC and CG zones located
in subject area. The City Council will then hold a final public hearing to consider the
recommendation of the Planning Commission and testimony regarding the identified text
amendments on October 12, 2009. A measure 56 notice was sent to all affected property owners
on September 2, 2009. Notice of the public hearing was published in the Woodburn Independent
newspaper on September 12 and September 16, 2009.
85
2. Type V Notification Reguiretnents. At least 20 days before an initial evidentiary public hearing at
which a Type V decision is to be considered, the Director shall issue a public notice that conforms
to the requirements of this subsection and any applicable state statute. Notice shall be sent to
affected governmental entities, special districts, providers of urban services, the Oregon
Department of Transportation and any affected recognized neighborhood associations and any
party who has requested in writing such notice. [WDO 4.141.09.A.3]
Finding_ Measure 56 notices were sent to all affected property owners on September 2, 2009,
Notification of the public hearing and legislative amendment was published in the Woodburn
Independent Newspaper on September 12 and September 15, 2009.
Notif cation of the legislative amendment was provided to the Oregon Department of Land
Conservation and Development (DECD) on August 27, 2009.
All notification contained information regarding the time, date, and location of the pubic hearings,
the file number, the staff contact for questions or submission of testimony. All notification also
included a summary of the proposed text amendments. All notification documents provided
information regarding the public hearing procedures and how to review or obtain copies of the
documents to be considered. Notification requirements consistent with the provisions of the
Woodburn Development Ordinance and statutory requirements were met for this legislative
amendment to the Woodburn Development Ordinance.
3. Initiation of a Legislative Proposal: Type V Actions initiated by the Council shall be referred to
the Planning Commission for a public hearing and recommendation to the Council. The City
Council shall hold the final public hearing on a proposed legislative decision, (WDO 4.101.17]
Findin s: The City Council accepted a grant from the State under the Transportation and Growth
Program in 2007. Acceptance of the grant initiated consideration of the Downtown Plan Update.
4. Comprehensive Plan Policy Consistency -Review, Revision and Update
A. Compliance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan;
Findings; The Comprehensive Plan requires that any change it makes in the Pian is
consistent with other goals and policies established in the Plan. The proposed additions are
consistent are with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
Citizen Involvement Policies and Gaals [Comprehensive Goal B1-These goals and
policies state that the City of Woodburn seek to encourage citizen input at all phases
of the land use planning process and that Woodburn shall coordinate with affected
state agencies regarding proposed comprehensive plan and land use regulation
amendments. Participants helped identify the best qualities of Downtown and an
overall vision for the next 20 years. Open houses where conducted on January 21 and
June 3, 2009. Participants in the community workshops were asked to help identify
what they liked best about downtown and to suggest key design and development
themes. Stakeholder interviews were conducted with key business owners, property
owners, civic groups, and appointed/electednfficials. The interviews affirmed the
same positive downtown features that were identified by the public. A stakeholder's
working group (SWG) was formed which met multiple times with the consultant team
to help set the right themes and long-term vision for downtown. The SWG provided
on-going review and input for the plan. A joint workshop was held on August 31,
2009 with the City Council and Planning Commission.
At the joint workshop the Historic Woodburn Neighborhood Association presented an
alternative downtown redevelopment plan which focused on two top priorities: less
86
crime and more clean up and preservation of authentic historic buildings. The goals of
the Downtown Development Plan Update and the alternative plan contain similar
goals of improving downtown Woodburn.
Notification of the open houses and workshop were sent to all property owners within
the notification area (Figure 4). Additional notification was sent to property owners
250 feet from the notification area. Notification and a copy of the text amendments
were provided to the DLCD, consistent with this policy as documented in the record.
Residential Land Development and Housing Policies and Goals [Comprehensive Goal
)) -The proposed Downtown Development Plan recognizes that housing is an
integral component of a complete downtown. Increasing the supply of housing in
Downtown Woodburn, including both for sale and rental housing as well as market
rate and affordable projects will contribute to the overall health and vitality of
Downtown Woodburn. This strategy is consistent with this comprehensive planning
goal of the City to ensure that adequate housing for sectors of the community is
provided.
Commercial Land Development and Employment Policies and Goals iComprehensive
Goal F -The proposed addition ofPolicy F-1.10 establishes the Downtown Gateway
sub-district which supports Goal F•1 by encouraging infill and redevelopment of
existing commercial areas within the community. Policy F-1.5 states "It would be of
benefit to the entire City to have Woodburn's Downtown Design and Conservation
District an active, healthy commercial area. Policy F-1.8 states as a policy "Ensure
that existing commercial sites are used efficiently. Consider the potential for
redevelopment of existing commercial sites and modifications to zoning regulations
that intensify development to attract new investrnent. The proposed Gateway sub-
district wiilallow for mixed-use redevelopment. A broader range of housing choice
and higher densities can be integrated with new employment or commercial uses.
Transportation Goals and Policies [Comprehensive Goal Hl -The goals and policies
within this section were amended as part of the 2005 Periodic Review package to be
consistent with the 2005 TSP. The purpose of the TSP is to guide the management and
development of appropriate transportation facilities in Woodburn, incorporating the
community's vision, while remaining consistent with state, regional, and local plans.
The Downtown Development Plan Update includes a framework plan for
transportation improvements that focuses on pedestrian and bicycle circulation
improvements, parking improvements for Old Town and streetscape enhancement
concepts for three of the planning sub-districts. The Plan recommends converting
portions of Grant, Hayes, and Harrison Streets to one-way streets. The plan also
develops alternative cross section standards for the Old Town commercial streets and
for Young Street from Mill Creek to Front Street.
The proposed amendments were evaluated by the Public Works Department
(Attachment C}, staff recommends that the TSP is amended adding the proposed street
cross sections but not making them street specific. The proposed street section would
add to the City's menu of transportation, providing flexibility in how streets are
87
constructed throughout the City. Particularly in the downtown where there are
narrower streets.
Downtown Design Policies and Goals [Comprehensive Goal K] -The vision
statement was established in 199? by downtown business and property owners, the
Downtown waodburn Association and interested citizens. The proposed additions of
Goal K-7 and K-8 and the corresponding policies are consistent with the vision
statement established in the Comprehensive Plan. Proposed K-7.1 is included to allow
multi-family residential development in the downtown area. This aims to enliven the
downtown which is consistent with the vision statement established in the
Comprehensive Plan. Vision statement 6 in the Downtown Design element describes
Downtown as part of the City's oldest neighborhood. Businesses, government and
employment uses are linked to residential neighborhoods, educational facilities,
recreation opportunities and good transportation services. The proposed Goal K-8 and
its corresponding policies aim to preserve the historic character of downtown. The
proposal recommends development standards and guidelines to the DDC district that
enhance street environment by providing building and streetscape designs. The update
of the Downtown Development Plan meets Policy K-1.2 (g}requirement that the plan
is updated every 5 years.
B. Compliance with the various elements of the Comprehensive Plan;
Findin s: The proposed additions are also in compliance with various elements of the
Comprehensive Plan elements relating to enhancing the quality of life that are discussed
under citizen involvement, residential land, commercial land, transportation and downtown
design.
C. Compliance with Statewide Goals and guidelines;
Findin s: There are 19 state land use goals that have been adopted by the state legislature.
The applicable statewide planning goals are Goals 1, 2, 8,10 and 12. The remaining goals
are not applicable to update of the Downtown Development Plan and proposed additions to
the Comprehensive Plan.
Goal 1-Citizen Involvement: To develop a citizen involvement program that insures
the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process.
Findin :The project was guided by a project team, made up of the consultant team
and City Staff. Community outreach has been a key element of the planning process.
Participants helped identify the best qualities of downtown and an overall vision for
the next 20 years. Open houses where conducted on January 21 and June 3, 2009.
Stakeholder interviews were conducted with key business owners, property owners,
civic groups, and appointed/electedofficials. A stakeholder's working group was
formed which met multiple times with the consultant team to help set the right themes
and long-term vision for downtown. A joint workshop was held on August 31, 2009
with the City Council and Planning Commission. Notice of the open house and joint
workshop were sent to all property owners within the notification area (Figure 4}.
Additional notification was sent to property owners Z50 feet from the notification area.
Measure Sb notices were sent to all affected property owners on September 2, 2009.
88
Notification of the public hearing and legislative amendment was published in the
Woodburn Independent Newspaper on September 12 and September 16, 2009. The
draft Downtown Plan and corresponding amendments are located on the city's
website. These amendments are consistent with this goal
At the joint workshop the Historic Woodburn Neighborhood Association presented an
alternative downtown redevelopment plan which focused on two top priorities: less
crime and more clean up and preservation of authentic historic buildings.
Goal 2--Land Use Planning: To establish a land use planning process and policy
framework as a basis for all decision and actions related to use of land and to assure an
adequate factual base for such decisions and actions.
Findin The City of Woodburn received a TGM grant to update the Woodburn
Downtown Development plan. The TGM program is a joint program of the Oregon
Department of Transportation (ODOT) and the Department of Land Conservation and
Development (DCLD) an as such the proposal has to meet the goals. The Woodburn
Downtown Development Flan Update and proposed amendments are consistent with
this goal.
Goal 9 -Economic Development: To provide adequate opportunities throughout the
state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of
Oregon's citizens.
Findin :The proposed Goal K-7 is intended to enliven downtown through the
development of housing. The corresponding policy encourages housing in the
downtown area as an opportunity to promote greater activity in downtown and to
support the local business owners.
Goa110 - Housing: To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state.
Findin :The proposed additions to the Comprehensive Plan allows for additional
housing to be built in the Downtown Area and the adjacent CG zoning district. The
establishment of the Downtown Gateway sub-district allows multi-family residential
development in an area that provides more consumers within an area of commercial
development. The proposed amendments allow for a variety of housing types in the
downtown area. Providing housing opportunities is consistent with this goal.
Goal 12 - Transportation: To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic
transportation system.
Findin :The update to the Downtown Development Plan proposes amendments to the
Transportation Systems Plan (TSP) to better integrate and focus long-range planning
for Woodburn's downtown.
D. That there is a public need for the change;
Findin s: There is a significant public need for the update to the Woodburn Downtown
Development Plan. The Comprehensive Plan requires that the plan be updated every 5 years. The
last plan was prepared in 1998. This update is built on the previous visions from the 1998 Plan but
it refines some of the goals. New opportunities are identified and more detailed concepts and
implementation strategies have been provided.
89
E. That this land best suites that public need; and
Findin s: The Comprehensive Plan sets as a vision statement that the Downtown is the center of
community life and that the Downtown is a place where a diverse community comes together to
work, shop, and play. The update to the Downtown Development Plan and the proposed additions
to the Comprehensive Plan is an opportunity to better serve the area.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
The Planning Commission and City Council received considerable public input at the joint
workshop. Among those quality of life issues raised during the workshop were crime reduction,
cleanup and preservation, traffic, noise, and problem rental properties. The Historic Woodburn
Neighborhood Association presented an alternative plan during the joint workshop. Extensive
input was directed towards quality of life issues. While some issues raised are associated with
Comprehensive Plan policies andlor land use standards (historic preservation, design standards),
others (crime, noise} are not typically associated with Plan or text amendments. Staff agrees that
most of these issues are best addressed separately and outside the land use process, such as using
Police programs to address crime for example. The Community Development Department's
response to some of the specific issues raised by the Historic Downtown Association is as follows:
1. Hei t Limits: The draft Downtown Development Plan Update and WDO amendments propose
a maximum building height. Currently there is no restriction on height in the DDC zone. (WDO
2.107.~S.B}. In the existing CG zone, the maximum height of buildings shall not exceed 70 feet.
The draft Downtown Development Pian Update proposes a maximum height of 50 feet or four
stories, whichever is less, in the Downtown Gateway sub-district.
2. Cleanup & Preservation: The WDO establishes specific design standards for the downtown and
the adjacent Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD}. These existing standards
guide redevelopment within the area. Amendments outlined in the Downtown Development
Plan Update further historic preservation through the establishment of specific guidelines for
Downtown Development and Conservation District (DDC}. Current guidelines are limited and
do not establish minimum design standards intended towards preserving the downtown character.
The Plan does not address "cleaning-up"downtown since it is not relevant to the Comprehensive
Plan or Woodbum Development Ordinance.
3. Traffic Issues: The Downtown Development Plan Update does not recommend any land use
decisions that would significantly increase downtown traffic beyond what the capacity of the
existing system can handle. The strategy for addressing the traffic needs of downtown is to
disperse traffic and enhance the efficiency in which the existing transportation moves traffic.
The emphasis within the Plan to make the downtown area more friendly for alternative means of
transportation, such as pedestrian, bicycle, and transit reduce vehicle trips and provide calming
tendencies for vehicular traffic that does flow through the area.
The concept ofusing ane-way streets to provide diagonal parking and dedicated bicycle routes
was identified as a method for increasing the number of downtown parking spaces (typically a
20% increase in parking stalls) and easing the effort for on-street parking. Contrary to the
position taken by the Historic Neighborhood Plan, studies have shown one-way streets do not
increase traffic speeds and actually provide a traffic calming affect.
90
It is important to know that the Plan suggests projects that may enhance the downtown area and
should be considered within the City's capital improvement program. Any specific street
improvement project included in the City's capital improvement program would include a
focused public involvement process. It is during this public involvement process that design
alternatives are evaluated and the best project specific alternative is selected.
There is a difference of opinion between the Downtown Development Plan Update and the
Historic Neighborhood Plan with regard to traffic and its impact on the community. Not all
traffic congestion is bad. There is not a healthy downtown area on earth that does not experience
traffic congestion. Traffic congestion is an indicator that people desire to be downtown to shop,
eat, and live. Significant increases in traffic passing through the adjoining neighborhood should
be avoided by dispersing the traffic through alternate routes and the promotion of other modes of
transportation.
4. Problem Rental Properties: The Downtown Development Plan Update does not specifically
address problem rental properties since it is not relevant to the Comprehensive Plan or
Woodburn Development Ordinance. This issue was recently addressed by the City Council's
passage in 2008 of a rental Housing Ordinance (see attached materials).
5. Land Use Restrictions: The draft Downtown Development Plan Update discourages
incompatible Light Industrial and Manufacturing activities in the Plan area. Existing business,
which become `non-conforming" through adoption of the Plan recommendations are allowed to
continue to operate, however expansion to those businesses are prohibited. Likewise, should a
"non-conforming" business close operation beyond b months or should they be destroyed by fire,
they would be required to relocate to an area zoned accordingly. The proposed amendments
allow businesses to continue to operate until they relocate.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment "A" Comprehensive Plan -Proposed Text Amendments
Attachment "B" Woodburn Development Ordinance -Proposed Text Amendments
Attachment "C" Public Works Director Comments to the proposed TSP amendments
Exhibit "A" Woodburn Downtown Development Plan Update (Distributed to the Planning
Commission in August 2009)
Figure "1" Downtown Plan Area
Figure "Z" Downtown Plan Subareas
Figure " 3" Zoning Designations -Downtown Development Plan Update
Figure "4" Notification Area -Downtown Development Plan Update
91
S#~lEet#~e~- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
F, Commercial Land Development and Employment
Goai
F-1. Encourage infill and redevelopment of existing commercial areas
within the community, as well as nodal neighborhood centers, to
meet future commercial development needs.
Policies
______.
F-1. I The City should at all times have sufficient land to accommodate the
retail needs of the City and the surrounding market area while
encouraging commercial infill and redevelopment. The City presently
has five major commercial areas: 99E, 1.5 Interchange, the downtown
area, the Pan Road Nodal Commercial area, and the 2141211199E four
corners intersection area. No new areas should be established.
F-1.2 Lands for high traffic generating uses (shopping centers, malls,
restaurants, etc.) should be located on well improved arterials. The uses
should provide the necessary traffic control devices needed to ameliorate
their impact on the arterial streets.
F-1.3 Strip zoning should be discouraged as a most unproductive form of
commercial land development. Strip zoning is characterized by the use
of small parcels of less than one acre, with lot depths of less than 150
feet and parcels containing multiple driveway access points. Whenever
possible, the City should encourage or require commercial developments
which are designed to allow pedestrians to shop without relying on the
private automobile to go from shop to shop. Therefore, acreage site lots
should be encouraged to develop "mall type" developments that allow a
one stop and shop opportunity. Commercial developments or
commercial development patterns that require the use of the private
automobile shall be discouraged.
F-1.4 Architectural design of commercial areas should be attractive with a
spacious feeling and enough landscaping to reduce the visual impact of
large expanses of asphalt parking areas. Nodal commercial areas should
be neighborhood and pedestrian oriented, with parking to the rear or side
of commercial buildings, and with pedestrian connections to neighboring
residential areas.
F-1.5 It would be of benefit to the entire City to have Woodburn's Downtown
Design and Conservation District an active, healthy commercial area.
92 ATTACHMENT A
~i#et~~a~- -Deleted Text Section
Ba1d/Underline -Proposed Text Change
Downtown redevelopment should be emphasized and the City should
encourage property owners to form a local improvement district to help
finance downtown improvements. Urban renewal funds may also be
used to fund planned improvements.
F-1.6 Commercial office and other low traffic generating commercial retail
uses can be located on collectors or in close proximity to residential
areas if care in architecture and site planning is exercised. The City
should ensure by proper regulations that any commercial uses located
close to residential areas have the proper architectural and landscaping
buffer zones.
F-1.7 The Dov-mtown Goals and Policies are included in Section K of the Plan
and are intended as general guidelines to help the City and its residents
reshape the downtown into a vita) part of the community. Generally,
development goals are broken into four categories, short-term goals,
intermediate term goals, long-term goals, and continual goals.
whenever development is proposed within the CBD these goals should
be reviewed and applied as necessary so as to maintain balance and
uniformity over time. Although not part of the Downtown Plan or
Woodburn Comprehensive Plan, Urban Renewal funding can help to
realize the goals and policies embodied in these land use plans.
F-1.8 Ensure that existing commercial sites are used efficiently. Consider the
potential for redevelopment of existing commercial sites and
modifications to zoning regulations that intensify development to attract
new investment.
F-1.9 Adopt a new NNC (Nodal Neighborhood Commercial) District, to be
applied in two Nodal Development Overlays:
(a) Near the intersection of Parr Road and the Evergreen Road extension
(approximately 10 acres}; and
(b) At the north boundary of the UGB along Boones Ferry Road, north
of the Mill Creek tributary (2-5 acres).
F-1.10 The Downtown Gateway sub-district of the CG zoning district is_an
area which extends eastward from Highway 99E towards downtown.
Special use provisions within the sub-district shall allow multi-family
residential development either as a stand-alone use or as Hart of a
vertical mixed use protect. The intent of allowing multi-family
residential development in this area is to provide more consumers
living within an area of commercial development and to provide 24-
hour a daylife into the eastern entrance to the downtown.
_2.
93
~l~e~~rgli- -Deleted Text Section
BoidlUaderline -Proposed Text Change
K. Downtown Design
Vision Sfafemenfs
During 1997, City officials, downtown business and property owners, Downtown
Woodburn Association and interested citizens developed vision statements for the
character and future revitalization of the Downtown. These vision statements
shall be recognized by the City as the overall expression of the Downtown's
future.
l . IMAGE OF DOWNTOWN: Downtown projects a positive image, one of
progress and prosperity. Downtown improvements have been visible and
well publicized. Downtown's image consists of a combination of
elements -physical appearance, and a look, and feel that it is thriving,
safe, and vital.
2. SAFETY: Downtown is a safe, secure place for customers, employees,
and the general public. Safety and security are assured by volunteer
efforts, and by physical improvements such as lighting which provides a
sense of security.
3. SOCIAL: Downtown is a place where a diverse community comes
together to work, shop, and play. It is a minor of the community, the
community's "living room". All persons in the community feel welcome,
and a part of, their downtown.
4. BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT: Downtown is a thriving environment for a
variety of businesses. The area contains a good mix of types of
businesses, a good overall marketing program is in place, and businesses
provide friendly, reliable customer service and convenient hours of
operation. Individual businesses are clean, attractive and present a good
physical appearance.
5. ATTRACTORS: Downtown is the center of community life, and serves
as a focus to define the community's historic and cultural heritage. A
community market brings all of the City's diverse communities together
every week. Downtown's architecture, the aquatic center and unique
businesses serve as a regional attractor. In addition, downtown offers
events and opportunities that draw people together to mingle, learn, and
enjoy.
6. NEIGHBORHOOD: Downtown is a part of the City's oldest
neighborhood. Businesses, government and employment uses are linked
to residential neighborhoods, educational facilities, recreation
opportunities and good transportation services. Throughout this central
neighborhood, both renovation and new development respect the history
and traditions of the community.
-3-
94
St~ilEet~~e~#- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
7. TRANSPORTATION: Downtown is easily accessible via the local street
system, public transportation, and other alternate modes of transportation.
Special transportation facilities improve circulation patterns within the
downtown, and provide links between downtown and key events and
places.
8. PARKING: while it is not appropriate to provide downtown parking at
the same level as found in shopping centers, good utilization and
management of the existing supply of downtown parking has been
accomplished.
9. IMPLEMENTATION: Implementing the vision for downtown has
involved both private and public investments. Investments are made in the
management structure for downtown, and in capital improvements to
improve the physical elements of downtown. Planning for these
investments, and examining options to pay for them is an on-going process
involving the City, Woodburn Downtown Association, property and
business owners.
-4-
95
lte~et~r • Deleted Text Section
BaldlUnderline -Proposed Text Change
Short Term Goals and Polices
K•1. Rehabilitation and Financing of the Downtown Development
Conservation District (DDCD)
Pol_ ic,,, ies
K-1.1 Because of the decline in both business and industry downtown, many
buildings have been abandoned and stand in a state of serious disrepair.
It is important in the short term that these undesirable, unsafe structures
be condemned and demolished if repair and maintenance is not practical.
Many buildings have been altered without regard to their surroundings,
succumbing to short-term fads, leaving the buildings quickly looking out
of date and incongruent. It is recommended that a system for removing
selective building elements, cleaning, maintaining, painting, and adding
selective elements be initiated.
K-1.2 Encourage a balanced financing plan to assist property owners in the
repair and rehabilitation of structures. The Plan may include
establishment of the following:
(a) Support and encourage an effective urban renewal district.
(b} Provide ongoing investments in downtown improvements.
(c) Economic Improvement District - a designated area, within which all
properties are taxed at a set rate applied to the value of the property
with the tax monies used in a revolving loan fund for building
maintenance, and improvement.
(d} Local, State, & National Historic District • a designated district
within which resources, and properties are inventoried and identified
for historic preservation.
(e) Establish a "501 C•3" tax exempt organization for the purpose of
qualifying for grants.
(f) Adopt a Downtown Development Plan and funding strategy for
Downtown improvements. Capital improvements shall be designed
and constructed to be in harmony with the concepts portrayed in the
Woodburn Downtown Development Plan,1997.
-5-
96
S~t~etl~rg)} -Deleted Text Section
BoldlUndertine -Proposed Text Change
(g) Update the Downtown Development Plan at Ieast every f ve years,
and involve the Woodburn Downtown Association, property and
business owners in the update process.
Goal
K-2. Improve Citizen Involvement in the DDCD.
Policies
K-2.1 Maintain and support the organization of a downtown business watch
group, where property owners can assist police in eliminating
undesirable, illegal behavior in the DDCD.
K-2.2 Business owners should encourage the involvement and education of
their employees in downtown activities.
K-2.3 The City shall oversee all development and ensure general conformance
with this document.
K-3. Improve Open Space Within the DDCD.
Policies
K-3.1 Introduce new plant materials to the Downtown Design and
Conservation District, including: ground cover; shrubs; and frees. A
program to introduce new plant materials would enhance the appearance
of the entire downtown. Participation on the part of both the City and the
downtown merchants will be needed to see these projects through to a
reasonable conclusion.
K-3.2 Design a set of uniform sign graphics for the DDCD. Using control in
developing street graphics provides balance and facilitates easy, pleasant
communication between people and their environment. Points of
consideration would include: Area of sign, placement, symbols used,
extent of illumination, colors, etc.
K-3.3 Construct a central downtown plaza or square to serve as a public
meeting place and center for cultural activities.
-6-
97
~e~- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
Woodburn's most vigorous period (1880-1950} shall guide new
development within the downtown area.
Policies
K-8.1 The development standards and guidelines for the DDC district
shall also encourage an enhanced street environment by providing
building and s#reetscape designs of interest #o pedestrians, such as
locating buildings close to the street with parking areas behind or
next to the building, limiting blank walls adjacent to the street, and
requiring views into active areas of retail spaces.
K-8.2 The DDC district development standards shall include a maximum
height restriction of 40-feet or three stories whichever is less,
consistent with the long-term pattern of development in downtown
Woodburn.
K-8.3 Building heights of two stories or greater are encouraged in the
DDC district.
Neighborhood Conservation Gverlay District Goals and
Policies
Goal
K_9 Preserve, to the greatest extent practical, the architectural integrity
of Woodburn's "older" (1590-1940) neighborhoods.
Policies
K 9;1 Identify residential neighborhoods that contain dwellings built between
1890.1940, which represents that period of time the DDCD was
developing.
K_,-9.2 Encourage those areas that
neighborhoods (l 890.1940)
conservation overlay district.
are determined to be the City's older
to implement the neighborhood
KK 9.3 Seek funding sources to assist homeowners in rehabilitation efforts that
implement overlay conservation districts standards.
-9-
100
£~sile~reugh- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Undetliae -Proposed Text Change
Summary of Zoning Revisions
Zoning revisions are proposed for the DDC Downtown Development and Conservation zone and
the CG Commercial General Zone. For the CG zone a new Gateway Subdistrict was created. The
subdistrict will allow mixed use development with a substantial housing component. C+ver time, the
new zoning may gradually phase out those light industrial and manufacturing uses that typically
would be incompatible with mixed use development. The redevelopment of the Gateway Subdistrict
will extend the sense of downtown across the railroad tracks.
CG --Gateway Subdistrict
New Uses Encouraged and Allowed
Housing types that include multi-family, duplexes and single-family attached.
Management and corporate offices.
Uses Discouraged and Not Allowed
Incompatible light industrial and manufacturing uses such as metal product fabrication and furniture
manufacturing, land extensive uses such as outdoor storage lots and land extensive uses for long-
term outdoor parking for non-customer uses such as bus facilities and RV lots.
Additions! Key Elements
• Building height limit of 50 feet or four stories.
DDC Zoning District
Revisions to the DDC zone emphasized historic character and pedestrian-oriented architecture. The
revisions allow more flexibility for housing choices and establish a building height limit. The
revisions will guide the design of buildings constructed in the DDC zoning district to ensure that,
through appropriate use of arcades, windows, building orientation, and architectural details, new
structures and alterations of existing structures are physically and visually compatible with other
buildings within the downtown business district.
New Uses Encouraged and Allowed
Multi-family and single-family attached housing, management and corporate offices.
Architectural Design Standards and Guidelines Updates
The purpose of these updates is to guide the design of buildings constructed in the DDC zoning
district to ensure that, through appropriate use of arcades, windows, building orientation, and
architectural details, new structures and alterations of existing structures are physically and visually
compatible with other buildings within the downtown business district.
- ~ 101
ATTACHMENT B
~e~~e- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
Key Elements
• Building height linut of 40 feet or three stories.
• Development standards and guidelines to preserve the historic character and scale of Old Town.
Zoning Revisions
The draft zoning updates show suggested ne /added text as underlined and suggested text to be
removed as strikethrough ~~i}~,
2.101.02 zoning Districts
The City of Woodburn shall be divided into the following zoning districts:
A. Residential Single Family (RS}.
B. Retirement Community Single Family Residential (R1S}.
C. Medium Density Residential (RM).
D. Commercial General (CG).
E. Downtown Development and Conservation (DDC).
F. Nodal Neighborhood Commercial {NNC)
G. Industrial Park (IP}.
H. Light Industrial (IL).
I. Public and Semi-Public (P/SP).
J. Neighborhood Conservation Gverlay District (NCOD).
K. Ripariaan Corridor and Wetlands Overlay District (RCWOD)
L. Southwest Industrial Reserve District (SWIR)
M. Nodal Districts
1. Nodal Single Family Residential (RSN)
2. Nodal Muln-Family Residential (RMN)
-2-
102
Stril~e~t- -Deleted Text Section
Bo_1d,/_~jnderline -Proposed Text Change
2.106 Commercial General (CG)
Commercial districts are centers of business and civic life. The General Commercial District
regulations apply to those commeraal areas outside or adjacent to the central business area. The
General Commercial district is intended to:
A. Promote efbcient use of land and urban services:
B. Accommodate automobile Q~ented and auto obile-dependent uses:
C. Use atiarotiriat,_ a desio~n sods to wide the au~ce and functionalit~of development
D. Provide for visitor accommodations and services:
E. Create a mixture of land uses that encourages e„ rntilovm„ ent ar~~~~s~~ options in close
vroximity to One ano er•
F. Provide connections to and appropriate transitions between residential areas and ommercial
G. Allow and encourage residential development in the Do m,~own Gateway subdis 'ct as a
comples mentarv, use to commercial user._s_in the district and in the adja ent Qwntow~ea;
H. ~g~~ - nd extensive commercial, storage, and industrial uses in the Downtown Gateway ub-
district.
2.10b.01 Permitted Uses
The following uses, when developed under the applicable development standards of the
WDO, are permitted in the CG zone.
A. Residential allowed either in conjunction with a permitted use or as a stand alone use.)
1. One dwelling unit in conjunction with a commercial use.
2. ~fultitile-family dwe~r~gs ,(rgntal or condominiu~~ ~ro~,ect at a net density of between 12 and
~2 dwellin-gu~its Per acre are ~ermittr~l in the Downtown Gateway sub-district. Multi,Pl~-
~amily dwellings are subaect to the dimensional~tandards and~~~velo~ent standards
of Section 2.104 unless the multiple-family dwelllinas axe built as part of a vertical mixed use
c eve1opT ent.
3. Multiple-famil dw~,g,- rental Q~,condominiumas a f vertical mixed use
~lev_ elop~nnent at a maximum net density of 32 dwellin~,units per acre are permitted in the
Downtown Gateway sub-district. Multiple-family dwellings in a vertical mixed use
- 3 'I 03
~~
S1~et~re~~- -Deleted Text Section
~4 Underline -Proposed Text Change
~~velo__ument are subject to the dimensional standards and other develoument standards of
the CG district.
4. ~ttac_ hed sin lg.e=f~~ily residences at a net density of 12 to 24 dwelling units ner acre are
uermitted in the Downtown Gatewav sub-district.
r
B. Special Trade Contractors. ~~ ~~tewa~r sub-district, the following uses are allowed onlvT when
located entirely within a wilding These Uses are allowed elsewhere in the CG district without
such a restriction.
1. Plumbing, heating and air-conditioning contractors. (235110)
2. Paper and wall coving contractors. (235210}
3. Masonry, drywall, insulation and tile. (2354)
4. Floor laying contractors. (235520)
5. Roofuig, siding, and sheet metal construction contractors (235610) entirely within a building.
6. Glass and glazing contractors. (235920)
7. Building equipment and other machinery installation contractors. (235950}
8. Ornamental ironwork contracting. (235990)
C. Fabricated metal products manufacturing, extent in the Gateway sub-district.
1. Fabricated metal product manufacturing (332) entirely within a building.
D. Furniture and Related Products Manufach~~ exc-ert in the Gatewav sub-district.
1. Household and institutional furniture and kitchen cabinet manufacturing (3371) entirely
within a building.
E. Retail Trade
1. Automotive parts (44131) without installation.
2. Furniture and home furnishings. (442}
3. Electronics and appliance stores. (443)
4. Building materials and garden equipment and supplies. (444} with all outdoor storage and
display enclosed by a 7' masonry wall. No outdoor storage is allowed in the Gateway sub-
district.
5. Food and beverage stores. (445}
- 4 104
l~et~re~gh- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
6. Health and personal care stores. (446}
7. Clothing and accessory stores. (448)
8. Sporting goods, hobby, book and music stores. (451)
9. General merchandise stores. (452)
10. Misc. retail (453) EXCEPT used merchandise stores (4533), other than antique shops, and
EXCEPT manufactured (mobile) home dealers. (45393}
F. Transportation & Warehousing
1. Postal service. (491)
G. Information
1. Publishing. (511)
2. Motion picture theaters (512131} EXCEPT drive-ins.
3. Radio and TV. (5131)
4. Cable networks. (5132)
5. Telecommunications. (5133) EXCEPT teiecommunicanon facilities subject to Section
2.204.03.
G. Information and data processing. (514)
[Section 2.106.O1.H as amended by Ordinance No. 2423, §7, effective on July 28, 2007.]
H. Finance and Insurance
1. Finance and insurance (52) EXCEPT pawn shops (522298) and check cashing, pay day loan
and cash transfer establishments [other than banks] as a predominant, ancillary, or required
supporting use. [Section 2.10G.01.H.1 as amended by Ordinance No. 2383, §1 G, passed
March 1 G, 2005.]
[Section 2.10G.01.I.2 and 2.1OG.01.I.3 as amended by Ordinance No. 2423, §4, effective
on July 28, 2007.]
I. Real Estate and Rental and Leasing
1. Real estate. (531)
2. Video tape and disc rental. (532230)
3. General rental centers (532310) with all outdoor storage and display on a paved surface.
5105
~r~~gl~- -Deleted Text Section
BoldlUnderline -Proposed Text Change
J. Professional, Scientific & Technical Services
1. Legal services. {5411}
2. Accounting. (5412)
3. Architects and engineers. (5413)
4. Speraalized design services. (5414)
5. Computer system design. (5415)
6. Management consulting. {5416)
7. Advertising. (5418)
8. Other professional services (5419} EXCEPT veterinary service contained entirely within a
building. {541940)
K. Administrative & Support Services
1. Administrative and support services (561} INCLUDING employment, travel and
investigation.
2. Management and corporate f~S-(~
L. Educational Service
1. Business schools. {6114)
2. Technical and trade schools. (6115}
M. Health Care and Social Services
1. Ambulatory health services (621} EXCEPT ambulance service. (62191)
2. Social assistance {624) INCLUDING child day care services.
N. Arts, Entertainment and Recreation
1. Performing arts and spectator sports. (711)
2. Museums and historic sites (712) EXCEPT zoos. (712130}
3. Fitness and recreational sports. {71391)
4. Bowling centers. (71395}
5. Other amusements INCLUDING ballrooms. (713990}
- d ~ 06
8'~~ll~ -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
0. Accommodation & Food Service
1. Hotels (EXCEPT casino hotels) and motels. (?2111)
2. Bed-and-breakfast inns. (721191}
3. Food service and drinking places (722} EXCEPT mobile food service.
P. Other Services
1. Electronic and precision equipment repair. (8112)
2. Electric motor repair entirely within a building.
3. Reupholstery and furniture repair. (81142)
4. Leather repair. (81143}
5. Personal care services (8121} INCLUDING barber shops and beauty salons.
6. Funeral homes. (812210)
7. Dry cleaning and laundry service (8123) EXCEPT linen supply.(81233)
8. Photo finishing. ($1292}
9. Parking lots and garages (81293) EXCEPT extended vehicle storage.(4939190}
10. All other personal services (812990} INCLUDING bail bonding and consumer buying
services.
11. Religious, civic and social organizations. (813)
Q. Public Administration
1. Public adnvnistration. (92}
R. Streets & Utilities
1. Rights of way and easements and the improvements therein for streets, water, sanitary sewer,
gas, oil, electric and communication lines and for storm water faalities and for pump
stations.
2.x.06.02 Special Permitted Uses
The following uses, when developed under the applicable development standards of the WDO
including the special development standards of Section 2.203, are permitted in the CG zone.
~ 107
Stt~et~krat~ -Deleted Text Section
BoldlUndertine -Proposed Text Change
A. Agricultural practices without Iivestock~ excetit in the GatewaYsab-district; subject to Section
2.203.02.
B. Complementary residential uses subject to Section 2.203,Ob.
C. Delivery services subject to Section 2.203.08.
D. Facilities during construction subject to Section 2.203.10.
E. Temporary outdoor marketing and special events subject to Section 2.203.19.
2.10b.03 Condirional Uses
The following uses may be permitted in the CG zone subject to the applicable development
standards of the WDO and the conditions of conclitional use,approval:
A. Retail Trade
1. Motor vehicle and parts dealers (441) EXCEPT automotive parts without installation.
2. Tractor and heavy equipment dealers exce tin the Gateway sub-district.
3. Gasoline stations. (447)
4. Used merchandise stores, other than antique shops. (4533)
5. Manufactured (mobile} home dealers, except in the Gateway sub-district. (453930}
B. B. Transportation & Warehousing
1. Urban transit system. (48511)
2. Interurban and Waal transit. (4852)
3. Taxi service. (48531)
4. Limousine service, except in the Gateway sub-district. (4853)
5. School transportation, extent in the Gateway sub-district. (4854)
6. Charter bus service, except in the Gateway sub-district. (4859)
7. Special needs transportation, except in the Gatewaysub-district (485991)
8. Motor vehicle towing, eXCeot in the Gateway, sub-district. (48841)
9. Self- andmini-storage, except ~ the Gatewayv snub-dt~tp~t.
-8-
108
S~ethre~~- -Deleted Text Section
fold/ nderline -Proposed Text Change
C. Finance and Insurance
1. Pawn shops. (522298}
2. Check cashing, pay day loans and cash transfer establishments, other than banks.
D. Professional, Scientific and Technical Services
1. Scientific research and development (5417)
2. Veterinary service. (541940}
E. Health Care and Social Services
1. Ambulance service. (b2191)
F. Accommodations and Food Service
1. Recreational vehicle parks, except in the Gatewaksub-district. (7212)
G. Other Services
1. Automotive maintenance. (8111 }
2. Commercial and industrial equipment repair, t in the Gatewaysub-district. (8113)
3. Home goods repair EXCEPT upholstery (81142) and leather repair (81143). (8114}
4. Linen supply. (81233}
H. Government and public utility buildings and structures EXCEPT uses permitted in Section
2.106.01 and telecommunications facilities subject to Section 2.204.03.
2.106.04 Accessory Uses
The following uses are permitted as accessory uses subject to Sections 2.202 and 2.203.
A. Fence or free standing wall.
2.106.05 Dimensional Standards
The following dimensional standards shall be the minimum requirements for all development in the
CG zone.
A. Lot Standards.
9109
S~et~rre- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
Lots in a CG zone shall comply with the applicable standards of Table 2.1.10.
TABLE 2.1.10 Lot Standards for Uses in a CG Zone
In a CG zone the lot area for anon-residential use shall be adequate to contain all structures within
the required setbacks. There shall be no minimum width or depth.
B. Building Height.
The maximum height of buildings shall not exceed 70 feet, and 50 feet or four stories whichever
is less in the Downtown Gatewal- subdistrict, EXCEPT chimneys, spires, domes, flag poles and
other features not used for human habitation (EXCEPT telecommunication facilities), shall not
exceed 100 feet.
C. Setback and Buffer Improvement Standards.
1. Minimum Front Setback and Setback Abutting a Street [Section 2.106.05.C.1 as amended by
Ordinance No. 2446, §11, passed on September 10, 2008.]:
a. Dimensions:
1) The minimum setback abutting a street shall be 15 feet plus any Special Setback,
Section 3.103.05.
[Section 2.106.05.C.1.a.2repealed by Ordinance No. 2383, `17, passed March 16, 2005.]
b. Off Street Parking and Maneuvering:
1) Off street parking and storage shall be prohibited within a required yard or special
setback EXCEPT for parking and storage adjacent to a wall. (Section
2.106.OS.C.l.b.1 as amended by Ordinance No. 2383, §18, passed March 16, 2005.]
2} The distance between the sidewalk on a public street and a loading dock shall be
sized to preclude vehicles using the dock from projecting over the sidewalk.
c. Clear Vision Area: Fences, walls, landscaping and signs shall be subject to clear vision
area standards, Section 3.103.10.
d. Vehicular Access: Permitted in conformance with Section 3.104.
2. Minimum Interior Side and Rear Setbacks [Section 2.106.05.C.2 as amended by Ordinance
No. 2446, §11, passed on September 10, 2008.]:
a. Development in a CG zone shall be subject to the setback and buffer requirements of
Table 2.1.11.
-10110
St~eE~re~g~ • Deleted Text Section
~~ nderline -Proposed Text Change
TABLE 2. I .I I Interior Yard and Buffer Standards for CG Zones
Abutting Property Landscaping Wall Interior Setback
RS, R1S, of RM zone There is no buffer yard Solid brick or 10 ft.
landscaping architectural
requirement for an wall with ana-graffiti
interior yard abutting a surface, no less than 6
buffer wall. feet or
greater than ? feet in
height.
CO, CG, DDC, There is no buffer yard Alternative A: Alternative A:
NNC, P/SP, IP, landscaping
SWIR or IL zone requirement for Wall requirements shall 5 ft.
an interior yard be
abutting a buffer wall. determined in
conjunction
with the applicable
Design
Review process.
Alternative B: Alternative B:
No wall required. Zero setback abutting
a building wall.
[Table 2.1.11 as amended by Ordinance 2391, §3, acknowledged on December 22, 2006.]
3. All primary buildings and structures, EXCEPT those described in Section 2.106.05.C.1, shall
be subject to the architectural guidelines of Section 3.107.06.
D. Signs.
Signs shall be subject to Section 3.110. [Section 2.106.06D as amended by Ordinance No. 2359,
§1, passed March 22, 2004.)
E. Landscaping and Sidewalks.
1. The street frontage of a subject property shall be improved with either property line
sidewalks. The minimum building setback from a private access easement shall be 5 feet.
2. Off street parking, Maneuvering and Storage: Off street par .king and storage shall be
prohibited within a required setback EXCEPT for parking and storage adjacent to a wall.
[Section 2.106.05.C.2.c as amended by Ordinance No. 23$3, §19, passed March 16, 2045.]
3. Clear Vision Area: Fences, walls, landscaping and signs shall be subject to clear vision area
standards, Section 3.103.10.
-11111
Stri~et~ -Deleted Te%t Section
Bold !Underline -Proposed Text Change
4. Vehicular Access: Permitted in conformance with Woodburn Access Management
Ordinance and Section 3.104.
2.10d.Ob Development Standards
All development in the CG zone shall comply with the applicable provisions of the WDO. The
following standards specifically apply to uses in the CG zone.
A. Off Street Parking.
Off street parking shall be subject to the standards of Section 2.106.05 and Section 3.105,
B. Setbacks and Lots, Generally.
Setbacks and lots shall be subject to Section 3.103.
C. Architectural Design Guidelines.
1. Multiple density residential buildings shall be subject to the design standards or guidelines of
Section 3.107.05.
2. All primary buildings and structures, EXCEPT those described in Section 2.106.05.0.1, shall
be subject to the architectural guidelines of Section 3.107.06.
D. Signs.
Signs shall be subject to Section 3.110. [Section 2.106.06D as amended by Ordinance No. 2359,
~1, passed March 22, 2004.E
E. Landscaping and Sidewalks.
1. The street fxontage of a subject property shall be improved with either property line
sidewalks and street trees or cwrb line sidewalks. The improvement shall be determined at
the time of subdivision, PUD or design review as applicable. Sidewalks and trees shall be
installed by the property owner to the standards of Section 3.101 and 3.106.
2. The subject property shall be landscaped to the standards of Section 3.106.
3. Common refuse collection facilities shall be screened on all sides by an architectural block
wall and solid gate, both with an anti-graffiti surface, a minimum of six feet and a maximum
of seven feet in height.
F. Property Disposition.
All uses shall be established and conducted on lots of record, as defined by Section 1.102 and
developed to the public facility and access standards of Sections 3.101, 3.102 and 3.104.
-12112
Set- -Deleted Te.Yt Section
~Qld/Underline -Proposed Text Change
1. New lots of record shall be subject to the following standards and procedures:
a. Partitions, Section 3.108;
b. Subdivisions, Section 3.108; or
c. Planned Unit Development Section 3.109.
2. Alteration of the property lines of existing lots of record shall be subject to the applicable
following standards and procedures:
a. Property Line Adjustment, Section 5.101.07.
b. Replatting, Section 3.108.
c. Vacation, applicable Oregon Revised Statutes.
2.107 Downtown Development and Conservation (DDC)
wn eve a ' i 'ct re 'on
a~a.1'he district is intended as Woodburn'_s_cente_r of vita_1 re ail activity. s, ervices, entertainment.
housing; mixed-use. ci _'c b 'din and uub,+hc stiace .The historic character of the downtown. to,_~e~ther,
vv=pedestrian-oriented arc 'tecture, streets and u 'c s ace ,define the district.
A. ~'he Downtown Develo~gment and Co sexvation District is intended to:
B. Promote efficient use of la~d~nd utb~, sn er~n_
C. tew ire of land uses that encourages ~plovlnent and housing options iIl close
uroxinu to Qne another:
D. Provide formal and informal cornmunitvoatherinQ.n cgs and otioortunities for socialization i.e..
alon„g,a~~ctive street front:
E. En~o~ra¢e pedestrian-oriented development:
F. Create a distinct storefront character in the Downtown Develotiment and Conservation District:
G. Provide connectYOn~ to and a~ propriate transitions between nearby residential areas and the
downtown;
H. Implement dg$ignn standards and ~uQ 'defines that maintain and enhance the City's historic
arc it t
2.10?.01 Permitted Uses
The following uses, when developed under the applicable development standards of the
WDO, are pernutted in the DDC zone.
-13113
St~~etl3re~k- -Deleted Text Section
Bo1d11s1nderline -Proposed Text Change
A. Residential
1. One dwelling unit in conjunction with a commercial use.
2. Multiple-famil we ' a ov ground floor commercial uses or other tiermitted uses.
3. M~ 1_e far,~y dwelling units, INCLUDING atiartment house.
4. ~ Attached single-family dwellings at a net density of 12 to 16 dwellinQ~ is er acre.
B. Retail Trade
1. Bakeries. (31181)
2. Printing and related support activities (323)
3. Furniture and home furnishing stores (442} INCLUDING:
a. Floor coverings and installation stores. (44221)
b. Window treatment and installation stores. (442291)
c. Used furniture stores. (45331)
4. Electronics and appliance stores and repair {44310) INCLUDING:
a. Camera shops. (44313)
b. Radio and TV stores. (443112)
c. Sewing machines stores. (443111}
5. Building material and garden equipment dealers (4441} LIMITED
T0:
a. Paint, wallpaper, and interior decorating stores. (444120)
b. Hardware stores. (44413)
c. Light fixture stores. (444190}
6. Garden supply store. (44422}
7. Food and beverage stores LIMITED T0.
a. Delicatessen stores.
b. Meat markets. (44521)
c. Fish markets LIMITED TO sales only. (44522)
8. Other specialty stores (44529} LIMITED T0:
a. Candy, nut, confectionery stores. (445292)
-14114
£~Erll~tree~i- -Deleted Text Section
fold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
b. Dairy products stores LIMITED TO sales only. {44529)
9. Health and personal care stores LIMITED T0:
a. Drug stores. (44611}
b. Optical goods stores. {44613}
c. Health food stores. {446191)
d. Hearing aid stores. {446199}
10. Clothing and clothing accessories {448) LIMITED T0:
a. Clothing stores. {44810}
b. Dressmaker and tailor shops.
c. Furriers and fur shops. (44819)
d. ~ewelry, watch, and clock stores. (44815 &44831}
e. Shoe stores. (44823)
f. Luggage stores. {44832}
11. Sporting goods stores (445111}INCLUDING:
a. Bicycle shops. {445111)
b. Gunsmiths and repair. {45111}
12. Hobby, toy, and game stores (45112} LIMITED T0:
a. Hobby shops. (45112}
b. Toy stores. {45112)
13. Sewing, needlework and piece goods stores. (45113)
14. Music, piano, and musical instrument stores. (45114}
15. Record and CD stores. (45122}
16. Book stores. (4523}
17. Department stores. {45211}
18.Other general merchandise stores (4529) INCLUDING variety stores. (45299)
19. Miscellaneous store retailers. (453}
a. Antique shops.
b. Artists supply stores. (453998)
c. Business machines, typewriters and repair. (453210)
d. Florist shops. (45311)
-15-
115
S~ri~~}~ -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
e. Gift, novelty, souvenir shops. (45322}
f. Greeting card stores. (45322)
g. Mail order house. (45411 }
h. Orthopedic and artificial limb stores.
i. Pet stores. (45391)
j. Stationery stores. (45321)
k. Used merchandise stores. (45331}
C. Transportation & Warehousing
1. Support Activities for Rail Transportation (4$8210)
2. Postal service. (491}
D. Information
1. Newspaper, periodical, and book publishing. (5111}
2. And TV studios and offices (5131} EXCEPT antennae and towers.
3. Cable networks. (5132)
4. Telecommunications (5133) EXCEPT telecommunication facilities subject to Section
2.204.03.
5. Information & data processing. (514)
E. Finance and Insurance
1. Finance and insurance (52) EXCEPT check cashing, pay day loan and cash transfer
establishments [other than banks] as a predominant, ancillary, or required supporting use.
F. Real Estate and Rental and Leasing
1. Real estate. (531)
2. Rental & leasing, without outdoor display or storage. (532}
G. Professional, Sraentific & Technical Services
1. Legal services. (5411)
2. Accounting. (5412)
3. Architects and engineers. (5413)
4. Specialized design services (5414} INCLUDING interior design services.
5. Computer system design. (5415)
6. Management consulting. (5416)
7. Advertising. (5418)
8, Other professional services (5419), EXCEPT veterinary service (541940) not contained in a
building.
H. Administrative & Support Services
1. Administrative and facilities support services. (5411 and 5612)
-16116
St~e~~- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
2. Employment services. (5613)
3. Business support services INCLUDING copy shops. (5614}
4. Travel and tour agencies. (5615}
5. Investigation and security services. (5616}
6. Services to buildings and dwellings (5417}, offices only.
7. Man~aee_ment and coraorate offices (551)
8. Other support services. (56199)
I. Educational Service
1. Educational services (611} both public and private, LIMITED T0:
a. Elementary and secondary schools. (6111)
b. Community college. (6112)
c. Business schools. (6114)
d. Technical and trade schools. (6115)
J. Health Care & Social Services
1. Ambulatory health care (621 }EXCEPT Ambulance service. (62191)
2. Social services (624) INCLUDING child day care services.
K. Arts, Entertainment & Recreation
1. Museums and historic sites (712) EXCEPT zoos (712130}.
2. Fitness and recreational sports (71394). [Section 2.107.01.x.2 as amended by Ordinance No.
2383, §20, passed March 16, 2005.]
3. Community center.
4. Taxidermists. (71151}
[Section 2.107.O1.L.3 as amended by Ordinance No. 2423, §2, effective on July 28,
2007.)
L. Accommodation & Food Service
1. Hotels (EXCEPT casino hotels) and motels. (72111}
2. Bed and breakfast inns. (21191)
3. Food service and drinking places (722) EXCEPT food contractors (72231}and mobile
food service.
M. Other Services
1. Personal care services (8121} INCLUDING:
a. Barber shops. (812111)
b. Beauty shops. (812112}
2. Funeral home. (812210)
3. Laundry, self service. ($1231)
4. Dry cleaning, self service. (81231)
.17_
117
Strslta~- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
5. Photo finishing. (81292}
6. Parking lots and garages (81293) EXCEPT extended vehicle storage. {493190)
7. All Other Personal Services (81299} INCLUDING bail bonding and consumer buying
services.
8. Religious, civic, professional and similar organizations. (813}
N. Public Administration
1. Public administration (92) INCLUDING government offices, courts, and police and fire
stations.
0. Streets and Utilities
1. Rights of way and easements and the improvements therein for streets, water, sanitary sewer,
gas, oil, electric and communication lines and for storm water facilities and for pump
stations.
2.107.02 Special Pemutted Uses
The following uses, when developed under the applicable development standazds of the WDO
including the special development standards of Section 2.203, are permitted in the DDC zone:
A. Complementary residential use subject to Section 2.203.06.
B. Craft industries subject to Section 2.203.07.
C. Delivery services subject to Section 2.203.08.
D. Facilities during construction subject to Section 2.203.10.
E. Temporary outdoor marketing and special events subject to Section2.203.19.
2.107.03 Conditional Uses
The following uses may be permitted subject to obtaining conditional use approval:
A. {$}Nursing care facilities. (6231}
B. {}Assisted care facilities. (62331}
C. {B}Grocery store, food market, food store. (44511}
D. {£~Gasoline stations (44719} INCLUDING repair services.
-18,18
~k~i~,- -Deleted Text Section
fold/Underline - Proposcd Text Change
E. {Wine shops.
F. {f~Government and public utility buildings and structures EXCEPT uses permitted in
Section 2.107.01 and telecommunications facilities subject to Section 2.204.03.
2.10?.04 Accessory Uses
The following uses are permitted as accessory uses subject to Sections 2.202 and 2.203.
A. Fence or free standing wall.
2,101.05 Dimensional Standards
The following dimensional standards shall be the muumum requirements for all development in the
DDC zone.
A. Lot Standards.
Lots in a DDC zone shall comply with the applicable standards of Table 2.1.12.
TABLE 2.1.12 lot Standards in a DDC Zone
In a DDC zone the lot area shall be adequate to contain all structures within the required
setbacks. There shall be no minimum width or depth.
B. Building Height.
Maximum building height is 40 fee or three stories, whichever is less.
C. Setback and Buffer Standards.
Setback and buffers are subject to the DDC design guidelines of Section
3.107.07.
2.147.06 Development Standards and Guidelines
All development in the DDC zone shall comply with the applicable provisions of the
WDO. Where the standards of the DDC zone and the WDD differ, the standards of the
DDC shall prevail. ~,tandard~ li ted in t1~~ section as "shall" are mandatory standards. Guidelines
which state "should" or "encouraged" are of mandatorvrbut aare considered desirable by the Ci .
~ Pu~ose.
1, '~ u}~ose of these development standards is to th_ desi _o~ uildinQS constructed
~ the DDC zoning district to ensure that, th ough appropriate use offacades. windows.
buildin ienta Qn, and archite tural details. new structures and alterations of existing
structures are physically and visually compatible with other buildings within the downtown
business district The majority of the existingg b,~ulcling~ in ~Qwnto_wn Woodburn reflect
architectural styles tha were pon,~lar during the late nineteenth and early twentieth century.
~t is the desire of the City to have buildings conform to architectural styles of~thl's_era. e
~1~119
S~l~gh- -Deleted Text Section
~~/Underline -Proposed Text Change
design standards are intende o further define those characteristics that cause building
look like they were constructed d~ this period.
2. These standards are intended to encourage good Qualiru design in new b
enhance street safety, a_ nd provide a comfortable street environment by rU o~ features of
~~ereSt to pedestrians. Good design results in bualdin~s that are in visual harmony with
~earb~building~ leading ~o a downtown that is attractive, interesting, active. and safe. 'These
aual'ties, in turn. contribute to the creation of a downtown core which facilitates easy
pedestrian movement and,es blishment of a rich mixture of uses
B. Applica ili .
1. The provisions of this ordinance shall apply to the following activities within the DDC:
~ All new building construction;
~ Any exterior building or site modification that requires a building permit; and,
c. All new signage.
2. This ordinance shall not apply to the following activities or uses:
a. Maintenance of the exterior of an existing structure, such as re-rooting, re-siding, or
repainting where similar materials and colors are used that comply with this ordinance;
b. Interior remodeling; and,
c. Single-family detached housing.
3. This ordinance shall apply only to those portions of a building or sign that are proposed for
construction or modification and shall not extend to other elements of the building or sign
that maybe out of compliance with the requirements of this ordinance (i.e., a permit to
replace a single window shall not require that all other windows on the building that maybe
out of compliance with this ordinance to be replaced, unless such action is uutiated by the
property owner). However, if a building should be destroyed due to flare, acadent, or an act
of God, the new or replacement structure shall be rebuilt to conform to the requirements of
this ordinance.
4. At the tune of ap lico„ ation~,the applicant shall choose whether the review of new residential
b~ildin~s shall be conducted as a Twe I review following the procedures of Section 5.101.01
~r as a T,~e II or III review followine the procedures of Section 5.102.02 or 5.103.02.
dept long on floor area.
~ {~4}Off Street Parking.
All parking and access standards of Sections 3.104 and 3.x05 shall apply EXCEPT that there
shall be no required parking ratio for ~Qn-residential uses end resi,~,.dential units above Oust
floor commexcial uses in the DDC zone.
~,; {}Design Guidelines or Standards.
-2a-
120
St~ed~en~r -Deleted Text Section
1B°_n rde 1~'ne_-Proposed Text Change
1. Multiple density residential buildings shall be subject to the design standards of guidelines of
Section 3.107.05 x~~ r boil ' as which mix residential us, cs v~~ non-residential uses.
2. All development, EXCEPT for, existing detac ed sing~e,f' x ho em s and that described in
Section 2.107.B.1, shall be subject to the DDC zone architectwral design guidelines and
standazds of Section 3.101.07 and the standards listed below. Single-family homes that are
used for businesses or home occupations are not exempt from compliance with these
Dui elines and standards. The provisions of this section shaD apply to all new consavction.
restorations,.and remodels. Restorations shall be defined as all ex-terior,retia,_„us, re=nlac~ement
of materials. alterations or changes, inclucling reroofing. painting. window. and sign
replac,_ ement, etc.
a. Standards. Standards for new con, ction s all reau~e builders to conform to the
architectural form of Woodburn's historic p_en. 'o_d ~1880s through 1940s~. As such. new
construction shall conform to the following standards listed below. Thro Q out the
~,~~,,~~e ~ _~oodburn's 'stork pe_riod,, the 18$Os through 940s.
and to buildings which displa~aracteristics o that period. The following list of
buildings is provided as a reference guide to th_ ose bps which displa* char~sdcs
intended by the standards. The list is a guide only --other boil ' gs may be used to
demonstrate the rec~i~red elements an /or the basis.. for visual compatr_bilit~.
~ Ex~mtiles~f ~,stQric storefront buildings for determining compa~ ility wig standards:
Association Building on Front Street between Garfield and Hav,, es.
Fulmer Building on Front Street one a corner of Front Streit and Arthur.
1. Site Development.
a. Buil~dtng fronts and entrances shall be oriented toward the street. Buildings with
froetaP~s on two or more s~ee~s shall be., oriented to at leapt one street.
~ ~g facades should be set at theme rod, edgg, alon~the sidewalk. A setback of up
to ten f= ~errnitte~ when occuvied bx pedestrian amenities ~e.~,.,,, fllaza, outdoox
~~~1s ~ frontages on two or ~ ro a streets should be set at the pTro=n, er~ty
edge on at least one street.
-~
BuildingyScale.
~ e overall size and pxoportion of new structures shall be compatible with the scale of
rig; t~ ' ' 1 storefront buildings constructed during. th_e histort~oeriod. This
standard may be met by either des'~g~the boil's size and ~ropo~'ons to a similar
to comparable historic structures ' the downtown,~or by the des ogn of the facade so
that it breaks a larger mass into smaller units that are similar to corn_oarable historic
re
b. f~,~actical, new building should have the same floor height as adjo~g build~gs in
case there is ever a desire to link the stoxefronts.
e. The relationship between the height and wid~,~ of the main facade of the building shall
be visibly compatible with ad~g or nearbv~i~,P of the historic tieriod or s le.
21121
~e~re~h- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
As with subsection ~Z)(i of this section 's standard maybe met,~throu~h either sir~ar
heigho t and wi~t~, or through d~;,gn gleme_,nts tha~,~rovide visual continuiTwi~h the
height and~width of ad~oirung o. r~earby b,~ildings of the historic de, riod:
~ H ht.
a. New buildings of t leas. t two stQri s~ h,~' ht are encouraged.
~: As sue ' ed in~Secta'o_n 2.107. S.B,~ e~heiQh~of all buildinas shall be one to ee stories
and not more than 40 feet in ma~ he' ht.
4. ~.~..~g Width.
a All new buildings should maxumz_.___-_' a lo_; frontaQ,e_,_as much as is nr„r actica~le.
b. New buildings whose street frontage i more than 50 feet wide,~hall be desien~ ed to
convey a sense of division„through the use of pilasters,~windows and door o~~
recess entries, off=sets or other arclu'tectur details.
5. t refrgnts
e. Primary entrances shall be oriented to the street. Corner buildir
~gs shall
have co
rimer
entrances, or s ,
„
„
hall or
, ovide at lg~st one entrance within 20 feet of the eet
~orner or a
d. corn r a.
e inner win
Th r
,
dows of multi-storv
buildin~s shall use mull-oa
ne
double-hung sash
e. _
windows or th
The relationsh ~
~
,
e enuiva~ent s_, le.
ip be~wee,~n soli~walls and window and door otie ' ~s on ~e main facade
shall be vises comtiatible with adjoin' g_or nearby_„tructures from xhe histo c
~g~d
f. ors le. Id~lly
_
~p roximately
The xelations~ ,
, first floor storefronts should lie abet 80 dercent,.glass from
___eet_a ; ov~grade to aPurr oximat lv 1Qfeet above grade.
2 f
o
f~~ and hei ht of window and door o~~s shall be visu~ll,~
~ compatible wit
Bl~~k walls, w _
h ad~giningor nnearby b ' dingy fxom the historic ti 'od or style.
alls without window or door Qp~g$, are no-t~ermitted alonQ
public
h. ,~
s eet .
ows and doorwa shal e cc,~,~ve,~ed over with p_a
er boards. or cardboard
Wes' d
p
_
excep
during t =
_
nod of 120
imes of construction r remodeling an~sha~ be limited to a pe
i. r
,
d- a; ss unless an extension is o e>w~'se„gr ,anted b_Tthe ct_ tv~, manager.
la~wi~nd4w, f_ g.
doors shall match the materials design, and character of the dis
~; ,
Architectural features such as awnings, windows, comices~etc., shall be provided at the
second floor to 'ffere~tiate the storefront from the upper lgvels of the buildin~,,,~4 add
visual interests and to allow the storefront to function as the base. for the rest of the
~~
6. Facade Mat 'sand Texture.
The materials and textt}re of a facade shall be compatible with those on b___uildi~gs
constructed during the his oric,period.
- 2~ 22
St~et}tre~}~ -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
b. Permitted exterior facade materials include: brick. cast iron. relatively narrow horizontal
wood or masonry si ' g, and stucco. Plywood siding. T 111,, and vertical board and
ba~en_ a_r~rohibited.
c. exposed concrete block f~ad~~, facin¢ the street are not,~l~we~. S~.~~• ce 4 scored-
faceblock may~ig~, e~d_~n, s~~anti~ies for foundations Qr other, ~on•damt
fe,~tures.
~; main facade materials s all be painte (exce,P~_~i ,rick, for which vaintin¢ is ontiona~
e. Metal sidine shall n4~ be used as a building-material on the facade fang a street.
a. W~n~da_ws which allow views to the interior activity or ' of y areas are encouraged,
Windows shall include ills at the bottorn,and pediments at the ton. Glass curtain,walls,
~ 've class, and ate or darkly~ed g~hall not be used on the first floor.
~ ground Floor Wi„~dows. All new buildings must provide ¢round floor windows along
ad~'~~.ent street ri¢ is-of--way.
1,~ Reed wind_Qvy, ,dither windows that allow views int working areas
or lobbies. pedestrian entrances. or dis_ nlap_„' doors.
Rewired windows_ must~~ve a sill no more than four feet above ¢rade. Where
irate 'or oor levels ,prohibit such .~ cement, the sill must hg raised to allows to
be no more than taro feet Bove the finished floor ley u~ to a maximum sill height
of six feet above grade.
~ Gl_~rtais~ windows are=ot ~e n~itted.
~ y~ted wuidQws and mirrored windows that block.two-way vi,,_ 'sibilit~e
uro~ibited as ¢xound floq~ win_dow_~~ong,~oet fa-
~ Any wall that faces ~ nun blic ri¢ht-of-way mom, ust certain at least 20% of the ¢ro~nd
floor wall area in ~spla~_v areas,.w~n_dows,,~~ d~rau~vs. Blank walls arc prohibited.
~ Upper Floor Window Standards.
~ Glass ar_c~ dime lions shall not exceed 5•feet by 7-feet. a lon¢est dimension may
be taken either horizontally or verticall~.l
~ Window must have trim or molding~,~ 1 a~ sc two ' ches wide around their
$ ers
At least half of all the window area in upper floors must be made up of ¢las~ nes
with dimensions no greater than 2-feet by 3-feet.
~ Main facade roofs dower than a 6:12 pitchl shall be concealed behind a sauare or
stepped parapet. Flat ro fs are permitted ehind a parapet.
b. AII~VAC sy~gms located on ton of a roof shall be located andl~~screene~ so a~ th~-
are not visible from the street. Dish-style antennas shall be located and/or screened so
that they are riot visible ~i~om the~,street. All screenin¢ material shall be natural an
be comuatible with the fa~~de of the front of the building
-23-
123
S'~l~}xr -Deleted Text Section
~oldl_Unde~rline -Proposed Text Change
c. New roofs on existing buildings. or on additions ~,o existiir~Q b„~, shall match the
nits ch and form of the on ' al oof.
d. Shed roofs are permitted on one-stow rear additions.
€ Back-lit or 'stern ruminated r fs are prohibited.
9. Awnin and an ies.
a. The use of_aw~ ' c r canopies over sidewalks is encQura,_ged.
b. Awnings shall exte d out from the building front to cover atleast two-thirds of the
sidewalk unless it is shown_,that ~uch_ a stance will interfere with exis ' Q treg~, n les.
gtc;, to provide pedestrian protection from tBe elements.
c. Awnings shall be flat ox sloping. AwningS shall be made Qf etal, wood,, canvas or
sirrular materials. Rounded bubble or plastic awrunogs are prohibited. Fullv glared
awnings are not permitted.
P
d. Awning~ ,~h~l, fit with~p the window bays (either a ove the main glass or the transom
l~ht~ so as not to Qbsg~,re or distract from si 'ficant architec tural features.
g; The colo r of the awnings all be cQr,~patible with its attached builds Wig.
f. Awnings shall not be internallv illuminated. ~lowever. liehting which is intended tQ
provide i llumination to the sidewalk and image is ru. 'tt,.~.
g; Awnings shall be a minimum of ei eet above the sidewalk .
h ere fe
Wl
er
l asible, awnings shal~be placed at the same height as tho,~eQ adjac_ ne t bu~ldin~
,,
~
,,
in o der ~o maintain a consistent horizontal rhvthrn along the street front
~~
a. Thep ' tin__,~f_l~rick w~s_i~,Permitted.
b. Subtle or subdued_,_tones commonly used d ~Q the historic period shall be used. Bright
Qr neon color~are_,~ro 'bited.
c. Different colors shall be used to accentuate and highligho t trim, windows, an,_ d aver
building features.
--o
11. Site ] e ' .
~ bands apinQ_.,,o.shall pat o,_, blitezate street and sidewalk views of sigoagg or architectural
features Q~h'ston~ g~:
~,2. P- arl~g:
a. Parkin areas shall not be located bet ween the front of the building aid the street
b. t sidg ~ to
Stree shall beset ba ck rn~nimum~f 5~feet from a pu lic sidewalk.
c. ___
Parking areas wig mo ._ ndsc_aped areas or
re than 1 Q s,Paces shall be divYded by la,,,.
d walkwa~s_ o^~ b~~
anui
Parking lot land
sc ,g, or.g~o_un oa
g shall onsist r
f b. wld~gs.
of a minimum o_f l0,tiercent of the total parking
e. w
_._
area A minimum of o
Knee walls are reauixe ne tree for eve
d ~ screen stre ry 10 parkin spaces shall be provided.
et side,Par~l_ots Knee walls shall not exceed
three feet in height and hall be const ructed with masonry Alternatively a combin_,_ation
-24-
124
S~ce~e~h- • Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
ofof. wall or fence and landscag~g~a,~~ga~vr,~ oved if ey,~rovide an effective buffer
d low-level screen of the narkinQo area.
13. rive throug businesses
~ priv_ a through businesses are_no~~~d_.
~ {}Signs.
Signs shall be subject to Section 3.110. [Section 2.107.06C as amended by Ordinance No. 2359,
~8, passed March 22, 2004.]
~; {B} ndsc gj~g:
d cap~~ect to the DDC zone architecturaldesign gw~delines [ands lords, of
Section 3.107.07.
(~. F~+ rnal to r~ge of Merchandise. The external st orage of merchandise and/ or m aterials, directly
1
~. Qr in~itec+l;-
Ou~d~ o~ rPiarpd to a business, is h~ebv tirohi
play,~ of Merchandise. Qutdoor d~n bited within the
~ys of merchand DDC distri
ise are ner ct.
rnitt
ed during
,,, buss o only and shall n t exceed ten perc ent of the total r etail sales a rea. Disnlav, s o_
merchandis e on public sidewalks max not reduce usable walking ar ea widths to le ss then six feet.
I. Qu door Ea Areas Outdoor dining areas a_re
ting encouraged and are permi tted on public
idew s. O
~ .
utdoor food vending carts are permit ted. Eating~reas andlor vendin g c~v pat
~ ,
rg ce usab
s
Wa~M~ l~r l~g,area widths on public sidew
he use of non-advertising wall m alks to less then
s ren~esenting six feet
the~or
area
_'s. cultural
_
~ieritage or h istoric even are encouraged as well as the use of arti stic wall m ural s A wall mural
~ an express ion of public a~ aimed dire on t he ex erior of a b uilding or on a backing that is
I -
y affixed to ~
i building and is sanctioned by the ~
~/.
I n ,o~ert~ owner.
ctu face
b"
t' tead
~ encourages that murals be painted on boards or c eramic oran•,els att a ed to a buil ding wall This
I fan h ~ p avo id problems down the road with nee ding to s ' ~a last or p ress ure wash brick
evalls to rem ove a mural. Thgu~e of applied panel s ado will allow quick remo val of the panel for
;.. . rest ration
_. when a mural has been tagge,~ ~,~ affiti.
1. A sin hermit is not required for a wa ll mural.
2. urals ar~n
W 1i m ot ~ernutted on the exterior wall containing the main entrance to the
_
'
3. cling.
b
~Xlall murals ma
~installed and main
tained in an area not exceeding a maximum si face
area of 80 per ce nt of the exterior wall ea of the Furst three stories upon the wall or facade
whe,~ re ~.~ mural sign is located.
4. Murals mad, not a used for any form of co a vial advertising•oenublic informatio~or
solicitation of an y kind. A mural shall be considered a wall sign if it contains woxds. Iogo s.
- z~ Zs
St~ed~ret- -Deleted Text Section
~o~l ,Underline -Proposed Text Change
trademaxks or ~ranh~c r_ e~ resentati_,_ons of any neon, roduct or service that ide~or
advertise a b~~tn_ ess.
5. ~Ju to_ 10,~ex cent Qf the wall moral area, at the lowest border of a mural~ma~r be utilized as
an acknowle Qement recog th_ a ~~sc~r~f the mural or for a signature by th~e_m_ural
artist a desisted area fox the acknowledgment Qr signature must not exceed a
maximum area of 6 ~,~,uare feet.
~, {£~Properry Disposition.
All uses shall be established and conducted on lots of record, as defined by Section 1.102 and
developed to the public facility and access standards of Sections 3.101, 3.102 and 3.104.
1. New lots of record shall be subject to the following standards and procedures:
a. Partitions, Section 3.108;
b. Subdivisions, Section 3.108; or
c. Planned Unit Development Section 3.109.
2. Alteration of the property lines o£ existing lots of record shall be subject to the applicable
following standards and procedures:
a. Property Line Adjustment, Section 5.101.07.
b. Replatting, Section 3.108.
c. Vacation, applicable Oregon Revised Statutes.
3.10?Architectural Design Guidelines and Standards
A. P se
1. The_a~ose Qf these architectural desi~ defines and standards is to guide the design of
b i~i'n~s Qnstructed in the City of Woodburn to ensure that. through ao~ ronriate building
orie_, ntation_, landscau dess~n a_ d architectural details, new structures and alteratl~ans o._f
exi ' h i all an vis all ati a with o er b ' wi i -.
2. a tandax in nd d t od ua ~ d in new n cti
_ enhance street safer, and arovide a c~omfo_rt~ble street environment bq~nrovidin~ features of
interest to~edestrians. ood design results in~gs that are in visual hargnon,,, with
n,.~lzy bLuldin~, leading to a city that is attractive interesting, active, and safe.
26126
S~tt~e~iret~- • Deleted Text Section
~~fsJ,ng- Proposed Text Change
3.107.01 Dwellings EXEMPT from Asehitectural Design Standards and
Guidelines
The following dwellings shall be EXEMPT from the provisions of Section 3.107:
A. Any single family or duplex dwelling (site built dwelling, manufactured dwelling or manufactured
home) that exists, or is subject to a building perrnit that has been issued poor to WDO,
EXCEPT such dwellings located within the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay (NCOD).
B. All new dwellings sited in Manufactured Dwelling Parks containing more than 3 acres.
3.107,02 Design Standards for Manufactured Homes Sited in Manufactured
Dwelling
Parks of 1 to 3 Acres
NOTIIV'CZUDED IN THIS COPY
3.1.07.05 Guidelines and Standards for Nlediurn Density Residential Buildings
A. Applicability.
Pursuant to Section 1.102, "Medium Density Residential Building" means any building where the
predominant use is multiple family, nursing care or assisted care residential. At the time of
application, the applicant shall choose whether the review will be conducted as a Type I re~~iew
following the procedures of Section 5.101.01 or as a Type II or III review following the applicable
procedures of Section 5.102.02 or 5.103.02, depending on floor area. [Section 3.107.05.A is amended
by Ordinance 2423, §28, effective on July 28, 200?.]
1. For a Type I review, the criteria of Section 3.107.05.B shall be read as "shall" and shall be
applied as standards.
2. For a Type II or III review, the criteria Section 3.107.05.$ shall be read as "should" and shall
be applied as guidelines.
B. Open Space Guidelines and Standards.
1. Common Open Space and Facilities.
a. Common open space and facilities consist of the site area and facilities not devoted to
dwellings, parking, streets, driveways or storage areas that are available for use by all
residents of a development.
b. Required yard setbacks should/shall be included as common open space.
- 2~12~
S~~~gl3- - Deleted Text Section
~oldf Underline -Proposed Text Change
C. Open Space and Facility Design Guidelines and Standards.
1. A minimum of 30 percent of the net site area of each medium density residential
development should/shall be permanently designated for use as common open space and
facilities.
2. The common area should/shall include at least one open space containing 2000 sq. ft., with
a minimum width of 3G feet.
3. Recreation Areas and Facilities. Facilities to accommodate children's and/or adult recreation,
meeting or education activities should/shall be provided at a ratio of 36 sq. ft. of outdoor, or
12 sq. ft. of indoor, common area per dwelling unit or living unit. The minimum improved
common area for this purpose should/shall be 720 square feet of outdoor or 240 sq. ft.
indoor space. The space for such improvements may- be counted as part of the common area
required by Section 3.107.05.B.1.c.2). at a 1:1 ratio for outdoor space and 3:1 ratio for indoor
space.
D. Private Open Space.
1. Ground Level Courtyard
a. Medium density dwelling units sited on the fixushed grade, or within 5 feet of the
finished grade, should/shall have 96 square feet of semi-enclosed, private open space,
with no dimension less than b feet.
b. Ground level private open space should/shall be visually and physically separated from
common open space through the use of perimeter landscaping or fencing.
E. Balcony
1. Medium density dwelling units sited more than 5 feet from the fvushed grade {a balcony)
should/shall have 48 square feet of private open space, with no dimension less than 6 feet.
F. Architectural Design Guidelines and Standards.
1. Building Mass and Facade.
a. Medium density residential buildings should/shall have no dimension greater than 150
feet.
b. Every two attached medium density residential dwelling units should/shall be offset by
at least 4 feet in depth.
c. Adjacent medium density residential buildings located within 28 feet of a property line,
should/shall vary the setback at least 4 feet.
d A flat roof, or the ridge of a sloping roof, for a medium density residential building
should/shall nat exceed a horizontal length of 100 feet without providing a difference in
elevation of at least 4 feet.
e. Medium density residential buildings should/shall incorporate a porch or recessed entry
for each ground level dwelling unit. Covered porches and entries should average at least
30 feet square per unit, with no dimension less than U feet.
f. All habitable rooms, except bath rooms, facing a required front yard should/shall
incorporate arindows.
- 2~2s
Stril~ed~~eag~t- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
g. Stair cases providing access above the first floor level should/shall not be visible from a
street.
2. Building Materials, Texture and Color.
a. The exterior finish for at least 90 percent of the facade should/shall be:
1) Either siding, brick or stucco. Plain concrete, corrugated metal, plywood and sheet
press board should/shall not be used as exterior finish material; and
2) Either white, tinted with a minimum of 10 parts per 100 of white, or shaded with a
minimum of ~ 0 parts per 100 of black or brown. Flourescent, "day-gio," or any
similar bright color should/shall not be used on the facade.
b. The roofing material for medium density dwellings should/shall be either composition
shingles; clay or concrete tile; metal; or cedar shingles or shakes. Composition shingles
shauld/shall be architectural style with a certified performance of at least 25 years.
3. Pedestrian Circulation.
a. Connection with Buildings and Streets. The internal pedestrian system in medium
density residential developments should/shall connect to other areas of the site, to other
building entrances and to adjacent streets.
b. When a residential building is sited within 24 feet of a street right of way, the building
should/shall contain entrances directly accessible from the street.
4. Parking. Fifty percent of the required parking should/shall be covered by garages.
5. Buffer Wall. A solid brick or architectural wall with anti-graffiti surface, no less than 6 feet or
greater than 7 feet in height, should/shall be constructed on the perimeter property line of
the development where the abutting use is commeraal or industrial and no comparable
buffer exists.
6. Sidewalk Location and Street Trees. Sidewalks should/shall be located at the property line
along streets with street trees, Section 3.106. [Section 3.107.05.C as amended by Ordinance
No. 23$3, §47, passed March 16, 2005.]
3.107.06 Guidelines and Standards for Non-Residenriai Structures in RS, R1S,
RM,
CO, CG and P/SP Zones
A. Applicability.
The following design guidelines shall be applicable to all non-residential structures and buildings in
the RS, R1S, RM, CO, CG and P zones.
29 -
129
e~l~ret~gh- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
B. Architectural Design Guidelines.
1. Mass & Bulk Arrt~culation Guidelines.
a. Building facades visible from streets and public parking areas should be articulated in
order to avoid the appearance of box-like structures with unbroken wall surfaces.
b. The appearance of exterior walls should be enhanced by incorporating three dimensional
design features, including the following:
1) Public doorways and/or passage ways through the building.
2) Wall offsets and/or projections.
3) Variation in building materials and/or textures.
4) Arcades, awnings, canopies and/or porches.
2. Materials and Textures Guidelines.
a. Building exteriors should exhibit fuvshes and textures that reduce the visual monotony
of bulky structures and large structural spaces; enhance visual interest of wall surfaces
and harmonize with the structural design.
b. The appearance of exterior surfaces should be enhanced by incorporating the following
1)At least 30% of the wall surface abutting a street should be glass.
{a) All walls visible from a street or public parking area should be surfaced with
wood, brick, stone, designer block, or stucco or with siding that has the
appearance of wood lap siding.
{b) The use of plain concrete, plain concrete block, corrugated metal, plywood, T-
111 and sheet composite siding as exterior finish materials for walls visible from
a street or parking area should be avoided.
{c) The color of at least 90 percent of the wall, roof and awning surface visible from
a street or public parking area should be an "earth tone" color containing 10
parts or more of brown or a "tinted" color containing 10 parts or more white.
Flourescent, "day-glo," or any similar bright color should not be used on the
building exterior.
3. Multi-planed Roof Guidelines.
a. The roof line at the top of a structure should establish a distinctive top to the building.
b. The roof line should not be flat or hold the same roof line ovex extended distances.
Rather the roof line should incorporate variations, such as:
1) Offsets and/or jogs in the plane of the roof.
2) Changes in the height of the exterior wall far flat roof buildings, including parapet
walls with variations in elevation and/or cornices.
4. Roof Mounted Equipment Guidelines. All roof mounted equipment, EXCEPT solar
collectors, should be screened from view from streets abutting the building site by:
-30_
130
S~~e~ir -Deleted Text Section
~ ld/ nderline -Proposed Text Change
a. Locating roof mounted equipment below the highest vertical element of the building; or
b. Screening roof top equipment using materials of the same character as the structure's
basic materials.
5. ~X/eather Protection Guidelines. All building faces abutting a street or a public parking area
should provide weather protection fox pedestrians. Features to pravide this protection
should include:
a. A continuous wallcway at least S feet wide along the face of the building utilizing a roof
overhang, arcade, awnings and/or canopies.
b. Awnings and canopies that incorporate the following design features:
1} Angled or curved surfaces facing a street or parking area.
2) A covering of canvas, treated canvas, awning fabric, or matte fuush vinyl.
3) A constant color and pattern scheme for all buildings within the same development.
4) No internal back lighting.
G. Landscaping and Screening Guidelines. The landscaping required by the standards of the
WDO should be augmented to address site specific visual impacts of abutting uses and the
visual character of the surrounding area.
7. Design Character Guidelines. Standardized or characteristic corporate and franchise design
elements should be refined to reduce domination of the visual environment by corporate
icons.
S. Buffer Wall. A solid brick or architectural wall with anti-graffiti surface, no less than G feet or
greater than 7 feet in height:
a. Should be constructed on the perimeter property line of nonresidential development to
mitigate adverse visual, noise and/or light impacts on the abutting use when no
comparable buffer exists, and
b. Shall be constructed where the standards of the underlying zone requvre such a wall for a
non-residential use in, or abutting, a RS, R1 S, or RM zoning district.
9. Sidewalk Location and Street Trees. Sidewalks should be located at the property line along
streets with street trees, Section 3.10G.
10. Solar Access Protection. Obstzvction of existing solar collectors on abutting properties by
site development should be mitigated.
C. Site and Building Access Guidelines.
1. Access to and from the site and circulation within the site should separate facilities for cars,
trucks and transit from those for bicycles and pedestrians.
2. Site access in compliance with Section 3.104 should be augmented by the following
considerations:
-331
~i~~ -Deleted Text Section
fold/Underline - Pxoposed Text Change
a. Vehicle Access.
1) Vehicle access points should be identified by accentuated landscaped areas, by
entrance throats designed to control access from abutting parking and by monument
type entrance signs.
2) New parking lots abutting major streets should connect internally with the parking
lots of abutting commercial uses or land zoned for commercial use.
- 32 -
132
Ste}- -Deleted Text Section
BoldlUnderGne -Proposed Text Change
b. Pedestrian Access and Circulation.
1) The buildings should be linked to the sidewalks on abutting streets by internal
pedestrian ways. Such pedestrian ways should be either raised or delineated by
distinctive pavers.
2) Parking areas should be designed in multiples of no more than 50 spaces separated
by landscaped buffexs or raised pedestrian ways in order to mitvnuze negative visual
impacts associated with expansive parking.
D. Building Location Guidelines. [Section 3.107.06.D as amended by Ordinance No. 2383, §48,
passed March 1 ~, 2005.]
1. Within the prescribed setbacks, building location and orientation should compliment
abutting uses and development patterns.
2. The maxumum yard abutting a street should be 150 feet.
E. Parking Location Guidelines.
Off street parking between the architectural front of a building and the setback line abutting street
should be limited to a depth of not more than 130 feet.
F. Design Standards.
1. Outdoor Storage Standards. Outdoor storage, when permitted, shall be screened from the
view of abutting streets by a solid brick or architectural block wall not less than G, nor more
than 9 feet in height.
2. Outdoor Lighting Standards. All outdoor lighting shall be designed so that:
a. Parking areas are evenly illuminated at ground level at one foot candle;
b. Entrance and loading areas are illuminated at ground level of two foot candles;
c. Illumination does not shine or reflect into any adjacent residentially zoned or used
property; and Lighting does not cast a glare onto moving vehicles on any public street.
3.107.07 Design Guidelines and Standards for the DDC and NNC zones
[Section 3.107.07 as amended by Ordinance No. 2391, §3, acknowledged on December 22, 2004.]
A. Applicability and Procedure.
The following guidelines and standards shall be applicable to the Downtown Development and
Conservation (DDC) and Nodal Neighborhood Commercial (NNC) zones. The Woodburn
Downtown Association (WDA) shall be notified as an interested party in conjunction with design
review within the DDC zone.
B. Design Guidelines for New Development.
- 33133
St~~~- -Deleted Text Section
old/Unde~ne -Proposed Text Change
1. Site Design Guidelines. All new development should comply with the following site design
guidelines.
a. Building placement. Buildings should occupy a minimum of 50 percent of all street
frontages along public streets. Buildings should be located at public street intersections.
b. Building setback. The minimum setback from a public street right of way maybe 0 feet,
the maximum building setback should be ~ 0 feet.
c. Front setback and setback abutting a street design. Landscaping, an arcade, or a hard-
surfaced expansion of the pedestrian path should be provided between a structure and a
public street
1) Setbacks abutting a street should be 5 feet in depth or equal to the building setback,
whichever is greater. The setback should be landscaped at a planting density of five
(5} planting units per 20 square feet to the street tree standards of Table 3.1.5.
2) Setbacks abutting an alleyway should be landscaped to the street tree standards of
Section 3.10G.03.A.1.
3} Hard-surfaced areas should be constructed with scared concrete ox modular paving
material,
4} Benches and other street furnishings shall be encouraged.
d. Walkway connection to building entrances. A walkway connection should connect a
building entrance and a public street. This walkway should be at least six (6) feet wide
and be paved with scored concrete or modular paving materials. Building entrances at
corners near a public street intersection shall be encouraged.
e. Parking location and landscape design. Parking for buildings or phases adjacent to public
street rights of way should be located to the side or rear of newly constructed buildings.
When located abutting a street, off street parking should be limited to 50 percent of the
street frontage. Setbacks abutting a street should be 5 feet in depth or equal to the
building setback, whichever is greater. The setback should be landscaped at a planting
density of f ve (5} planting units per 20 square feet to the street tree standards of Section
3.10G.03.A.1.
f. interior side and rear yards setbacks should be landscaped to the street tree standards of
Section 3.106.03.A.1.b.
g. Any open area not used for building space should be landscaped incompliance with
WD4 standards and guidelines.
2. New Building Architectural Design Guidelines and Standards.
a. Applicability.
1} All non-residential buildings shall comply with the following design guidelines (read
as "should"}.
2) At the time of application, the applicant shall choose whether the review of new
residential buildings shall be conducted as a Type I review following the procedures
3134
S~~d~~'- -Deleted Text Section
~otd/Underline -Proposed Text Change
of Section 5.101.01 or as a Type II or III review following the procedures of Section
5.102.02 or 5.103.02, depending on floor area.
(a) For a Type I review, the criteria of Section 3.107.04.8 shall be read as "shall" and
shall be applied as standards.
(b} Fox a Type II or III review, the criteria Section 3.107.04.8 shall be read as
"should" and shall be applied as guidelines.
b. Architectural Design Guidelines and Standards.
1} Ground floor window. All street-facing building elevations that are set back 14 feet
or less from a public street should include a minimum of 50 percent of the ground
floor wall area with windows, display areas or doorway openings. The ground floor
wall area shall be measured from three feet above grade to nine feet above grade the
entire width of the street-facing elevation. The ground floor window requirement
should be met within the ground floor wall area and for glass doorway openings to
the ground level. Up to 50 percent of the required ground floor window area on a
particular street-facing building elevation may be met on an adjoining building
elevation when the adjoining elevation is also street-facing and setback 10 feet or
less.
2} Building facades. No building facade should/shall extend for more than 300 feet
without a pedestrian connection between or through the building. Facades that face a
public street should/shall extend no more than 50 feet without providing at least one
of the following features:
(a) A variation in building material;
(b) A building off-set of at least 1 foot;
(c} A wall area that is entirely separated from other wall areas by a projection, such
as an arcade; or
(d} By other design features that reflect the building's structural system.
3) Weather protection. Weather protection for pedestrians, such as awnings, canopies
and arcades should/shall be provided at building entrances. Weather protection shall
be encouraged along building frontages abutting a public sidewalk or ahard-surfaced
expansion of a sidewalk, and along building frontages between a building entrance
and a public street or access way. Awnings and canopies should/shall not be back lit.
4} Building materials. Corrugated metal, plywood, sheet press board or vinyl siding
should/shall not be used as exterior finish material. PLvn concrete block and plain
concrete should/shall not be used as exterior finish material EXCEPT as a
foundation material where the foundation material should/shall not be revealed for
more than 2 feet.
5) Roofs and roof lines. EXCEPT in the case of a building entrance feature, xoofs
should/shall be designed as an extension of the primary materials used for the
-35-
135
St~~ -Deleted Text Section
~, lei,/Unc Arline -Proposed Text Change
building and should respect the building's structural system and architectural style.
False fronts and false roofs should/shall not be used.
b} Roof-mounted equipment. All roof-mounted equipment should /shall be screened
from view from adjacent public streets. Satellite dishes and other communication
equipment should/shall be set back or positioned on a roof so that exposure from
adjacent public streets is miiumized. Solar heating panels shall/shall be exempt from
this guideline.
C. Architectural Design Guidelines for the Exterior Alteration of Existing Buildings
1. General Scope. An application for exterior alteration of an existing building should be
approved if the change or the treatment proposed is determined to be harmonious and
compatible with the appearance and character of the building and should not be approved if
found to be detrimental to or otherwise adversely affecting the architectural significance,
integrity, historic appearance, or historic value of the building.
2. Design Guidelines. The following guidelines shall apply to the exterior alterations to existing
buildings:
a. Retention of original construction. So far as possible, all original exterior materials and
details should be preserved or reproduced to match the original.
b. Height. Additional stories maybe added to buildings proti-ided that:
9} The added height complies with requirements of the state Building Code; and
2} The added height does not alter the traditional scale and proportions of the building
style; and
3) The added height is visually compatible with adjacent buildings.
c. Bulk. Horizontal additions may be added to buildings provided that:
1} The building of the addition does not exceed that which was traditional for the
building style; and
2) The addition maintains the traditional scale and proportion of the building; and
3) The addition is visually compatible with adjacent buildings.
d. Visual Integrity of Stxucture. The lines of columns, piers, spandrels, and other primary
structural elements should be maintained so far as practicable.
e. Scale and Proportion. The scale and proportion of altered or added building elements,
the relationship of voids to solid (windows to wall) should be visually compatible with
the traditional architectural character of the building.
Material, Color and Texture. The materials, colors and textures used in the alteration or
addition should be fully compatible with the traditional architectural character of the
historic building. In general colors should be emphasized as follows: darker colors for
window sashes; medium for building; and lightest for window trim and detailing.
-36-
136
• ~
S~t~~e~ret~gh- -Deleted Text Section
BaldlUnderline -Proposed Text Change
g. Lighting and Other Appurtenances. Exterior lighting and other appurtenances, such as
walls, fences, awnings, and landscaping should be visually compatible with the traditional
architectural character of the building.
37 -
137
~•
~• ~
~~~- - De]eted Text Section
fold/Underline -Proposed Text Change
Downtown Commercial
Square or
Stepped
~,, ~ Parapet Roof
Upper Stott ~,..
Residential. Awnings P e f ~-~.
Weathei oectiori
t
large F~Storc ~ "-- '
~~
4Yindows
~~
..
~` -~ 0 0 ~ .
~
~
.~.....
Zero Build•to•line .r-.r
Unacceptable Rehabilitation, Restoration, ~ Preservation
ds, . Remodel is not
' ~ sensit'roe to original
ildf
l
d t
R
d
1 fl .~ f architectural details.
e
w
ng ~ ~
emo
e
facade does not match
ari~inal materials.
~ ~ I
C ~~
Windows do not Horizontal character f remodel doesn't match
cover SO-404b of vertical ehararter of original upper stories.
storefront area
38 -
138
~. ti
~' r
ugh- -Deleted Text Section
Bold/Underliee -Proposed Text Change
5.102 Type II Application Requirements
5.102.02 Design Review for All Structures LESS TI~[AN 1000/Z000 Sq. fit.
A. Purpose. The purpose of Type II design review is to insure compliance with all applicable site
development standards and architectural design guidelines of Section 3.1 and o_ ther stand r~ds+of
~ for:
1. All new structures LESS THAN 1044 sq. ft. of gross floor area in the RS,
R1 S, RM, C4, CG, DDC, NNC, and P f SP zones, all new structures or additions LESS
THAN 2000 square feet of gross floor area in the IP, IL, and SV~IIR zones, and single family
and duplex dwellings in the NCOD, but EXCLUDING strictures subject to TYPE I
Design Review.
2. Any change in use that results in a greater parking requirement.
B. Application Requirements. An application shall include a completed City application form, filing
fee, deeds, notification area rnap and labels, written narrative statement regarding compliance
with criteria, location map and the following additional exhibits:
1. Street and Utilities Plan, as applicable;
Z. Site Design Plan;
3. Grading Plan; and
4, Architectural drawings (plan view and elevations) [sates-sae-be+at~}. Materials
sample boazd --optional at Planning Director's discretion.
Criteria. The applicable guidelines and standards of Section 3.1 shall apply and other applicable
sections of the WDO.
-39-
139
~ \ ..
;.
::'~''~~-*a-~
;~. phi.
,~
~o~ ~~
~~:, -~t.=:~~ «6, PUBLIC WORKS flEPARTMENT
September 10, 2009
T0: Jim Hendryx, Community Development Direct
FROM: Dan Brown, Public works Director
SUBJECT: w40DBURN OOwNTOWN DEVELOPMENT PLAN UPDATE
CHANGES TQ THE TRANSPORTATIQN SYSTEM PLAN
The Woodburn Downtown Development Plan Update has recommended changes to the
Transportation System Plan regarding street cross sections. It is my recommendation
that any amendments to the Transportation System Plan with regard to street cross
sections be addressed by adding new cross sections to menu of potential solutions
versus making cross sections! changes street specific. The reasoning for this
recommendation is that the street cross section used for street improvements should be
based upon the transportation system need to address community development versus
a pre-determined cross section applied due to street classification.
The Downtown Plan recommends that on-street parking be provided for Young Street
west of Mil! Greek and east of Front Street. However, the current TSP classes Young
Street as Minor Arterial and the TSP cross section for an arterial does not provide for
on-street parking. Adopting the recommendation of the Downtown Plan to provide on-
street parking should be addressed in a broader context than simple deviation from the
standard cross section for an arterial for this specific section of Young Street. Rather, l
would prefer that the amendmen# to the TSP define alternative cross sections that may
be applied if conditions warrant. I recommend that the City consider adoption of a
Boulevard cross section similar to that promoted by METRO for softening arterials in an
urban environment. The compromises associated with traffic flaw and management
must be weighed by the urban planners and engineers when adopting a Boulevard
cross section versus the current arterial cross section. This decision as to applying an
appropriate cross section for a specific street must be made in the context of its impact
on the entire transportation system and the anticipated land uses adjacent to the street.
Depending on how property redevelops along Young Street, it remaining a minor arterial
may be the best design for the City. However, I do strongly advocate that urban
planners have the flexibili#y within the TSP to adopt a Boulevard cross section should it
be a more appropriate solution for the community.
The Downtown Plan also identified the application ofone-way streets and diagonal
parking. 1 recommend any amendment to the TSP not be street specific, but rather
provide a standard cross-section for cone-way street providing diagonal parking, thru
140 ATTACHMENT C
PUBLIC VY4RKS DEPARTMENT
September 14, 209
Page 2
lane, bike lane, and sidewalks. This cross-section would be applicable where
appropriate and would be based upon the transportation system needs and land use in
the vicinity of the street.
The TSP should provide flexibility to adopt the appropriate cross-section to meet the
specific needs of the community, It should also be understood that the fiscal resources
are not available to improve the transportation system to the cross-sections specified for
new development and that in areas of redevelopment it is difficult to anticipate what
cross-se~ion would serve best the revital'~zation of that segment of the community. The
reality is that the City of Woodburn will have to adopt cross-sections that ~t within
existing right-of-way and this is the design constraint that will dictate the final cross-
section,
In conclusion, it is my recommendation that any changes to the TSP simply be the
addition of optional cross-sections that may be applied if land use and urban planning
conditions warrant. I bel'seve it is premature to amend the TSP with any specific
changes in classification or the application of anon-standard cross section to a specific
street based upon the finding of the Woodbum Downtown Development Plan Update.
141
~ ~
tY ~ d fir;
W O V~
Z Z ~ 1 `i ~ /
a Z gpt1A~ ~`. ~/
N ~ ~ ; .
0
( 70 EcO~,~ /
o ~ i
i I
t!) Z ~? U~ / ,,
~. Y
N w o a(
a ~ w ~ ~
~ ~, U
j O ~ 0 W; ALEXANDRA AV
(%~ 4 ~ le ~ w~s:~rJ ~ ~ ,k'' ~
Q ~ ~ ~~`~~ ¢ ~ O
ssr M,
F~ Z ~
Z
~,
O~Cr : ~ ~ ,,'°,~w , JAMES ST ~
~X
W HAYES ST `k:
~,w
.... ~~~ .~~ o
KOFFLER AV
U
~ W ` 1~
,NFORO ~ 1
c ~ a a HARDCASTLE AV
u
m N N i l
IGHTON 5 Q
~~ ~' ~ ,
Q ~•i•.~NM•AN~..~
a,
0 Y Y• ~ Z
U U I r-
Q ~
ul<E ST N ~ J Wo i ~~ ~ WILLIAMS Av ~'~
U d . ~ Q
FORD ST o N ~ ~ U
Q 1 ~ ~ GR ~~ r / ~~s /
ADEL ST m ~ '~~ o
I ~ s~, yti ~~ ~ ~'~.
~ Q ~~ ~ r ~~ ~.s
SER ST SANTIAM l}R ~~,~ `"'
~' ~ St luke~'~~`
~~ ~ ~ y~ . i=ronfi ~.
i ., ~ , ~ Catholic ~o ~ ~ Park
.«...~..... ......N..«........~......~...~.........~ ~ ~
~ ~ ;•~~j ~ Sc~gol ~ti ~y
/ ~
z t'j~ ?p~~ ~ a
y ~ h~ i
~•~~~ ~ rsr * ~ sr~~ ~~ Po~'~ 4Sr
~%....„~, o l;'.: Fs United ~ta~ sr !i
~ ••~~~ ~R,c~ sr /P `~ ~ ai
1 I ~ }
qq ~sr ~ ~ Ch`a~~r of ~o, o
ryLR , C0 ~ J U
MpNr s''/ r ~ \~ ~ Ctierrid~eta
t ~ .. ~ ski Comm .
R
~NtN..t•••~NNt..+~ ; "'~. ,~ S ~,~,;. s...: ~~, ~ osl~e
I RYE ST ••1 ~c(F~'F ~ ~ PU ~~F
r ~ ~q ~ ssr y'` Pa
1 6ARLEY ST ~ o,~, ysr City +~ ~4 ti~ ~ - ~•
,, ~,,.
'' . ~ y ~`
is u ppu n ~"tum, rzm f tlw in.~si curtMH ~ ~ ~
lliMLuncr'llusmaT . R~ '~ T,N.; ~
inl'rm~tinn nulahlr. il~w~n'cr. it yMroIJ rkx tx ttri~idattl n1ru~lr fur Kxkny [~` • ~ ,
t'11d ki `~';f ~•
~~ Urban GmwtA &+undsy ,, ` ' ~ ; / Y
(~ CuReM '~ ~ eR ~o o; oU
. ,.. _ pt,Wmoua project Arca Streets ~" '!~';',
r ~reeN~ay ~ Proposed Urban Gmx1h Bou ;
••••• Galeµay Area Boutrdar}' '~ ~ .._...... ,, ~Ar$T r $Cale 1 "'~$~~,
••+ MajorAnerial GaifCourus O G1 • ~
•••• Cin Limits ~->;.
-- Local Strcel ~ Parks ~ i
---~ Railroad Q ~~ ~ r"""'
- ~- Streams Assessor' Taxless l ^ = 140 ' J
City of Woodburn
Downtown Development Plan Update
~~
SCALE IN FEET'
Downtown Plan Subareas
- Creek ®Woodburn Downtown Plan Subareas
Weda~id A Old Town
C too Year Floodplain B Gateway District
C South Front Street Corridor
Potential Gateway Treatments D North Front Street Corridor
E Young; Street Corridor
4
143
1
....
~~, ~
r
.~i +°
~~1
:,.h.»
.w,..„,
f• n~nci~lan ~'ll~
ieled GawMwg Gm~
iuurMM dr ~rwcuw
City of Woodburn
FIGURE 2
.. .. ... .• ..~ ' _ ' ~ h1
µ.'~ ~;..
CD ~~ , ,
is
r
P SP
R
_ ~a _
Y~v' ~'~rl.~ •
. ~ ,, ~ r
RS \. ~ ~,,,:. , r..
. ~
MI ° ~< ~ .4i'~,. 'i ., ~ :gip
t .r3,- ~
• ~.. f ~• PISP
~- y~:;,
R6 ~ .,,,, . .~~~
t • ~; • . ~ ,
'~ RS .~
-' .: : ;
~,~ .•
~• ,,
,, ~ ~ : ~ ~ -
RS ~ ` ~ ' ~ RS ,
City of Woodburn • Downtown Develoament,Plan Update Zoning Districts
"""' City Limits ~ RS • Single Family Residental
~~~~'~~~~ Streams ®RSN -Nodal Single Family Residental
~"""" Railroad ~ R1 S -Retirement Community Single Family Residential
""" Downtown Project Area ®RM -Medium Density Residential
"'~"'i Gateway Area Boundary RMN • Nodal Medium Density Residental
Gateway Subdistrict ~ CO • Commercial Office
r...~...
~._,•_-i FEMA 100 year Flood Plain CG • Commerical General
~:•`:.` ~ Si nificant Wetlands Overla District DDC -Downtown Development and Conservation
g y
Other Wetlands ~ IP -Industrial Park ~.Q~,
w '`''-~ E
Riparian Corridor & Wetlands Overlay District (RCWOD) y~ `~ IL -Light Industrial ~~'
s
Assessor Taxlots __~_~ PISP -Public and Semi-Public o ?so soo ~,ooo
Fcet
+seta+mer. This map is a graphic repraentation, us+ng the most torrent +nformtuion available. However, it should not be considered accurate for scaling FubliC Works Dep8r11
- ~ -- - FIGURE 3
144
•.rr .S ~, ri ~ '
.• , _ f
.Y... E,•
'1 0. ~ ~'~ fir' ~ ~'d r' ~1•.%! ..~ - .. ~..t.rr •..::«,• .. Yt~,;'
s.,::.. ~... :, , r; '~... . ' 6 fir. i ~
7•• ~~ • r• PISP ~ :-
. .~;_,. ,~ ,~., ~ _ :.~ - PISP ~,.: ~.~ ...
.1... _, ~ ~C01
r.. :1 •~,
'`'. 1 f f.1 I 1 r IM f,'1 ,., •f~ , .. ,..,1 ~ ~ -.l' 41 ~ . 1'.~' rl .. ...,
•.~'•.trriJ:.It~1 ~ ~• a4 •~1. -i4 'l ;~1}~',~f .:)•K •.,r • rye
' ~ ~ J ! f~ ' f. ( iY
~ 1 it ,r . ,.; 't: 'f i "a• ~'7'~~af . S ,k'i,4. , • r ~ ~ r
PISP .. A ~ w~~. ~, .~}~ ~_;, ,-:- ,
' ra, 0 'ii;Hr ti ~k ~1. ~:t+C .~a~l~j•' ~ ,• '~ •K ..nt ,,. ... ,
,, ... ...~ ~ 4 fit,' f ,* 1 t Ih f Jt' ''v!i K' :.~rs~i . .1•, •~ ''~:
. ~~ s~,~t~:~~ ~,~~ .~ ~~ ~4~ i• ,~ 'PISP ~• ,~
. . ' •• •• ~ Rg ~ ~ >. ~,.t .•ry ~~° .~;1'~~~}ty.~~ PISP ... • w:• ~•..~
:, ~ ~ I :' j +~4~ ,~.
a, .. 1 ,~ prl• II . _ ...
.. ,.. .. , ::. ~'t ,few +°• ` ,tir,.1. ~. r •
!~ ~ ~j( '"•'~
. - .RSA: ,..,,r ,, .t: ,»L.Q •:,ti •,~ .. , _ ~:
;~'
• ~.{ ,,• ~, x,+ ~"it ;~7" X11 .. , ~.. ~ ~~ .,'.. si:.... ...,,,; _ a
.. . ~ I vl.~~: ' 414 ~• w ~ ~.. ' ~r - ' r • ~ ° ~ •
.,_ '~ ~'t ' , 'ii
L.,.: i,r~ ~,~ Y 1.., ..,• O ,s
~•'
• ~ M~' ~ , , ,.,,,,. _. ~ PISP ,
.•,, ~,. f ..,;.
, .'g• R
`' ~. ~., :r....
....
Y. ,. ~~ ..,. I , ' r,
.. . , f ,. •
. •.
' "tr ..~t ~'w. lr' I
~, ~;
,' RS
.. PISP ~' y l . . ' • •
PIP • • ~~~ •,,,, . _ , ... , Ci of Woodburn
• ~ ,. ~+ ^^ I ~• • , , ' , Downtown Develo meat Alan
• ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~~ ' : '~ •~ ~ ~ Nopfication Area Ma
~' - y. ., p
R . '. •'ti5,., ., ••.~~ Le end
.' ~''~. ', X11. ~..~ City Limits
• , ti • • ~~ : ;, ~;~ _., Streams e
• E ... ~ k• it •'~
,` ,. ~ 1
• ~.' ' ~:;~•: ~~. ~ ~~ ,.« Railroad
+ ' ; '1,' ~ ~.. .~. Gateway Arcs Boundary
~ ,, _,. ,
. ~ ~; • ~ QDDP(VotificaUasArea
. .. .. ,. ~..~. ;4R4 ..
Q, •
• r' ;~ .; . ', 250' DDP Notiflcatioa Area
• RS , .~
:~ C ,,
r : ~: ,... .. • • : `, ~.. .... pcurrenl Urban Growth Boundary
Proposed Urbaa Growth Boundar
•~•. .. I_+r •~
:. ~ :;: ~ ...._ „i . _ ... QAssessurTaxlots
~\ • • , 1 ! ,
, .~~ ~ • ~. 0 230 460 920 fort
,•,
• •~ ~ • •~ r' ~ ~ ~•y •.. [)I.N'Il1UIL'f: ThtlfAJp I%il ~I.yMll fi~rCJt11WlHhl, L1111E
, ; ~+~• •• ..~.... ._~._...~..+~. ,,.ti««. IIK IIWYI cURCIN IlIrUfNil Y
. lun ~ all+rl* I laru'era. a a1nluW
.~ , ._ , .r , , . , . :1' ; ... ... ~ uul Ec Cuuideml acar;lle r~~r uallap
• •~~: •~~. FIGURE 4
. ... ~ .~ ~_ Public Works Lkpartntent
. ~ r ••~ ~ ~ .. .. UV ~ ~ - IKjv Engineering DivisionlGlS
t'on
s pss°~a i
. hbo~'ocyd
bum ~~~~ t Plan
ric W~ ~o men
The H~Sto Radave P
Down~wn
~wAA
own{p°n' •
~~ Dream for OuT ~I'storic D ~ Ll yCl
~~.o c)td S~tttem1eY
~ 46
t 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Downtown Redevelopment Plan
TrensM~tions AveilebleonMneB<wwyvsedrernierNouse.com ~ Contact Person: O~reUCrays, Chak, 503.981.0011
Plan presented August 31, 2009 ~ A~ aarent do~ntouun pictures taken August 16, 2009
SECTION 1
iNTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 4
EXECUTNE SUMMARY ............................................................................................... . 7
PLAN OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................ .. 8
About the Historic Woodburn Neighborhoods Association ....................................... 8
The Need for an Alterr>ative Downto~r Redev~opment Plan .................................. 8
Ratiorr>allle ..................................................................................................................... 9
Plan Design ............................................................................................................... 11
PLAN PRIORI'I'IES ....................................................................................................... 13
Summary of Priorities ................................................................................................ 13
Priority 1 Crime Reducdon ........................................................................................ 15
Priority 2 Clean Up 1 Authentic Preservation ............................................................ 19
Priority 3 Reduce a Redirect Traffic ......................................................................... 23
Priority 4 Reduce Noise ............................................................................................. 26
Priority 5 Reduce Problem Rentals .......................................................................... 28
PLAN SUMMARY ......................................................................................................... 31
SECTION 2
REVIEW OF THE CITY CONSULTANT'S DRAFT PLAN .......................................... 3~5
2
147
The Historic Woodburn Neighborhoods Assoaation
~I~N z
S
An Historic Redevelopment Ptan for Do~~OWn
3
1~8
or ~~' Hl~p7~~ Do~t~~
Qtr r}ream
~~
~;~~
Our Dream for Our Historic Downtown
The Old Settlemier District
The Historic Woodburn Neighborhoods Association
Downtown Redevelopment Pian
Preserved Auk 31,2009
INTRODUCTION
Here is our dream for our oid downtown. it is a dream seated by your downtown Woodburn neighbors who are
part of the Historic Woodburn Neighborhoods Association.
We're the folks who have chosen to live and work in the shadow of Set~emier House. You see us up high on
ladders re-painting the brackets on our old Victorians. You see us on our hands and knees replaang old bricks
on narrow pathways that lead to turn-of-the-century bungalows. You walk on our old-style stone sidewalks that
still carry carved inscriptions from an earlier time. Some of us have spent our entire lives here; others have
moved from far-away. All of us have chosen to live in a place that is still old and deeply rooted in the past.
4
149
2
People sometimes ask us "Why do you live downtown?" 8y that, they mean "Why do you live downtown with all
the noise, the speeding cars, the problem renters, the decaying buildings, and the barking dogs?" We stay for the
~auty of old Woodbum. We marvel at the falling-down carnage house on Settlemier Street, and long to go inside
the empty brick stores near Front Street. We stay because we cherish the stately ofd homes that line Settlemier
Street. We stay because we still see beauty in wom-out Woodbum buildings like the old city hall. We stay
because beneath the decades of decay and dirt that shroud downtown, we can see the faint glimmer of a rare
and special gem.
We have created this downtown redevelopment plan because we want to join with the City of Woodburn to
protect what's left of this fragile treasure. We are painfully aware that in the
blink of an eye, we could forever lose this special legacy. Generation after
generation has protected downtown through winter storms, raging fires, and
even earthquakes. Now our generation has been entrusted to save what
remains so our children and our children's children will have more than
fading pictures of long-ago bulldozed buildings. We believe it is now our
generation's responsibility to protect downtown so that all future
generations will have an opportunity to experience for themselves the
beauty that still exists here. We cannot be the generation that lets
Woodbum's links to the past be irrevocably broken.
Woodburn will never have another old downtown.
5
150
we either protec# and restore what remains, or we will lose what makes downtown special. You can drive to any
city and see nice neighborhoods, but not every city has an old part of town. we believe that this pr~osed
downtown redevelopment plan is our last chance to save what is special, beautiful, and unique about woodbum's
first and fast historic neighborhood.
There will never be another chance
to preserve woodbum's old downtown.
b
151
Our Dream ~or Our Historic Downtown
The old Settlemier District
t~G.gtoric woo~um Neighbart,oods Assoaation Downtown Redevelopment Plan
FuN Flan, PawerPant, and Translations: www.se~Uerniert~ousecarrVhistaric.t~trnl
Presented August 31, 2009 I Durrep Crays, HVVNA Cta~ir, 503.981.0011
Executive Summary
Here is our dream for our old downtown. It's a dream created by your downtown neighbors who are part of the
Historic Woodburn Neighborhoods Association. We've seated this downtown redevelopment plan because we v+~nt
to joi n with the City of Woodburn to protect what's left of this fragile treasure. We're painfully aware that in the blink of
an eye, we could forever lose this special legacy. Generation after generation has protected downtown through
storms, fires, and even earthquakes. Now our generation has been entrusted to save what remains so that those
who followwili have more than faded pictures oflong-ago, bulldozed buildings. But, we must stop downtown's decay
not just for future generations, but also for ourselves. Since historic Settlemier House and old downtown have been
the city's heart since 1892, saving "yesterday" could be the fastest path to a better tomorrow. Our historic past is our
greatest asset; restoring it could ra~dly end the blight, create a new image and a place we call The Old Settlemier
District. We cannot be the generation that lets Woodbum's links to the past be irtevocably broken. Woodburn will
never have another o~ downtown.
KEY PLAN ELEMENTS: Our redevelopment plan revolves around two lop priorities: LESS CRIME, and MORE
CLEANUP !PRESERVATION OF AUTHENTIC HISTORIC BUILDINGS. These items are the primary recipients
of all funding, staffing, and resources. These two priorities are paramount because our canvassing revealed that
downtown residents name them as "more important than anything else." There are three additional goals: LESS
TRAFFIC, LESS NOISE, and LESS RENTAL PR08LEMS. These are our second set of guiding principals to
consider when allocating funds, staffing, and resources. To recap, we seek: (1}LESS Crime, {2}MORE Clean
Up 1 Preservation of Authentic Buildings, (3} LESS Traffic, {4} LESS Noise, (5} LESS Rental Problems.
We also request that some of our members join a Downtown Redevelopment Leadership Committee to work
with the City to provide support and leadership. Any downtown redevelopment plan needs both the City and
residents--the largest group of stakeholders-- to work together as a united team. The Historic Woodburn
Neighborhoods Association is stepping forward as a strong, dedicated, unified entity, asking to help shoulder the
load and lead the way. The task ahead is monumental. Previous plans have been treed, and evidence of their
failure is painfully visible throughout downtown. Further failure likely means that the remaining historic fragments
of Wooclbum's history will be lost to nature and the wrecking ball. No matter how long Woodburn survives into the
future, it will never have another historic downtown. We want to be your partner creasing The Old Settlemier
District from the ashes of the past.
There will be no second chance if we fail as caretakers of this special place we inherited.
There will be no way to ever make it up to our children and our children's children
if we allow historic Woodburn to crumble on our watch.
152
PLAN OVERVIEW
out t~e
Historic Wooc~urn Neig~or~oods Association
The Historic Woodburn Neighborhoods Association is an alliance of the atizen
stakeholders most affected by the proposed Downtown Redevelopment Pian.
We are downtown residents and business owners. We care so muds about
arr old downtown, that w+e have devoted huge chunks of our lives to research
this plan, and to prepare it for your consideration. As an association, we have
spent approximately 18 months canvas~ng our neighbors in an effort to
~~
~~~
discover our canmunity's dreams for historic downtown Woodburn. We sponsored an estimated 30 large and
small meetings, and 25 neighborhood walks. We believe that we have made contact with as much of 70.80% of
downtown residents and businesses during our intensive outreach efforts. We have nearly 100 members and our
neighbortbod watch signs are visible in many downtown homes and businesses.
The Need ~or
an Alternative Downtown Rec~.evelopment Plan
The Historic Woodburn Neighb~hoods Association has rapidly become a central force in downtown Woodburn.
Because we live and vwrk here, it was easy for us to conduct a thorough and inten~ve investigational campaign
into the community's hopes and dreams for downtown redevelopment.
We believe that our assoaation's canvassing effor#s may have been more extensive and
open than the very limited atizen feedback options that were allowed as contributions to
the city consultant's downtown plan. Since we believe that our association may have
more successfully involved the largest constituency to be affected by the redevelopment
plan--downtown residents-- we experienced much distress when those views and
visions were not being incorporated into the plan. We felt our voice wasn't being heard.
Because of this sense of being left out, wee ask you to appreciate the necessity for this
alternative viewpoint, and to carefully consider integrating the ideas contained in our plan. We recognize that
S
153
some of the ideas contained in the consultant's plan have value, but we feel that its plan still does not adequately
reflect residents' top priorities. These priorities will be thoroughly detailed in our alternative proposal in
subsequent pages.
The city appointed a stakeholder committee to help guide the
consultant's work. We do not believe that panel included even a single
committee member whose only focus and agenda lay with historic
downtown residents. We are profoundly concerned that the historic
preservation viewpoint was not sufficiently represented on the board.
Had there been citizen representatives devoted to only the historic
preservation outlook, we believe an entirely different plan would have
emerged. Because of this possible lack of representation for the preservation outlook, we are now requesting that
some of the members of our association be appointed to a Downtown Redevelopment Leadership Committee io
help oversee and lead the remaining phases of this project.
Please note that even though the consultant's panel was 100°~ business and government representatives, the
vast majority of downtown stakeholders are not business owners or government officals. The vast majority of
downtown stakeholders are residents. The consultant's downtown redevelopment plan was created with scant
input from residents, who are by far the majority stakeholders. Public meetings that did allow resident attendance
did not allow meaningful verbal input, only token written correspondence. Reddentoutragewas evident at those
meetings, in the newspaper, and in our association meetings. There was enormous resentment over being
excluded from a process that affected us far more than the outsider who was in charge of the project. We are
now requesting that the cty correct this oversight by letting downtown residents begin taking a leadership role so
they can have a voice in their own future. Because all factions of Woodburn must be included, of course that
leadership committee should include a diverse cross-section of all Woodburn groups and interests as well. We
want to correct the existing gap, not in any way perpetuate it. However, since residents outnumber business
owners and government officials, we would hope that the make-up of the Downtown Redevelopment Leadership
Committee would reflect that reality.
Rationale
We believe that the downtown redevelopment plan is not just a chance to shape downtown's future. We believe
that it is our last chance to save Woodbum's past. We believe that if downtown's decades-long descent into blight
is to be reversed, the cty must engage downtown residents to take leadership roles. We certainly need business
support but since most of downtown consists of residents, the leadership, participation and support must come
154
from this sects: This sectahas feitside-lined and unheard throughout much of the initial redevelopment plan
process. our association is a large, ready-made, positive, active, passionate force just waiting to join the city's
team. The city can not succeed without us, and we can't succeed without the city. The plan contained in these
pages could set the stage for a sucxessful partnership.
Together
the Histot~c Woodburn Neighborhoods
Association
and the City of Woodburn
might finally accomplish the impossible:
We might save our old downtown.
~~
~~~.. j°
;_..
a.:.
. ~::
...,
:; ~:~ ~ .
,~ ~
~o
155
Plan Design
This redevelopment plan has 5 main goals, but highlights two priorities
above all others. These two mission-critical items are 1) Crime
Reduction and 2) Clean Up 1 Preservation of Authentic Buildings.
We cannot adequately capture how fervently these two top goals are
rated by downtown residents. We strongly recommend that these
priorities are given over-riding consideration for all resources.
We have identified several secondary priorities as well. We recommend that these second tier goals receive
second status for consideration when allocating resources. The remaining goals are: 3) Reduce Traffic, 4)
Reduce Noise, and 5) Reduce Problem Rentals.
To recap the eve priorities, they are:
1. LESS CRIME
2. MORE CLEAN UP /PRESERVE AUTHENTIC
BUILDINGS
3. LESS TRAFFIC
4. LESS NOISE
5. LESS RENTAL PROBLEMS
Further, our entire plan is framed within the context of retaining old downtown's genuine historic character instead
of relying on new reproduction buildings that bear no connection to old Woodburn ar its families, history, and
story. Our plan emphasizes the destructiveness of substituting facsimile old buildings that lack any roots in
Woodburn, its families and history. This historic preservation component is central to this redevelopment plan.
We recognize that our redevelopment plan was crafted by neighbors not city planners. It is true that we are just
teachers and business owners, retired people and writers, public speakers and office workers, engineers and
stay-at-home parents, not trained city de~gners. Our plan still contains specific recommendations and a
compelling rationale. We hope that what we may lack in urban design jargon and buzz words will be
overshadowed by the importance of our mission to save the past for future generations.
ll
156
The first section of this docurnsnt contains our redevelopment fan.
The second section of this document is a review of the most recent
v$rsion of the consultant's redevelopment plan f~ ttte city. We have
indicated our concerns with the consultant's plan ar~d suggested
specific alternatives whenever possible. The review section also
highlights areas of agreement between the two plans, along with any
suggestions for improvement.
Please remember that we are seeking to frame every aspect of the final downtown redevelopment plan in the
context of preservation of authentic buildings. In addition, we are seeking to make our two key priorities the over-
ard~ing conaems that receive the vast bulk of all plan monies, staff and resa,-ces.
The driving force behind our plan is to conserve downtown's past for future re~dents to experience. The
consultant's plan does not revolve around this dynamic. We hope that our ideas-• which come from city residents
and business owners, not from outsiders--will become the core of the city's final redevelopment fan.
Only by integrating preservation of
historic structures into the plan, do
we keep alive our hope for
preserving the only old downtown
this city will ever have.
12
157
PLAN PRIORITIES
Summary o~ Priorities
Our Dream for Our Historic Downtown: The Old Settlemier District
emphasizes five major areas, with the first two items identified as the most critical.
1 }Crime Reduction
2) Clean Up 1 Preservation of Authentic Buildings
3) Reduce Traffic
4} Reduce Noise
5} Reduce Problem Rentals
These areas do not receive the same treatment in the current version of the consultant's plan. Some of these
priorities appear to be completely missing in the consultant's plan. Our canvassing of downtown residents
showed that these 5 elements were the overwhelming concems; our plan revolves around those concerns. There
are additional, compelling reasons why these priorities must become the Redevelopment plan's tap goals:
A) We have created a redevelopment plan that prioritizes the preservation of old and authentic buildings
instead of the creation of new, facsimile buildings that are decorated to look old but have no actual ties to
Woodburn past. Historic buildings are full of memories and stories that pre-date us all. New, reproduction
buildings may look historic but have no historic value of any sort. Unless we prioritize saving buildings with
historic value, w will lose these irreplaceable assets forever.
B) To successfully preserve Woodbum's downtown, it is imperative that chronic, serious livability issues be
immediately addressed. Crime and blight have dominated downtown for several decades with no serious,
effective efforts to remedy these overwhelming safety and livability concems. Our plan directs every available
dollar, employee, and resource to restore downtown to being a clean and safe place to live. Downtown residents
have clearly indicated that nothing else matters in downtown when crime is rampant and buildings and property
are in decay.
13
158
C} Our plan calls for the fight against crime and decay to begin at once. We don't want to wait any longer for
downtown to be safe. We don't want to live in a place where buildings and land are left to slowly rot and die. We
want the City to prioritize downtown crime reduction and blight reduction as Job 1. Downtown has been dying for
decades. There can be no more excuses, and no more delays. Downtown residents want to begin the
tumaround, and they want to begin it #oday.
D) our plan also indudes the goal of redudng or redirecting traffic around
residential downtown. We also seek a reduction in nose from downtown festivals,
stereos, cars, animals, and parties so that livability will improve. We want help to
reduce the chronic, serious rental prodems that include homes housing dozens of
unrelated people; homes being used for drug trafficking, renters who create noise ar
live in buildings that are unsafe for habitation.
The detailed explanations for all these key elements begin in the next pages.
Finally, since downtown W~dburn has so long been viewed by many in a most negative light, we have
researched how other historic, but disrespected regions have been ade to recover. We looked first to Portland, to
the once dirty, decaying Northwest sector, and to the quick tumaround of North Portland. Noting that the once
gritty, old Northwest Portland warehouse district now more than lives up to its name of The Pearl, we seek to
inaugurate downtown's transfomnatia~ by dubdng it The Old Settlemier District. Woodburn was not blessed
with a natural focal point. We have no picturesque river or leafy forest. Since 1892, Settlemier House has been
the symbol of Woodburn. We believe that by re•branding downtown Woodburn as The Qld Sedlemier District, we
can more rapidly cut through past perceptions. We hope that the picturesque new name v~ill one day be
engraved onhistoric-looking plaque atop every downtown street sign, This
new name will hasten a tumaround in the attitudes that have long been a
cloud over our downtown.
Just as an old, decaying Portland warehouse distl~ct
eventually became a Pearl, we hope that one day our
struggling region will be a place whose name is
synonymous not with blight but histoi7c beauty.
14
159
Priority 1
CRIME REDUCTION
T~~e Pro~lem:
The Historic Woodburn Neighbafioods Association wants to send a near, loud, and unmistakable message to
the City of Woodburn: CRIME MUST GOGOWN--NOW! Those are the exact arords said over and over again
by residents during our meetings. No issues draws as much passion and fervor. We are not able to
adequately use words on paper to communicate the urgency of this issue for all of us. We can not continue to
live in downtown in the middle of drug dealing, speeding cars, burglary, graffiti, vandalism, stolen cars, and
trespass. Some of us have endured multiple criminal acts. Because of this, there are many of us that believe
that downtown crime is out of control. It seems that criminals believe that they can flaunt laws and do as they
wish unchecked in downtown Woodburn, Oregon. Since the move of the police department, we feel as if we
live in a Wild West free•for-all where criminals do as they wish without much fear of consequence.
15
160
Downtown residents are more concerned about crime than any other issue that relates to downtown's future.
Polling of downtown residents has shown us that nearly all our neighbors have been directly affected by
crime, a know someone close to them who has been affected. When our association members voted to
determine the top priorities for our association, crime was the most overwhelming, mast passionate concern.
Many downtovm residents used to hear police vehicles pass their house countless times per day. Now it is a
very rare event to see a police car in downtown. At our neighborhood watch set-up meeting, we were told by
the Acting Chief that as few as four officers protect all of Woodburn most nights. That number has proven to
be woefully inadequate for downtown's safety and livability.
The consensus arnang downtown residents is that Woodburn
cannot be made livable until the rampant crime is reduced
downtown. Since the relocation of the department to Highway
214, downtown residents feel they have endured unprecedented
levels of car theft, break in, public urination, vandalism, graffiti,
drug dealing, and burglary. Redevelopment must address this.
Downtown residents characterize what they are experiencing as a crime wave even though Woodburn Police
cite statistics to the contrary. Perhaps much of downtown crime goes unreported to the police. That would
account for the gap between residents' experience and the police statistics. It is logical that reporting of crime
might be quite low since many downtown residents told us that they never got a satisfactory resolution or help
with the criminal acts they did report. We have countless reports of too few pdice, too little and inconsistent
follow-through, and refusals by dispatchers to dispatch officers even when officers are available, Just one
example: Chronic problems like 17 unrelated young males living in a single family house on Ga~ield Street
persisted for three months without any resolution. Police seemed reluctant to issue stations even after 20 or
30 calls from many different neighbors. Further, dispatchers have refused requests for help with a variety of
"low priority" crime like chickens and dogs disrupting traffic on heavily used roads.
While downtown re~dents admire and like our police, it is obvious that the
police department is stretched thin. Many residents believe that the current
epidemic of unsolved auto thefts might be slowed if police staffing allowed
for more prompt, on-going investigations. Based on residents' experience,
police appear to be faced with enormous demand that may exceed their
16
161
staffing and resources. While we understand how deeply committed and well-intentioned our police are,
following a serious crime, it sari be difficult to locate and maintain on-going communication with staff members
who seem to have many competing demands for their time. officers and investigators appear to be faced with
a heavy load of cases. Investigations appear to take a back seat when timely and thorough follow-up is
delayed by many other competing cases, plus all the emergencies and ells that happen each day. Re~dents
understand that demand may exceed police resources, but are concerned that solvable cases may be left
unresolved because~no one was able tofollow-through in a timely and thorough manner.
The out-of-control crime in downtown has made our neighborhood feel like a sinking ship. You do not spruce
up or remodel a sinking ship. That is what the consultant's plan proposes. Amazingly, crime reduction is
completely absent from the consultant's plan. Any plan that fails to make crime reduction the lop focus leaves
us stranded on the sinking ship. Crime reduction must be the cornerstone of Redevelopment and its
immediate, central focus.
Nothing else in the redevelopment plan
matters if it occurs in the context of
out-of-control crime--nothing.
The 5alutions:
1. Residents want CRIME REDUCTION NOW.
2. We request that Redevelopment dollars and resources be dedicated first to IMMEDIATELY HIRING
ADDITIONAL POLICE OFFICERS, and to RAMP UP ENFORCEMENT AND ISSUING CITATIONS
3. We want Redevelopment dollars and resources dedicated first to adding a viable DOWNTOWN POLICE
SATELLITE location at the old Salud building or neighboring location, and to have that office consistently
staffed wish officers.
4. We want Redevelopment dollars and resources dedicated first to making high crime areas of downtown,
like Front Street into ZERO TOLERANCE CRIME ZONES. This zone is similar to the approach used by
Portland Police in Pioneer Square following the elimination of No Sit, No Lie enforcement. An infraction in the
Zero Tolerance Zone would be charged no matter how minor. This is necessary to protect school children who
travel in this area, from having io have to view public urination, drug dealing, and other illegal activity.
5. Redevelopment dollars and resources must be dedicated first to ADDING CODE ENFORCEMENT
17
162
OFFICERS and deploying them in downtown to reduce flagrant, on-gang code vi~ations. Officers should
provide fewer warnings and INCREASE THE NUMBER OF CITATIONS ISSUED
6. PUBLICIZE CRIME REDUCTION as THE over-arching goal of Redevelopment, to t~egin immediately.
V1N411 A
'v
~a It~r~wiMnw/Mw,W ewe.... • ~m..~aw~
18
163
Priority 2
CLEAN UP /
AUTHENTIC PRESERVATION
The Pro~~em:
By overwhelming consensus, cleaning up and preserving downtown is viewed
as the second most critical focus for the Downtown Redevelopment Plan.
Clean Up:
Residents are tired of the blighted homes, the abandoned vehicles, overgrown
lawns, and unsafe buildings. Downtown has spiraled into decay over the past
two decades ar so, and the time has come to stop the decline and reverse the
trend.
Authentic Preservation:
Woodburn has one chance to preserve authentic old buildings. There will be no do-overs if we let historically
important albeit decaying buildings succumb to bulldozers and nature. These neglected old buildings are our
heritage, our only physical links to Woodbum's past. Since Woodburn lacks any natural features to draw
people hers as residents or visitors, our old downtown Wray be our best asset to build our identity around.
Since 1892, Settlemier House has been the single entity in Woodburn that is routinely identified as a symbol of
our town. By preserving our other historic buildings we are expanding and building upon on our pre-existing,
l9
164
longtime symbol.
You may wonder if it will matter if Woodburn loses Old City Hall or the Victorian carnage house on Settlemier
Street. You may question how the old, empty brick storefronts near Front Street could ever matter to a city.
The answer ':s that these unloved old buildings are the only remaining
links to the past, and our best hope to carve a po~tive identity from
the circumstances we've been given. If we replace these historic
structures with new structures, it's like throwing away diamond and
substituting glassr-and hoping that no one will notice the difference.
Our old buildings-- as empty as they appear--are chock full of stories
about old Woodburn families. These empty buildings brim with all the history that happened in those walls. All
that we have become, began within all those old walls and ceilings. If you would never consider for a second
bulldozing majestic Settlemier House, then consider that old City Hall is just Settlemier House unpainted,
unkempt and unloved. If you would never consider bulldozing Settlemier House, then consider that the old
brick store fronts are just a restoration away from once again having their own grace and beauty. Our old
buildings are the keepers of our past. They have a specialness, uniqueness, and an dd soul that cannot ever
be replicated in even the mostwell-constructed, new building.
There will always be opportunities to build more new
buildings in Woodburn. There will never be additional
opportunities to save the old buildings that we are
supposed to care take for all subsequent generations
to treasure.
The ~ o~utions:
i. CLEAN UP MUST BECOME THE SECOND CENTRAL FOCUS of the Redevelopment Plan, and must
START IMMEDIATELY
2. CLEAN UP MUST RECEIVE SECOND PRIORITY WHEN ALLOCATING FUNDS AND RESOURCES
of the Redevelopment Plan
3. STRENGTHEN BUILDING CODES to ensure structures are safe and habitable
20
165
a, DESIGNATE DOWNTOWN A REHAB ZONE AND RESTRICT DESTRUCTION OF HISTORIC
STRUCTURES
5.OFFER INCENTIVES FOR REHAB OF HISTORIC STRUCTURES
6. REQUIRE THE CITY OF WOODBURN REHAB HISTORIC STRUCTURES instead of create new
buildings even if the cost of rehab may exceed building new
7. HIRE MORE HOUSltVG CODE OFFICERS, RESTORATION EXPERTS, AND BUILDING
CONSULTANTS to assist residents and business owners to restore or fix historic and other buildings. HIRE
STAFF TO ASSIST BUILDING OWNERS TO SECURE GRANTS AND FUNDING to restore or tix decaying
historic structures
S. OFFER TAX INCENTIVES, GRANTS and other funding support to save historic buildings, and make this
a top priority.
9. The CITY SHOULD BECOME A ROLE MODEL FOR REHABBING HISTORIC STRUCTURES by
restoring old downtown buildings before building new ones. The city should become a leader in
sustainability by not allowing city buildings to stay unoccupied. The city should model "green,"
environmentally friendly practices
1Q. REQUIRE LANDLORDS HAVE A SPECIAL LICENSE AND DEMONSTRATE SAFETY AND
LIVABILITY of rentals prior to renting
11. DEVELOP HISTORIC DESIGN CODE STANDARDS for downtown buildings.
12. ADD HISTORIC FIXTURES throughout downtown like antique-looking street lamps, caps on street
posts with the historic district name, building plaques, cobblestone roads or sidewalks, old-looking benches
and seating, and create old-style signs at downtown entrances announcing the historic district, etc.
13. ASSIST EXISTING DOWNTOWN BUSINESSES TO RESTORE FACADES to put them in good repair,
Similar incentives should be provided to home owners as well
14. INCREASE FINES AND PENALTIES for owning dilapidated buildings and property, and enforce them
15. HIRE STAFF TO ATTRACT BUSINESSES, SCHOOLS, MUSEUMS, and other entities to fill downtown
buildings, being careful to identify more than just business as prospects. Staff must think "out of the box"
and consider ideas like creating start-up business incubators inlow-fee office space, offering major books
stares free use of vacant downtown city-owned buildings, and attracting nonprofits, art groups, associations
and school groups. Woodburn could stand out Pram the crowd by offering rents drastically below market as
an incentive to entities who commit to stay for a fixed period. All businesses must be compatible with
nearby schools, library, and residences
16. COMMIT TO CLEAN UP AND PRESERVATION AS A TOP GOAL and publicize throughout Woodburn
17. Nearly 60% of Woodburn is Latina, 40°/° are members of other groups, Downtown stores are largely
21
166
focused on serving Latino community members. We want to MAINTAIN EXISTING DOWNTOWN
BUSINESSES WHILE EXPANDING OPPORTUNITIES TO INCLUDE OFFERINGS THAT SERVE OTHER
GROUPS AS WELL. We want everyone to fee! welcomed and comfortable downtown, regardless of their
ethnicity. Diversity only works when everyone feels at home. Downtown belongs to all of us; we ali need to
feel that we fit in here.
22
167
Priority 3
REDUCE OR
REDIRECT TRAFFIC
T~e Pro~~em:
Residential doamtown streets are already no match for the current volume of traffic that flows through each
day. Beginning each morning you can see cars racing down from Highway 99 along Young and Garfield
Streets in a mad dash for Settlemier Street. Unimpeded by any stop signs ar traffic signals until reaching
Settlemier Street, cars are free to speed along at 45 miles an hour or
faster. Many vehicles create a roar as they approach freeway speed
along roads what were meant to be used as quiet side streets. It is no
surprise that there have been at least a half dozen very serious
acadents in the past decade all along the portion of Garfield that runs
between Second and Settlemier Streets. At least half of these
accidents also produced significant injuries, some to children.
Settlemier Street was created as the way for our ancestors to reach stately old houses, and was never meant
to be amini-freeway from Highway 214 to Highway 99. With every growth spurt of the city, downtown's old,
narrow streets have had to absorb more cars, faster cars, and streets that once were quiet each evening now
stay abuzz with cars all day and well into night.
The current city Redevelopment Plan draft proposes increasing downtown density from the 158 households
that we have now to a whopping 1,163 households in twenty years. With current Woodburn households
23
1fi8
es#imated at 3.2 people per home, that would be 3,721 people living downtown. with the current cars per
household at 1.2, that means all those added people will be driving 4,465 cars each day. Our ready maxed•
out roads will be carrying many times more traffic rating past homes, playgrounds and schools. To add more
traffic to overloaded narrow streets is like trying to fit three vehides into a two car garage. It can be done but
only with a lot of pain and destruction. Despite these compelling facts and safety concerns, thQ consultant's
plan proposes to cram more households into downtown, and exponentially more traffic onto our already
unsafe and maxed-out roads.
Part of what makes historic neighborhoods historic are the narrow, tree-tined streets that were designed to
handle traffic into mid-century. They weren't intended to handle the current population. The most difficult tfung
to change is that many people have their minds made up, that that they--and every carowner in Oregon--has
the right to drive on any dry street in Woodburn from Point A to Point B as quiddy as p~sibie.
Residents and the preservation of historic neighborhoods must come first. we must do everything necessary
to encourage non-resident commuter traffic to bypass downtown by using 99E or 214; note that non-resident
commuter traffic isn't business traffic.
Creative and "outride the box"thinking and planning can mitigate or change commuter issues and out-of-date
historic traffic patterns. We should take steps such as adding stop lights and signs; and prohibiting left toms
and through traffic during commuter hours. For instance, adding one or more stop signs or stop lights on
Young Street would keep commuter traffic from raring from 99E to Settlemier via Young and Garfield Streets.
A "Right turn only from 6:30 AM to 8:30 AM" sign at Parr Road would force commuter traffic from 8oone's
Ferry to tom onto Front Street. This could result in amajority ofnon-resident ca~nmuters deriding that stay'sng
on 99 E might be faster.
Historic downtown, built for pedestrians and mid-century residential traffic, is unsafe for non-resident
commuter traffic and hugesemi-trucks detouring around weigh stations. Residential downtown streets will
never be a safe or appropriate place for massave,fast-moving modern-day traffic.
.+~.
Historic downtown streets designed for a different era
are unsafe when speeding cars and massive semi-
trucks use our residential roads as freeways.
24
169
The ~ olutiorls:
1. STOP NON-RESIDENT COMMUTERS FROM USING DOWNTOWN RESIDENTIAL STREETS
2. DO NOT ADD ONE WAY STREETS to downtown
3. DO NOT INCREASE DOWNTOWN RESIDENT POPULATION or add new developments until traffic can
be better controlled. Current infrastructure cannot handle current traffic, much less absorb a greater load.
Residential downtown is already struggling with the twin safety threats ofout-of-control traffic and out-of-
control crime.
4. ENCOURAGE NON-RESIDENT COMMUTER TRAFFIC TO USE 99E AND 214 and bypass downtown;
or create a bypass around downtown
~. USE SIGNAGE TO CHANGE TRAFFIC PATTERNS, and divert drivers away from downtown residential
neighborhoods. PLACE A STOP SIGN OR LIGHT BETWEEN HIGHWAY 99 AND SETTLEMIER STREET
along Young Street before or after the railroad tracks so vehicles can't race unhindered by traffic control
from 99 to Settlemier via Young and Garfield Streets
fi. ADD CAMERAS, SPEED CONTROL DEVICES on Settlemier, Garfield and Young Streets and
elsewhere in downtown
7. EXTEND BAN ON SEMI TRUCKS in down#own to cover a larger area, with better prohibition signage
and enforcement
8. PARKING DOWNTOWN ON FRONT STREET SHOULD BETIME-LIMITED
9. INCREASE CAR-FREE AND BIKE FRIENDLY AREAS
10. ADD SMALL PLAYGROUND, SMALL PARK, DOG PARK, OR SIMILAR CAR•FREE AREA near Plaza
and Hayes Street
25
170
Priority 4
REDUCE NOISE
`Che Prolileni:
Downtown is a tough place to live because of the on-going, serious, chronic
problems residents and bus'snesses face with rbise. Residents report that the noise
problems jeopardize their physical health and mental health, and can even tum
them into "homeless homeowners" when they flee their homes in search of quiet.
At the top of the list of noise pollution problems are music, barking des,
rating cars, parties, and b~ming car stereos. Perhaps the most frustrating
noise pollution comes from arysanctioned events, the spring, summer and
fall downtown festivals that blast sound and bass fa' as much as a whopping
8 hours a day, and as late as 8 PM on work nights. There is no excuse to let
serious, chronic livability problems like noise continue to be a constant
concern in downtown. The City has an obligation to protect residents from intrusive, continuous, ear-shattering
music, barking, amplification, festivals, and parties. we appreciate how important festivals are in our
community, and do support our neighbors staging outdoor events. However, it seems tremendously unfairthat
downtown residents must endure the blaring noise day after day, weekend after weekend, hour after hour.
It is way past time to stop the relentless noise
from creating "homeless homeowners" forced to
flee their homes in search of relief.
26
171
T~e ~olr~tiolzs:
1, ROTATE FESTIVALS THROUGHOUT THE CITY. Downtown residents support festivals in Woodburn
but do not want to be the sole locale for an entire city's parties. We want to be the site of just our share of
events, not the vast majority. Downtown residents have no objection to hosting events that do not include
outdoor amplified sound.
2. CREATE A NOISE FOCUS GROUP {like WDO Focus Group) to review and update animal and noise
control ordinances. REVIEW AND UPDATE UNUSABLE NOISE AND ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCES
which strongly favor the noisemaker, and are virtually unusable by those victimized by dog barking, parties,
stereos, etc. Other cities have ordinances that are more balanced and usable. Currently, for many types of
noise, the affeaed person must arrange to get an officer, a sound meter, and the noise to happen all at the
same time. With just a handful of police and meters, the odds are slim that affected residents will be able to
get all those events to align so that citations can be issued. Amazingly, code officers report they cannot cite
owners of barking dogs, that an affected citizen must take the risk of exposing their identity by filing a formal
complaint. Roadblocks dominate when residents attempt to get help managing problematic nose.
3. REVIEW AND UPDATE ORDINANCES REGULATING TENANTS AND LANDLORDS. The current
ordinances are not usable, especially since officers appear reluctant to issue citations. Multiple citations are
needed to sanction landlords but it is nearly impossible to get the requisite number within the permitted time
frame when police hesitate to cite, or decide to relegate the matter to code enforcement. Code enforcement
offcers are often unavailable especially on weekends and nights when noise and housing issues can be
center stage.
4. INCREASE FINES AND SANCTIONS FOR NOISE POLLUTION and enforce.
5. HAVE CODE ENFORCEMENT AND POLICE RAMP UP ENFORCEMENT AND WRITE MORE
CITATIONS instead of repeated warnings aver months.
~..
~~_
:~,~
;,:.
.. ,,,~~
~~
::- .~ ;~
~._~.
2?
172
Tie P~•o~lem:
Downtown has chronic problems with rental housing, Landlords often fail to
maintain rental homes, and appear to permit, condone or overlook criminal
behavior by tenants.
There have been chronic problems with rental properties being used for
drug dealing, as chop shops, and manufacturing drugs. Some renters host loud parties, fast stereos, have
barking dogs, or keep farm animals as pets. Ordinances regulating rentals appear to have little impact, with a
sense of lawlessness and an "I can do what I want" attitude evident. Blatant vitiations of housing ordinances
can be viewed on almost any block in downtown. Many rentals and other homes appear to lack windows,
walls, plumbing, and some have rainwater seeping through their roofs into both second and first floors. You
can see roofs overgrown with plants, and plywood exterior walls held together with blue tarps, a few nails, and
duct tape. Pick almost any block in downtown and you can see for yourself incredibly unsafe, overcrowded,
unclean, unlivable conditions.
Many single family homes, intended to house a family in two or three bedrooms become de-facto "dorms"
28
173
Priority 5
REDUCE PROBLEM
RENTALS
housing as many as 23 unrelated tenants, as was the case on Garfield all summer, where a small family and
11 men lived in less than 2nd square feet. Tenants in the dorm added 7 cars to the street, and many of the
tenants camped out in Library Park in the early evening during the summer heat waves. The residents could
often been slmtted reclining or sleeping there in an effort to escape the cramped quarters in their overfilled,
over-heated home. The tenants often verbally abused neighboring females with expliat sexual comments,
played their stereo loud enough to be heard blocks away, and connected a hose across the street to a
neighbor's faucet in an attempt to simulate indoor plumbing. It took nearly 3 months and more than 30 calls to
police and code enforcement to gain resolution. The owner, a local farmer, simply choose to ignore Waodbum
housing ordinances and stuffed a whopping 23 human beings into a two bedroom house through all of July's
100 degree weather. The suffering and discomfort was obvious to all who passed by, and could see into the
open, uncurtained windows. Unfortunately, this situation was hardly unique; ii is a common concern through
residential downtown. Housing regulations mean nothing in downtown; landlords simply choose to ignore
them, cramming as many humans into tiny spaces as necessary to be profitable.
We cannot allow profound overcrowding and slum conditions to continue to exist in rental homes--for the
sake of the tenants and for the sake of all downtown. Codes must be enforced. Right now, housing codes
function not as requirements but suggestions that tenants and homeowners can elect not to comply with.
Although it is not politically correct to say it out loud, we a!I know that there are prominent, longtime, respected
Woodburn community members who in truthfulness, are slumlords. We cannot continue to close our eyes and
ignore the blight and suffering we drive by every day.
Old downtown buildings must be maintained and
not allowed to crumble around the children and
families who live inside them.
Tj~e ~o~utions:
1. REVIEW AND STRENGTHEN CODES REGULATING TENANTS AND LANDLORDS especially as
relates to having a rental shut down for on-going law or code violations. The current regulations are
unrealistic and unusable by neighbors when attempting to rein in chronic, serious problems with rental
units.
2. REQUIRE LANDLORDS T4 DEMONSTRATE LIVABILITY PRIOR TO RENTING, REQUIRE LICENSE
29
174
TO RENT HOMES
3. ADD STAFF TO ASSIST LANDLORDS AND TENANTS TO CREATE SAFE, CLEAN, LIVABLE
RENTAL SITUATIONS, and aid tenants to Blow applicable ordinances and laws. Ensure that Spanish-
spealcingpolice officers and code enforcement officers are available in sufficient number to be an
effective res~rce to ensure that renters live in safe, dean units, and that renters understand applicable
laws and rules, and how on-going serious violations can jeopardize their housing.
30
175
PLAN SUMMARY
The redevelopment of downtown must revolve around two top priorities.
These two priorities must be primary recipients of all funding, staffing, and
resource decisions. The two top priorities are LESS CRIME, and MORE
CLEANUP ! PRESERVATION OF AUTHENTIC HISTORIC BUILDINGS.
There are three additional, secondary priorities: LESS TRAFFIC, LESS
NOISE, LESS RENTAL PROBLEMS. These goals should receive second status in the plan, and be
considered as the second choice when allocating funds, staffing, and resources.
To recap the five priorities, they are:
1. LESS CRIME
2. MORE CLEAN UPI PRESERVE AUTHENTIC
BUILDINGS
3. LESS TRAFFIC
4, LESS NOISE
5. LESS RENTAL PROBLEMS
The association recommends alaser-like focus on these five priorities as the only way to quickly and
effectively target the most serious and persistent proems that downtown faces today. Maintaining this focus
also limits the possitulity that unrealistic, extraneous goals deemed undesirable by downtown stakeholders,
will be pursued. Unfortunately, many elements of the city consultant's draft redevelopment plan are so fanciful
and unrealistic that they will never happen- and residents do not want these proposed elements in their
downtown.
Residents want redevelopment to mean an immediate reduction of problems, and an increase in clean-up and
restoration. It's that simple. We know what we want for our awn downtown, and it would be tragic if the words
31
176
of a single outside consultant from another aty were given more force than the words of the peo~e who live
here.
Any downtown redevelopment plan needs both the City of Woodbum and the city's largest stakeholder group
to work together as a united team. The Historic Woodbum Neighborhoods Association is stepping forward as
a strong, dedicated, unified entity, and asking the City to let us help shoulder the load and lead the way.
The task ahead is monumental. Previous plans have been tried and evidence of their failure is painfully visible
throughout downtown. Further failure likely means that the remaining historic fragments of Woodbum's
history will be lost to nature and the wrecking ball. No matter how long Woodbum survives into the future, it
will never have another historic downtown.
There will be no second
chance if we continue to fail
as caretakers of this special
place we inherited. There
will be no way to ever make
it up to our children and our
children's children 'If we
allow historic Woodbum to
crumble on our watch.
But this plan and this time can be different than past efforts. This time the City of Woodbum has aready-
made powerful, unstoppable force of nature called the Historic woodbum Neighborhoods Association.
Boasting nearly 100 members, our group offers you a deep passion for our neighborhood, and a fierce drive
that is unparalleled in this city's history.
We want to be your partner in doing the impossible: creating a new downtown from the ashes of the past.
32
177
Please let us join forces with you and other stakeholders to create the
Old Settlernier Dis#rict where everyone is welcome, and everyone can
feel safe. This is a plan for all of woodbum, and a!I of its residents,
formulated by its residents.
Please appoint our members and other stakeholders to a Downtown
Redevelopment Leadership Committee, and adopt our Historic
Downtown Redevelopment Plan.
Together we can recover the historic gift we've been given, and transform our
crumbling downtown into a place everyone can be proud to call home
The Old Settlernier District
Established X009
33
178
~st0~''~ ~°~to
for ~'r ~ '
Our ~!~~~'~' ~ ~~
• ~~„
~:~
~-~,~
ociation
• Woodburn Nei9hb°rhoods Ass
The Histor-c ~ graft Plan
eview of the C~tY Consu-tant s
R
3~
179
INTRODUCTION to REVIEW
The following chart takes a critical look at the current version of the Woodburn Downtown Development Plan
Update prepared by Otak, Leland Consulting Group and Kittelson Associates.
Here, the Historic Woodburn Neighborhoods Association looks at the proposed plan for Woaibum's future
from the standpoint of a prudent homeowner.
Our view is that most of us are prudent homeowners and have similar priorities:
1. LESS CRIME
We first want to be sure that our family is safe in our home
2. MORE CLEAN UP 1 PRESERVE AUTHENTIC
BUILDINGS
We want our home to be clean and comfortable and maintained in a
way that enriches our lives and protects our real estate investment.
3. LESS TRAFFIC
We want our neighborhood to reflect our core values: Our lave of
shaded quiet streets flanked by pleasing architecture, our need for streets where it is safe for the children
to walk to the library ar ride a bicycle, our joy walking to meet friends for an enjoyable evening at a place
near home.
4. LESS NOISE
We chose a neighborhood that is not overcrowded, without all of the
attendant problems such as loud traffic, or other unreasonable public noise.
5. LESS RENTAL PROBLEMS
We want everyone to live in a home of which we can be proud.
Looking at the Woodburn Downtown Development Plan, we see some ideas
that are acceptable and some ideas we belieue are not prudent and should not be implemented.
The folloving pages are presented in graph form to assist in comparing our analysis with the plan the
consultant is presenting tonight.
35
180
Historic Woodburn Neid~ibor~ioods .Association Review
d
o~ ~Oooal~urn Downtown Development Pan Update June 2009
The city consultant's plan was developed under a grant from the Oregon Transportation and Growth
'Management Program with restricted input from city residents
The plan refers to five planning sub areas: Old Town, the Gateway District, South Front Street Comdor, North
Front Street Corridor, and Young Street Comdor.
The plan has three fundamental goals: Enhance old town as a "healthy heart" for downtown, create a "complete
downtown" with new development in the Gateway Sub area, and sssstain a successful l~~ness community.
No. Plan
Section
and Pa a Woodburn Downtown
Development Plan
the Plan Premise Historic Woodburn Neighborhoods
Assoc. (HWNA~ Position
1. Housing "Increasing the number C_,~mmgnt: There are no plans to
Strategy, of people living alleviate resulting traffic through the
Page 2 downtown will surrounding neighborhoods, and we
contribute to its health are opposed to increasing housing in
and vitality." historic Woodburn, with the possible
exception of currently existing buildings
that could be remodeled to provide
live/work spaces. We feel that until
crime and the general blight of
downtown have been addressed, and
proven to be successful, all available
money should be spent on those
efforts.
Recommendations: Prior to
considering any plan for additional
housing in historic Woodburn: {1)
Implement increased police presence
sufficient to reduce drug trafficking and
other crime. {2}Strengthen City
ordinances to eliminate loitering,
littering, noise, and public urination,
and include in the plan funding for
increased police presence necessary
for the ordinances to be enforced.
36
181
No. Plan
Section
and Pa a Woodburn Downtown
Development Plan
the Plan Premise Historic Woodburn Neighborhoods
Assoc. ~HWNA) Position
2. Vision, "Improvements and Comment; Vve agree but historic must
Page.6 new development mean authentic vintage buildings not
should respect and new facsimile creations
contribute to the
historic character of
the City."
3. Vision, "Residential omment: We do not want to lose this.
Page 6 ~ ~ neighborhoods offer Preservation of the historic
pleasant, livable, and neighborhoods surrounding downtown
historical residential must be an central part of any
living. There are cozy downtown development.
streets with full and
mature shade tree
cover. Residents live
in and within a short
walking distance of
downtown retailers."
4. Goals - "...updates set building Comments: This is a misleading
Zoning and height limitations and statement since the plan is to raise the
Comprehen provide stronger current height limit. We prefer the
sive Pian architectural design name "Old Settlemier District."
Update to guidelines and
Preserve standards for Old Recommendation: The City make no
Historic Town." zoning changes until the basics are
Character, accomplished, a reasonable crime rate
Page 7 is achieved and the downtown is
relatively free of speeding cars, undue
noise, litter, and people involved in
criminal activities
5. Goals - "...a broader range of Co, mment: Except for iivelwork lofts,
Zoning and housing choices can we are opposed to broadening the
Comprehen now be provided, range of housing choices in historic
sive Plan including mixed•use Woodburn.
Updates for development typical of
Housing downtown and Main
Choices, St. environments."
Page l
37
182
No. Plan Section Woodburn Historic Woodbum Neighborhoods
and Page Downtown Assoc. ~HWNAy Position
Development Plan
the Plan Premise
6. Engage the ~ ~ ' "The dialogue mmen : The consultant failed in this
Community, should identify the by identifying only business and civic
Page 8 key actors, their leaders as key actors, ignoring the
interests, and how largest investors: the residents.
best to engage them
in a constructive and
non confrontational
atmosphere."
7. Community Page 2: "The SWG Cow The outreach effort
Outreach, was an espeaally excluded from active participation in
Pages ~ & 8 valuable resource.... the Stakeholder Working Group (SWG)
the owners of over 1,700 homes
Page 8: located within 114 mile of at least one
"Community of the five sub areas. The SWG was
Outreach has been limited to business owners, and civic
a key element of the and political leaders.
process
Participants were
Recommendation: The City appoints
asked to help resident homeowners to the SWG who
identify what they have no government, political or
liked best about business interests in downtown
downtown and to Woodburn.
sugges# key design
and development
themes..."
8. Community "Most of the Comment: We see ourselves as
Outreach, ~ stakeholders agreed stakeholders and oppose the idea of
Page 9 the additional additional housing in historic Woodburn
housing due to the current amount of crime. We
opportunities in also oppose this because of the current
downtown would overloaded state of downtown even
help create a good before any increase of traffic through
pedestrian and residential neighborhoods.
business
environment."
38
183
No. Plan Section Woodburn Historic Woodburn Neighborhoods
and Page Downtown Assoc. (HWNA} Position
Development Plan
the Plan Premise
9. Development "...opportunities to Co_.mment: We approve.
Concepts - strengthen First
First Street, Street include...a
Page 10 functional
restoration of the
historic movie
theater."
10. Development The Association Co_ mment: We agree.
Concepts - Building is identif ed
The as a key opportunity Recommendation: Possible uses:
Association site. police substation, educational facility,
Building, museum, business co-op,
Page 10 w/conference room and one shared
secretary for micro businesses,
incubator businesses, tech startups,
couldlbe offered rent-free, low rent, or
with subsidies to a business that has
drawing power, such as a book store.
11. Development First St. Mixed-Use Comment: We are opposed to the
Concepts - Concept Plan Dept. city's incurring the expense of moving
Dept. of Public of Public Works the Dept. of Public Works and to
Works, Annex Bldg. - leaving this building vacant, as
Page 10 Develop into a more happened with the old City Hail.
active commercial or
mixed use. Recommendation: Change the plan to
state that the City relocates the Dept.
of Public Works only after it sells the
Garfield Street property at a fair market
value. The City must support historic
downtown Woodburn by the utilization
of old buildings and stop unnecessary
expenditures in relocating
departments.
39
184
No. Plan Section Woodburn
Downtown
Development Plan
the Plan Premise Historic Woodbum Neighborhoods
Assoc. (HWNA} Position
12. Development Redevelopment mment: This site is unsuitable for
Concepts - program for senior anything other than moderately low•
Site at Front housing. rent housing due to railroad noise, and
and ~ ~ we oppose more low-income housing
~' ~ Cleveland in Woodbum.
Streets,
Page 10 Recommendation: We would like to
see a train museum, dog park, or
similar.
13. Development Downtown Woodburn mments: Again, the Plan ignores
Concepts • offers an attractive the current reality of downtown
Pedestrian- pedestrian Woodburn. The negative aspects of
Friendly en~ronment. The the neighborhood, such as drugs being
Environment, plan provides sold openly on the street, public
Page 10 streetscape plans, urination, litter, and the generally
transportation unkempt look of the area cause people
improvements, and to feel intimidated. Those are the
land use changes to reasons there is little pedestrian traffic
enhance the in downtown Woodbum. We want
pedestrian downtown to be family friendly.
environment.
Rec~ nda,=o_ (1) Do not
implement plans for one-way traffic
downtown. (2) Include in the plan
funding for increased police patrols to
enforce existing speed limits and heavy
truck traffic laws. (3} Include in the plan
funding for increased police presence
sufficient to reduce drug trafficking and
other crime. (4}Strengthen City
ordinances making the area a Zero
Tolerance Zone to eliminate criminal
behavior, littering, noise, spitting and
public urination, and include in the plan
funding for increased police presence
necessary for the ordinances to be
enforced. (5} Revise housing codes
to eliminate "boarding houses" in
single-family residences and enforce
the codes. (6} Include a public
restroom in the plan.
40
185
No. Plan Section Woodburn
Downtown
Development Plan
the Plan Premise Historic Woodburn Neighborhoods
Assoc. (HWNA) Position
14. Opportunity Replaces the Public Com=,: This idea proposes a new
Sites for Works Annex Building three-story building with 15
Revitalization and two small apartments. We oppose three-story
- First Street businesses that front buildings and apartments in historic
Mixed Use onto Garfield with Woodbum.
Concept,
Page 1 o three-story, mixed-use
redevelopment with Recommendation: Remove from the
ground floor retail or plan. It is our recommendation that the
office space with two City demonstrate leadership in green
floors of apartments living and conserve funds by keeping
above. The Public Works Dept. in its current
location.
15.
Opportunity "Preferred Co_ mm=: vUe disagree with the
Si#es for Development proposal for additional residences in
Revitalization Option...use as an the Old Settlemier District, with the
- Assoaation events center would possible exception of livelwork spaces.
Building, bring active uses to Building residences without parking
Page 11 old town... creates a new problem and eventually
would transfer the expense for
"AI#emative providing additional parking to the city.
Development
Options,..it would be Recommendation: Examples we favor
possible to use the for the use of this building are a police
upper floor lofts for substation, educational facility,
housing or as museum, micro businesses, incubator
livelwork spaces... businesses, business startups, tech
startups, business co-op wlconference
"Since the Downtown room and shared staff. Space could be
Development and offered rent-free, or with other
Conservation Zone subsidies, to a bookstore, or other
does not require business that has drawing power.
parking for housing Carefully leased, the Association
units..." Building could quickly generate income
and immediately give a destination on
the plaza.
41
186
No. Plan Section
~. Woodburn
Downtown
Development Plan
(the Plan) Premise Historic Woodburn Neighborhoods
Assoc. (HWNA) Position
16. Opportunity Lighting, signage and Recom~menda= We support the
Sites for landscaping consultant's recommendation for
Revitalization improvements to the parking. We would also like to see the
- Parking, public parking lot use of Victorian-era lampposts, his#onc
Page 12 located behind the sign caps, seating, and hanging flower
Post Office. baskets.
17. Opportunity Preferred Com nt: We oppose three-story
Sites far Development Opflon: buildings in historic Woodbum. This
Revitalization Senior Housing over site is unsuitable for housing of any
-Oak Street Retai110ffice Space demographic group, but, particularly far
to Cleveland senior housing due to the problem of
Street Block , the noise of the railroad.
Page 12
Recommendation: We would like to
see s train museum, dog park, or
similar use.
18, Transportation ".,.incorporation of Cam-m,~nt: We oppose the proposed
improvements angled parking will one-way streets. Grant, Hayes and
- Parking, necessitate the Harrison Streets changed tonne-way
Page 25 conversion of some traffic, as stated, is intended to
downtown street increase available on-street parking.
segments fromtwo- Changing Grant Street and Hayes
way traffic tonne- Street as shown on Figure 8, only adds
way traffic." 14 parking places. We believe the cost
of changes to the streets, curbs,
sidewalks and signage is not justified.
Recommendations: (1 }Remove one-
waytraffic changes to Grant, Hayes
and Hamson Streets from the plan. (2)
Make existing parking areas more
obvious and attractive. (3) Provide for
designated areas away from
businesses for employee parking, (4)
Look into the feasibility of making
parking lots along the Front Street side
of the railroad tracks.
42
187
No. Plan Section Woodburn
Downtown
Development Plan
the Plan Premise Historic Woodburn Neighborhoods
Assoc. ~HWNA) Position
19. Transportation "Downtown Co.-: We support the plan's
Improvements . ~ Woodbunl's streets recommendation for welcoming,
- Streetscape should be fully attractive public places. We would also
Concept walkable, attractive like to see the use ofVictorian-era
Plans, and enjoyable public lampposts, historic sign caps, seating,
Page 28, places. and hanging flower baskets. The plan
Figures 9,10 should include racks for parking
& 11 "For paving bicycles.
treatments the use
of warm colors in
Recommendations: Designate
poured concrete downtown Woodbum a Zero Tolerance
pavers." Zone to make crime problems,
inciud~ng drug sales, graffit, public
urination, and litter a top priority.
20. Transportation "On-street parking omment: We want more bike-friendly
Improvemen#s will replace on-street streets.
-Young Street bike lanes since
Corridor, parking is critical to a Recommendation: On-street parking
Page 31 successful mixed-use on Young Street should not replace
development." bike lanes since the trend is to
encourage more bicycle traffic.
21. Strategic uHistoric Old Town Cam: Though the town has
Business has apedestrian- retained its character, it could be
Developmen# friendly scale and charming if restored, and the scale is
Plan -Market charming...character. definitely pedestrian-friendly, the Plan
and Economic ...streets in Historic again fails to mention the obvious
Opportunities, Old Town have been problem that most residential families
Page 40 retained over time, feel intimidated by the current crime
making it a pleasant, level and blight in the downtown area
interesting and and avoid the area.
authentic
environment." Recommendation: Designate
downtown a Zero Tolerance Zone to
make crime problems, including drug
sales, public urination, graffiti and litter,
atop priority. Focus onfamily-friendly
as a goal. Offer incentives for owners
to restore the existing historic and
authentic buildings.
43
188
I~ ~
No. Plan Section Woodburn
Downtown
Development Pian
the Plan Premise Historic Woodburn Neighborhoods
Assoc. {HWNA~ Position
22. Strategic "There is a lack of Co__nt: We agree that the Plaza
Business true retail has potential and there is not enough
Development anchors...The plaza diversity in the businesses in
Plan • Market has potential... downtown Woodburn. Increasing the
and~Economic population density is no guarantee that
Constraints, "There is currently a the downtown businesses that were
Page 40 ~ lack of diversity in once here will be replaced.
retail and
entertainment Recommendation: Focus on a more
choices .,. realistic idea of the types of businesses
that might populate Front Street.
"Business owners, Pursue a diverse downtown business
property owners and section that will more closely represent
even close•in the population of Woodburn. We need
residents indicated a downtown we can all enjoy visiting,
tha# they are hesitant where we all feel at home, and find the
to invest... services we need.
"Increasing the
variety of re#ail,
service, and
entertainment
options would
potentially reduce
retai! leakage in the
study area."
~a
189
.~
No. Plan Section V1loodbum
Downtown
Development Plan
the Plan Premise Historic Woodburn Neighborhoods
Assoc. ~HWNAj Position
23. Strategic "In interviews and Co_ mment; Our first priority must be to
Business discussions, parking make our downtown safe. We also
Development in Historic Old Town need to solve our image problem.
.Plan -Market
and Economic was a frequently
repeated issue of
Recommendations: We recommend
Constraints, frustration. Although that zoning andlor ordinance changes
Page 40 many admitted there proposed pursuant to implementing the
is enough parking Plan are supported by crime statistics
Downtown, there is a that show marked improvement over
perception that there 2008.
is not enough parking
and that it is not
We also recommend that there be no
managed well, zoning or ordinance changes until it is
demonstrated that focal residents are
"The concem for willing to shop or attend functions in
personal safety was historic downtown Woodburn.
a theme when
discussing the study This could be tested by creating and
area in general and enforcing a Zero Tolerance Zone and
Historic Old Town addressing crime vigorously. An
and Plaza area, improvement in the crime rate could
specifically, then be followed by opening the
Loitering, drug use, Association Building for use. With
and prostitution were creative and careful attention given to
the primary areas of the use, the Association Building could
concem heard during quickly generate income andlor give
stakeholder the public a destination on the plaza.
interviews."
45
190
No. Plan Section Woodburn
Downtown
Development Plan
the Plan Premise Historic Woodburn Neighborhoods
Assoc. ~HWNAj Position
24. Strategic "The strategy to omment: The entire first paragraph
Business ~ revitalize Downtown of this section of the plan is
Development Woodburn nonsensical. It states that the strategy
Plan - ~ ~ (particularly along the to revitalize downtown vVoodburn is to
Commercial Young Street focus on housing as the I a nd
Mix Plan; Comdor) is to focus rominent infill land use. It states that
Page 41 on housing as the housing is the most economically
lead and prominent viable land use and that it will introduce
infill land new residents who can support retail
use....Housing is the growth.
most economically
viable land use in the The Plan discusses Young Street as if
short term, it will ~t is vacant. It fails to acknowledge that
introduce new there are currently many residences on
residents who can Young Street and that it runs through
support nearby retail an existing residential area.
growth.." Recommenda_ tion: This part of the
Strategic Business Development Plan
makes no valid recommendation and
should be deleted.
25. Strategic Al Establish a mment: All available resources
Business dedicated Urban should be placed at the disposal of the
Development Renewal staff person police department to address crime in
Actions historic Woodburn. This should be the
Summary B6 Implement a first step for Urban Renewal.
Matrix, Comprehensive
Table 2, Public Safety Recommendations: (1 } Bfi becomes
Page 43 Program for the Area A7: 4lmplement a Comprehensive
by Increasing Police Public Safety Program for the Area by
Presence in the Increasing Police Presence in the
Area", to be done in Area", to be done in Year 1.
Year 1
(2} Move "Establish a dedicated Urban
Renewal staff person (UR Manager}" to
A2, with timing 3-5 years, contingent
upon prior solution of crime and image
problems.
Plan Section Woodburn Historic Woodburn Nei hborhoods
46
191
. , ~
Downtown
Development Plan
the Plan Premise Assoc. ~HWNA) Position
26. Strategic B1 Institute a Comments: We agree. The proposals
Business Storefront of 61, E1 and E2 are a1! positive
Development Improvement
Summary Program Recommendation: E1: Renovate the
Matrix, Assembly Hali to accommodate: a
Table 2, E1 Complete police substation, educational facility,
Pages 43.44 Renovation of museum, micro businesses, incubator
Assembly Hall businesses, business startups, tech
startups, business co-op wlconference
E2 Establish room and shared staff.
Farmer's Market on Recommendation: E2 On Tuesday
the Plaza nights when we have Music in the
Park, we should also have a farmer's
market in the plaza, and close Garfield
Street.
47
192
To:
Mayor Kathy Figley
Woodburn Planning Commission
City Council
From: Kay McEwen, S4 Smith Orive, Woodburn, OR 97071
Submitted Public Testimony for
0912412009
Planning Commission Meeting
Re: Proposed Development Changes for the City of Woodburn
Date: September 12, 2009
First, I want to tha~,_, nk,,,~ou, for the work you are doing for the City of Woodburn. Your devoted
public service is very much appreciated. I attended the August 31 City/Community Workshop
and was duly impressed both by the Council and by the interest and participation of the
community. "Communication is the heart of community' has become my new mantra. ft was
certainly evident on August 31. You asked for community response in writing to the ODOT
proposals, so here are my viewpoints:
First, I was heartened to discover that there are many in our community who share the same
viewpoint and perspective as I. I am no longer a lone voice, crying in the wilderness. Many
share my point of view, many of whom are far more qualified, with more expertise. However,
having lived here since !was 7, I have an historical perspective throughout the decades which
may provide invaluable insight.
I applaud the concept of designating Old Town an historical district: Old Settlemier District.
It provides an historical buildings protection which may open up opportunities for restoration
grants and communitywide efforts. The City of Springfield, for example, has received Arts and
Humanities grants to restore its old movie theatre, turning it into a Fine Arts Center providing
both movies and live theatre for the community. If we can resurrect and restore the Pix
Theatre (which would take "an act of love," according to the Mayor of Silverton), we can
restore the heart and core of our town to family activities. Downtown is no longer safe for
women, children and no longer provides opportunity for family activities. Restoration of the
Pix Theatre could provide local entertainment, similar to Silverton, Newberg, and Springfield.
i could envision restoration of Old City Hall, gathering together the various city services which
now inhabit the old First National bank of Oregon and the building on Young Street. It could
house an office for Woodburn Proud, and perhaps house offices for the School District, being
the third largest employer in Woodburn, making Education a focal presence and mandate in
our city. Such central focus would provide structure and impetus to the downtown restoration
project. Currently, the Post Office has had to truncate its rhododendron bushes because a
vagrant defecates behind them and the Post Office has been unable to stop her. It reminded
me of the vagrants urinating on the Pix Theatre when citizens tried to go to the movies there,
trying to support it. The abandonment and neglect of Old City HaII contributes to the
abandonment and neglect of surrounding buildings in the downtown area. Its restoration and
use would contribute to the resurrection of the downtown area for business/educational
purposes.
193
The focal purpose of OD~T is transportation, parking, cars. Cars and big buildings are the
primary contributors to greenhouse gas emissions and to the global warming problems.
Woodburn's motto was "Tree Ci •" Jesse Settfemier, in his inimitable wisdom, planted trees
to provide oxygen and shade for our community. Whenever !teach the rainforest and
northwest rainforest units, I refer to the canopies which shelter us and which provide a symbol
of unfettered growth to maturity herein Woodburn, 1 am hurt to the quick to see a truncating
pruning practice, harmful to the trees, cropping up in Woodburn. I shudder when I see trees
smaller than the buildings which they landscape because OPB has stated: "The hedge which
surrounds a property produces the oxygen needed for the inhabitants of that property." We
must five in right relationship, in appropriate ratio:proportion to Earth, to our trees. High-rise,
high-density apartments do not do that; they are disproportionate, and therefore ultimately
harmful.
Not only would cars and high-density housing harm our oxygen cycle, it would also harm our
watershed. Woodburn does not have afree-flowing water source, such as Bull Run or North
Santiam, and our water already tastes like ~, during certain times of the year, being of the
Pudding River Watershed. Sometimes the taste of Woodburn water literally makes me gag.
We need to protect our watershed, and high-density housing aggravates that condition. Those
who work for OD4T probably already enjoy water from free-flowing water sources rather than
Woodburn water from the Pudding River watershed.
1 do believe, however, that the ODOT plan has some merit, but of in the locations for which
OD4T designed it. I recall that Kathy 1=igley first ran on the platform to revitalize light rail in
Woodburn, with a rail transportation corridor connecting Sllverton, Mt. Angel, and Stayton to
Woodburn through light rail. I believe that ODOTshigh-density housing would be better
located in West Woodburn, revitalizing the light rail that runs through West Woodburn,
connecting to Wilsonville, and from there possibly to Hillsboro (Intel). I could envision a new
develop similar to that in Hillsboro or in Wilsonville on the old Dammasch property aver in
West Woodburn. Moving the site to West Woodburn would provide support for OD4T to
consider adding an addition I-5 entrance via Butteville Road (providing a parallel alternative to
traveling on I-5, and to Mt. Angel, Gervais bypassing Woodburn). West Woodburn residents
might welcome development out there with open arms, and since St. Paul residents came out
of the woodwork to block development in St. Paul, developers are seeking "country" sites and
fresh air. A West Woodburn site provides future opportunity €or a light rail, perhaps MAX
system to reach from Portland to Woodburn.
Finally, our core area needs to be protected and restored by whatever means necessary. The
failure of our town has been, since I grew up, the failure to regulate and protect and provide a
sense of safety and security because of a fear of retaliation. Although Woodburn may indeed
have a "charism" as a sanctuary and a town which values families, if our own hearts looked as
bad and unsafe as does the core area of Woodburn, the doctors would order immediate bypass
surgery. Downtown is not "family-friendly," nor do women feel safe there. Even my colleague
teachers from other Latin American countries lock their door when downtown; that in itself is a
commentary on downtown. And, although policemen say "lack of cause," I think that because
194
of sexual harassment Paws, if women feel unsafejthreatened in an environment, it needs to be
remedied, fixed, and repaired. Our leverage is in the sexual harassment laws.
Re: '"rhe Association Building," or Old Salud: I believe that it should function, rather than be
abandoned and part of "the empty building syndrome" which plagues our country. Beverly
Koutney is striving for a Senior Citizens Center with activities; why not !ether utilize it rent-free
as a public service center for the Seniors and to bring more integrated activities Downtown?
Newberg has a very active Senior Citizens Center (Old Salud},which is called'The Adult
Enrichment Center," which draws participants from ages 60 upward on a daily basis to do
weekly trail-walking excursions, Tai Chi, craft activities, dances, potlucks, and trips. As such, it
could be a core part of The Community Center, which could include both The Plaza and The Pix
Theatre and The Old City Hall. All of those component parts could comprise
"The Cor»munity Center," in a functional, active manner. Old Salud could also function as an
Amtrak Station (similar to Solano Beach CA where my daughter lives; the Amtrak and Coaster run
regularly, so I didn't even need to use a car). Amtrak used to stop daily here in Woodburn when I
was growing up here;lesse Settlemier donated or sold his land for that purpose.
Finally, I am in wholehearted support for the Greenway Project, and as I picked up trash and
litter today with the Woodburn Proud group along the Greenway Project, I was enthused about
the "Adopt a Park" program that I heard the Park Department sponsors. On
www.treehuaeer.c__m, (read that cattails remove arsenic from the watershed; therefore I
believe that we should plant cattails intentionally along the Greenway Project/Mill Creek to
intentionally filter the water from arsenic. Our landscape guy at school tells me that aspen and
birch filter the soil from heavy metals; we should intentionally plant aspen and birch along the
Greenway for the purpose of filtering out heavy metals from our water. We should plant trees
as a hedge against the I-5 freeway to filter and protect us from the dust and debris caused by
I-5. The amount of dirt entering my house weekly (porch, breezeway, patio] is disheartening.
By improving communication in our community, I believe that we can better organize our
community to participate in the Adopt a Park and city beautification projects. I am going to try
to involve students and parents at our school in such an environmental support project,
"No two things can occupy the same space at the same time:' I am reminded of moving back
to Woodburn in 1985, after ODOT destroyed our family business and my family was destroyed
in its wake. Woodburn was in much more dire straits at that time than it is now. We prayed for
the Holy Spirit to infuse Woodburn with new life, and the OPGA Golf Course and Tukwila
infused new life into the community, and God sent the Earthquake, so we got a new swimming
pool. I watched ODOT bulldoze out Patterson's Family Restaurant and Wendy's in the dead of
night when no one was there to watch, and leave stubble, unkempt and an eyesore, in its wake.
Systems have aregulator-and an anomaly. Our anomaly is Denial, Apathy,Neglect,ond lack of
Communication. let's step up the Regulation and Action to restore Downtown and implement
the 1998 plan (on which we in one accord) and to implement the Greenway Project and
Beautify Woodburn through the Adopt a Park Program. Then, let's work to implement Kathy
Figley's "light rail" project and to pressure ODOT through implementing our political power into
opening up a Butteville Road entrance to the South and a Crosby Road entrance to the North
195
(exits can still be done through the main exitj. Then, let's look at developing West Woodburn so
we can do a MAX line via light rail to Portland from the West Woodburn line.
Are we having fun yet?
Sincerely and Appreciatively,
Kay McEwen
196
~~l'indows Live Hotrnail from Qwest Print Message
Print
RE: redevelopment plan
From: Richard Lawry (cherylrick@msn.com)
Sent: Thu 9/24JQ9 7:46 AM
To: sharon coming (sharon97@q.com)
September 20, 2009
City of Woodburn
Attn: Planning Commission
Patty Grigarieff
Kevin Kenagy
Eflen Bandelow
Richard ~enn'sngs
Srad Hutchison
l}avid Vancii
tarry GrosJacques
Page 1 of 2
Close
Dear Commission Members:
This letter is written to express our concern with the Legislative Amendment Staff Report regarding the
proposed Redevelopment Plan. This Staff Report recommends the adoption of the plan pretty much as written
and states that concerns about crime and cleanup of downtown have not been addressed as the
redevelopment plan is a land use proposal and such concerns are best addressed elsewhere. This approach
negates the main focus of input of the Woodburn Neighborhood Association (as presented to the City on
August 31) and is not only short-sighted but possibly disingenuous. It appears that the staff recommendation
is to have the plan approved with the (east amount of amendment it can get away with. land use document
or not, the addition of language requiring stakeholder including downtown residents) approval of real efforts
to reduce crime and cleanup of the downtown business district priorto implementation of any of the land use
recommendations is both highly appropriate and necessary. Simply adding some kind of language that
establishes a mechanism {committee or other body) which can realistically address our concerns does not
seem inconsistent with a "land use document". WE Wlll STRENOUSLY OPPOSE ADOPTION OF THE ENTIRE
PLAN WITHOUT SUCH AMENDMENT.
With regards to some of the specific proposals in the plan, there are some with which we disagree:
The plan provides far too much residential growth for the infrastructure of central Woodburn. Page 8
of the staff report states, under "Traffic issues: The Downtown Development Plan Update does not
recommend any land use decisions that would si ni. g ~ „candy increase downtown traffic bey d what the
http:/l6y 107w.bay 107.mail.live.com/mail/PnntShell~aspx?type=message&cpids=~565cce-... 9/24/2009
Windows Live Hotrnail from Qwest Pnnt Message
Page 2 of 2
capacity of the existing system can handle." This supports our contention that the capacity of the
system will be exceeded. Further, we believe that ODOT's capacity standards are already too high and
any increase above their levels is unacceptable. The addition of the planned residential units in the
downtown area will destroy the fabric of the community and cannot be accommodated without major
structural changes to the streets of the area. There are already a huge number of vacant housing units
on the outskirts of the central city and that is where any increases to the housing stock of the City
should be concentrated. Growth to the downtown core area should be limited to small businesses,
induding retail, services, and office space. We disagree with the idea that the way to get downtown
back on its feet is to provide additional housing. WE WII.I STRENOUSLY OPPOSE THE ENTIRE PIAN IF
THE PROPOSAL FOR ADDING HOUSING UNITS IS NOT DRASTICALLY REDUCED.
The proposed one-way streets do not add anything except the "appearance of additional parking
spaces", Our experience with one-way streets in downtown Sacramento, while a much bigger city, leads
us to be unalterably opposed to their adoption here. Specifically, one-way streets lead to faster traffic
speeds making them less safe for pedestrians and bicyclists. The one-way streets in residential
Sacramento resulted in the conversion of virtually all single-family homes into apartments. No one
wants to raise children on a one-way street. Additionally, they can be confusing to motorists leading to
vehicles wandering around in the residential neighborhoods. Sacramento ultimately retuned the one-
way streets totwo-way even streets leading directly to and from Interstate 80.
In summary, we do not believe that the city staff report has made any significant modifications to the plan
based on the overwhelming public input at the August 31~ workshop. This lack of consideration of the public
voice is extremely disturbing and has had the result of making ourselves and many others vigorously opposed
to the redevelopment plan in its entirety.
Sincerely,
Richard and Cheryl Lowry
4l9 - 5~' St.
1Noodbum, QR
email with security by Microsoft. Get it now.
Lauren found her dream laptop. Find the PC that's right for you.
http:llby 147w.bay 107.mail.live.comlmail/PnntShell.~~ix?type=message&cpids=~S65cce-... 9/24/2009
Windows Live Hotmail from Qwest Print Message
Print
Woodburn Development Plan
From: Deborah Higginbotham (deborah.higginbotham@gmail.com)
Sent: Sun 9/10/09 8:45 PM
To: sharon97@q.com
Hello Sharon,
Close
A friend had to pass me your HWNA email notice. Please put me on your list as I would love to receive your
notifications. I work late in the evenings, but would love to come and support when I am able. I've not
familiar with anyone else's thoughts on the matter, but would like to chime in mine. Here are my issues with
what is being proposed:
High Density Housing: With more population added to the downtown, there comes the addition of:
1) More Loifering: People who five in amulti-family dwelling generally have the tendency to spend time out
of doors to GET AWAY FROM oVER-CROWDING.
2} Cliques.• The importance of this is that as a frequent walker through the downtown, I get frightened if I
have to go through or pass cliques as a 'crowd' against one person is very daunting.
3) Trosh and Urination Problem - As a small business owner, I am more than happy to do my part picking
up trash that's left on the lawn, porch, and street in front of my business, but if you're going to double or
triple the amount of people allowed downtown, then I hope that it's going to be the city responsible for
picking up com, dirty diapers, candy wrappers, left-over food and drug paraphernalia. I agree that this
problem needs to be solved before any escalation of the plan is ever considered.
4} Violence:
How quickly we forget? I bet the families of the people who were murdered downtown don't forget. My
teenage boys still talk about the shooting tragedy (one block away from my business and residence) that they
were minutes from seeing happen. Hey, about the drive-by random shootings? Come to my house and see
two windows still shot out.
one Way Streets:
Due to my occupation, I've lived in many metropolitan cities in my 60 years of life and I have never agreed
that one way streets are a solution to any problem. It causes confusion, frustration and at it's worst,
debilitating accidents.
Rentals:
Problem rentals aren't relevant? This one is the most irksome to me. As a landlord, I can speak from
experience. Renters don't respect anything. They'll purposefully trash a residence just to retaliate if they're
asked to act responsibly. You're more than welcomed to check my last rental's report with the police
Page 1 of 2
htrp:llby 107w.bay 107.mail.live.comlmaiUPrintShell~~x?'type-message&cpids=29da8fad... 9!24/2009
Windows Live Hotmail from Qwest Print Message
Page 2 of Z
department and, subsequent court rase, if you question my experience in this area. You quadruple the
population of the downtown and add loss of income, drug-influenced behavior and the friction that close
housing brings and you've gat a monumental problem.
Summary: In some respects, I see improvement over the years. I remember walking down streets with my
children in tow and witnessing prostitution acts in public. I remember gun shots just missing my business
~ with children in attendance} over a gang related incident. I remember the State Police on every corner with
dogs and special task forces trying to control gang violence. I remember a police escort home so that I would
be safe.
The area I most object to is that I wonder if the people planning these proposals actually live and experience
this city as I do. I've lived here 29 years in the same area. My husband has lived here ail his life. I think it's
great that someone who is being paid to come up with ideas does it, but they had better be doing it because
the KNOW the area, EXPERIENCED the chemistry of any social setting downtown and will actually COMMIT to
living in this area. My family does all three. We don't see a move coming up. We consider this home and not
a place to hang our hats because of temporary employment.
Thank you, These are my views.
Deborah Higginbotham
468 Garfield Street
Woobbum, OR 91071
http:ll by 107w. bay 107.mail.live.comlmaiUPrintShellx?type=message&cpids=29da8fad... 9/24/2009
„il,,,,,w~,~,y~ n~~~id~a aom t~v~est ~nnt Message
Print
Fw, Woodburn Deveiopmenfi Pl
from; DonJlinda KEMMERICH (lindacat44@
Seat: Sun 9/20/091:33 PM
To: sharon97@q.com
Hi Sharon:
Don and Linda Kemmerich
x'02 S. Settlemier Ave.
I think Deborah Higginbotham's e- mai{says it all
High Density Housing: With more population added to the downtown, there tames the addition af;
Cf ose
1) More loitering: Qeopie who live in amulti-family dwelling generally have the tendency to spend time out
of doors to GET AWAY i:ROMQVER-CROWDING.
2) Cliques: The importance of this is that as a frequent walker through the downtown, I get frightened if I
have to go through or pass cliques as a 'crowd' against one person is very daunting.
3) Trash and Urination Problem - As a small business owner, I am more than happy to do my part picking
up trash that's left on the Lawn, porch, and street in front of my business, but if you're going to double or
triple the amount of people allowed downtown, then I hope that it's going to be the city responsible for
picking up corn, dirty diapers, candy wrappers, left-over food and drug paraphernalia, I agree #hat this
problem needs to be solved before any escalation of the plan is ever considered.
G) Violence:
How quickly we forget? i bet the families of the people who were murdered downtown don't forget. My
teenage boys still talk about the shooting tragedy (one block away from my business and residence) that they
were minutes from seeing happen. Mey, about the drive-by random shootings? Come to my house and see
two windows still shot out.
One Way Streets:
Due to my occupation, I've lived in many metropolitan cities in my 60 years of life and I have never agreed
that one way streets are a solution to any problem. It causes confusion, frustration and at it's worst,
debilitating accidents.
Rentals:
Problem rentals aren't relevant? This one is the most irksome to me. As a landlord, I can speak from
experience. Renters don't respect anything. They'll purposefully trash a residence just to retaliate if they're
asked to act responsibly. You're more than welcomed to check my last rental's report with the police
department and, subsequent court case, if you question my experience in this area. You quadruple the
population of the downtown and add loss of income, drug-influenced behavior and the friction that close
housing brings and you've got a monumental problem.
Page 1 of 2
http://by 107w.bay 107.mail.live.comlmaiUPrintShell.a?type=message&cpids=217c4f00... 9/24/2009
r~ „~u~ WS L~~C nucmait nom west rant Message
Page 2 of 2
Summary: In some respects, I see improvement over the years. I remember walking down streets with my
children in tow and witnessing prostitution acts in public. I remember gun shots just missing my business
(with children ire attendance) over a gang related incident. I remember the State Police on every corner with
dogs and special task forces trying to control gang violence. I remember a police escort home so that I would
be safe.
The area I most abject to is that I wonder if the people planning these proposals actually live and experience
this city as I do, I've lived here 29 years in the same area. My husband has lived here all his life. I think it's
great that someone who is being paid to come up with ideas does it, but they had better be doing it because
the KNOW the area, EXPERIENCED the chemistry of any social setting downtown and will actually COMMIT to
living in this area. My family does all three. We don't see a mane coming up. We consider this home and not
a place to hang our hats because of temporary employment.
Thank you. These are my views.
Deborah Higginbotham
468 Garfield Street
Woodburn, OR 97071
Don and Linda Kemmerich
70Z S, Settlemier Ave.
Woodburn, OR 97071
http:llby 107w.bay 107.mail.iive.comlmaiUPrintShel l.~~c?type=message&cpids=217c4f00... 9/24/2009
i ubv ~ va a
Natalie Labossiere
From: J ERICKSON ~uana_iguana7t~msn.com~
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 3:22 PM
to: Natalie Labossiere
Subject: Downtown planning
Dear Ms. Labossiere,
I am writing regarding planning. I like the plans and ideas for downtown Woodburn, and I like
what I see happening in and around Woodburn, in general. However, I am very concerned about
our schools. The new plan calls for new housing, There is new development out by WalMart, and
there will always be growth, But where are the children of these families going to go to school?
Currently, our schools are overcrowded. Our facilities don't even meet the current population's
need. And yet, there is no talk of building new schools •• except for floating a bond. The people
can no longer pay as a tax. I am a single mom who has a good job, Because of the rural housing
money and tax break, I was hoping to finally be able to afford a house here in Woodburn where I
am renting. But the property taxes are so high here that it makes a house out of reach -• and there
are more taxes coming with the sewer facility increase. It is just too much. New school
development needs to be part of any new housing planning in Woodburn. I think all city
government and planning officials are remiss in not considering such an important aspect of a vital
community.
I spoke with a planning clerk who said the problem is land. but if you can continue to build
houses, condos, and apartments, I think you should be able to build schools. I'm sure it is more
complicated than that, but to just keep packing the kids into already severely avercrowed facilities
just brings down the quality of the very city you are trying to revitalize.
Sincerely,
Jane Erickson
Woodburn, Oregon
9/24/2009 205
Page 1 of
Jim Hendryx
From: SHARON CdRNiNG [sharon97@q.comj
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 200912:49 PM
To: Jim Hendryx
Subject: FW: redevelopment plan
Hi, Jim. dust received another one. Sharon
From: cherylrick@msn.com
To: sharon97@q.com
Subject: RE: redevelopment plan
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 200912:46:42 -0700
September 20, 2009
City of Woodburn
Attn: Planning Commission
Patty Grigorieff
Kevin Kenagy
Ellen Bandeiow
Richard kennings
Brad Hutchison
David Vancil
Larry Gros~acques
Dear Commission Members:
This letter is written to express our concern with the Legislative Amendment Staff Report regarding
the proposed Redevelopment Plan. This Staff Report recommends the adoption of the plan pretty
much as written and states that concerns about crime and cleanup of downtown have not been
addressed as the redevelopment plan is a land use proposal and such concerns are best addressed
elsewhere. This approach negates the main focus of input of the Woodburn Neighborhood
Association (as presented to the City on August 31} and is not only short-sighted but possibly
disingenuous. It appears that the staff recommendation is to have the plan approved with the least
amount of amendment it can get away with, Land use document or not, the addition of language
requiring stakeholder (including downtown residents} approval of real efforts to reduce crime and
cleanup of the downtown business district prior to implementation of any of the land use
recommendations is both highly appropriate and necessary. Simply adding some kind of language
that establishes a mechanism (committee or other body) which can realistically address our
9iZ4t2oo9 206
Page 2 of
concerns does not seem inconsistent with a "land use document". WE WILL STRENOUSLY OPPOSE
ADOPTION OF THE ENTIRE PLAN WITHOUT SUCH AMENDMENT.
With regards to some of the specific proposals in the plan, there are some with which we disagree:
The plan provides for toa much residential growth for the infrastructure of central Woodburn,
Page 8 of the staff report states, under "Traffic Issues: The Downtown Development Plan
Update does not recommend any land use decisions that would si nifi n I increase
downtown traffic bend what the capacity of the ~xistinc~$y~tem can handle." This supports
our contention that the capacity of the system will be exceeded. Further, we believe that
ODOT's capacity standards are already too high and any increase above their levels is
unacceptable. The addition of the planned residential units in the downtown area will destroy
the fabric of the community and cannot be accommodated without major structural changes
to the streets of the area. There are already a huge number of vacant housing units on the
outskirts of the central city and that is where any increases to the housing stock of the City
should be concentrated. Growth to the downtown core area should be limited to small
businesses, including retail, services, and office space. We disagree with the idea that the
way to get downtown back on its feet is to provide additional housing. WE WILL STRENOUSLY
OPPOSE THE ENTIRE PLAN IF THE PROPOSAL FOR ADDING HOUSING UNIT5 IS NOT
DRASTICALLY REDUCED.
The proposed one-way streets do not add anything except the "appearance of additional
parking spaces". Our experience with one-way streets in downtown Sacramento, while a
much bigger city, leads us to be unalterably opposed to their adoption here. Specifically, one-
waystreets lead to faster traffic speeds making them less safe for pedestrians and bicyclists.
The one-way streets in residential Sacramento resulted in the conversion of virtually a!I
single-family homes into~apartments. No one wants to raise children on a one-way street.
Additionally, they can be confusing to motorists leading to vehicles wandering around in the
residential neighborhoods. Sacramento ultimately returned the one-way streets to two-way
even streets leading directly to and from Interstate 80.
In summary, we do not believe that the city staff report has made any significant modifications to
the plan based on the overwhelming public input at the August 31St workshop. This lack of
consideration of the public voice is extremely disturbing and has had the result of making ourselves
and many others vigorously opposed to the redevelopment plan in its entirety.
Sincerely,
Richard and Cheryl Lowry
479 - Sty' St.
Woodburn, OR
email with security by Microsoft. Get.t.now..
Lauren found her dream laptop. Find_the.PC.that's_.r~ht for.~oy,
9/24/20Q9 207
Page 1 of
Jim Hendryx
From: SHARON CORNING [sharon97@q,comj
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 200910:07 AM
To: Jim Hendryx
Subject: FW: Be @ City Hall 7 PM Thursday if Yau Still Ha#e One Way Streets, Traffic, High Density
Housing
Attachments: image001. jpg
Hi, ]im. I have received a few emails on the subject of the Downtown Dev. Plan and am
forwarding them to you. Please pass them on to the Planning Commission, Mayor and City
Council. Thanks, Sharon Corning
From: nickit@nwesi,com
To: sharon97@q.com
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 ib:39:48 -0700
Subject; FW: Be @ City Hall 7 PM Thursday if You Still Hate One Way Streets, Traffic, High Density
Housing
Hi Sharon,
! have a meeting in Charbonneau at 6:3C on Thursday so l will be fate to the meeting but please put in my two
cents".
i am completely against one way streets. They are confusing and counterproductive to a viable downtown (away
to get through downtown as fast as you can?) or conducive to a family friendly neighborhood tmare traffic).
Crime is my number one priority and cleanup second because one leads to the other. Why would you want to
build, rent or buy a home or business if you may be shot, stabbed or robbed in your home of business. If you
don't fee! safe and comfortable you don't have pride of ownership sa you don't keep things up.
Which brings up slumlord landlords which don't have to live near their rentals and don't keep the property up.
They rent to as many people they can without expectations of staying and making a home. Which leads to crime
and filth which is what we have now in downtown.
Sa why even have a "plan" until some of the above problems are addressed.
Thank you,
Nicki
Nicki Todd
Accounts Receivable
..,4 y:~ ~'~i:
.L'M~ ~I ..~fi7! .~. .A ,r ~,..
..1 .} .. .~.-
~S?: f +'
N~RTMIIV~,T ~'vGIIvEr:?tNr SeRVfcr. INC
From: Youth Change, Your Problem-Kid Problem-Solver [mailto:dwells@youthchg.com]
Sent; Monday, September 21, 2009 9:40 PM
Subject; Be @ City Hal! 7 PM Thursday if You Still Hate One Way Streets, Traffic, High Density Housing
Unless you've grown to like one-way streets; lots and lots of low income, high density housing; and
9/24/2049 208
Page 2 of 3
more than double the traffic, you just have to be at
City Hail 7 PM Thursday ;o TALK BACK
Be~~are the Planning Commission VOTES
You may say:
"But I don't like to speak in public" or "I have to be somewhere else."
Okay, then send your comments to me, and I will find someone to read them aloud at the meeting.
We can also try to put your comments in our PowerPoint if you send them to me soon. And, you
can have your comments included without your name if you are worried about that as I know some
of you are.
If you can come, you may see your words, or pictures of your house or business featured in the
PowerPoint presentation that the Association will be presenting. This new PowerPoint has all new
pictures, and provides compelling reasons to the Planning Commission to alter the Plan the City is
presenting. That Pian calls for double the traffic, more than double the people, and Harrison,
Hayes, Grant, and First to possibly become the one-way streets you said you don't want.
YUUR TURN TO TALK!
_7 PM Thursday
i a[k the_ Planni~ Commission before the~,vote!
Ruth Herman Wells YOUTH C H A N G E
-Your Problem-Kid Problem-Solver -
Workshops -- Books -- Instant eBooks
On-Site Training -- Keynotes -- Posters
275 N. Third St., Woodburn OR 9071
i~ito_ i, WwUd.Sou~hc~1G'. CcTi cwe%1S~.ycuthc:~g..co~n
Phone 1-503-982-4220 Fax ~-503-582-7910
FOLLOW US ON TWIT: ER `~ ~, moo; /_/.~~~~ tter_. tom/~cu ~hch~
9/24/2009 209
Gary & Peppi Kosikowski
611 Harrison St
Woodburn, OR 97071
September 24, 2009
To the Honorable Mayor, Planning Commission, City Council, and Concerned Citizens:
This correspondence is in regard to the proposed Downtown and Traffic Plans.
Our first statement is a request that any decisions about these Plans be CONTINUED.
The issues are too important for a single evening of discourse and debate.
The following statements, I hope, will open a positive dialogue in the debate of changes
to our City.
I believe that our present planners mean well but are getting conflicting signals from City
Officials, State Officials, and the citizens. Jim and his crew is a competent bunch but the
demands of their job can be overwhelming. AS A CITY, we need to reach a common
vision for change that benefits all, not j ust special interests,
If the present Front Street construction is any representation of the scope of the City's
vision for an improved downtown, we are in trouble. How can access be improved while
street widths are substantially decreased? How will vne-way streets and opening new
streets improve the flow of traffic to a now constricted road surface?
Have you forgotten that the MAIN RAILROAD LINE FOR THE WEST COAST runs
thru downtown? It's not going anywhere; it's only getting busier.
A viable downtown must meet the present needs of it's populace and anticipate future
demands. The design will foster and encourage investment. It will provide safe and
secure housing. It will promote ownership, not only of property, but also of what it
represents and demands.
It can be stated simply: the quality of a neighborhood is not determined by the intent of
the planners, it is determined by the quality of the neighbors.
The City must make family home ownership a priority. "Single family" houses in the
downtown area are used as income property (rentals) with no regard for the intent of the
zoning statutes. An Enforcement Officer once told me that the rule of "a man's home is
his castle" governs how people live in these houses. A castle two doors from me has
anywhere from 8-15 single, unrelated men "sub•renting"sleeping space in it on any given
night.
210
In closing, I like to say:
WE OPPOSE ANY PLAN that includes ane•way streets in the downtown area or
that includes the opening 5`h Street.
Mayor Figley said in a response to an email I sent her asking about opening S`" Street
dated January 9, 2009:
"However, there are no immediate plans to open 5th, and it is unlikely to happen without
ample opportunity for you or any other member of the community to express your
opinion about whether or not to do so. First, we are very well aware that the street is
substandard in many respects. Second, we share your concern about having a street with
no sidewalks serving as a route taking children to school. Third, we do not have the
money budgeted to deal with either of these situations for the next couple of years at
least. We are doing some work on the sewer and storm drain lines in the area {what you
have been seeing), and we have some street repairs in our capital plan for a couple of
years from now. At this point, that is the extent of our plans for the area."
Someone should tell City Administrators because, as Dan Brown told me on August 21,
2009, the opening of S`" Street "is a done deal."
[sent him a copy of the Mayor's email.
I haven't heard from him since.
Please feel free to contact me if you have questions.
Sincerely,
Gary A. Kosikowski
503-989-1692
Cc: file
RM
211
~.t..iil•l.
L31 :.~
:~:. z
~ooD~vR,~
inCPr±r;l~ilir~ l~~b'`~
~ ~
October 12, 2009
T0: Honorable Mayor and City Council through City Administrator
FROM: Dan Brown, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE 2009 INFLOW AND
INFILTRATION (I&I) REMOVAL PROJECT
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council award the construction contract for the 2009 !&I Removal
Project to Jeff Kersey Construction Co. in the amount of 99 95 .00.
BACKGROUND:
The contract is affiliated with Project #2009-038-28, Bid No. 2010-01, for the
accomplishing the 2009 inflow and Infiltration Removal at various locations
within the City of Woodburn.
Bids for the improvement were opened on September 1, 2009. Three {3) bids
were received from responsible, pre-qualified Bidders. Offers received are as
follows:
No: Name, A_ unt
1 Jeff Kersey Construction $99,953.00
2 Harry Stanley Construction $130,000.00
3 John Rice Excavation $133,920.00
Engineer's Estimate X81,760.00
The recommended award is 220 over the Engineer's estimate.
DISCUSSION:
The project was approved in the 2009-1 o Capital Improvement Project budget.
The contract award is in conformance with public contracting laws of the State
of Oregon as outlined in ORS Chapter 279C and the laws and regulations of the
City of Woodburn, therefore, staff is recommending the contract be awarded.
Agenda Item Review: City Administratb~r~~ City Attorney,~~',~ Finance ~
212
Honorable Mayor and City Council
October 12, 2009
Page 2
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Sufficient funds are available and the project will be funded under Sewer
Construction Rehabilitation (472, as identified in the 09/10 fiscal budget.
213
ti
.~ 3
~-~
'
0 DBV~t,~
~
1,~„ ~r~~c~~rrt~f 18.1
October 12, 2009
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council through City Administrator
FROM: Jim Row, Community Services Director
SUBJECT: Award of Construction Contract for the Mill creek Greenway Trail
Project
RECGMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council Award the construction contract for the
Mill Creek Greenway Trail Project to Canby Excavating in the amount of
$364,061.45.
BACKGROUND:
This contract is for the construction of the Mill Creek Greenway Trail Phase 1
project, including the replacement of the Marsha!! Street culvert.
The City received thirteen sealed bids for the project. They were publicly
opened and read on October 1, 2009, and then tabulated with the following
results:
No. Name Ammo ~~t
1. Canby Excavating, Inc. $364,061.45
2. 2KG Contractors, Inc. $374,450.75
3. Varchan Environmental Const. $375,747.00
4. Triplett 1Nellman, Inc. $398,184.77
5. Banzer Construction Co. $399,618.00
6. Siting Northwest, Inc. $437,951.50
7. Parsons Excavating, Inc. $455,935.50
8. Nomarco, Inc. $460,350.25
9. Gelco Construction Co. $46b,791.90
10. Kerr Contractors, Inc. $468,585.50
11. North Santiam Paving Co. $481,181.50
12. Coffman Excavation, LLC $527,230.00
13. Excel Excavation, Inc. $563,196.00
Agenda Item Review: City Administrat City Attorney
Finance ~'
214
Honorable Mayor and City Council
October 12, 2009
Page 2
The Engineer's Estimate was $435,742.10.
DISCUSSION:
This project has been changed from its initial design to incorporate the
modifications approved by the City Council at their June 8, 2009 regular
meeting. These alterations were developed through an extensive community
input process that was initiated in April 2009 as a result of concerns arising from
some residents living in the project area.
in order to realize design and construction efficiencies, the Marshall Street
Culvert Replacement Project has been incorporated into this project. That
portion of work will be funded through the Storm/ Sewer SDC Fund.
For the Council's information: One of the Bidders, Varchan Environmental
Construction, hand delivered a fetter to the City on October 5, 2009, indicating
concern over our handling of their failure to comply with the requirements of
Addendum #2. Varchan's letter does not state that it is a formal protest and
does not set forth the grounds for any protest as required by the City's Public
Contracting Rules. The issue relates to Varchan's failure to incorporate changes
made to the bidding documents by Addendum #2, which was submitted to all
plan holders on 9/25/09. Varchan submitted a signed acknowledgement of
having received Addendum #2, but failed to incorporate the required changes
into their bid. Specifically, Addendum #2 corrected a quantity error in line 13 of
Bid Schedule B. Item 13 called for "5 ft. Sidewalk & Railing (complete in place) ".
The quantity listed in the original schedule was 35 square feet. The correct
quantity was 210 square feet. Addendum #2 corrected the error and supplied
a revised bid form, which all bidders were required to use in preparing their bids.
The Community Services Director replied to Varchan on October 7, 2009. Both
Varchan's letter and the City's response are attached.
The contract award is in conformance with Oregon's Public Contracting Statute
FORS 279C) and the City of Woodburn's Public Contracting Ordinance,
therefore, staff recommends. that the City Council award the contract.
FINANCIA! IMPACT:
The project is funded by a $210,000 grant from Oregon State Parks, Parks SDCs,
and Storm/ Sewer SDCs, and is included in the City's 2009-2010 CIP Budget.
215
Honorable Mayor and City Council
October 12, 2009
Page 3
Oregon State Parks agreed to extend the expiration of the grant agreement
through the end of February 2010. If construction is delayed due to inclement
weather, the City will request another six month extension.
216
VARCHAN ENVIRONMENTAL CONS1R11CTION
`VARIETY ANO CIiANGE'
VARCHAN ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRUCTION INC.
P.O. Box 2830
HlUsboro~ Oregon 97123
Olf~e (5031693.7111
FAX (5031693.7254
City of 'w+oaanurn.ure~ _ .
Mill Creek Greenwav Multi-use Pedestrian Hat's rra::
Ar~~ect No. 2009-032.28
Rid No. 2010.02
Subject: minor clerical error on tabulation
To Jim Rowe
Notice of response to low bid deemed non respondent by City off' W`ooanuri
Date of verbal non respondent offer by Jim Rowe October 2.200
Date of response October 5, 2009
Varchan Environmental Construction is ¢ivin¢ constructive notice of a minor clerics!
error in line item #13 tabulation before contract award. Varchan Environmental
onstruction asserts that the magnitude of this error constitute the contracting officer to
seek clarification with VEC and make proper corrections. VEC acknowledged and signed
ali addendums 1,2.:
This could result in a formal protest and injunction on the bid award,
Respectfitlly ubmi d;
Steve Hasse!
"President''
217
~~~~`
~•
\.,f ~)~'
Incorporated 988
October 7, 2009
Steve Hassel
Varchan Environmental Construction, Inc.
PO Box 2830
Hillsboro, OR 97123
Dear Mr, Hassel:
I am in receipt of your letter regarding the Mill Creek Greenway Trail Project, which was
hand delivered an October S, 2009, The intent of your letter is unclear and does not
expressly state that it is a foiznal protest to the City's intent to award the contract. Also,
your letter does not set forth the grounds upon which the protest is based, as required by
OAR 137-049-0450.
As we discussed during our October S, 2009 meeting, there are number of problems with
your submitted bid. First, you failed to use Addendum #2 in preparing your bid,
Addendum #2 corrected a quantity error in line 13 of Bid Schedule B. Item 13 called for
"5 ft. Sidewalk & Railing (complete in place)". The quantity listed in the original schedule
was 35 square feet. The correct quantity is 210 square feet. While you signed the
acknowledgement that you received Addendum #2, you did not utilize the corrected form
and/ or quantity in preparing your bid. You could reasonably be considered a
nonresponsive bidder for this oversight.
Second, after correcting your mistake and utilizing the unit price that you supplied, then
multiplying it by the correct quantity of 210 square feet, you ended up not being the low
bidder.
I also wish to point out that you submitted the required prequalification application one
day prior to the bid opening, as opposed to the required seven days prior. In the interest of
being as flexible with you as possible, the City provided you with a temporary three month
qualification, so that you would be eligible for this project.
Community Services
,2?0 rl~tautgorrrery St-•cet • 1~%d(xu•~r, Oregon 9~07•i
P;r.5U,3.95z-5,264 ' Tn~ 503.950-7.45
218
The City Council will be asked to award the construction contract for this project at their
meeting on October 12, 2009 at 7:00 PM at Woodburn City Hall Council Chambers, You
are entitled to express your concerns to the City Council at that time.
Sincere ,
r
Jim Row
Community Services Director
219
~,_.~ ,ti
~~~
..~
BURS
lKivrporarra! 198'1
October 12, 2009
T0: Honorable Mayor and City Council through City Administrator
,.
FROM: Jim Hendryx, Community Development Director ~
SUBJECT: Planning Commission approval of variance case VAR 2009-01 at
~}9 ~trtet; tax lot 051 W 18AB 11600
RECOMMENDATION:
No action is recommended. This item is placed before the Council for
information purposes in compliance with the Woodburn Development
Ordinance. The Council may call up this item for review if it desires.
BACKGROUND:
The Public Works Department requested a variance to install a 4,000 gallon
above-ground tank to store fuel for emergency generators, sewage lift stations,
and City equipment during natural disasters. The proposed location was in the
20-foot setback abutting Broadway Street, On September 10, the Planning
Commission held a public hearing on the matter and approved the application.
DISCUSSION:
None.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
This decision is anticipated to have no public sector financial impact.
Agenda Item Review; City Administrator ~~ ~ity Attorney
Finance .~
220
Honorable Mayor and City Council
October 12, 2009
Page 2
Detail of site plan
w
w
221
Aerial photo of the site