Agenda - 10/22/2001
AGENDA
WOODBURN CITY COllNC./L
OCTOBER 2~ 2IKJ1 - 7:00P.M.
270 MontgrJme.ry Street * * Woodh~ Oregon
1. CALL TO ORDER AND FLAG SALUTE
2. ROLL CALL
3. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND APPOINTMENTS
Announcements:
A. City Hall and Woodburn Public Library will be closed on
Monday, November 12, 2001 in celebration of Veterans Day.
B. First November Council meeting reschedule to November 13, 2001.
C. Community Development Block Grant public hearing
November 26, 2001-7:00 p.m.
D. Woodburn Public Library Activities:
"Day ofthe Dead" celebration, Nov. 27, 7:00 pm at City Hall.
Spanish Storytime, Saturdays, Nov. 3,10,17 & 24 at 11:30 a.m.
Appointments:
E. Appointment of Councilor McCallum to 9-1-1 Board of Directors.
F. Appointment of Isaiah Constante to the Museum Committee. . . . . . . .. 3F/G
G. Appointment of Thomas Albright to the Community Center . . . . . . . .. 3F/G
Planning Committee.
4. PRESENTATIONSIPROCLAMATIONS
Presentations:
A. Woodburn Police Canine Program.
B. Human Rights Award to Elida Sifuentez.
5. COMMITIEE REPORTS
A. Chamber of Commerce.
B. Woodburn Downtown Association.
6. COMMUNICATIONS - None
7. BUSINESS FROM THE PUBLIC (This allows the public to introduce items for
Council consideration not already scheduled on the agenda.)
Page 1 - Woodburn City Council Agenda of October 22,2001.
8. CONSENT AGENDA - Items listed on the consent agenda are considered routine
and may be enacted by one motion. Any item may be removed for discussion at
the request of a Council member.
A. Woodburn City Council minutes of October 8, 2001 .................. 8A
Recommended action: Approve the Woodburn City Council minutes
of October 8,2001.
B. Woodburn Planning Commission minutes of September 27, 2001 ... . . .. 8B
Recommended action: Accept the Woodburn Planning Commission
minutes of September 27,2001.
C. Woodburn Library Board minutes of October 10, 2001 ............... 8C
Recommended action: Accept the Woodburn Library Board minutes
of October 10,2001.
D. Woodburn Recreation & Park Board minutes of October 9, 2001 . . . . . .. 8D
Recommended action: Accept the Woodburn Recreation & Park
Board minutes of October 9, 2201
E. Community Center Planning Committee minutes of October 11, 2001 ... 8E
Recommended action: Accept the Community Center Planning
Committee minutes of October 11,2001.
F. Leaf Pickup Program - Fall 2001 .................................. 8F
Recommended action: Receive status report.
G. Claims for the month of September 2001 ........................... 8G
Recommended action: Accept the claims for the month of September 2001.
9. TABLED BUSINESS
10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Appeal of the Planning Commission denial of Subdivision 01-01 and
Variance 01-06, "Kalugin Subdivision" - a request to approve a five lot
subdivision and three variance requests on a 1.91 acre site located at
1810 and 1820 E.
Hardcastle Avenue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. lOA
Recommended action: Conduct public hearing, receive public comment
and instruct staff to prepare an ordinance reflecting the Council's decision.
11. GENERAL BUSINESS
A. Council Bill No. 2353 - Ordinance changing the zoning designation
on certain property located at 3002 Stacy Allison Way from
Marion County "Urban Transition Farm" (UTF) to City of
Woodburn "Commercial General District" (CG) ................... 11A
Recommended action: Approve the Ordinance.
Page 2 - Woodburn City Council Agenda of October 22,2001.
B. Council Bill No. 2354 - Resolution establishing a new schedule for
water system development charges ............................... llB
Recommended action: Approve the Resolution.
C. Council Bill No. 2355 - Resolution entering into a development
agreement with M-C Builders, Inc., Heritage Meadows, LLC and
Hidden Creek Properties, LLC and authorize the Mayor to sign
said agreement ................................................ 11 C
Recommended action: Approve the Resolution.
D. School District easement for sidewalk on W. Hayes Street ............ lID
Recommended action: Accept the sidewalk easement requested and
prepared by city Public Works staff and grant by the Woodburn School
District for construction of a sidewalk on W. Hayes Street adjacent to the
playground fence at Nellie Muir School.
E. Contract award for construction of sidewalk and storm drain
improvements to Hayes Street ................................... 11E
Recommended action: Award the contractfor sidewalk and storm
drain improvements to the lowest responsible bidder, Gelco Construction,
Inc., in the amount of $13, 01 O. 00.
F. Contract award for purchase of a used van ........................ 11F
Recommended action: Award the contract for purchase of a used van
to the lowest responsible bidder, Hubbard Chevrolet, in the amount of
$14, 737.00, plus DMV and documentfeet.
G. Contract award for construction of the West Lincoln Storm Drain
Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 11 G
Recommended action: Award: Reject all bids for the West Lincoln
Storm Drain Project and direct staff to issue a call for rebid after
specification clarification.
H. Contract award for building modifications - 347 N. Front Street.
I. Contract award for pedestrian crossing warning signal at the
intersection ofSettlemier and West Hayes.......................... 111
Recommended action: Award the construction contract to the lowest
responsible bidder, Electrical Construction Co., for the installation
of a pedestrian crossing warning signal at the intersection of Settlemier
and West Hayes in the amount of $19, 085. 00. . .
J. Request from Woodburn Elks Lodge for closure ofthe Hayes Street
alley located directly behind the Elks Lodge building ................. 11J
Recommended action: Approve alley closure at Hayes Street directly behind
the Elks Lodge building.
K. Request for Full On-Premise liquor license: Elmer's Restaurant ...... 11K
Recommended action: Approve a Full On-Premise liquor license
for Elmer's Restaurant.
Page 3 - Woodburn City Council Agenda of October 22,2001.
L. Designation of voting delegate at annual business meeting of
League of Oregon Cities Conference .............................. IlL
Recommended action: Appoint Councilors to represent the city
as a voting delegate and alternate delegate for the annual business
meeting at the League of Oregon Cities Conference.
12. PUBLIC COMMENT
13. NEW BUSINESS
14. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS - These are Planning Commission actions
that may be called up by the City Council.
A. Planning Commission approval of Site Plan Review 01-10 for Phases II
and III of Woodburn Company Stores ............................ 14A
15. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
16. MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS
17. EXECUTIVE SESSION
(A) To consider records that are exempt by law from public inspection pursuant to
ORS 192.660 (1)(1).
(B) To consult with counsel concerning the legal rights and duties of a public body
with regard to current litigation or litigation likely to be filed pursuant to ORS
192.660 (1)(h).
18. ADJOURNMENT
Page 4 - W oodbum City Council Agenda of October 22, 200 1.
WOODBURN
ORE G 0 N
Incorporated 1889
October 19,2001
TO: City Councilors
From: Office of the Mayor
Appointments
The following appointments are made, subject to the approval of the Council. Please
forward any adverse comments to me prior to Council Meeting Monday October 22,
2001. No reply is required if you approve of my decisions.
Community Center Planning Committee
Thomas Albright - Thomas is a junior at Woodburn High School and has
expressed an interest in getting involved in city projects. We need his input from
the youth of our community as we progress with the planning. He is the
individual who has been doing the cable network for Council meetings. He
comes highly recommended from the High School staff.
Woodburn Historical Museum Committee
Isaiah Constante - He will take the place of Amber Velasco, who graduated
from high school in June 2001. His appointment will expire in September of the
year he graduates from W oodbum High School. He comes highly recommended
by the staff at the High School.
I have spoken with both of the above individuals and am convinced that they will
both represent the youth of our community in a responsible manner.
I thank you in advance for your consideration of these individuals.
Office of the Mayor
270 Montgomery Strut. Woodburn, Oregon 97071
Ph.503-982-5228 . Fax 503-982-5243
G
A
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 8, 2001
TAPE
READING
0001 DATE. COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CITY OF WOODBURN,
COUNTY OF MARION, STATE OF OREGON, OCTOBER 8,2001.
CONVENED. The meeting convened at 7:00 p.m. with Mayor Jennings presiding.
0020 ROLL CALL.
Mayor
Councilor
Councilor
Councilor
Councilor
Councilor
Councilor
Jennings
Bjelland
Chadwick
Figley
McCallum
Nichols
Sifuentez
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Present
Staff Present: City Administrator Brown, City Attorney Shields, Public Works Director
Tiwari, Community Development Director Mulder, Police Chief Null, Finance Director
Gillespie, Public Works Manager Rohman, Park & Recreation Director Westrick, City
Recorder Tennant
0045 ANNOUNCEMENTS.
A) Woodburn Aquatic Center has resumed regular hours of operation following closure
of the facility for annual maintenance;
B) City Council Workshop will be held on Monday, October 15,2001, 7:00 p.m., in the
City Hall Council Chambers for the purpose of meeting with the Community Center
Planning Committee to discuss the Community Center plan;
C) Public Hearing - October 22, 2001: A hearing will be held before the Council at
7:00 pm., City Hall Council Chambers, regarding an appeal of the Planning Commission
denial of Subdivision 01-01 and Variance 01-06 (request to subdivide 1.91 acre site into 5
residential lots located at 1810 and 1829 E. Hardcastle Ave.);
D) Prime Time Family Reading: The Library will host this program on October 2,9, 16
and 23, 2001, from 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm., in the Library's Multi-Purpose and Carnegie
Rooms;
E) Board/Commission Vacancies: Citizens interested in serving on the Planning
Commission or Recreation & Park Board are encouraged to submit an application;
F) Dia de los Muertos - Honoring Our Ancestors: Councilor Sifuentez briefly
explained the Dia de los Muertos celebration which is a Hispanic celebration to honor
their ancestors. This celebration will begin on October 23rd and conclude on November
3rd.
Page 1 - Council Meeting Minutes, October 8, 2001
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 8, 2001
TAPE
READING
0235 APPOINTMENT: RECREATION & PARK BOARD.
Mayor Jennings appointed Woodburn High School student Ty Burlingham to the
Recreation & Park Board with his term to expire in September 2003. The Mayor stated
that Mr. Burlingham is a 4th generation Burlingham and each generation of his family has
been very involved in the community.
FIGLEyIMCCALLUM.... approve the appointment ofTy Burlingham to the Recreation
and Park Board. The motion passed unanimously.
Ty Burlingham stated that he is excited in becoming a Board member and is very
interested in working on upcoming projects such as the Skate Park.
0408 Mayor Jennings introduced Senator Peter Courtney who, if the Secretary of State
approves the State redistricting plan, will be the State Senator representing Woodburn.
Peter Courtney expressed his desire to work with local citizens, Mayor, Council, and City
staff on any issue that may effect the Woodburn community. He stated that he had
attended the groundbreaking ceremonies for the Cipriano Ferrel Education Center and he
was very impressed with the friendliness of the Woodburn citizens. Additionally, he had
an opportunity to appear before the Mid- Willamette Area Commission on Transportation
(MW ACT) on behalf of the City in order to provide testimony on the need for the
interchange improvements and widening of Highway 214. On October 18th, he will be in
attendance at the MW ACT meeting as requested by the Mayor.
Mayor Jennings thanked Senator Courtney for his efforts last week at the MW ACT
meeting and for attending the groundbreaking ceremony.
0666 CHAMBER OF COMMERCE REPORT.
Don Judson, President of the Chamber Board, stated that the Board had recently
completed their annual planning retreat and they have expanded their goal in raising
Chamber membership from 5,000 to 30,000 in an effort to make this a better Chamber.
Upcoming events are as follows:
1) The first full-day session of their Leadership Youth Program will begin on Tuesday
which is modeled after a successful effort in Salem. This program will involve 21
students from Woodburn High School (sophomores and juniors) and the students will
meet one day a month for the next 9 months on various sessions such as history, culture,
legal system, business, commerce, and government. Students will also complete a
community project of their choosing.
2) The Chamber Forum will be held on October 17th, 12:00 noon, at Woodburn Crossing
with the guest speaker being Dr. Gretchen Schuette, President ofChemeketa Community
College.
3) On October 18th, the Chamber will host Business after Hours at their new office at
Woodburn Crossing. He stated that the Visitor's Center is receiving twice as many
visitors daily at the new office and the Chamber is looking seriously at opening the
Page 2 - Council Meeting Minutes, October 8, 2001
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 8, 2001
TAPE
READING
Visitor's Center on weekends next year.
He also distributed copies of the new Chamber's Community Guide publication which
will be used as a sales tool in (1) developing the economy of Woodburn, (2) recruiting
teachers for the School District, and (3) forwarding to businesses located outside of the
City who are interested in knowing more about Woodburn. He stated that the new
Chamber Director had prepared this type of publication for the Chamber office he had
worked at previously. The Woodburn Independent did some of the writing and editing in
addition to putting the publication together for the Chamber.
Councilor Figley stated that she had seen the publication prior to this meeting and she
congratulated the Chamber in publishing an excellent publication.
0993 CONSENT AGENDA.
A) approve Council workshop minutes of September 17, 200 I, and the regular and
executive session minutes of September 24, 200 I;
B) accept the Planning Commission minutes of September 13, 2001;
C) accept the Community Center Committee minutes of September 27, 200 I;
D) accept the Building Activity report for September 200 I;
E) accept the Planning Project Tracking sheet dated September 17,2001; and
F) receive the Ordinance Revision Update / Livability Task Force Report.
FIGLEy/SIFUENTEZ.... adopt the consent agenda as presented. The motion passed
unanimously.
1026 PUBLIC HEARING: WATER SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES.
Mayor Jennings declared the public hearing open at 7:16 p.m..
Public Works Manager Rohman stated that the system development charge is a
component of the Water Master Plan. Notices of this hearing were sent to parties that had
indicated an interest in being notified of any amendments to any of the City's system
development charges in addition to being advertised in the local newspaper. He stated
that the amendments being recommended to the Council were developed by the Water
Master Plan Committee with the assistance of a consultant who completed a water rate
study and had reviewed the Water system development charges with the Committee.
John Ghilarducci, Consultant with Financial Consulting Solutions Group, reviewed
background information on system development charges and on how these funds can be
spent by the City. He reminded the Council that these charges are assessed at the time of
development and can be spent for capital improvements only. The two elements within
the system development charge are reimbursement fee (any related capital facilities) and
improvement fee (capital increasing facilities only). These fees can be spent differently
therefore, he suggested that the fees be tracked separately since the reimbursement fee has
more flexibility in spending over the improvement fee. He reviewed the process in
calculating the system development charge along with the proposed system development
Page 3 - Council Meeting Minutes, October 8, 2001
~
A
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 8, 2001
TAPE
READING
charges as recommended by the Water Master Plan Committee. Under the
recommendation, the reimbursement fee would be $3.39 per gallon per day, the
improvement fee would be $4.12 per gallon per day, and the total system development
charge, including an administrative cost recovery of 3.07%, would be $7.84 per gallon
per day. For the purpose of comparing the cost increase, he stated that the current single
family residence system development charge is approximately $1,450.00 while the new
system development charge would be $2,085.00. A comparison of the proposed charge to
other nearby cities results in an average system development charge of $2,380.00.
1807 No one in the audience commented on the proposed water system development charges.
Mayor Jennings declared the public hearing closed at 7:28 p.m..
FIGLEy/SIFUENTEZ.... direct staff to prepare a resolution adopting the revised Water
System Development Charge methodology and the revised Water System Development
Charge rates. The motion passed unanimously.
1900 PUBLIC HEARING: 2001 LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT.
Mayor Jennings declared the public hearing open at 7:30 p.m..
Police Chief Null stated that the City was awarded a $10,893 block grant in July 2001.
This grant, along with a local match of $1 ,210, brings the total amount funds to be
utilized under the grant to $12,103. He stated that the following two conditions must be
met before funds can be requested from the Dept. Of Justice: (1) an advisory board makes
a non-binding recommendation to the Council, and (2) a public hearing is held to allow
for public input.
A needs assessment was conducted by staff and it was determined that equipment could
be used in 5 different police programs: 1) digital fingerprint system, 2) patrol bicycle
replacement, 3) digital camera system, 4) vehicle video camera, and 5) laptop mobile data
computers. Since the Police Department is in the process of implementing a wireless
communication system by installing 7 computers within the patrol vehicles, staff
recommended the purchase of laptop mo.bile computers which would allow the
department to expand the wireless technology outside of the patrol vehicles. The units
would be used by the detectives, special patrol details, evidence technician, and
administration. The Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Advisory Committee has
concurred with the staffs recommendation to use the funds for the purchase of the lap top
computer terminals and related software.
Councilor McCallum stated that he serves as member of the Local Law Enforcement
Block Grant Advisory Committee in his capacity as President of Woodburn Together. He
also stated that Woodburn Together has no financial obligation to this program but their
organization does participate as part of their community service efforts.
Bob Hayes, 612 N. Cascade, stated that he is a volunteer for the Marion County Sheriffs
office and also volunteers as a mentor at Maclaren School. He stated that he is very
proud of our law enforcement personnel in our community and, in light of what occurred
Page 4 - Council Meeting Minutes, October 8, 2001
8
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 8, 2001
TAPE
READING
last month in our country, the City needs to do all that they can for our law enforcement
personnel.
Councilor McCallum stated that Chief Null always comes prepared to their meetings and
provides the committee members with funding recommendations.
Mayor Jennings declared the public hearing closed at 7:37 p.m..
FIGLEYINICHOLS... approve the receipt and allocation of Local Law Enforcement
Block Grant funds for the purchase of Mobile Data Computer equipment and software.
The motion passed unanimously.
2387 PUBLIC HEARING: ZONE CHANGE #01-04 (Applicant: Wal-Mart Real Estate
Business Trust).
Mayor Jennings declared the public hearing open at 7:38 p.m..
Recorder Tennant read the land use statement required under ORS Chapter 197.
Community Development Director Mulder stated that the applicant has requested to
change the zoning ofa small strip ofland (.91 acre) located south of the existing Wal-
Mart store from Marion County UTF (Urban Transition Farm) to the City's CG
(Commercial General District) zone. This strip ofland was part of the island annexation
approved by the Council in June 2001 and, at that time, the Council did not do any zone
changes on those parcels. The applicant is requesting that the zone be changed to General
Commercial in that they have a submitted a proposal for an expansion of the Wal-Mart
store that will go across this property. The Planning Commission approved the final
order recommending the zone change following their September 13, 2001 hearing on this
application.
No one in the audience spoke either for or against the proposed zone change.
Mayor Jennings declared the public hearing closed at 7:45 p.m..
FIGLEYINICHOLS... concur with the Planning Commission's final order on Zone
Change #01-04 and direct staff to prepare an ordinance to substantiate the Council's
decision. The motion passed unanimously.
2928 CITY COUNCIL WARD BOUNDARIES.
Administrator Brown reviewed the process followed to date in reapportioning the
population ward boundaries and re-drawing new boundaries. The City had contracted
with the Council of Governments to work on this project since they had the technical
ability and equipment to re-draw the boundary lines using census data. Representatives
of two community groups had previously approached the Council on maintaining
communities of common interest as a criteria of reapportionment. Other criteria included
(1) keeping population as equal as possible, (2) wards be contiguous, (3) communities of
common interest not be divided, (4) utilize existing geographical or political boundaries,
(5) boundary lines not be drawn favoring any political party, incumbent legislator, or
other person, (6) boundary lines not be drawn for the purpose of diluting the voting
Page 5 - Council Meeting Minutes, October 8, 2001
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 8,2001
TAPE
READING
strength of any language or ethnic minority, and (7) each incumbent's residence be
retained within the same ward number. During the workshop last month, the Council
reviewed 4 alternatives and, during the workshop, COG was asked to prepare a 5th
alternative that combined alternatives 3 and 4. The alternatives before the Council at this
meeting are as follows:
(1) Alternative 3 - provides for compact district bounds with close population deviation
from the target population of3,350 and the Hispanic population within the wards are
fairly represented in about 2/3 of the community;
(2) Alternative 4 - took the same set of parameters but took into account future growth in
3 of the district's where the City anticipated growth, therefore, the population deviation is
slightly lower in those wards in anticipation of a lessor population difference between
wards when this exercise is completed 10 years from now; and
(3) Alternative 5 - maintained the same approach but sought to provide for greater
representation of the Senior Estates community in Ward 4.
Once the Council has selected an alternative, staff will bring back an ordinance for
Council adoption which would establish the new ward boundaries.
3266 Councilor Bjelland stated that he was strongly in favor of Alternative 5 since it gives the
best distribution of community of common interest to Senior Estates and to the Hispanic
population. Additionally, the population deviation is only a 2.7% change either over or
under the target population.
Councilors Sifuentez and Chadwick indicated that either Alternatives 4 or 5 would be
acceptable to them. _
Councilor Nichols favored Alternative 5 even though the population within each ward
will be out of balance by the time the next decennial census is completed.
Councilor Figley stated that her concern is that the City follow the law and, in her
opinion, either Alternative 3, 4, or 5 would be fine. Her preference would be either
Alternative 4 or 5.
Councilor McCallum stated that the City was well served by utilizing the services of the
Council of Governments. He agreed with Councilor Figley in that he could live with
Alternatives 3, 4, or 5 and felt that the Council has done an excellent job of responding to
the groups that came in and made suggestions. He expressed concern with the criteria of
projecting out future population growth but, once the Council looked at the criteria in
Alternative #4, a pretty good job was done in this area. In Alternative #5, adjustments
were made that people had asked for which resulted in 4 wards being heavily Latino and
2 wards encompass Senior Estates. This alternative indicates that the City has done a
good job of meeting needs addressed by the groups. He reiterated that he would be happy
with either Alternative 3, 4 or 5 but Alternative 5 is an excellent alternative. In regards to
the use of the term communities of common interest, he hoped that the City can get this
bias with whatever plan is chosen and get back to being one community of common
interest and that is W oodbum, Oregon, USA. He stated that he would be pleased to
Page 6 - Council Meeting Minutes, October 8, 2001
8A
8
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 8,2001
TAPE
READING
represent any of these wards.
Mayor Jennings stated that either of the Alternatives would be acceptable to him,
however, he would prefer to use an alternative that would include some projected growth.
3721 FIGLEYIBJELLAND... select Reapportionment Alternative 5 and direct staff to
prepare an ordinance relating to reapportionment of the ward boundaries. The motion
passed unanimously.
3762 RESCHEDULE NOVEMBER 12. 2001 COUNCIL MEETING DATE DUE TO
OBSERVANCE OF VETERAN'S DAY HOLIDAY.
It was the consensus of the Council to reschedule the November 12,2001 regular Council
meeting to Tuesday, November 13,2001.
3824 COUNCIL BILL 2349 - RESOLUTION ENTERING INTO A CONTRACT WITH
CITY COUNTY INSURANCE SERVICES TRUST FOR MEMBERSHIP IN THE
RISK SHARING POOL.
Councilor Chadwick introduced Council Bill 2349. Recorder Tennant read the bill by
title only since there were no objections from the Council. On roll call vote for fmal
passage, the bill passed unanimously. Mayor Jennings declared the bill duly passed.
3905 COUNCIL BILL 2350 - RESOLUTION EXTENDING WORKERS'
COMPENSATION COVERAGE TO VOLUNTEERS.
Council Bill 2350 was introduced by Councilor Chadwick. The bill was read by title only
since there were no objections from the Council. On roll call vote for final passage, the
bill passed unanimously. Mayor Jennings declared Council Bill 2350 duly passed.
3966 COUNCIL BILL 2351 - RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A PUBLIC HEARING
DATE FOR THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF AN EXISTING SANITARY
SEWER EASEMENT AND TWO UTILITY EASEMENTS.
Council Bill 2351 was introduced by Councilor Chadwick. Recorder Tennant read the
bill by title only since there were no objections from the Council. On roll call vote for
final passage, the bill passed unanimously. Mayor Jennings declared Council Bill 2351
duly passed.
4038 COUNCIL BILL 2352 - ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 1998 (CIVIL
INFRACTION ORDINANCE) TO PROVIDE THAT AN UNCLASSIFIED CIVIL
INFRACTION CONSTITUTES A CLASS I CIVIL INFRACTION.
Councilor Chadwick introduced Council Bill 2352. The two readings of the bill were
read by title only since there were no objections from the Council.
Mayor Jennings stated that it had come to the City's attention that some ordinances, such
as the sign ordinance, did not specify a penalty provision for code violations. This
Page 7 - Council Meeting Minutes, October 8, 2001
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 8, 2001
TAPE
READING
ordinance will provide the Enforcement officers the authority to write citations for
violations. In regards to the sign ordinance, there is no grandfather clause that would be
applicable and Code Enforcement officers will issue citations as is done with any other
potential violation of the law.
On roll call vote for fmal passage, the bill passed unanimously. Mayor Jennings declared
Council Bill 2352 duly passed with the emergency clause.
4278 LIOUOR LICENSE APPLICATION: D & D RESTAURANT (1615 Mt. Hood Ave).
An application for a Limited On-Premise liquor license was submitted by Terence &
Janet Priser, owners of the D & D Restaurant. Chief Null recommended that the license
be approved.
FIGLEY/SIFUENTEZ... approve a Limited On-Premise liquor license for D & D
Restaurant. The motion passed 5-1 with Councilor Nichols voting nay.
4323 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT: TRAFFIC SAFETY GRANT
AWARD.
The City was awarded two safety grants totaling $8,000 for seat belt enforcement and
DUll traffic safety with grant funds to become available October 1,2001 and to be spent.
by September 30, 2002.
FIGLEYINICHOLS.... approve receipt and allocation of grant awards for traffic
enforcement and approve the intergovernmental agreement with the Oregon Dept. Of
Transportation, Transportation Safety Division, through the Oregon Association of Chiefs
of Police, and the Woodburn Police Department.
The motion passed unanimously.
4358 CONTRACT AWARD: FINANCIAL SYSTEM SOFfW ARE.
FIGLEYINICHOLS.... award the contract for financial system software to New World
Systems, direct staff to finalize negotiations of the contract, and authorize the City
Administrator to sign the contract. The motion passed unanimously.
Finance Director Gillespie stated that staff had used a model Request for Proposal (RFP)
from the Government Finance Officer's Association which is a very thorough document
that City staff tailored to our needs. Proposals were sent to 29 vendors, however,
responses were only received from 5 vendors. He reviewed the process followed which
resulted in the selection of New World Systems. Three teams were formed representing
management, technical (finance and technical support), and users. Each team established
their own criteria and prioritized a vendor list. Representatives from each team then met
as a group and selected one vendor, New World Systems, as the financial systems
software for the City. Even though this process involved a lot of staff time, he felt that it
provided assurance that the right product would be purchased to meet user needs and it
provided documentation as to why another vendor was not selected. He stated that the
Page 8 - Council Meeting Minutes, October 8, 2001
$
A
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 8, 2001
TAPE
READING
RFP allows the City to evaluate attributes other than cost such as usability, support, and
financial stability of the vendor. It was noted that the life cycle cost for New World is the
middle vendor of the three finalists which reflects management's view of value, the user
team's considerations of individual sub-systems within the software programs, and the
fmance team's evaluation of workflow and information accessibility and analysis. The
current financial software has been used for 12 years and it is anticipated that the new
financial system software should last 6 to 10 years.
Councilor McCallum requested clarification of the maintenance agreement costs.
Finance Director Gillespie stated that the City is currently paying approximately $6,000
annually for support from the vendor. In the three proposals before the Council, the
annual maintenance fees range from $23, 000 to $33,000. He stated that the these fees
are reflective of the current market for a windows based product. New World Systems
does not charge additional fees when new versions and/or upgrades are released whereas
the other vendors do have a charge in addition to the annual maintenance fee.
Councilor Figley questioned if staff has seen the N ew World financial package at another
site in Oregon.
Director Gillespie stated that New World does not have their product installed in an
Oregon site. Staff did 3 reference checks for each vendor and, for the New World
System, the closest site was Bountiful, Utah. New World System is giving the City a
$40,000 discount in order to be a demonstration site in the northwest. The references
were done via telephone and the respondents gave a very solid report on the New World
System. It was also noted that NORCOM is using New World software for their dispatch
system and they will also be the software vendor for the mobile units being installed in
the City's police cars. New World has been in business for approximately 20 years.
In regards to conversion, Director Gillespie stated that he has told New World that he
wants the conversion for general ledger completed by the end of March 2002, payroll and
personnel by March or April 2002, and Utility Billing to follow the payroll and personnel
module.
On roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously.
5550 CONTRACT AWARD: LIOUID SPREADER - Wastewater Division.
Bids for a 1500 gallon liquid manure spreader attachment were received from the
following vendors: Fisher Mill Supply, Inc., $12,478.00; Lenon Implement Co.,
$12,635.00; and Ernst Hardware Co, $13,402.00. Staff recommended the acceptance of
the low bid which was less than the budget estimate of $13,800.
FIGLEY/SIFUENTEZ... award the contract for a poplar plantation liquid spreader to
Fisher Mill Supply, Inc., the lowest responsible bidder, in the amount of$12,478.00. The
motion passed unanimously.
Page 9 - Council Meeting Minutes, October 8, 2001
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 8, 2001
TAPE
READING
5680 CONTRACT AWARD: ORCHARD TRACTOR - Wastewater Division.
Bids for a low profile orchard tractor to be used in the poplar plantation were received
from the following vendors: Fisher Mill Supply, Inc., $49,994.00; Ernst Hardware Co.,
$52,300.00; and Lenon Implement Co., $52,850.00. Staff recommended the acceptance
of the low bid submitted by Fisher Mill Supply, Inc. which was below the budget estimate
of $50,000.
FIGLEY/SIFUENTEZ... award the contract for a poplar plantation orchard tractor to
Fisher Mill Supply, Inc., the lowest responsible bidder, in the amount of $49,994.00. The
motion passed unanimously.
5739 CONTRACT AWARD: HARD HOSE REEL - Wastewater Division.
The only bidder for a self-retrieving hard hose reel to be used in the poplar plantation was
received from Ernst Hardware Co. in the amount of $34,750. Staff recommended that the
bid be rejected and the re-advertisement process be followed since the specification for
one custom component used on the hose reel system was not clearly identified thereby
creating confusion amongst the prospective bidders.
FIGLEYINICHOLS... reject bid #22-11 for a poplar plantation self-retrieving hard hose
reel and allow staff to re-advertise after specification modification. The motion passed
unanimously.
5783 CONSIDERATION OF CITY ADMINISTRATOR EMPLOYMENT
AGREEMENT.
Mayor Jennings stated that the Administrator was entitled to the COLA adjustment per
his contract plus the new agreement provides for a 5.8% paylbenefit increase. In looking
at outside comparator cities, the Administrator will be paid in the middle based on the
evaluation he received last month. The Mayor stated that he and Council President Figley
both felt that the pay adjustment was fair and he expressed his opinion that the City
Administrator has gone forward with the extra step in not only putting in a lot of extra
time on City business but has probably saved the City this much money if not more.
FIGLEYINICHOLS... approve and authorize the Mayor to execute the attached
employment agreement with John C. Brown. The motion passed unanimously.
6230 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS:
A) Site Plan Review #01-11- Additions to the Woodburn High School Athletic
Fields.
No action was taken by the Council on the Planning Commission's decision.
6340 CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT.
A) Update on 347 N. Front Street: Administrator Brown stated that the asbestos
assessment did reveal some small amounts of abatement work in the floor and ceiling
Page 10 - Council Meeting Minutes, October 8,2001
A
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 8, 2001
TAPE
READING
tiles amounting to approximately $7,000. This information has been provided to the 5
prospective bidders and bids will be opened next week. It is anticipated that the bid
results will be included in the October 22nd agenda for a Council decision.
B) Mid Willamette Area Commission on Transportation (MW ACT) Meeting of
October 4, 2001: Administrator Brown stated that a delegation representing Woodburn
did attend the MW ACT meeting for the purpose of providing input to the Commission
regarding the Transportation Improvement Act funding and recommendations for the
Region II projects that would be submitted to the Oregon Transportation Commission
(OTC). The City had submitted an application for a $23 million interchange/widening
project. He stated that the City did have a group of individuals who spoke on the City's
behalf which included Senator Courtney, Representative Zauner, Mayor Jennings,
Council President Figley, and representatives from the Chamber, School District, and Fire
District. Even though there were a larger number of individuals present promoting the
NewberglDundee project, he felt that the testimony given by our supporters weighed just
as heavily. Staff is hopeful that MW ACT will make a decision that is favorable to the
City at their October 18th meeting and this project will move forward to the OTC for its
consideration.
6697 MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS.
Councilor Bjelland concurred with the Administrator that the representatives from
Woodburn did an excellent job in presenting the project to MWACT. Even though the
City's representatives. were outnumbered by NewberglDundee, there are times when a
small number can be more effective in getting the information across to the decision
makers. He stated that the process is still being discussed by the MW ACT Chair and the
Regional ODOT Representative, however, it may be similar to the process used in dealing
with the prioritization of the preservation projects that MW ACT dealt with at the last
meeting. The next meeting is a special meeting for MW ACT on October 18th at which
time MW ACT will be asked to prioritize the modernization projects that had been
submitted by the October 5th deadline. The next step will be for MW ACT to, most
probably, recommend two larger scale projects and several smaller scale projects which
would then go to Region II for review. Region II consists of 3 area commissions on
transportation and Lane County and one member from each commission and Lane County
will attend the Region II meeting. The projects selected by Region II will be forwarded
on to OTC for final selection of the projects for funding out of the Transportation
Improvement Act. When prioritizing the preservation projects, MW ACT members were
asked to individually prioritize the 6 projects and to rank them from 1 to 6. Selection was
then determined by adding up the scores put on by each member of the commission and
the project with the highest score was the project selected as MW ACT's #1 project. He
noted that the preservation project selected as #1 is a Woodburn project that being Hwy.
214 improvements between Woodburn and Mt. Angel. He stated that he will continue to
Page 11 - Council Meeting Minutes, October 8, 2001
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 8,2001
TAPE
READING
promote what he feels is the most legitimate use the funds that being the improvement of
interchange and widening ofHwy. 214.
0312 Mayor Jennings stated that MW ACT scores projects by a ranking system since, at the
time MW ACT was chartered, it was set-up whereby there are no motions for a simple
majority vote and the consensus method is used.
Councilor Bjelland stated that the Newberg/Dundee project will need to overcome some
significant barriers before that project every really gets funded. He hopes to be able to
make this point, along with a few others, to other members ofMW ACT and why the
Woodburn project can be completed within the funding provided by the Transportation
Improvement Act. The application for the Newberg/Dundee project is asking for
approximately $18 million for an environmental impact statement and some right-of- way
acquisitions, however, this total project will cost anywhere between $90 million and $200
million which will require Federal Highway dollars to support the majority of the project.
He learned today that to use Federal Highway dollars that a match of State funds is
required and it is normally in the area of 20%. Traditionally, the only source of State
funds has come out of State gas tax funds which are used to fund projects in the STIP
(State-wide Transportation Improvement Plan). He stated that the Newberg/Dundee
project is a concept and there is no final route established nor have they addressed the
environmental, land use, or other issues that will need to be addressed satisfactorily
before a project of that type can be moved forward. He reiterated that the Woodburn
project already has $4.2 million in the STIP and these additional funds from the
Transportation Impro_vement Act will complete the project thereby making it a more
logical use of the dollars within the region.
0671 Councilor Bjelland stated that one other project that Woodburn might have from the
preservation project funding is the improvement ofHwy. 211 from Woodburn to Molalla.
This a lower rated prioritized project but, because of the amount of funding set aside for
preservation projects, there is a reasonable chance that this project may make it as well.
Councilor Sifuentez reminded the public that the Musewn has a new addition which is
very well done and it is another piece of history that the City can be proud of.
She also stated that on November 16th, Maclaren School is celebrating their 75th
anniversary and tours will be conducted during the afternoon.
Lastly, she stated that, when picking up litter along the highway last Saturday, there were
a lot of weeds growing in sidewalk cracks and she questioned who was responsible for
weed control.
Director Tiwari stated that the property owner is responsible for keeping the sidewalks
clean and weed free. However, in those cases where the weeds are between the curb and
sidewalk, often times the City will get involve to keep the weeds under control.
0898 Councilor Chadwick expressed her appreciation in having Councilor Bjelland looking out
for the City's transportation needs.
Page 12 - Council Meeting Minutes, October 8, 2001
A
A
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 8, 2001
TAPE
READING
Councilor Nichols stated that he had received a complaint from individuals regarding cars
being parked in the right-of-way. One of these individuals received a citation and has
been going around town and seen other cars parked in the right-of-way but nothing seems
to happen even though the owners of those vehicles are in violation of the law.
Chief Null stated that parking in the right-of-way can be handled by Code Enforcement or
by a Police Officer. Citations are issued by the officers if they see a violation and they
have time to deal with the issue.
Councilor Nichols also questioned if any action was going to be taken regarding
installation of alarm systems at the water wells.
Mayor Jennings stated that he has discussed this issue with staff and it would be very
difficult for anybody to contaminate the City's water system. The water is drawn up from
the well directly into pipes and then to the reservoir. The doors to the well house are
locked and, right after the September 11 th terrorist act, all of the well houses were
checked and the doors were still locked. The cost for installing a video monitoring
system in extremely high for what it would protect.
Administrator Brown stated that, as the City looks at the system design for the new water
system, security will be one of those issues that will be built into the process. With
respect to City security, staff is looking at all of our systems at this time. He has been in
contact with Representative Darlene Hooley's office to see if any federal funding may be
available for an assessment and plan development. The City is looking at all of our city
systems and will be taking care of those that need to be strengthened.
Councilor Nichols al~o requested that the City check the plywood on the top of the
building at 347 N. Front since it seems to be loose and he does not want the boards to fall
down to the sidewalk area and potentially injuring a pedestrian.
Administrator Brown stated that no plans have been made to do anything more with the
building other than making the improvements soon to be decided upon by the Council.
Staff will look at the plywood to make sure it is secured.
Councilor Nichols stated that, in talking to a local landscape contractor, now is the time
of year to spray for weeds with long roots and, in a lot of our city streets, these type of
weeds are growing in the cracks and spraying would be beneficial to preserve the streets.
Councilor Figley concurred with Councilor Sifuentez that the remodeled Museum looks
great and it is wonderful to have a clean, well-organized facility that will provide for a
rotation of the displays. She stated that Kezia Merwin has done a very good job with not
only with the Museum but with the event planning she is doing including the upcoming
Dia de los Muertos event.
Councilor McCallum stated that the Fall Clean-up day was held last Saturday, and
MacLaren participated on Friday. An excellent job was done by all of the participants.
The Saturday effort concentrated from Boones Ferry Rd. to Hwy. 99E and the downtown
Page 13 - Council Meeting Minutes, October 8, 2001
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
October 8, 2001
TAPE
READING
area. There were a number of groups involved and he gave credit to the Girl Scouts
Troop 343, Boy Scouts 152, Woodburn High School Key Club, Portland General
Electric, Woodburn Kiwanis, Downtown Association, Tulip Festival Committee, and the
Livability Task Force. He also thanked the Mayor for his presence at this event, to the
Police Department and Public Works Department for their assistance, and to McDonalds
and Salvadore's Bakery.
Councilor McCallum also requested that staff remind Union Pacific that it is now October
and the work on the Hardcastle railroad crossing still needs to be done.
1416 Mayor Jennings stated that the Livability Task Force has been diligently working on
revisions to city ordinances and he thanked the Task Force for their continued effort in
making Woodburn a more livable community.
He also reminded the Council that the League of Oregon Cities conference will be held in
November and Councilors interested in attending need to finalize arrangements with the
Administrator's office so that reserved hotel rooms not to be used can be released.
1614 ADJOURNMENT.
FIGLEY/SIFUENTEZ... meeting be adjourned. The motion passed unanimously.
The meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m..
APPROVED
RICHARD JENNINGS, MAYOR
ATTEST
Mary Tennant, Recorder
City of Woodburn, Oregon
Page 14 - Council Meeting Minutes, October 8, 2001
HI
WOODBURN PLANNING COMMISSION
September 27, 2001
CONVENED The Planning Commission met in a regular session at 7:00 p.m. with Chairperson Young
presiding.
ROLL CALL
Chairperson
Vice Chairperson
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Young
Cox
Fletcher
Miller
Lima
Mill
Bandelow
Lonergan
P
P
P
A
P
P
P
P
Staff Present:
Jim Mulder, Community Development Director
Naomi Zwerdling, Senior Planner
Deniece Won, Assistant City Attorney
Chairperson Young provided an opening statement for Public Hearing.
MINUTES
A. Minutes of September 13, 2001 Plannina Commission Meetina
Commissioner Bandelow noted correction be made to her statement contained under Business from the
Commission to read ....the sewer line is being put in on Highway 214 down by the High School prior to the
sidewalks being put in."
Vice Chairperson Cox moved to approve the minutes with the noted correction. Commissioner Bandelow
seconded the motion. Motion carried.
BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE
None
COMMUNICATIONS
A. City Council Meetina of Auaust. 27. 2001
PUBLIC HEARING
A. Site Plan Review 01-01. Lot Line Adiustment 01-07 and Variance 01-12.102.082 sauare foot
expansion of the existina store located at 3002 Stacv Allison Wav. Pacific Land Desian.
applicant (Continue hearina to October 11.2001 meetina at applicant's reauest)
Staff explained the reason for the request for continuance is due to the fact that the applicant and Staff are
still working out a few details.
Commissioner Loneraan moved to accept the applicant's requestto continue the hearing to October 11, 2001.
Commissioner Lima seconded the motion, which unanimously carried.
B. Site Plan Review 01-10. amend condition of approval #1 and condition of approval #23 of Site
Plan Review 01-18. Woodburn Companv Stores. Crala Realty Group. applicant
Staff read the applicable ORS Statement and provided a presentation as reflected in the Staff Report. She
entered two items into the record (Exhibit I - Letter from Michael Robinson of Stoel Rives in response to the
Site Plan Review Staff Report 01-10; Exhibit J - Memorandum from Community Development Department
regarding the revision of Condition of Approval #23 as part of Site Plan Review 01-10).
Planning Commission Meeting - September 27, 200]
Pa~e 1 of 8
B\
Vice ChairDerson Cox remarked part of the statement made at the beginning of a hearing is that an applicant
cannot later raise constitutional issues if they do not raise an issue in a way that the Planning Commission
can respond. He questioned from a legal point of view whether this in effect is really for purposes of whether
they can reduce what they had been required to do before, whether they can come in now with a so called
"amended application" only less than two months after the original approval? Additionally, Vice Chairperson
Cox asked if the applicant is bound by the fact that these were not matters that were raised initially?
Deniece Won interjected Mr. Robinson's letter was received this morning and she has therefore, not had a
great deal of opportunity to explore the legal ramifications that he raises with respect to the Dolan case. She
indicated preliminarily their reaction is that he was obligated to raise the constitutional issues at the initial
evidentiary process and having not done so, those Dolan responsibilities are probably not applicable upon the
City at this point in time.
Commissioner Lima requested a brief overview of the Dolan case.
Deniece Won explained if you are going to require a developer to dedicate for public use some private right,
the government has a responsibility to make findings of facts to show that there is a connection between the
impact of the development and the dedication that they are requiring them to make or give and also to prove
that there is a roughly proportionally relationship between the impact and the dedication you are asking for.
She stated this was a United States Supreme Court decision.
Staff stated they are comfortable with the legal opinion at this point in time. He indicated they have also
reviewed it and agree with the opinion. Additionally, he reported the City does not have anything to prohibit
an applicant from coming back before the Commission because the applicant has a right to return. He also
commented the Commission has the right to act upon the application whether that be to approve or deny it
on merit. Staff said based on legal opinion we are not held to a Dolan standard at this point because the issue
was not raised at the initial Site Plan Review hearing.
Testimony by the Applicant
Mike Robinson. 900 SW 5lh Ave.. Suite 2600. Portland. OR 97204-1268 stated he is here tonight on behalf
of Craig Realty Group. He commented this is the first time he has been here where Steve Craig and Staff
have not agreed on something. Additionally, he expressed his appreciation to Staff on how promptly they
reviewed this application and got it on the agenda. Mr. Robinson referred to Vice Chairperson Cox's concerns
and remarked he disagrees with the City Attorney's answer. He said that this is a new application and it
should be judged under the standards that apply to it including constitutional law. Mr. Robinson further
commented it is fine if the City wants to take the position that having agreed to it once we are forever
prohibited in coming back in seeking to amend the application and change it but he does not think the courts
will agree to that. Additionally, he pointed out and summarized case, McCluervy, City of Springfield, LUBA
Case #99-121 which he believes is pretty closely on point. He quoted LUBA's decision for this particular case
"The fact the petitioner's may have been aware of the conditions of approval in the first case doesn't provide
a basis for concluding that they agreed to the imposition of the exactions or that the exactions imposed here
are roughly proportional to the impact of the proposed development." Mr. Robinson remarked we may have
a difference of opinion and he stated the way this works is that this is a new application and it needs to be
judged under the merits of the application but also the constitutional standards. He reported they are asking
to amend the conditions of approval that would allow Steven Craig to not have to improve the road, west of
the first driveway. Mr. Robinson pointed out Mr. Craig and his company have made substantial transportation
improvements, i.e., overcrossing redesign over the freeway, Arney Road from Highway 211-214 up to the
Woodburn Company Stores project and Sprague Lane. Additionally, he stated Mr. Craig worked with the City
Attorney's staff to draft the Reimbursement Ordinance and they are now defending that in court and they are
paying for that defense. Mr. Robinson remarked Mr. Craig has gone out of his way to try and do what the City
wanted done but Arney Lane is literally the end of the road for two reasons. Firstly, because the economy has
changed. Whereas Mr. Craig was the one that proposed that Arney Lane be constructed and dedicated in
the way it was originally proposed, he now recognizes that it is something that is not necessary for the
Company Stores. He is trying to find ways to reduce the costs of completing Phase 2 and Phase 3 so he can
Planning Commission Meeting - September 27, 200]
Page 2 of 8
8
do them in an economic way. This is one of the things that he can do to reduce costs and really have no
impact on the public or the Company Stores at all. Secondly, Mr. Robinson indicated Arney Lane doesn't
really serve anybody. Woodburn Company Stores is adequately served by the driveways on Arney Road and
it is taken care of by the east driveway on Arney Lane. He further stated the two homes that are still there are
served by existing Arney Lane and Woodburn Company Stores is served by what Mr. Craig is proposing to
develop which is the easterly driveway on Arney Lane. The properties off to the west are served by private
drives off Arney Lane. Mr. Robinson stated the opportunity to acquire that right-of-way is present if there is
insufficient right-of-way on their property. He asked the application be approved because the fact that Public
Works may want the road does not translate into a legal requirement that there be a road there. He stated
there is simply no code requirement that requires either the dedication or improvement. Mr. Robinson referred -
to the issue raised in the Staff Report regarding a "long standing policy" and commented this is not something
that is adopted in the Land Use Regulations which are the only regulations that apply to this kind of application
and even if it is in the code, you still have to meet the Dolan standard. He stated there is no benefit to the
Woodburn Company Stores and there is no evidence that shows that they need this for traffic or safety
reasons. Mr. Robinson noted that the Woodburn Company Stores realignment of Arney Road and Arney Lane
actually reduced the impact on Arney Lane. In closing, Mr. Robinson said if the Commission adopts the
conditions recommended by Staff, it is still a cost that is unjustified by law that Mr. Craig will have to bear
when he does Phase 3. He commented irregardless on how you look at it, it is a cost that he has to measure
against the return of that property. He asked that the Commission make a decision tonight if at all possible.
Commissioner Mill asked whether there is a financial partner involved Le., Teacher's Annuity?
Mike Robinson replied he does not know. He stated Craig Realty Group, Woodburn-LLC is a partnership and
Mr. Craig has investors. Mr. Robinson further remarked, as far as he knows, it is primarily private individuals
and there aren't any public entities or organizations involved.
Commissioner Fletcher inquired if Mr. Craig has discussed what the cost would be if he had to construct the
improvements?
Mike Robinson replied the cost has been discussed and he guesstimated it would be in the order of $250
thousand.
Testimony by Proponents
Mary Graves. General Manaaer. Woodburn Companv Stores. 2650 SW 2200 Ct.. Gresham. OR 97080 said
she is making her comments tonight on behalf of Steven Craig, Craig Realty Group and the Woodburn
Company Stores. She reported the center has proved to be fairly successful. It was indicated by Ms. Graves
that she assumes that all of the members of the Commission are pleased with the center's contribution to the
City and the presentation of the center to those outside of the City. She remarked there were significant cost
overruns with their Phase 1 construction due in part to all of the off-site improvements that were required of
them. Additionally, Ms. Graves reported sales the first year were above expectations but due to the economic
situation in this country, the sales have not been as robust as what they would have liked to have seen in their
second and third year. She stated the center needs to remain profitable for the tenants in order to sustain
the success of the center. Construction costs obviously translates into rent levels and rent levels in turn are
offset by sales. Ms. Graves indicated to build the second and third phases with all of the offsite
improvements, they feel do not really directly benefit the center, is proving to be more costly than what they
had anticipated. Furthermore, cost must be brought in line with projected profitability in order to move forward
with this construction. If not, it would not be advisable to push forward with construction at this time. In
closing, Ms. Graves asked for the Commission's consideration and assistance in helping them maintain the
success of the center and it's continued growth within the City of Woodburn.
Commissioner Mill requested a brief outline how the rent and common area charges are going to be
determined for a new tenant.
Mary Graves explained the rent will be based on what the market will handle and where they feel they would
Planning Commission Meeting - September 27, 200]
Page 3 of 8
B
be profitable in order to maintain some level of sales. She stated there is a base rent and the common area
maintenance is based on what it costs them to run the center in a year. Ms. Graves further reported they are
locked into a certain percentage of increases each year. Additionally, the tenant also pays into a promotional
fund which allows them to promote the center as a factory outlet destination and they require that they make
a charitable contribution to the charity oftheir choice during the year. Furthermore, many of tenants also have,
in addition to their base rent, to pay percentage rent once they reach what they consider to be a break even
point. Ms. Graves further explained they compete with the standards that have been set by other factory outlet
centers in the country and based on the performance of the center and their sales per square foot sort of
dictates a lot of where those levels might end up.
Testimony by Opponents
Martin W. Rohrer. 16 Abelarde. Lake Osweao. OR 97035 stated he is a property owner on Arney Lane. He
commented although he is speaking for himself, he might be expressing some of the same thoughts some
of the people further west on the road have. Mr. Rohrer said they have been very pleased with the
development that Craig Realty has done and he has very much been a supporter and has cooperated in
everything they have asked him to do. He indicated he is saddened to come here tonight to disagree with Mr.
Craig on this particular matter. Mr. Rohrer remarked those on the west end of the road have an economic
interest in the road being put in at this time. However, it also seems that a deal was sort of struck and now
they are asking to go back on it. The property owners along that road were asked to cooperate and support
the proposals they have made on the various stages and in exchange for that they thought they would get
what they agreed to do at the time. Mr. Rohrer also commented there are aesthetic, contractual and
economic issues because it could be quite a while before the property on the north side of Arney Lane is
brought into the City. He further stated until that happens, there is not going to be any improvements done
by the people along Arney Lane other than Craig Realty because they are the only ones that have any reasons
for doing anything at this point. Mr. Rohrer pointed out the road is very torn up and not nearly as convenient
an access as it was originally. He also commented just because the Dolan issue may be an open issue at
this point, it does not mean that the Commission has to take the position that it is unfair to ask them to do that.
Mr. Rohrer supports the Staff Report with respect to the Arney Lane improvement requirements.
Commissioner Mill requested clarification from Mr. Rohrer if he is in any way representing the other property
owners or his own interest.
Martin Rohrer responded he is representing his own interest tonight.
Commissioner Mill inquired Staff how many individual property owners are in the northern stretch that would
be affected by this roadway improvement?
Staff referred to the map and reported there are potentially five parcels.
Commissioner Lima questioned Mr. Rohrer whether he has talked to any of the other owners in that area
regarding the possibility of getting together with Craig Realty in sharing the costs for the improvements?
Martin Rohrer humorOUSly answered they would be glad to do that if Commissioner Lima could arrange to
bring them into the City limits.
James Adnev. 9075 Arnev Lane. Woodburn. OR commented he has no problem with either keeping it a Lane
or a Road but would like a decision made so life can go on in the farming community.
Chairperson Youna inquired if Mr. Adney has access into his property under the current configuration and is
it somewhat restricted by this project?
James Adnev replied he does have access into his property under the current configuration. He also indicated
he is, at times, restricted by this project.
Planning Commission Meeting - September 27, 2001
Page 4 of 8
B
Vice Chairperson Cox asked if the east portion of the road is in worst condition than it was before the
relocation of Arney Road?
James Adnev responded it is in worst condition just from equipment running over it.
Applicant Rebuttal
Mike Robinson encouraged the Commission to ask him questions now so he has the opportunity to answer
them because it is particularly disappointing to attorneys to hear issues raised after the public hearing is
closed when he does not have the chance to address them. Mr. Robinson stated it is not Mr. Craig's
obligation to build a road just because the road might serve other people in the future. He noted that Mr.
Craig built the road all the way from the highway and back by the Texaco Gas Station. Mr. Robinson reported
when the Texaco Station owner sold the property that became Jack-in-the-Box, they would have had to build
that road if Mr. Craig hadn't done it. He announced that property owner is presently in court opposing paying
his fair share on that road. Mr. Robinson remarked what happens is that everybody looks for Steve Craig to
build this because he apparently has deep pockets, he's from California and he builds nice shopping centers.
The reality is nobody wants to share in the cost. He questioned if it is something that Mr. Craig is creating that
makes the need for him to build that road to that width all the way to the property line? Mr. Robinson further
commented it is not fair to ask Mr. Craig to build the road if it is to serve other people or property that is not
in the City yet or to make a connection that is not even shown on the TSP. Mr. Robinson requested the
Commission to site it on whether the code requires it or whether there is some evidence that requires Mr.
Craig to build it because of the impact to the center.
Vice Chairoerson Cox said if we did not require Mr. Craig to improve the road would he at least sign a
nonremonstrate agreement so that if sometime in the future, if and when the road is improved, that he would
not object to the formation of a local improvement district to distribute the cost in an equitable manner?
Mike Robinson responded Mr. Craig would not agree to that. He remarked when those folks want to develop
at urban levels they can set up a reimbursement district and assess Mr. Craig for it. He pointed out the code
states that "anyone that pulls any building permit within ten years after the improvement is made is subject
to the reimbursement agreement." Mr. Robinson further stated Mr. Craig does not need on-street parking
on Arney Lane west of the east driveway and in fact the Woodburn Fire District has stated they are fine with
the proposed access. Additionally, he does not have any property that is served there and there is absolutely
nothing that is associated with Woodburn Company Stores that causes the need for the road to be improved.
Commissioner LonerQan inquired if there is a history that Craig Realty has said that they will improve that?
Mike Robinson replied affirmatively. He stated Public Works did not require Arney Lane at the width that it
is approved at, Steve Craig was the one that suggested that.
Discussion
Chairoerson Younq closed the Public Hearing and opened discussion to the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Mill remarked he heard some inconsistencies in statements made by the applicant. He
referred to the Springfield case that was cited by Mr. Robinson and commented there is no lapse in time in
this application. Additionally. he stated the applicant referred to the application as a new application and then
later on referred to it as an amended application. Commissioner Mill said it appears to him as a new
application and not an amended one. He stated he understands the economy has changed but at the end
of July when this was approved there were economic indicators indicating that the economy was starting a
down slide. Additionally, Commissioner Mill stated he feels the widening of the driveway is an excellent idea
and should be done irregardless. He also said he would be looking for other entries into that property if he
were a shopper there and would see a benefit to the property if that road was extended. Commissioner Mill
also noted he can foresee that street completely utilized during certain times of the year, Le., Christmas retail
rush. In closing, he stated we should hold them to the improvements that were originally listed in the
application approved by the Commission on July 26, 2001 regarding the improvements of Arney Lane to the
Planning Commission Meeting - September 27, 2001
Page 5 of 8
west boundary of the property line and also to grant the applicant's request to widen that driveway.
Commissioner Bandelow agreed with Commission Mill. Additionally, she said she does not see an issue with
the widening of the driveway since the Fire Department does not have a problem with it. She said we are all
very pleased with the improvements that have been done by Mr. Craig. Commissioner Bandelow also
remarked Craig Realty was aware of the sliding economy two months ago and she feels an agreement is an
agreement. She stated having an improved road would be beneficial to Craig Realty if nothing else, just in
appearance, and would like them to see them stay with the agreement they made with the City and keep the
condition for the extension of Arney Road and improvements.
Vice Chairperson Cox remarked he does not think a reimbursement agreement would fit this situation at all.
He appreciates the economic dilemma that Craig Realty is in and he is willing to try to save them some money
at least in the short term and to cut down on the financial impact of this if it can be done in a way that does
not hurt our long range objectives and our duties as Planning Commissioners. Vice Chairperson Cox said
he is willing to go along with the Public Works staffs generated recommendation and this will give the
applicant some break in terms of up front costs and it will allow them to defer those costs until the time Phase
3 comes on line. He indicated it will preserve the City's and their obligation as Commissioners to provide for
the long range transportation needs of the community. Vice Chairperson Cox commented we can not wait
until the last piece of property is improved to require the improvements to be built in other portions. In closing,
he said he will vote in favor of Staffs recommendation.
Commissioner Fletcher commented he assumes the economics have changed, at least in the short run,
because of September 11th. He stated he would be persuaded by the arguments made so far to go ahead
and approve Staffs recommendation.
Commissioner Lima remarked this case is a reversal of what has happened before with the School District
where they did something and then came back saying they need our approval.
Commissioner Loneraan concurred with his fellow Commissioners. He stated we have agreed to this and he
is not convinced that it should be changed at this point.
Chairperson Youna clarified Condition #23 as presented in the Staff Report has been changed somewhat and
clarified in the memorandum presented to the Planning Commission this evening. He agreed that these
conditions were conditions of approval and were stated and addressed during the July meeting. Chairperson
Young expressed his wish to give the applicant the opportunity for not having to do them immediately but
would like to see that as part of the project.
Vice Chairperson Cox moved to amend Site Plan Review 01-10 Condition of Approval #1 as set forth in the
application and the Staff Report and partially amend Condition of Approval #23 of Site Plan Review 00-18
as stated in the original Staff Report including the language that was presented in the memorandum dated
September 27, 2001 and subject to all the other conditions in the Staff Report and that Staff return with an
appropriate orderto reflect the Commission's findings and decision. Vice Chairperson Cox requested findings
to also include Dolan issues. Commissioner Lima seconded the motion, which unanimously carried.
Commissioner Fletcher asked if the Final Order stands on it's own merit to go to the City Council?
Staff answered the order will be final unless appealed or called up by the City Council.
Deniece Won interjected given Mr. Robinson's argument there is also a possibility of a challenge for damages
in circuit court.
ITEMS FOR ACTION
A. Site Plan Review 01-11. reauest to build athletic facilities at Woodburn Hiah School, 1785 N.
Front St.. Woodburn School District. applicant (Administrative approval)
Planning Commission Meeting - September 27, 2001
Page 6 of 8
B
8B
Chairoerson Youna explained this application is not being presented as a hearing because of the small size
of the structures that are being requested.
Commissioner Loneraan moved to accept Staffs recommendation regarding Site Plan Review 01-11. Motion
was seconded by Commissioner Lima. Motion unanimously carried.
Chairoerson Youna explained items for action, at one time, were simply addressed as discussion
items/administrative review. He stated it is much more definitive to have items for action because action is
needed by the Planning Commission in order for those to go forth as opposed to discussion items which are
something that we can discuss and not necessarily require action on the Commission's part.
B. Extension of Time for Planned Unit Development 97-03. Conditional Use 97-07 and Variance
97-12. Boones CrossinQ
Vice Chairperson Cox moved to grant the extension as recommended by Staff for a period of two years in this
matter. Commissioner Mill seconded the motion, which unanimously carried.
Chairperson Youna clarified this is to approve a request to extend the expiration date for submittal of final
plans to November 29, 2003.
C. Extension of Time for Variance 01-01 and 01-02. Partition at 1690 Laurel Ave.
Chairperson Youna reported Staff recommends the Commission approve applicant's request to extend the
expiration date for six months to March 22, 2002.
Commissioner Lima moved to approve the extension of time for Variance 01-01 and Variance 01-02. Motion
was seconded by Commissioner Loneraan. Motion carried unanimously.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
None
REPORTS
A. PlanninQ Proiect Trackina Sheet (revised 9-17-01)
BUSINESS FROM THE COMMISSION
Chairperson Youna reminded the Commission that business raised should be strictly pertaining to land use
issues.
Commissioner Mill brought up the issue pertaining shopping carts being left all over the neighborhood. He
reported carts are being left for longer than a week specifically on Tierra Lynn. He stated Shop-N-Cart needs
a phone call to remind them that they do have a responsibility to keep that up. Secondly, he related there was
a gentleman by the name of Fred Sugden who worked for the Woodburn Police Department for a number
of years and tragically died, not in the line of duty, but nonetheless he was an active City employee at the time
of his death. He stated he was very well loved and had good cross-cultural emphasis. Commissioner Mill
suggested it would be a fitting tribute to the man to, sometime in the future, if the opportunity arises, to name
some type of street after him.
Chairperson Youna remarked that is probably a possibility because we have some subdivisions that the
streets have been labeled "N, "B" and "ca.
Staff indicated that is a possibility. He stated the City does not have code provisions that directs them how
they name streets. However, Staff said they will be developing those in the new development ordinance. He
explained currently the policy is the developer submits whatever names they want and Staff reviews them for
appropriateness. Staff remarked he personally does not like. "vanity names" , meaning developers naming
streets after themselves and their children.
Planning Commission Meeting - September 27, 200]
Pag.e 7 of 8
Commissioner Fletcher inquired if the City adopts what the developer wants as far as naming streets? He 8B
also asked who has the final say in the matter?
Staff replied Staff reviews it to make sure there aren't any conflicts. He restated his personal preference is
not to have vanity names. Staff commented names should have some sort of relationship to the City or
community. He reported Staff reviews and approves street names.
Commissioner Fletcher further questioned if Staffs decision is non-appealable?
Staff responded the developer may appeal it if they wish to do so and it would come before the Planning
Commission at that point.
Vice Chairperson Cox quoted the Subdivision Ordinance "Plats that are submitted shall include the names
of the proposed streets." He commented this has been ignored many times. Vice Chairperson Cox reported
the final plat does not come before the Commission because it is an engineering job more than it is a planning
job and that is where the street names actually get recorded and signed off by the City.
Staff stated Staff has no objections to bringing the final plat before the Commission for their review.
Chairperson Younq commented he signs the final plat as Chairperson of the Planning Commission and
therefore, he does have an opportunity to review it. He stated he has not paid close attention to the street
names at the time he signs the plats.
Commissioner Bandelow raised concerns regarding identified flying objects by the freeway interchange again.
She questioned whether there is something that can control these advertising blimps?
Deniece Won inte~ected there are some enforcement proceedings that have begun but she cannot inform
the Commission of the status.
Commissioner Bandelow inquired if the new sign ordinance will be coming up and will there be something
addressing improper use of signage?
Staff replied he personally wants to get the sign ordinance before the Commission as soon as possible
because he dislikes working with the current ordinance. However, the overall development code is a priority
at this time. He said it is a huge task and right now it is impossible to try to accomplish both tasks at the same
time. Staff stated he expects the sign ordinance to come soon after the development code is completed. He
hopes the development code will be presented in the form of workshops in December with a hearing to take
place in January and possibly come forward with the sign ordinance sometime in the Spring.
Commissioner Bandelow further commented temporary signs are put up everywhere. She said we are
defeating the purpose of trying to beautify the city and make it look like a city when we aren't enforcing the
ordinance already in place.
Vice Chairperson Cox interjected if you want to get rid of a bad law, start enforcing it.
Deniece Won remarked some of the problems with the code are in this enforcement provision.
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner LonerQan moved to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Lima seconded the motion, which
carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
APPROVED
ROYCE YOUNG, CHAIRPERSON
DATE
ATTEST
Jim Mulder,
Community Development Director
City of Woodburn, Oregon
Date
Planning Commission Meeting - September 27, 200]
Page 8 of 8
c
MINUTES
MONTHLY MEETING OF WOODBURN PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD
DATE:
ROLL CALL:
October 10, 2001
Phyllis Bauer
Marie Brown
Ardis Knauf
Kay Kuka
- Present
- Present
- Absent
- Present
Barbara Pugh
Kevin Schiedler
Pat Will
Mary Chadwick
Ex-Officio
- Present
- Present
- Excused
- Present
STAFF PRESENT: Linda Sprauer, Director
Judy Coreson, Recording Secretary
GUESTS: None
CALL TO ORDER: President Kay Kuka called the meeting to order at 12 Noon.
SECRETARY'S
REPORT:
The monthly Board minutes of September 12, 2001 were approved as
submitted.
CORRESPONDENCE: None
PUBLIC COMMENT: None
DIRECTOR'S
REPORT:
Monthly Statistics: The monthly statistics were self-explanatory. The
number of people visiting the library for the month of September was
13,603. The Board was given graphs showing statistics for circulation
and the number of people visiting the library. Statistics show that
more people are visiting the library when comparing the years 1996
to 2001. Circulation is increasing when comparing the 1999, 2000,
and 2001 statistics. More people are using the self-check out unit.
Activities: A list of activities was distributed to the Board. On Sunday,
October 14 Robert Pyle, an author from Grays, WA, will present "Life
As Field Trip" at 2 pm in the City Hall Council Chambers. A Middle
East presentation will given by John Mandeville, a Professor from
PSU, on Monday, Octob~r 15, at 1 pm at the Chemeketa Center
Room 102. A "Day of the Dead" celebration is scheduled on
1
! ~c
Saturday, October 27, at 7 pm in the City Hall Council Chambers. A
bilingual lecture in Spanish and English will be presented by Susan
Dearborn Jackson of Redmond, OR. A children's storytime is also
scheduled. Antonio Ramos will have an alter display at the library.
Internet classes continue on Friday and Saturday mornings. The
"Prime Time Family Reading Time" program is underway. The library
will be closed Monday, November 12, for Veterans Day and
Thursday, November 22 for Thanksgiving.
Staff News: Beverly Phillips was hired as the new Children's Librarian
to replace Mary Parra who resigned to accept a librarian position at
Nellie Muir School. Mary continues to work on an hourly basis for the
Prime Time Family Time Program. Beverly was Woodburn's
Children's Librarian approximately 10 years ago. She will begin
Tuesday, October 23 working Tuesday through Saturday.
Cliff Smith, a retired Salem Public Library employee, is now on on-call
status for Woodburn library as a Reference Librarian.
Volunteer of the Month: Mary Lou Bellante was chosen Volunteer of
the Month for October.
Grant Activity: The Prime Time Family Reading Time is funded
through a partnership between the Louisiana Endowment for
Humanities and the American Library Association Public Programs
Office funded by an National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH)
Grant.
OLD BUSINESS: Project Update: The roof repair has begun on the Carnegie building.
The brick has been cleaned. Painting and the replacement of the
windows, gutters and down spouts still need to be done.
Woodburn/Canby Exchange Cards: After the Board's decision to
discontinue this agreement at the September 12 Library Board
meeting, the Canby Library Board decided that Canby would rather
not stop this agreement. We are waiting to hear from Canby
concerning how they plan to continue this agreement. If Canby
continues, they will need to have a method to determine if the
patron's library card is at Woodburn.
Material Selection Policy: Revisions of the current policy were
proposed and discussed. The Board will review the "Freedom To
Read" section and will respond at the next meeting. The Interlibrary
Library Board Minutes - 10/10101
2
! 8e
Loan Policy and Meeting Room Policy were given to the Board for
their review to be updated.
NEW BUSINESS: Goal Setting Meeting: The Board decided to meet Thursday,
November 1, from 4 to 7 pm at the library to review and update the
library's goals.
BUSINESS TOIFROM
THE CITY COUNCIL
ANDIOR MAYOR: None
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 12:45 pm.
Respectfully Submitted,
~~
fGdy C&eson
Recording Secretary
Library Board Minutes - 10/10101
3
MINUTES
Woodburn Recreation and Parks Board
Regular Monthly Meeting
Tuesday, October 9, 2001
7:00pm
City Council Chambers
1. The meeting was called to order at 7pm by Herb Mittmann.
2. Role Call
Members present: Richard Hammond, Member; Patricia Watts, Member; Herb Mittmann,
Vice Chair; Ty Burlingham, Member; Sharon Felix, Member.
Staff present: Randy Westrick, Director; Brian Sjothun, Leisure Services; Kathy Willcox,
Aquatics; Jennifer Goodrick, AA
Members absent: Frank Anderson, Member.
3. Approval of Minutes from May 13,2001 meeting.
A motion to accept the minutes as written was made by Herb Mittmann.
The motion was seconded by Richard Hammond
The motion was passed unanimously.
4. Business from the audience: None.
5. Business from the Director
Division Reports
A Leisure Services Division -Brian reported the Drop-In Centers moved to
Lincoln and Washington schools this year. Attendance at the drop-in centers today was 228 kids.
Currently they are experiencing growing pains due to lack of staff. The program has a few
logistic problems to be worked out with the school district, and Brian is confident that they can
do so. This year saw 505 kids participate in youth soccer, mostly using Centennial Park, which is
not a problem now that the parking lot has been completed. Approximately 255 kids attended the
Co-Rec dance last Friday. Over all, the Leisure Service Division provides services to
approximately 1,000 kids per month. Pat Watts asked about the progress for funding the
proposed teen center. Brian reported that we did not get the grant for which we had applied.
The funding source cut the grant program in half. Only 150 applications from more than 4,000
applications were funded. Pat asked what was the next step in the plan. Randy said we would
apply for a 21 st Century Schoolhouse grant, we will be working with the school district to submit
and apply this spring. Pat asked ifwe can probably get the teen center established using a
volunteer staff. Brian said that staffing this type of program with volunteers would be extremely
difficult. We are looking for alternative funding sources.
r
8
B. Aquatics Division. - Kathy Willcox reported the pool is very busy. It opened
last Monday after a three week shut down. Barracuda swim practice, WHS water polo practice
and other programs have the pool running at maximum capacity in the afternoons. Fourth grade
swim lessons and home school swim lessons keep the pool busy in mornings. October 12 is Free
Swim Saturday. Kathy is currently short staffed due to employees graduating from high school
and gone to college. Kathy is life guarding herself as well. Randy told the Board that life
guarding is a good skill for young people because the training is portable and everyone needs
guards. Herb asked what they would do if they were so short staffed that they could not keep the
school safe. Kathy said that had not happened, but they would limit the number of people allowed
who enter the pool if necessary to keep it safe. Sharon asked how many people could fit in pool;
the maximum capacity is 335
C. Parks Maintenance & Facilities - Randy Westrick reported that the restroom at
Centennial Park is 90% done: the roof needs to be finished, our staff other contractors will attend
to some details. A dedication ceremony is being planned for this spring on the first day of youth
ball. Brian and Randy said that it is gratifying to see the park being used as it was designed.
Herb asked about drainage the drainage issues. Randy said it is working well with some minor
glitches, but nothing that they did not expect and noting that cannot be fixed. The Centennial
Tree Project planted big trees from Oregon Turf & Tree. Burlingham Park received a grant for
lighting and other security features. Desired upgrades for Burlingham will also include pathways,
a second basketball hoop and playground upgrades. Parks and Facilities did a great job
coordinating major renovation projects at the Aquatic Center. These include: replace the heat
exchanger in the boiler, water is now back to the proper temperature; replacement of the glass
block on the south exterior wall; repairs to the water sanitation equipment; complete renovation
of all plaster surfaces and repairs to the floor in the women's locker room. Woodburn's water
has a high Ph. and the chemicals used to correct that condition are very corrosive on the
equipment. These problems should subside when the water department makes upgrades in the
future.
D. Directors Report - Randy reported that the emergency access request to
Legion Park has been withdrawn, the project has been. Due to the Veterans Day holiday, the City
Council will be meeting on the second Tuesday in November, the Recreation & Parks Board usual
meeting day next. After a brief discussion, the next meeting of the Board was scheduled for
Tuesday, November 6.
6. Skate park Project Workshop Report. Randy reported that the group of young men present
has been working with WRPD on the skate park project for nearly a year. The City Council has
set aside $50,000 to get the project going. Silverton Hospital gave $6800 to help develop a
design. Our skate park grant application last spring was not successful, in part because we were
not at the level then that we are now with design. Randy asked the Board to approve a design
tonight. Dominick Oyzon from Purkiss--Rose, RSI was introduced to show and discuss the
conceptual plans drawn up. Dominick described the process of creating the conceptual designs.
Three workshops were held, the first involved 20 to 25 kids was an input process with no
preconceived notion of what the design should be. The second workshop offered three design
concepts to be considered and enhanced by the skate park committee. Tonight's the third
workshop had a few minor changes to be built into the final design. Randy said that the Board
could vote on the design now, or when the revisions are made.
Randy asked Skate Park Committee Chair, Evan Thomas to tell a little bit about the design
process and the other aspects that he and the skate park committee been working on, such as fund
raising and developing rules of conduct. Evan stated that they have raised approximately $10,000
so far this year and are hoping to raise more. They also will pursue getting building materials
donated. Evan told the Board at least 30 kids in this area that he knows of personally, and the
park would draw kids from other areas. He also said the rules they were drafting were obvious
and made common sense, like no loitering, skate at own risk. In response Board questions about
"hanging out," Randy said that this is a high activity area and will be easily monitored, that parks
are, largely, meant to be a place to hang out. Evan stated that the skate park committee members
are dedicated to help monitor the park. Randy said that risk management would determine any
requirements for safety equipment and procedures. The city will make sure the park is regularly
maintained. Ty Burlingham asked about fund raising including what they plan. Evan said that a
donations program targeting businesses and individuals is being planned. A brochure featuring
the design will be printed once the design is approved. Sharon Felix asked Evan about the
younger skaters, are there spectator areas for people to watch their kids? Bruce Thomas pointed
out the gazebo and the picnic areas were right next to the proposed site in Settlemier Park.
Richard suggested the possibility of bleachers being added to expand the skate park. Sharon said
she was very glad to hear this report and thanked the skate park committee for all of the hard
work that they have given this project. She said she felt that this has been needed in our town for
a long time. She expressed her hopes that we can get another grant and disappointment that we
did not get this one. Randy said there are several sources of funds to explore. Sharon suggested
a skate-a-thon as a fund raiser as well, and again thanked the group for their presentation.
Herb Mittmann called for a vote to recommend the skate park design.
Richard Hammond moved to approve design.
Pat Watts seconded the motion.
The motion to approve the design was unanimous.
Herb commended the group, stating there are many kids who need this park and when they get it
the group will be very proud of their accomplishment.
7. Future Board Business: Sharon will be giving a thorough community center planning
committee update to the board at the November 6 meeting. She reported that the group has
recommended the Settlemier site, and will be attending a City Council Workshop on October 15
where they will have the opportunity to discuss their findings. The committee has gone on field
trips to see other community centers and brought back several great ideas that she hopes we can
incorporate into Woodburn's new center. Randy explained that the committee came up with a
three-phase plan, the first part to replace what we have, and second and third phases to add a
gym, a pavilion, classrooms, performing arts centers, etc. The City Council now needs to refocus
their ideas to direct the committee how to proceed.
'D
D
8. Board Comments: There were none, but Randy invited the Board to get out and see
Centennial Park, and plan to attend the dedication ceremony that will be held in April or May
2002. Herb again welcomed Ty to the board.
9. Adjournment-meeting was adjourned by Herb at 8:00pm
Community Center Planning Committee
Minutes
October 11, 2001
1. Can to Order: Flurry Stone called the meeting to order at 7: 10
2. Roll Call: Member: Flurry Stone, Patty Eammons, Preston Tack, Melissa Tittle,
Phil Hand.
Staff Randy Westrick, Jennifer Goodrick Guest: Randy Saunders
3. City Council Workshop: October 11: The City Council has scheduled a workshop to
review, refine and refocus their vision for the proposed Community Center. After Flurry's report
to the council on September 24 it became obvious that different Council members had different
ideas about the community center and the process of procuring funding for the building and where
is should or could be built. The Community Center Planning Committee has been invited to
attend this workshop so that they can provide information from the research the Committee has
done thus far. Randy stated the 10/15 workshop was to "make sure we're all singing off the same
sheet of music." Flurry reiterated that the cost should be kept in mind as the Committee and the
Council decide how best to proceed.
4. New Concept Plans: Randy Saunders brought several conceptual drawings to the meeting,
both building plans and building footprints in Settlemier Park, for both Phase I and for a combine
Phase I and n. One ofthe issues is that a flood plane runs through Settlemier Park, and we're
waiting to find out where it is and if a parking lot can be built in a flood plane. Randy Saunders
assured the Committee that there are several options available even if the flood plane is an issue
for parking. Flurry voiced concerns that the plans contain too much parking and hopes to offer
more options, such as acquiring properties on Oak Street for parking rather that utilizing existing
park land as the only source for parking. Flurry asked Randy
Saunders how he came up with the amount of parking needed. Randy said the parking was based
on both city ordinances and a-formula based on the square footage of the building.
Front street will be revitalized next year by the Public Works Dept next summer. If it is
determined that the new Community Center belongs on Front Street, then Public Works can get a
head start on the entrances, turn arounds and other features that will be needed.
Randy Westrick reported that he is going to be working with the Trust for Public Lands
regarding property next to Legion Park. This could be a good spot for a community center. The
Trust for Public Lands would purchase the land and hold it in trust for the city until we are able to
secure the funding for it, probably through SDC (systems development charges).
Randy Saunders stated that Settlemier Park needs to be "master planned". There was
consensus in the Committee.
5. Meeting Schedule: The next meeting was tentatively scheduled for October 25.
6. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned by general consensus at 8:45 pm.
MEMO
TO:
City Council through the City Administrato~
Public Works Director ~~ ~ ~ ·
Leaf Pick Up and Disposal Program - Fall 2002
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
October 12, 2001
Increased Fall Sweeping Efforts
The City Council has directed in past years that Public Works increase its sweeping effort during the fall.
This effort has been directed at the downtown area and main streets leading to schools. The areas
where sweeping intervals are increased to weekly are shown on the attached map. The remainder of
the city is swept once per month according to the usual schedule. Increased sweeping will run from
November 5, 2001 to December 15. 2001.
City Fall Leaf Disposal at No Additional Cost to Woodburn Residents
Similar to prior years. leaf drop off will be provided at no cost from November 6 to December 15, 2001
in the fenced Public Works storage facility located at 300 E. Cleveland Street just east of the railroad
tracks. Woodburn residents may drop off leaves at the Public Works facility during the times outlined
below:
Monday through Friday
Saturday
8:30 am to 3:30 pm
10:30 am to 3:30 pm
Signs will direct individuals where to deposit the leaves. Leaves must be removed from plastic bags or
other containers before being deposited.
Other options for leaf disposal
1. Composting on private property - will provide soil for next year's garden and flower beds.
2. Composting at Marion County site. Marion County is composting yard waste, which can be dropped
at the North Marion Station located at 17827 Whitney Lane, NE near the ash disposal site. County
composting service is available to both residential and commercial people for a cost. Information on
cost and conditions may be obtained by calling 981-4117.
3. Pickup at residence - United Disposal employees will pick up bagged leaves as a part of their regular
service for an additional charge. However, residents may fill their United Disposal yard debris
container each week until leaves have been disposed of.
For additional information contact: Woodburn Street Department
Matt Gwynn 503-980-2424
Cheryl VanNatta 503-982-5236
Marion County Solid Waste Program at 981-4117
GST\lg
Attachment: Sweeping Schedule Map
LEAFDISPOSAL- 2001
r--"1 r
LEGEND
~cVtd6.r Scheduled Weekly Sweeping
~III' Extension of Weekly Sweeping Dunng
Leaf Clean-up
F
AlP CHECK LISTING FOR THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER 2001
CHECK DEPARTMENT VENDOR NAME VENDOR DATE AMOUNT
NO NO
56893 POSTAGE.VARIOUS US POSTAL SERVICE 020089 9/1/01 $1,600.00
56894 SUPPlIES.lIBRARY OFFICE MAX 014031 9/5/01 $93.94
56895 PAYROLL-ATTY VANTAGEPOINT NONE 9/6/01 $373.49
56896 PAYROLL.PUB WKS ICMA RETIREMENT 060050 9/6/01 $617.96
56897 PAYROLL.VARIOUS PERS 014424 9/6/01 $95.61
56898 SERVICES. WATER VALLEY MAILING 021044 9/6/01 $686.40
56899 PETTY CASH.VARIOUS CITY OF WOODBURN 015255 9/7/01 $155.32
56900 VOl D VOID VOID $0.00
56901 VO I D VO I D VOID $0.00
56902 VO I D VOID VOID $0.00
56903 SUPPlI ES. POLICE LANDS END NONE 9/8/01 $189.95
56904 REFUND-PLANNING KOHL NONE 9/8/01 $2,366.00
56905 REFUND. PARKS DON FACKRELL NONE 9/8/01 $36.00
56906 REFUND. PARKS APOSTOLIC ASSEMBLY NONE 9/8/01 $25.00
56907 REFUND-HOTEL TAX WOODBURN INN NONE 9/8/01 $1,737.68
56908 SERVICES-POLICE ACTS OREGON NONE 9/8/01 $85.00
56909 REFUND. POLICE FARMERS INSURANCE NONE 9/8/01 $4.00
56910 SUPPlIES.MUSEUM VANCE YODER NONE 9/8/01 $19.77
56911 SUPPlIES.WATER ACKLEY TOOL CO 000040 9/8/01 $701.25
56912 SUPPlIES.C STORES ADVANCED LASER IMAGING 000066 9/8/01 $459.60
56913 SERVICES.ENG AEROTEK 000080 9/8/01 $320.00
56914 SUPPLlES.WATER AM FIRE PROTECTION 000222 9/8/01 $385.00
56915 SUPPlIES.lIBRARY AMERICANA PUBLISHING 000370 9/8/01 $90.00
56916 SUPPLlES.WATER A.l COUPLING 000409 9/8/01 $9.62
56917 SUPPLIES-BUILDING ANDERSON GRAPHIC 000429 9/8/01 $132.80
56918 SERVICES.VARIOUS ARCH WIRELESS 000535 9/8/01 $292.22
56919 SUPPLI ES.POLlCE ARTISTIC SIGNS 000540 9/8/01 $335.16
56920 SERVICES. POLICE BM CLEAN I NG 001030 9/8/01 $200.00
56921 SERVICES.VARIOUS _ BOLDT CARLISLE 001345 9/8/01 $1,030.00
56922 SUPPLI ES.L1 BRARY BOOK WHOLESALERS 001350 9/8/01 $97.37
56923 SUPPLIES-LIBRARY BOOKS IN MOTION 001351 9/8/01 $324.42
56924 SUPPLlES.STREET BROOKS HARDWARE 001480 9/8/01 $79.98
56925 SERVICES.FI NANCE CANBY TELEPHONE 002062 9/8/01 $39.90
56926 SERVICES. POLICE CASE AUTOMOTIVE 002190 9/8/01 $693.76
56927 SUPPLlES.VARIOUS COW GOVERNMENT 002320 9/8/01 $2,883.58
56928 SUPPlIES.L1BRARY CHEMEKETA COMM COLL 002410 9/8/01 $659.85
56929 SUPPLI ES-WWTP CLACKAMAS COMM COLL 002550 9/8/01 $176.75
56930 SUPPLIES. WATER CONSOLIDATED SUPPLY 002770 9/8/01 $294.50
56931 SERVICES-WWTP CORPINC 002879 9/8/01 $1,513.52
56932 SERVICES-ENG CRANE & MERSETH 002896 9/8/01 $355.20
56933 SUPPLIES. LI BRARY CREATIVE JOYS 002901 9/8/01 $79.11
56934 SERVICES-FI NANCE DIRECT LINK 003240 9/8/01 $315.00
56935 SUPPLlES.L1BRARY DONARS SPANISH 003250 9/8/01 $405.35
56936 SERVICES. FI NANCE DP NORTHWEST 003264 9/8/01 $1,010.00
56937 SERVICES. PARKS EAGLE WEB PRESS 004018 9/8/01 $1,071.39
56938 SUPPLlES.L1BRARY EQUIFAX CITY DIRECTORY 004250 9/8/01 $248.50
56939 SERVICES-PUB WKS DALE R FRASER SALES 005334 9/8/01 $755.00
56940 SERVICES. POLICE INN OF 7TH MOUNTAIN 008030 9/8/01 $301.50
Page 1
AlP CHECK LISTING FOR THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER 2001
8
56941 SUPPLlES.WWTP IND WELDING SUPPLY 008100 9/8/01 $31.50
56942 SUPPLIES-LIBRARY INGRAM DIST 008116 9/8/01 $4,295.63
56943 SERVICES. POLICE DR ROBERT JONES 009147 9/8/01 $760.00
56944 SUPPLI ES. STREET KEIZER OUTDOOR POWER 010045 9/8/01 $429.99
56945 SUPPLI ES.L1 BRARY L1BROS SIN FRONTERAS 011277 9/8/01 $176.33
56946 SERVICES-COURT MSI GROUP 012015 9/8/01 $125.00
56947 SUPPLIES. POLICE MARION ENVIRON 012227 9/8/01 $13.60
56948 SUPPLI ES. VARIOUS MCCORMICK BARKDUST 012350 9/8/01 $1.330.00
56949 SUPPLIES-VARIOUS METROFUELlNG 012448 9/8/01 $2,044.99
56950 SUPPLIES. II BRARY MICRO MARKETING 012462 9/8/01 $203.50
56951 SUPPLlES.PARKS MOORE MEDICAL 012588 9/8/01 $636.80
56952 SUPPLIES-LIBRARY THE MOUNTAINEERS BOOKS 012630 9/8/01 $23.04
56953 SUPPLIES. LIBRARY NAME BADGES BY JAN 013009 9/8/01 $6.50
56954 SERVICES-PARKS NATIONAL REC & PARK 013090 9/8/01 $160.00
56955 SERVICES.WWTP NEALS FRAMERY 013146 9/8/01 $488.52
56956 SERVICES.VARIOUS NW NATURAL 013350 9/8/01 $2.804.82
56957 SERVICES-ENG ONSITE ENVIRON 014055 9/8/01 $602.40
56958 SUPPLlES.POLlCE OR DMV 014240 9/8/01 $6.50
56959 SERVICES. PUB WKS OR DEPT OF TRANS 014260 9/8/01 $6.71
56960 SERVICES-PARKS OR REC & PARKS ASSOC 014431 9/8/01 $150.00
56961 SERVICES.WATER PAULS SMALL MTR 015175 9/8/01 $61.07
56962 SUPPLI ES. LIBRARY POOL & CREW 015371 9/8/01 $154.75
56963 SERVICES.VARIOUS PORT GENERAL ELEC 015420 9/8/01 $31,017.97
56964 SUPPLlES-ENG PUB WKS SUPPLY 015648 9/8/01 $35.00
56965 SERVICES. VARIOUS QWEST 016201 9/8/01 $199.07
56966 SERVICES.VARIOUS QWEST 016202 9/8/01 $906.69
56967 SUPPLlES.L1BRARY QWEST OEX 016203 9/8/01 $61.21
56968 SUPPLlES.L1BRARY RECORDED BOOKS 017102 9/8/01 $94.20
56969 SUPPLI ES.WWTP RED WING SHOE 017137 9/8/01 $168.00
56970 SUPPLI ES-L1 BRARY REGENT BOOK 017148 9/8/01 $13.77
56971 SUPPlI ES. PARKS - RlDDEL ALL AMERICAN 017205 9/8/01 $160.35
56972 REIMBURSE.POLlCE ROBERT RODRIGUEZ 017290 9/8/01 $33.77
56973 SUPPLlES.POLlCE SANDERSON SAFETY 018173 9/8/01 $288.00
56974 REIMBURSE.WWTP FRANK SINClAIR 018502 9/8/01 $34.80
56975 SERVICES-ENG TEK SYSTEMS 019046 9/8/01 $368.00
56976 SUPPLIES-STREET UNOCAL:ERNI E GRAHAM 020010 9/8/01 $631.38
56977 SERVICES.VARIOUS UNITED DISPOSAL 020020 9/8/01 $1.346.55
56978 SUPPLI ES.L1 BRARY VIDEO SAMPLER 021138 9/8/01 $357.08
56979 SUPPLlES.POLlCE VIKING OFFICE 021180 9/8/01 $131.47
56980 SUPPlI ES. liBRARY VISIONS 021203 9/8/01 $104.20
56981 SUPPLlES.L1BRARY WEISS RATINGS 022128 9/8/01 $588.90
56982 SUPPLlES.POLlCE WHEEL GRAPHICS 022280 9/8/01 $321.31
56983 REIMBURSE.PARKS KATHY WILLCOX 022390 9/8/01 $47.85
56984 SUPPLlES.VARIOUS YES GRAPHICS 024025 9/8/01 $209.50
56985 VO 10 VO I D VO I D $0.00
56986 VOl D VO I 0 VOID $0.00
56987 VOID VO I D VO I 0 $0.00
56988 SUPPLlES.ADMIN MACLAREN SITP NONE 9/14/01 $160.00
56989 SUPPLlES.STREET UNDERGROUND FOCUS NONE 9/14/01 $50.00
56990 SERVICES. PARKS OR TRAIL CHAPTER NONE 9/14/01 $225.00
Page 2
AlP CHECK LISTING FOR THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER 2001
56991 SUPPLlES,WWTP ABIQUA SUPPLY 000034 9/14/01 $200.00
56992 SUPPLlES-WWTP ABLE CRANE 000035 9/14/01 $315.00
56993 SERVICES-VARIOUS WILLIAM E ADAMS 000047 9/14/01 $2,500.00
56994 SUPPLlES,L1BRARY AM INSTITUTE OF SM BUS 000244 9/14/01 $143.95
56995 SUPPLlES.WWTP APSCOINC 000462 9/14/01 $209.52
56996 SERVICES.WATER ARAMARK UNIFORM 000534 9/14/01 $31.35
56997 SERVICES,WWTP AT&T 000623 9/14/01 $15.49
56998 SERVICES. PARKS METROCALL 000655 9/14/01 $14.03
56999 SUPPLIES-WATER BATTERIES PLUS 001161 9/14/01 $499.89
57000 SUPPLlES,STREET BEN, KO.MATIC 001200 9/14/01 $717.71
57001 SUPPLlES.ENG BIMART CORP 001275 9/14/01 $47.58
57002 SERVICES.COURT ALVINA BLAINE 001293 9/14/01 $240.00
57003 SERVICES.WWTP BOBS BACKHOE 001325 9/14/01 $4,793.40
57004 SERVICES-PLANNING ROGER J BUDKE 001580 9/14/01 $2,317.50
57005 SERVICES.WWTP CARLS SEPTIC TANK 002136 9/14/01 $875.00
57006 SERVICES,WWTP CHERRY CITY ELECTRIC 002424 9/14/01 $697.69
57007 SERVICES.FINANCE CITY OF HILLSBORO 002510 9/14/01 $260.01
57008 RETAINAGE-ADMIN CITY OF WOODBURN ' 002526 9/14/01 $865.00
57009 SUPPLlES.PARKS COASTWlDE LAB 002626 9/14/01 $1,280.33
57010 SERVICES.POLICE COMPAQ FIN SERVICES 002724 9/14/01 $118.54
57011 SERVICES.PUB WKS DAILY JOURNAL 003020 9/14/01 $185.25
57012 SUPPUES.POUCE DANNER SHOE 003036 9/14/01 $103.95
57013 SERVICES-WATER DE HAAS & ASSOC 003108 9/14/01 $1,078.65
57014 SERVICES.ADMI N DORTIGNACQ & ASSOC 003258 9/14/01 $1,500.00
57015 SUPPUES.UBRARY EBseo SUBSCRIPTION 004040 9/14/01 $63.17
57016 SERVICES-VARIOUS ESCHELON TELECOM 004264 9/14/01 $450.00
57017 SUPPLlES.PARKS FARWEST EQUIPMENT 005065 9/14/01 $1,054.13
57018 SERVICES. WATER FCS GROUP INC 005072 9/14/01 $1,452.50
57019 SERVICES-ADMIN FI RST CASCADE CORP 005130 9/14/01 $16,435.00
57020 SUPPLlES.WWTP FISHERS PUMP 005147 9/14/01 $144.16
57021 SUPPlI ES. LIBRARY - GALE GROUP 006015 9/14/01 $540.57
57022 SUPPLlES.L1BRARY GAYLORD BROS 006030 9/14/01 $263.98
57023 SUPPLlES.ENG GW HARDWARE 006405 9/14/01 $13.09
57024 SUPPUES,WATER HALTON CO 007046 9/14/01 $754.04
57025 SERVICES. VARIOUS HIRE CALLING 007240 9/14/01 $1,816.80
57026 SERVICES-WWTP ED HOOLEY 007301 9/14/01 $350.00
57027 SERVICES.WWTP LAN CO PUMPING 011032 9/14/01 $450.00
57028 SERVICES.WWTP lEWELL YN TECH 011215 9/15/01 $698.00
57029 SERVICES.WWTP MEDFORD TRUCKING 012411 9/14/01 $8,865.00
57030 SERV1CES,WWTP MOLAlLA COMM 012563 9/14/01 $57.63
57031 SERVICES.PARKS MUFFLERS HITCHES 012655 9/14/01 $193.50
57032 SUPPLI ES.PARKS NATIONAL CHEMSEARCH 013030 9/14/01 $3,883.45
57033 SERVICES.POUCE NORCOM 013198 9/14/01 $22,536.92
57034 SERVICES-WWTP NC ANALYTICAL 013216 9/14/01 $252.00
57035 SUPPLlES.WWTP NORTHSTAR CHEMICAL 013235 9/14/01 $1,778.70
57036 SERVICES.VARIOUS NW NATURAL 013350 9/14/01 $18.16
57037 REIMBURSE-POLICE PAUL NULL 013420 9/14/01 $35.90
57038 SUPPlI ES-WWTP NURNBERG SCIENTIFIC 013435 9/14/01 $1,012.44
57039 SUPPlIES.WWTP OFFICE DEPOT 014029 9/14/01 $158.85
57040 SERVICES-ENG ONSllE ENVIRON 014055 9/14/01 $495.73
Page 3
AlP CHECK LISTING FOR THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER 2001
8
57041 SUPPLIES. LI BRARY OXMOORE HOUSE 014710 9/14/01 $16.92
57042 SUPPLlES.PARKS PAULS SMALL MTR 015175 9/14/01 $127.47
57043 SUPPlIES.WATER PORTER YETT 015400 9/14/01 $419.25
57044 SERVICES-STREET PORT GENERAL ElEC 015420 9/14/01 $10,169.23
57045 SERVICES-SELF INS PRIMA OR CHAPTER 015538 9/14/01 $130.00
57046 SERVICES. VARIOUS QWEST 016202 9/14/01 $2,613.45
57047 SUPPLlES.ENG SALEM PRINTING 018110 9/14/01 $254.70
57048 SUPPLIES-LIBRARY SIERRA SPRINGS 018460 9/14/01 $63.50
57049 REIMBURSE.ADMIN MATT SMITH 018569 9/14/01 $41.95
57050 SUPPLlES.VARIOUS CORPORATE EXPRESS 019100 9/14/01 $567.15
57051 SUPPlIES.POLlCE TIMELESS ENTERPRISES 019159 9/14/01 $348.00
57052 SUPPlIES.PARKS TRIAD TECH 019246 9/14/01 $51.79
57053 SERVICES.PARKS UNITED DISPOSAL 020020 9/14/01 $460.90
57054 SUPPLlES.PARKS UNITED RENTALS 020033 9/14/01 $281. 98
57055 SERVICES. WATER VALLEY MAILING 021044 9/14/01 $617.60
57056 SUPPLlES.VARIOUS WILCO FARMERS 022292 9/14/01 $273.90
57057 SERVICES. POLICE WBN FLORIST 022600 9/14/01 $216.00
57058 SERVICES. VARIOUS WBN INDEPENDENT 022630 9/14/01 $186.50
57059 SUPPLlES.VARIOUS YES GRAPHICS 024025 9/14/01 $1,221.75
57060 SERVICES-NON DEPT IRS 060070 9/14/01 $1,260.00
57061 SERVICES.L1 BRARY LI NCC 011238 9/19/01 $315.00
57062 SERVICES.WATER VALLEY MAILING 021044 9/20/01 $515.20
57063 VOID VO I D VO I D $0.00
57064 VO I D VOl D VO I D $0.00
57065 VOID VOID VOID $0.00
57066 REFUND.BUILDING BARGAUNSEN CONSULT NONE 9/21/01 $646.72
57067 REFUND. PARKS LETICIA REYES NONE 9/21/01 $17.00
57068 REFUND. PARKS LINDA MORENO NONE 9/21/01 $8.00
57069 REFUND. PARKS ELPIDIO CARRILLO NONE 9/21/01 $19.00
57070 REFUND. PARKS ALBA CEA NONE 9/21/01 $17.00
57071 REFUND. PARKS - SINFO CHACON NONE 9/21/01 $17.00
57072 REFUND-PARKS THERESA LABANSKY NONE 9/21/01 $19.00
57073 REFUND. PARKS JAVIER RAMIREZ NONE 9/21/01 $19.00
57074 REFUND.PARKS ANTONIO RAMOS NONE 9/21/01 $10.00
57075 REFUND. PARKS ADELLA CABRERA NONE 9/21/01 $17.00
57076 REFUND. PARKS GUADALUPE GUERRERO NONE 9/21/01 $19.00
57077 REFUND. PARKS MARK HOLMGREN NONE 9/21/01 $19.00
57078 REFUND-PARKS CHERIE MOTT NONE 9/21/01 $17.00
57079 REFUND.PARKS PORTER LLEVINE NONE 9/21/01 $8.00
57000 SE:RVICE:S.WWfP PNPCA CONFtRE:NCE: NONE. ~/~1J01 $310.00
57081 SERVICES. PARKS BEST WESTERN NONE 9/21/01 $380.92
57082 SERVICES. POLICE CALIFORNIA NARCOTIC NONE 9/21/01 $365.00
57083 SERVICES.MUSEUM JOHN PlLAFIAN NONE 9/21/01 $6.50
57084 SUPPLlES-ENG ME IMAGING 000017 9/21/01 $249.82
57085 SERVICES.VARIOUS WILLIAM E ADAMS 000047 9/21/01 $2,900.00
57086 SUPPLlES.C STORES ADVANCED LASER 000066 9/21/01 $381.85
57087 SERVICES-ENG AEROTEKINC 000080 9/21/01 $195.00
57088 REIMBURSE.POLlCE JASON ALEXANDER 000120 9/21/01 $48.62
57089 SERVICES-WATER AMTEST OREGON 000400 9/21/01 $370.50
57090 SERVICES.POllCE LANGUAGE LINE 000659 9/21/01 $1,582.61
Page 4
AlP CHECK LISTING FOR THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER 2001
8 !
57091 SERVICES.WWTP BOBS BACKHOE 001325 9/21/01 $4,745.00
57092 SERVICES. POLICE BULLARD SMITH 001584 9/21/01 $197.35
57093 SUPPlI ES-STREET CANBY SAND 002060 9/21/01 $645.21
57094 SERVICES. PARKS CG CONSTRUCTION 002380 9/21/01 $4,987.00
57095 SERVICES.SELF INS CIS CITY CTY INS 002488 9/21/01 $200.00
57096 SUPPLI ES. WATER CONSOLIDATED SUPPLY 002770 9/21/01 $535.33
57097 SERVICES. PUB WKS CRANE & MERSETH 002896 9/21/01 $15,234.60
57098 SUPPlI ES.POllCE CRYSTAL SPRINGS 002919 9/21/01 $38.00
57099 SERVICES. VARIOUS DAILY JOURNAL 003020 9/21/01 $669.50
57100 SERVICES. FINANCE DP NORTHWEST 003264 9/21/01 $640.00
57101 SERVICES.WWTP DR DAVIS LOCK 003275 9/21/01 $1,060.00
57102 SUPPlIES.WATER FAMILlAN NW 005030 9/21/01 $145.44
57103 SERVICES.WWTP JAMES W FOWLER CO 005215 9/21/01 $246,159.08
57104 SERVICES.PUB WKS GELCO CONSTRUCTION 006058 9/21/01 $62,918.72
57105 SERVICES.L1BRARY GE CAPITAL 006079 9/21/01 $191.62
57106 REIMBURSE. FI NANCE BEN GILLESPIE 006189 9/21/01 $106.48
57107 REI MBURSE.COURT JENNIFER GOODRICK 006225 9/21/01 $150.50
57108 SERVICES-PARKS GOPHER GUARD 006229 9/21/01 $1,440.00
57109 SUPPLlES.WATER WW GRAINGER 006283 9/21/01 $103.81
57110 SERVICES.PARKS CJ HANSEN CO 007055 9/21/01 $407.00
57111 SERVICES. VARIOUS HIRE CALLING 007240 9/21/01 $3,423.85
57112 SERVICES. PARKS HUBBARD PLUMBING 007323 9/21/01 $75.00
57113 SUPPlI ES.POLlCE IN THE LINE OF DUTY 008028 9/21/01 $95.00
57114 SUPPLlES.WATER IND GASKET 008074 9/21/01 $104.60
57115 SERVICES.VARIOUS 10S CAP IT AL 008118 9/21/01 $1,000.51
57116 REIMBURSE-FINANCE GERALD LEIMBACH 011190 9/21/01 $106.27
57117 SERVICES-VARIOUS MARION CTY CLERK 012087 9/21/01 $358.00
57118 SERVICES. POLICE MCCURDY TRAVEL 012365 9/21/01 $674.49
57119 REIMBURSE.MUSEUM KEZIA MERWIN 012440 9/21/01 $279.41
57120 SUPPLIES-TRANS METROFUELlNG 012448 9/21/01 $550.75
57121 SERVICES.WWTP - MILES CHEVROLET 012490 9/21/01 $698.42
57122 SUPPLIES-PARKS MOORE MEDICAL 012588 9/21/01 $32.50
57123 SERVICES.ENG MULTI TECH ENG 012682 9/21/01 $631.25
57124 SUPPLlES.WWTP NORTH COAST ELECTRIC 013215 9/21/01 $221.48
57125 SERVICES-WWTP NC ANALYTICAL 013216 9/21/01 $890.00
57126 SUPPLlES.WWTP NURNBERG SCIENTIFIC 013435 9/21/01 $56.60
57127 SERVICES.ENG ONS1TE ENV1RON 014055 9/21/01 $502.00
57128 SERVICES. TRANSIT OREGON TRANSIT ASSOC 014610 9/21/01 $200.00
57129 SERVICES.L1BRARY OREGONIAN PUBLISH 014653 9/21/01 $608.30
57130 REI MBURSE. FINANCE VEE OTT 014685 9/21/01 $12.00
57131 SUPPLI ES.PARKS PEPSI COLA 015225 9/21/01 $75.20
57132 SUPPLlES.PARKS RADIO SHACK 017030 9/21/01 $208.98
57133 SUPPLlES.WATER RAD1X CORP 017035 9/21/01 $13,843.74
57134 REIMBURSE.COURT JACQUELINE RODRIGUEZ 017288 9/21/01 $92.99
57135 SERVICES. PARKS RSS ARCHITECTURE 017346 9/21/01 $353.75
57136 SUPPLI ES. PARKS S&S WORLDWIDE 018017 9/21/01 $951.14
57137 SUPPLlES.PARKS SCOT CUSTODIAL SUPPLY 018308 9/21/01 $453.75
57138 SUPPLIES-POLICE SMITH & WESSON CAMERAS 018580 9/21/01 $1,800.00
57139 SUPPlIES.PARKS SOS LOCK SERVICE 018608 9/21/01 $85.50
57140 SERVICES.WWTP STATESMAN JOURNAL 018760 9/21/01 $183.94
Page 5
AlP CHECK LISTING FOR THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER 2001
57141 SERVICES.WWTP SUN RIVER 018848 9/21/01 $500.00
57142 SERVICES. ENG TEK SYSTEMS 019046 9/21/01 $368.00
57143 SUPPLIES-VARIOUS CORPORATE EXPRESS 019100 9/21/01 $1,831.02
57144 SUPPLIES. PARKS TRAFFIC SAFETY 019220 9/21/01 $331.00
57145 SERVICES- WoNTP TSI 019268 9/21/01 $680.00
57146 SUPPLIES-VARIOUS UNOCAL:ERNIE GRAHAM 020010 9/21/01 $740.53
57147 SUPPLlES.L1BRARY WAlMART STORES 022035 9/21/01 $60.00
57148 SERVICES. POLICE WBN FAMILY CLINIC 022587 9/21/01 $233.00
57149 SERVICES. PUB WKS WBNINDEPENDENT 022630 9/21/01 $277.40
57150 SERVICES. PARKS WBN RADIATOR 022700 9/21/01 $361.34-
57151 SERVICES.PARKS XEROX CORP 023020 9/21/01 $62.28
57152 SUPPLlES.VARIOUS YES GRAPHICS 024025 9/21/01 $39.00
57153 SUPPLIES. POLICE ZEP MFG CO 025010 9/21/01 $129.79
57154 SUPPLI ES.WoNTP ZEE MEDICAL 025070 9/21/01 $88.84
57155 SERVICES.VARIOUS ASSOCIATED ADMINISTRATO 000562 9/24/01 $610.00
57156 PETTY CASH.VARIOUS CITY OF WOODBURN 015255 9/24/01 $154.59
57157 SERVICES.WATER VALLEY MAILING 021044 9/27/01 $410.00
57158 VOID VO I D VOID $0.00
57159 VOID VOl D VOID $0.00
57160 VO 10 VOID VOID $0.00
57161 REFUND.WTR/SWR ROHRER, C NONE 9/28/01 $27.65
57162 REFUND.WTR/SWR NANCY OSTERGAARD NONE 9/28/01 $4.22
57163 SERVICES-PARKS ROBBIE NANEZ NONE 9/28/01 $195.00
57164 SERVICES.PARKS MATILDE RAMIREZ NONE 9/28/01 $182.00
57165 SERVICES.PARSK YOlllN PELAEZ NONE 9/28/01 $198.00
57166 SERVICES.PARKS MARIO TAVERZ NONE 9/28/01 $45.00
57167 SERVI CES. PARKS SARAH LOPEZ NONE 9/28/01 $72.00
57168 SERVICES. PARKS FELIX HERNANDEZ NONE 9/28/01 $72.00
57169 SERVICES.PARKS HECTOR RAMI REZ NONE 9/28/01 $90.00
57170 SUPPLI ES.STREET SHERWI N WI LLlAMS NONE 9/28/01 $30.00
57171 SUPPlIES.WTR - A&A DRILLING SERV 000010 9/28/01 $990.00
57172 SERVICES-PARKS A&A PEST CONTROL 000011 9/28/01 $210.00
57173 SUPPLlES.ENG A&E IMAGING 000017 9/28/01 $222.57
57174 SERVICES. PARKS ACE SEPTIC 000031 9/28/01 $858.50
57175 SERVICES-ENG AEROTEK 000080 9/28/01 $160.00
57176 SUPPLlES-WWTP ARAMARK UNIFORM 000533 9/28/01 $151.72
57177 SERVICES.VARIOUS ARAMARK UNIFORM 000534 9/28/01 $1.079.49
57178 SERVICES. POLICE AUTO ADDITIONS 000558 9/28/01 $242.74
57179 SUPPLI ES.MUSEUM AWARDS & ATHLETICS 000580 9/28/01 $22.00
57180 SERVICES.VARIOUS AT&T 000623 9/28/01 $100.06
57181 SERVICES. WATER AWWA NW OR SUBSECT 000663 9/28/01 $100.00
57182 SUPPLlES.PARKS BASHORS TEAM 00 1156 9/28/01 $47.00
57183 REI MBURSE. ENG PAUL BECKER 001170 9/28/01 $70.00
57184 SUPPLI ES.PARKS HOUSEHOLD BANK 001199 9/28/01 $625.84
57185 SUPPLlES.STREET BEN.KO.MATIC 001200 9/28/01 $304.50
57186 SUPPlIES.VARIOUS BI MART CORP 001275 9/28/01 $1,100.51
57187 SUPPLlES.WATER BRANOMINSTRUMENT 001410 9/28/01 $64.96
57188 SERVICES-WWTP BROWN & CALDWELL 001573 9/28/01 $12,490.64
57189 SUPPLlES.WWTP BUILDING TECH BOOKSTORE 001587 9/28/01 $219.15
57190 SUPPLIES. STREET CAPITAL PAINT 002079 9/28/01 $2,093.58
Page 6
AlP CHECK LISTING FOR THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER 2001
57191 SUPPLI ES. PARKS CASCADE COLUMBIA 002218 9/28/01 $937.00
57192 SUPPLlES.PARKS CASCADE POOLS 002226 9/28/01 $646.63
57193 SERVICES.WWTP CHERRY CITY ELECTRIC 002424 9/28/01 $226.13
57194 SUPPLlES.VARIOUS COASTAL FARM 002625 9/28/01 $193.55
57195 SERVICES. PUB WKS CRANE & MERSETH 002896 9/28/01 $965.65
57196 SERVICES-ENG CTL CORP 002926 9/28/01 $478.58
57197 SERVICES. PUB WKS DAILY JOURNAL 003020 9/28/01 $43.87
57198 SUPPLlES.VARIOUS DAVISON AUTO 003080 9/28/01 $342.72
57199 REIMBURSE.POLlCE ALLEN DEVAULT 003217 9/28/01 $122.68
57200 SERVICES.FINANCE DP NORTHWEST 003264 9/28/01 $529.00
57201 SERVICES. PARKS ENGELMAN ELECTRIC 004190 9/28/01 $1,825.01
57202 REI MBURSE.POLlCE LI NDA EUBANK 004280 9/28/01 $32.02
57203 SUPPLlES.VARIOUS FARM PLAN 005062 9/28/01 $51.24
57204 SERVICES. POLICE FOTO MAGIC 005258 9/28/01 $99.02
57205 SUPPLlES.PARKS FRANKLIN COVEY 005332 9/28/01 $72.76
57206 SUPPLIES. POLICE GALLS INC 006011 9/28/01 $807.51
57207 REIMBURSE-PARKS JENNIFER GOODRICK 006225 9/28/01 $94.89
57208 SERVICES-POLICE MARK GORELlK 006232 9/28/01 $225.00
57209 SUPPLlES.VARIOUS GW HARDWARE 006405 9/28/01 $1,875.25
57210 REIMBURSE.POLlCE L CRAIG HALUPOWSKI 007048 9/28/01 $106.37
57211 SERVICES-PARKS CJ HANSEN CO 007055 9/28/01 $654.40
57212 SUPPLlES.WWTP HARBOR FREIGHT 007080 9/28/01 $60.80
57213 SERVICES-PARKS HILLYERS MID CITY 007228 9/28/01 $85.00
57214 SERVICES- VARIOUS HIRE CALLING 007240 9/28/01 $1,879.80
57215 SUPPLlES.C GARAGE INDUSTRIAL SOURCE 008088 9/28/01 $39.98
57216 SUPPLI ES.STREET IND WELDING 008100 9/28/01 $44.27
57217 SERVICES. PARKS 10S CAPITAL 008118 9/28/01 $265.00
57218 SERVICES.WATER IKON OFFICE 008119 9/28/01 $10.04
57219 RENT. POLICE KEY INVESTMENTS 010080 9/28/01 $3,682.59
57220 SERVICES-PUB WKS WI LLlAM KOSTEN BORDER 010297 9/28/01 $2,562.00
57221 SUPPLIES. VARIOUS - L&L BUILDING 011010 9/28/01 $505.75
57222 SUPPLI ES.PARKS LINCOLN EQUIPMENT 011250 9/28/01 $228.86
57223 SUPPLlES.PARKS LITTLE CHEMICAL 011285 9/28/01 $10,179.90
57224 SERVICES-RECORDER LOCAL GOVT PERSONNEL 011300 9/28/01 $195.00
57225 SERVICES.COURT MSI GROUP 012015 9/28/01 $125.00
57226 SUPPLlES.WWTP MASCOTT EQUIPMENT 012248 9/28/01 $753.47
57227 SERVICES.WWTP MEDFORD TRUCKING 012411 9/28/01 $2,165.00
57228 SUPPLIES-VARIOUS METROFUELlNG 012448 9/28/01 $2,683.13
57229 SUPPLlES.VARIOUS MR P'S AUTO PTS 012510 9/28/01 $87.25
57230 REIMBURSE,PLANNING JIM MULDER 012670 9/28/01 $31.53
57231 SUPPLI ES-STREET NES TRENCH 013157 9/28/01 $1,112.50
57232 SERVICES. VARIOUS NEXTEL COMM 013188 9/28/01 $1,578.68
57233 SERVICES.WWTP N CREEK ANALYTICAL 013216 9/28/01 $330.00
57234 SERVICES.PARKS NW ELEVATOR 013275 9/28/01 $900.00
57235 SERVICES-ENG NW GEOTECH 013287 9/28/01 $125.00
57236 SERVICES. VARIOUS ONE CALL CONCEPTS 014054 9/28/01 $91.80
57237 SERVICES-STREET OR DEPT OF TRANS 014260 9/28/01 $18.19
57238 SUPPLIES. POLICE OR FIRE EQUIPMENT 014304 9/28/01 $74.48
57239 SUPPLI ES.STREET PACIFIC SAFETY SUPPLY 015040 9/28/01 $280.00
57240 SUPPLIES-STREET PAULS SMALL MTR 015175 9/28/01 $135.28
Page 7
57241
57242
57243
57244
57245
57246
57247
57248
57249
57250
57251
57252
57253
57254
57255
57256
57257
57258
57259
57260
57261
57262
57263
57264
57265
57266
57267
57268
57269
57270
57271
57272
57273
57274
57275
57276
57277
57278
57279
57280
A/P CHECK LISTING FOR THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER 2001
SUPPlIES.WWTP PLATT ELECTRlC
SUPPlIES.WWTP PRAXAIR DIST
SUPPLlES.PARKS PROMOTIONS WEST
SERVICES-WATER PROTECTION ONE
SERVICES. PARKS PURKISS ROSE RSI
SERVICES.FINANCE QWEST
SUPPlIES.WWTP ROGERS MACHINERY
SUPPLlES.POLlCE ROSE CITY STAMP
SUPPLIES. PARKS ROTHS IGA
SUPPlI ES. STREET SAFFRON SUPPLY
SUPPLlES.POLlCE LES SCHWAB TIRE
SUPPLlES.SELF INS SHESHUNOFF INFO
RElMBURSE.ATTY N ROBERT SHlELDS
SUPPLlES.WWTP SIERRA SPRINGS
SERVICES. PARKS SONITROL
SUPPlIES.STREET TAYLOR MOTORCYCLE
SERVICES.ENG TEK SYSTEMS
REIMBURSE. RECORDEr MARY TENNANT
SUPPLIES. SELF lNS TOPHEAL TH
SUPPLlES.SELF INS TOP SAFETY
SUPPLlES.STREET TRAFFIC SAFETY
SERVlCES.PUB WKS UNlON PAClFIC
SERVICES-VARIOUS VERIZON WIRELESS
SUPPlIES.POLlCE WALKERS CYCLE
SUPPlIES.WWTP WEARGUARD
SUPPLlES.PARKS WBN FERTILIZER
SERVICES.PUB WKS WBN INDEPENDENT
SERVICES. PARKS WBN MASONRY
SUPPLlES.VARIOUS WBN RENT-ALL
SERVICES.POLlCE WBN 24 HOUR TOWING
SUPPlIES.WWTP - YES GRAPHlCS
REIMBURSE. OAR DOROTHA BORLAND
REIMBURSE.DAR SALLY BUSE
REIMBURSE.DAR CORNELIUS DONNELLY
REIMBURSE. OAR LEONARD GIAUQUE
REIMBURSE-OAR FRED HAYES
RElMBURSE.DAR BEULAH JORDAN
REIMBURSE-OAR J WARD O'BRIEN
REIMBURSE.OAR GERTRUDE REES
REIMBURSE.DAR STEVE STURN
Page 8
015340
015480
015563
015566
015670
016202
017297
017314
017340
018020
018300
018435
018450
018460
018605
019033
019046
019055
019182
019186
019220
020015
021124
022023
022115
022590
022630
022670
022708
022755
024025
045100
045110
045230
045290
045315
045320
045497
045545
045585
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
9/28/01
$189.41
$14.46
$3,892.50
$63.00
$4,008.12
$281.17
$733.40
$28.15
$267.25
$80.34
$854.52
$396.95
$227.76
$269.00
$50.00
$2,735.00
$736.00
$240.14
$479.74
$107.88
$1,215.00
$3,090.00
$954.52
$57.20
$251.09
$515.91
$131.40
$7,600.00
$367.50
$80.00
$223.00
$132.68
$39.84
$103.85
$170.19
$179.80
$84.63
$91.45
$60.45
$121.83
$655,766.20 /'
CITY OF WOODBURN
Community Development
MEMORANDUM
270 Montgomery Street
Woodburn, Oregon 97071
(503) 982-5246
Date:
October 22, 2001
Honorable Mayor and City Council thru City Administrator50
Jim Mulder, Director of Community Development r
Appeal of Planning Commission denial of Suljdivision 01-01 and
Variance 01-06 "Kalugin Subdivision"
To:
From:
Subject:
RECOMMENDATION: In regard to this proposal, the City Council has the following
options:
1) Concur with the Planning Commission's final order and deny Subdivision
01-01 and Variance 01-06.
2) Modify the Planning Commission's final order.
3) Approve Subdivision 01-01 and Variance 01-06.
It is recommended that the City Council instruct staff to prepare an ordinance to
substantiate the Council's decision.
BACKGROUND:
At their hearing on August 23, 2001, the Planning Commission considered a request by
Wilhelm Engineering and Quality Plus Interiors to approve a five-lot subdivision on a
1.91 acre site and three variance requests to allow the following: 1) five lots to access a
private drive when four is the maximum permitted, 2) the private drive serving the
subdivision to extend beyond the 150-foot depth maximum to 250 feet, and 3) four of
the lots to be created without public right-of-way frontage and accessed by private drive.
The subject site is located on the south side of Hardcastle Avenue between Dunn Court
and Orchard Lane, addressed at 1810 and 1820 Hardcastle Avenue.
On September 13, 2001, the Planning Commission approved a final order denying
Subdivision 01-01 and Variance 01-06. The Planning Commission's decision was
subsequently appealed by Kevin Mayne, attorney representing Lazar Kalugin of Quality
Plus Interiors. This public hearing is to consider that appeal and has been noticed as a
de novo hearing which allows new evidence and testimony to be presented by any
party. The appellant's grounds for appeal and the response thereto are attached to this
report along with the Planning Commission's final order, staff report and minutes.
I
loA I
, I
The staff report reviewed by the Commission on August 23,2001 recommended
approval for Subdivision 01-01 and Variance 01-06 for the following reasons: 1) the
length and relatively narrow layout of the site creates difficulties with regard to access
and lot configurations, 2) the subdivision would serve as infill development, 3) it is not
feasible at this time to further develop the site with intended residential uses without the
variances since additional public right-of-way access is not available, 4) the site has
limited right-of-way frontage compared to the site's overall size, prohibiting extension of
public right-of-way onto the site from its existing frontage along Hardcastle.
The Planning Commission denied Subdivision 01-01 and Variance 01-06 for the
following reasons: 1) the site should be served by a public street, 2) this proposal does
not allow the site to be developed to its intended residential density, 3) extension of
public right-of-way to the south of the site, which would be from Centennial Drive to the
east, may take place in the future allowing the site to be developed closer to its
potential, 4) without the public right-of-way extension to the south, further development
of the site in the future would require additional variances, 5) since the proposed private
drive would be on private property, the city would have limited enforcement ability in
maintaining unobstructed emergency access to the lots without public right-of-way
frontage, 6) the city would have a limited ability to enforce no parking on the private
drive.
The appellant requests the City Council to reconsider the Planning Commission's
decision and the original staff report for the following reasons: 1) there is no time line as
to when, if ever, Centennial Drive will be extended to the site since it would require
additional dedication of private property owned by a third party, 2) it is not feasible to
provide a public street extension from Hardcastle Drive since the required right-of-way
width would not fit between two existing single-family homes along Hardcastle, 3) there
are clear hardships and practical difficulties that do not allow a public street on the
property, leaving a private drive as the only available alternative for development of the
site, 4) blocking of the private drive would not occur since future residents would be
required to provide off-street parking spaces separate from the private drive, and since
conditions of approval would prevent obstruction of the drive, 5) the current
development application for single-family homes is in harmony with the zoning of the
property and the Comprehensive Plan, 6) denial was based on the "possibility" of
extension of a public street through the site in the future.
Attachments:
Exhibit A: Planning Commission Final Order, dated 9/13/01
Exhibit B: Planning Commission 8/23/01 Minutes
Exhibit C: Planning Commission 8/23/01 Staff Report
Exhibit D: Notice of Intent to Appeal, dated September 24, 2001
Exhibit E: Appellant's Appeal Statement, dated October 2,2001
10~ I
EXHIBIT "A"
Planning Commission Final Order
9/13/01
. K /
WO'ODBURN
lOA
ORE G 0 N
Incorporated 1889
IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF WOODBURN, OREGON
SUBDIVISION 01-01
VARIANCE 01-06
)
)
)
)
FINAL ORDER
)
)
)
)
WHEREAS, a request was made to the Planning Commission to hear a proposal
for a subdivision and variance approval for a five-lot residential subdivision, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the matter at their regularly
scheduled meeting on August 23, 2001, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the written and oral testimony
presented by staff, the applicant, and other interested persons to the proposal, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission closed the hearing, and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission moved to deny SUB 01-01 and VAR 01-
06 and instructed staff to prepare findings and conclusions.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED BY THE COMMISSION:
1. The Planning Commission hereby denies Subdivision 01-01 and Variance 01-06.
Said decision is based on substantial evidence presented at the hearing and the
findings and conclusions contained in Exhibit "A", which is attached hereto and
by reference incorporated herein.
Approved:
t:) '(It 310 /
, . ,
Date
FINAL ORDER - SUB 01-01 VAR 01-06
Page
Community Devdopment Department
270 Montgomery Strut · Woodburn, Oregon 97071
Ph.503-982-5246 . Fax 503-982-5244
lOA
EXHIBIT "An
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
I. APPLICATION INFORMATION
Applicant: George Wilhelm
Wilhelm Engineering, Inc.
P.O. Box 561
1771 Mt. Jefferson Ave
Woodburn, OR 97071
Property Owner: Lazar Kalugin
Quality Plus Interiors, Inc.
11220 Portland Road NE
Salem, OR 97305
II. NATURE OF THE APPLICATION:
The applicant proposes to subdivide two residential properties into five lots for future
residential use. The proposed subdivision includes three variance requests: 1) to
allow five lots to access a private drive when four is the maximum permitted, 2) to
allow the private drive serving the subdivision to extend beyond the 150-foot depth
maximum to 250 feet, and 3) to allow four of the lots to be created without public
right-of-way frontage, rather they would be accessed by a private drive.
III. RELEVANT FACTS:
The subject properties are located on the south side of E. Hardcastle Ave between
Hwy 99E and the easterly city limit. The properties are addressed at 1810 and
1820 E. Hardcastle Ave, further identified on Marion County Assessor Maps as
Township 5 South, Range 1 West, Section 8DC, Tax Lots 6000 (1820 E.
Hardcastle) and 6101 (1810 E. Hardcastle).
The combined size of both subject properties is 1.91 acres (83,200 square feet). TL
6000 is 1.05 acres and TL 6101 is 0.86 acres. The proposed lots range in size from
6,020 square feet to 29,500 square feet and will have widths of no less than 70 feet
and lengths of no less than 86 feet. Four of the five lots are proposed to be
accessed by a 24-foot wide private drive within a 39-foot wide private right-of-way.
Most of this private right-of-way is proposed to be within a separate tract of land, but
portions would need to extend onto an existing and proposed single-family lots
through easements.
The site is virtually flat with no more than one (1) foot of change in elevation. The
FINAL ORDER - SUB 01-01 VAR 01-06
Page 2
10
property consists of trees and vegetation, some of which are to be removed as part
of this project. TL 6101 is currently vacant, and TL 6000 has a shed which is to be
removed and a new single-family home which is to remain. This existing home is
proposed to be located within Lot 1.
The subject site is zoned Single-Family Residential (RS) and has a Comprehensive
Plan Map designation of Low Density Residential. Adjacently located to the west
is a two-family home (duplex) neighborhood zoned Multi-Family Residential (RM)
District. The city limit is along the south of the property, and the adjacent property
to the south consists of an orchard which is under Marion County zoning of Single-
Family (RS) Residential. This is the only adjacent property that is not within the
Woodburn city limit. The adjacent property to the east is zoned RS and has a
single-family home. To the north on the opposite side of Hardcastle is also a two-
family home (duplex) neighborhood zoned RM.
IV. RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA:
SUB 01-01
A. WOODBURN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
B. WOODBURN ZONING ORDINANCE
Chapter 8 General Standards
Chapter 9 Residential Standards
Chapter 10 Off-Street Parking, Loading and Driveway Requirements
Chapter 22 RS - Single Family Residential District
Chapter 39 Mandatory Parkland Dedication or Cash-In-Lieu-of
C. WOODBURN SUBDIVISION STANDARDS
D. WOODBURN SIGN ORDINANCE
E. WOODBURN TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS PLAN
F. WOODBURN ACCESS MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE
VAR 01-06
A. WOODBURN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
B. WOODBURN ZONING ORDINANCE
Chapter 8 General Standards
Chapter 10 Off-Street Parking, Loading and Driveway Requirements
Chapter 13 Variance Procedures
FINAL ORDER - SUB 01-01 VAR 01-06
Page 3
10
C. WOODBURN SUBDIVISION STANDARDS
D. WOODBURN ACCESS MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE
V. FINDINGS
SUB 01-01
A. Woodburn Comprehensive Plan
FINDING: Applicable goals and policies have been satisfied through the
implementation of the Woodburn Zoning Ordinance and other applicable ordinances
in affect at the time of approval. The proposed use is residential in nature. A
residential use is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan Map designation of Low
Density Residential on the subject properties.
B. Woodburn Zonina Ordinance
1. Chapter 8. General Standards.
Section 8.030. Dwellings and All Other Buildings to be Accessible to
Public Streets. Every dwelling shall be situated on a lot having direct
access by abutting upon a public street or a pre-existing private driveway of
a width of not less than 20 feet and a private drive shall not serve more than
four dwelling units except when approved under Planned Development....
FINDING: Four of the five proposed lots are to be created without public right-of-
way frontage. A variance is being requested as part of this proposal from the
standard requiring all lots to abut public right-of-way (referred to as "Variance No.
3" in this report).
In addition, five lots are proposed to access the private drive that would serve this
subdivision. Said access is to be located in a separate tract of land and a portion
of an existing access easement along the east side a single-family lot, which is
located adjacent to the northwest of the subject site. This lot was partitioned from
TL 6101 as Parcel 1 of Partition Plat 1995-42, herein referred to as "Parcel 1 " (see
Exhibit "C"). The existing access easement was established as part of this partition
to provide access to TL 6101. As part of this subdivision request, this existing
easement is proposed to be incorporated into the proposed private drive, continuing
to provide access to Parcel 1 in addition to the proposed four interior lots. The five
lots accessing the private drive exceed the maximum allowance of four lots. As a
result, an additional variance is being requested as part of this subdivision to allow
five lots to access the private drive (referred to as "Variance NO.1" in this report).
FINAL ORDER - SUB 01-01 VAR 01-06 Page 4
10
Section 8.040. Special Setback Distances
(12) East Hardcastle Avenue, U.S. Hwy 99E to East City Limits... ... ...40 feet
FINDING: The subject site abuts a section of E. Hardcastle Ave with a 60-foot wide
right-of-way. This puts the center line of Hardcastle 30 feet from the front property
line of the site. With a required 40-foot special setback distance from the roadway
center line, 10 feet of special setback is required from the site's front property line.
By adding this to the minimum 20-foot front yard setback required in the RS District,
the minimum setback distance required from the front property line is 30 feet. There
is a single-family home on the front portion of the site which is approximately 40 feet
from the front property line. The minimum special setback distance is being met in
this proposal.
Section 8.190. Vision Clearance. A triangular area at the street or highway
corner of a corner lot, or the corner at any alley street intersection of a lot, the
space being defined by a diagonal line across the corner between the points of
the streets rights-of-way lines or street-alley rights-of-way lines measured from
the corner. The vision clearance area for corner lots at street intersections shall
have a minimum of 30 foot legs along each street and for alley-street
intersections in said districts the vision clearance area shall have legs of a
minimum of ten feet along both alleys and streets. The vision clearance area
shall not contain any plantings, walls, structures, or temporary or permanent
obstructions to vision exceeding 30 inches in height above the curb level, or
street shoulder where there is no curb, except a supporting pillar or post not
greater than 12 inches in diameter or 12 inches on the diagonal of a rectangular
pillar or post; and further, excepting those posts or supporting members of street
signs, street lights, and traffic control signs installed as directed by the Building
Inspector, or any other sign erected for public safety.
Vision clearance shall not be required at a height of seven feet or more above
the curb level, or seven feet, six inches above the shoulder of a street that does
not have a curb.
FINDING: Vision clearance triangles have been applied to the point where the
proposed private drive connects with E. Hardcastle Avenue. There are none of the
above-described obstructions within these triangle areas, nor are any proposed as
part of this project.
2. Chapter 9. Residential Standards.
FINDING: At such time that building permit applications are made on each lot,
residential setback requirements would be reviewed for compliance. There is
FINAL ORDER - SUB 01-01 VAR 01-06
Page 5
currently one single-family home and an accessory structure on the subject site.
The accessory structure is to be removed, and the single-family home is to be
located on proposed Lot 1 of this subdivision. As discussed in the portion of this
report addressing WZO Chapter 22 "Single Family Residential (RS) District", the
proposed layout of Lot 1 in relation to the location of the existing home complies
with residential setback and maximum lot coverage standards.
10
3. Chapter 10. Off Street Parking, Loading and Driveway Standards.
Section 10.050. Off-Street Automobile Parking Requirements.
(a) Single-family dwellings:
(1) One and one-half spaces per dwelling.
FINDING: The applicant has indicated that the proposed lots will be constructed
with single-family homes. The existing home on proposed Lot 1 has been provided
with the necessary off-street parking spaces. At the time of building permit
submittal for said residential dwellings, each lot would need to provide the required
one and one-half off-street parking spaces.
Section 10.080. Driveway Standards.
I) Standards for driveways serving more than one dwelling unit:
(3) Minimum width of the driveway pavement shall be 24 feet.
(4) A turnaround shall be provided on all private, dead-end streets;
minimum of 40 foot radius for cul-de-sac turnarounds, minimum of
two forty foot long legs by 20 feet for a "T", "Y" or "branch" turnaround.
FINDING: The private drive providing access to the proposed four interior lots is to
be 24 feet in width. The dead-end of the drive is proposed as a "T" turnaround with
30-foot long legs 25 feet in width. The legs are 10 feet short ofthe minimum length.
(5) Maximum depth of a private street shall be 150 feet, measured from
the right-at-way line to the point where the street no longer serves
more than one unit.
(6) Private streets are designated as fire lanes so no blockage could be
allowed. "No Parking" signs shall be erected and maintained by the
property owner.
(7) Driveways serving private single family detached homes shall:
(a) Serve no more than four units;
FINAL ORDER - SUB 01-01 VAR 01-06
Page 6
10
(b) Not be allowed unless no practical development of a public street
is possible and the land cannot be otherwise utilized for urban-
type units.
FINDING: With regard to the maximum depth for private drives of 150 feet and the
requirement that private driveways serve no more than four single-family homes, the
applicant is requesting variances from these standards, which are further addressed
in this report under WZO Chapter 13 "Variance Procedures".
In reference to subsection 8(b), a public street extension onto the subject property
would require a right-of-way width of at least 50 feet and a cul-de-sac radius of no
less than 55 feet. As a result, a public street would not be practical to serve
allowable development on this site due to the long and narrow shape of the subject
properties and the site's limited frontage width along existing right-of-way.
4. Chapter 22. Single Family Residential District.
Section 22.010. Use. Within the RS Single Family Residential District no
building, structure, or premises shall be used, arranged or designed to be
used except for one or more of the following uses:
(a) Single Family Dwelling
FINDING: The applicant has indicated that the proposed lots will be constructed
with single-family homes. The subject site is zoned Single-Family Residential (RS)
District, and single-family homes are permitted outright.
Section 22.040. Height. In an RS District, no building or structure shall
exceed 35 feet or two and one-half stories in height...
FINDING: The existing home which would be encompassed by Lot 1 is 17 feet in
height at its tallest point. At this time, there are no other residential structures on
the site. Future structures would be reviewed for compliance with height limits at
the time of building permit submittal.
Section 22.050. Rear Yard. There shall be a rear yard on every lot in an
RS District which shall have a minimum depth of 24 feet for a one-story
building, 30 feet for a two-story building and 36 feet for a two and one-half
story building. In the case of a corner lot, the minimum depth shall be 14
feet for a one-story building, 20 feet for a two-story building and 26 feet for
a two and one-half story building.
FINDING: None of the proposed lots would be corner lots. The existing home on
the site is one story. Proposed Lot 1, which would encompass the existing home,
FINAL ORDER - SUB 01-01 VAR 01-06
Page 7
10
provides for a rear yard setback of 25 feet. This setback distance meets the
minimum required for this lot. Any future homes on the site would be reviewed for
setback compliance at the time of building permit submittal. All proposed lots
consist of sizes and configurations that allow for required setbacks to be met while
providing for reasonable building areas.
Section 22.060. Side Yards. There shall be a side yard on each side of the
main building on every lot in an RS District in width not less than five feet for
a one-story building, nor less than six feet for a two or two and one-half story
building... .
FINDING: The existing home would have side yard setbacks of approximately 10
and 12 feet to the proposed property lines of Lot 1, meeting the minimum
requirement. All future structures within the subdivision would be reviewed for
setback compliance at the time of building permit submittal.
Section 22.070. Front Yard. Every building erected, constructed, or altered
in an RS District shall conform to the front yard setback set forth in Section
9.040.
FINDING: Chapter 9 requires a front yard setback distance no less than 20 feet,
and as mentioned, there is a required special setback distance from the front
property line of an additional 1 0 feet. The special setback only affects the existing
home on proposed Lot 1, which in addition to the minimum front yard setback of 20
feet, requires a total front yard setback of 30 feet. The existing home is
approximately 40 feet from the front property line, meeting the minimum setback.
The remaining lots would be reviewed for setback compliance at the time of building
permit submittal for future structures.
Section 22.080. Lot Area and Width. In an RS District the minimum
requirements for lot area shall be 6,000 square feet for each dwelling and
every lot shall have a minimum width of sixty feet at the front building line.
No dwelling or main building other than a dwelling shall occupy more than
30 percent of the lot area, except where an accessory building is attached
to or made a part of the dwelling, or main building, in which case 35 percent
of the lot area may be occupied by such dwelling or main building....
FINDING: The existing home on proposed Lot 1 has an attached garage, allowing
the home and garage to cover up to 35 percent of the lot. The existing home
occupies approximately 25 percent of the proposed Lot 1, complying with the
maximum coverage allowed. Future residential structures on the other proposed
lots in this subdivision would be reviewed for compliance with maximum coverage
standards at the time of building permit submittal.
FINAL ORDER - SUB 01-01 VAR 01-06
Page 8
10
5. Chapter 39. Parkland Dedication and Cash-in-lieu
FINDING: The System Development Charge for park purposes is $1,267.00 per lot,
resulting in a total charge of $5,068.00 for the four lots without residential structures.
There would be no charge for Lot 1 since this fee was paid when the existing house
was constructed.
C. Woodburn Subdivision Standards
Chapter III. Section 6.
(3) No final plat of a proposed subdivision or partition or replat shall be
approved unless:
(b) Streets and roads held for private use and indicated on the
tentative plan for such subdivision, partition or replat have been
approved by the City.
FINDING: The only access extension proposed as part of this subdivision is a
private access drive extending in a north-south direction from E. Hardcastle
Avenue. The access has been marked on the tentative plan through a separate
tract of land and an existing access easement along the east side of the adjacent
Parcel 1.
(6) The subdividing of land shall be such that each lot shall abut on a
public street.
FINDING: There are no public street extensions proposed as part of this
application. Four of the five proposed lots do not abut a public street, and a
variance request is being made from the above-mentioned standard as part of this
application.
Chapter III. Section 7.
A. Tentative plans for subdivisions shall include the following information:
a. Name of proposed subdivision
b. Vicinity map
c. Subdivision plan
d. Names and addresses in notification area
e. Diagram of water system
f. Diagram of sewage & storm drain system
g. Diagram of streets and sidewalk system
h. Legal description of subject property
I. Name of proposed streets
FINAL ORDER - SUB 01-01 VAR 01-06
Page 9
10
j. Lot numbers
k. Identification of easements, parkland dedication, and
private utilities.
FINDING: Sufficient information has been submitted by the applicant. Attached
with this report is a preliminary plat that indicates the proposed lots and the
applicable above-listed information.
Section 13 (B). Lots:
All lots shall have a minimum size of the zoning district in which they are
located. In cul-de-sacs the minimum lot line fronting the turnaround shall be
40 feet, and in the case of a curved lot line where the radius of curvature is
100 feet or less, the minimum lot line fronting that curvature shall be 40 feet,
and in no cases shall the lot width be less than 60 feet at the buildinQ line.
If topography, drainage, or other conditions justify, the Commission may
require a greater area on any or all lots within a subdivision. The minimum
size for various types of lots shall be as given in the following table:
Type of Lot
Minimum Width
Interior lot (fronting one street)
60 feet
FINDING: All lots, although not all fronting public right-of-way, are treated as interior
lots in this subdivision. Each lot has been configured on the preliminary plat to
provide at least 60 feet of width at building lines. The above standard for lot
configuration has been satisfied.
D. Woodburn Sian Ordinance
FINDING: Other than premises identification required by the Woodburn Fire
District, there are no signs proposed as part of this application at this time. Any
future signs would require approval andlor permit from the Community Development
Department.
E. Woodburn Transportation Systems Plan
FINDING: The subdivision furthers the intent of the transportation plan by limiting
the number of public right-of-way accesses serving the subdivision. In addition, the
single-family home on Parcel 1 to the northwest of this subdivision would have
access from the proposed private drive instead of direct access onto E. Hardcastle,
providing for better traffic flow.
FINAL ORDER - SUB 01-01 VAR 01-06
Page 10
10
F. Woodburn Access Manaaement Ordinance
FINDING: E. Hardcastle Avenue is classified as a minor arterial in this Ordinance.
Minor arterials are required to have no less than 245 feet between driveways. This
spacing distance is not met due to the existing driveway on Lot 1 and the proposed
private drive serving the remainder of the subdivision. This Ordinance allows the
Community Development Director to waive the spacing requirement if it is not
feasible to meet the requirement. The existing driveway is approximately 13 feet
from the proposed private drive. Since the driveway on proposed Lot 1 is existing,
and since the proposed location of the private drive cannot be located elsewhere
and must serve as a shared access, the Community Development Director has
waived the 245-foot driveway spacing distance along E. Hardcastle to allow the 13-
foot distance proposed.
VAR 01-06
A. Woodburn Comprehensive Plan
FINDING: Applicable goals and policies have been satisfied through the
implementation of the Woodburn Zoning Ordinance and other applicable ordinances
in affect at the time of approval. The proposed use is residential in nature. A
residential use is compatible with the designated Comprehensive Plan Map of Low
Density Residential on the subject properties.
B. Woodburn Zonina Ordinance
1. Chapter 8. General Standards.
Section 8.030. Dwellings and All Other Buildings to be Accessible to
Public Streets. Every dwelling shall be situated on a lot having direct
access by abutting upon a public street or a pre-existing private driveway of
a width of not less than 20 feet and a private drive shall not serve more than
four dwelling units except when approved under Planned Development....
FINDING: Four of the five lots are to be created without public right-of-way
frontage. A variance is being requested as part of this proposal from the standard
requiring all lots to abut public right-of-way (referred to as "Variance NO.3" in this
report).
In addition, five lots are proposed to access the private drive that would serve this
subdivision. Said access is to be encompassed by a separate tract of land and a
portion of an existing access easement along the east side of a single-family lot,
which is located adjacently to the northeast of the subject site. This lot was
partitioned from TL 6101 as Parcel 1 of Partition Plat 1995-42, herein referred to as
FINAL ORDER - SUB 01-01 VAR 01-06
Page 11
10
"Parcel 1 " (see Exhibit "C"). The existing access easement was established as part
ofthis partition to provide access to TL 6101. As part of this subdivision request,
this existing easement is proposed to be incorporated into the proposed private
drive, continuing to provide access to Parcel 1 in addition to the proposed four
interior lots. The five lots accessing the private drive exceed the maximum
allowance of four lots. As a result, an additional variance is being requested as part
of this subdivision to allow five lots to access the private drive (referred to as
"Variance No.1" in this report).
2. Chapter 10. Off Street Parking, Loading and Driveway Standards.
Section 10.080. Driveway Standards.
I) Standards for driveways serving more than one dwelling unit:
(5) Maximum depth of a private street shall be 150 feet, measured from
the right-of-way line to the point where the street no longer serves
more than one unit.
(6) Driveways serving private single family detached homes shall:
(c) Serve no more than four units;
(d) Not be allowed unless no practical development of a public street
is possible and the land cannot be otherwise utilized for urban-
type units.
FINDINGS: The applicant is requesting three variances for this proposal, two of
which are from the standards listed in the above subsections. The private street is
proposed to exceed the maximum 150-foot depth with a proposed depth of 250
feet. In addition, the preliminary subdivision plan shows that five lots would access
the private drive through the request of a variance. These variance requests are
further addressed in this report under Chapter 13 "Variance Procedures".
3. Chapter 13. Variance Procedures.
FINDING: Each of the proposed variances are addressed under the following
criteria and are referenced as follows:
Variance No.1: Request to allow five single-family lots to access off a single
private street where only four are permitted;
Variance No.2: Request to allow the private street to extend 250 feet in depth
from the E. Hardcastle Avenue right-of-way when only a
maximum of 150 feet is permitted;
Variance No.3 Request to allow single-family residential lots to be created
without right-of-way frontage and to abut private street frontage
when required to abut public right-of-way.
FINAL ORDER - SUB 01-01 VAR 01-06 Page 12
10
Section 13.020. Conditions for Granting a Variance.
(a) That there are unnecessary, unreasonable hardships or practical
difficulties which can be relieved only by modifying the literal
requirements of the ordinance;
FINDING: Variance No.1: The Planning Commission finds that even though this
variance would allow for infill residential development on this site, such development
would be limited to the north portion of the property. The south portion of the
property would be left as two large parcels which could not be developed to their
allowed densities. A public street connection through the subject site would allow
the property to be divided into more than five lots. The Commission finds that this
variance request does not comply with this criterion.
Variance No.2: There is the possibility of Centennial Drive extending to the south
portion of the site in the future which would allow public street access onto the site.
If Centennial Drive is extended, the proposed private drive would no longer be the
only means available to the applicant for access to new lots. The Planning
Commission finds that the applicant has not complied with this variance criterion.
Variance No.3: Although the applicant is unable to create more than four lots with
public right-of-way frontage at this time, future extension of Centennial Drive would
relieve the applicant of this difficulty since a second means of public right-of-way
frontage would be available to the south portion of the site. The Planning
Commission finds that the applicant has not complied with this variance criterion.
(b) That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
applying.to the land, buildings or use referred to in the application, which
circumstances or conditions do not apply generally to land, buildings, or
uses in the same district; however, non-conforming land uses or
structures in the vicinity shall not in themselves constitute such
circumstances or conditions;
FINDING: Variance No.1: The Planning Commission finds that there are no
extraordinary circumstances applying to this site that would warrant approval for four
of the proposed lots to be created without right-of-way frontage. As a result, the
finding is that this variance does not comply with the above criterion.
Variance No.2: Without public right-of-way, the property cannot be efficiently
developed as an in-fill site without obtaining additional variances in the future, and
as mentioned, there is the likelihood that a public street will be extended to the site
in the future to allow for more efficient development. The Planning Commission
finds that this variance criterion has not been met.
FINAL ORDER - SUB 01-01 VAR 01-06
Page 13
10
Variance No.3: The Commission finds that the variances requested in this
proposal should not be granted since there is the possibility for the extension of
Centennial Drive (a public street) in the future.
(c) That granting the application will not be materially detrimental to the
public welfare or be injurious to property or improvements in the
neighborhood or the premises;
FINDING: Variance No.1: The Planning Commission finds that granting this
variance could be detrimental to the public welfare since there would be limited
enforcement ability of the city to keep the private drive unobstructed for emergency
access. As a result, the Commission finds that this variance criterion has not been
met.
Variance No.2: The Planning Commission finds that allowing the private drive to
extend beyond the depth maximum would be injurious to the public welfare since
the city has limited authority to enforce "no" parking on private drives. As a result,
access could be blocked by parked cars which the city would have limited ability to
remove, and the city would therefore be limited in ensuring that emergency access
is maintained. The Commission finds that this variance criterion has not been met.
Variance No.3: Enforcement of no parking on the private drive would be done
through a homeowner's association for the subdivision. In the event that the
association does not enforce it, the city's ability to take over enforcement would be
limited since it is a private drive. The Planning Commission finds that allowing four
of the lots to be accessed solely by a private drive would be injurious to the public
welfare since the city would have limited assurance that the emergency access to
these four lots would be maintained. As a result, the finding is that this criterion has
not been met by this variance request.
(d) That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of
the substantial property rights of the petitioner;
FINDING: These variances are not necessary for the preservation of the
substantial property rights of the petitioner in that the property can be fully
developed by the extension of public right-of-way. The Planning Commission finds
that the three variance requests do not meet this criterion.
(e) That granting of the application will not, under the circumstances of the
particular case, adversely affect the health or safety of persons working
or residing in the neighborhood of the property of the applicant.
FINAL ORDER - SUB 01-01 VAR 01-06
Page 14
10
FINDING: Variance No.1: The Planning Commission finds that allowing more
than four lots to access a private drive would compromise public health and safety
since access needs for five lots would be converged onto a single access that could
be blocked by parked vehicles. The Commission finding is that this variance
request does not satisfy the above criterion.
Variance No.2: The Planning Commission finds that the protection of health and
safety of individuals residing in the immediate neighborhood could be adversely
impacted by allowing the private drive to exceed its maximum depth due to lack of
parking enforcement and access clearance on the private drive. The Commission
finds that the applicant has not met the above criterion for this variance request.
Variance No.3: The Planning Commission finds that enforcement of a "no parking"
provision could become a problem in the future since the city's enforcement ability
would be limited. The finding is that this variance request does not satisfy the
above criterion.
(f) That the granting of the application will be in general harmony with the
intent and purpose of this ordinance and will not adversely affect any
officially adopted comprehensive plan. .
FINDING: Variance No.1: The Planning Commission finds that this variance
request would not be in general harmony with intent and purpose of this ordinance
since the number of lots allowed to access a single private drive would be exceeded
in this proposal.
Variance No.2. The Planning Commission finds that this variance request does not
allow this in-fill site to be efficiently developed nearly to its potential without a public
street on the property and compromises public safety. Considering the possibility
of extending a public street to the south portion of the site in the future, the
Commission further finds that efficient development and public safety could be
better ensured on the site at such time with a public street connection. The
Commission finds that this variance request does not satisfy the above criterion.
Variance No.3: The intent and purpose of this Ordinance is to promote public
safety. The Planning Commission finds that this variance request would not be in
general harmony with the Ordinance since four of the lots are proposed without
right-of-way frontage. The Commission further finds that access to these lots could
be hindered because the city would have limited authority in keeping the private
drive unobstructed. The Commission finds that the applicant has not met the above
criterion for this variance request.
FINAL ORDER - SUB 01-01 VAR 01-06
Page 15
10
C. Woodburn Subdivision Standards
Chapter III Section 6
(6) The subdividing of land shall be such that each lot shall abut on a
public street.
FINDING: There are no public street extensions proposed as part of this application.
Four of the five proposed lots do not abut a public street. Thus, the Planning
Commission denies the subdivision proposal since the Commission finds that the
requested variances, which would allow these four lots to be created without public
street frontage, do not meet the variance criteria.
Chapter V. Section 20. Variances to the Reaulations:
A. The Commission may consider a variance of any requirements set forth
in these standards, upon application by the subdivider. The basic
considerations for granting a variance will be proof that:
(1) Special physical conditions or circumstances peculiar to the property
under consideration make a variance necessary.
(2) That the variance is necessary for the proper development of the
subdivision and the preservation of property rights and values.
(3) That the variance will not be present or hereafter be detrimental to
the public welfare or injurious to other properties or persons adjacent
to or in the vicinity of the proposed subdivision.
Consideration for a variance from these regulations shall be based upon
a written statement by the subdivider in which is given complete details
of consideration and reasons why a specific variance should be granted.
A request for a variance from these regulations shall be filed with the
Planning Commission prior to presentation of the final plat for approval.
No variance will be considered after a plat has been recorded;
FINDING: The above criteria for variance consideration have been addressed
previously in the report under Chapter 13 of the Zoning Ordinance. It is specifically
stated that the proposed subdivision would not be possible without the approval of
the three said variance requests. The applicant has provided a written statement
which addresses the variance criteria and describes the reasons for requesting the
variances. As stated in the section of this report addressing Chapter 13 of the
Woodburn Zoning Ordinance, the Planning Commission finds that the criteria for
granting variances have not been met on any of the three variances requested as
part of this proposal.
FINAL ORDER - SUB 01-01 VAR 01-06
Page 16
10
The Planning Commission finds that a pivate street through the property would not
allow for the proper development of the site. A future public street connection could
be made to the south via a connection with Centennial Drive, which would allow for
additional lots to be created. These lots would therefore have public right-of-way
access. The applicant's variance requests would not be necessary with the public
street connection.
D. Woodburn Access Manaaement Ordinance
FINDING: E. Hardcastle Avenue is classified as a minor arterial in this Ordinance.
Minor arterials are required to have no less than 245 feet between driveways. This
spacing distance is not met due to the existing driveway on Lot 1 and the proposed
private drive serving the remainder of the subdivision. This Ordinance allows the
Community Development Director to waive the spacing requirement if it is not
feasible to meet the spacing requirement. The existing driveway on proposed Lot
1 is approximately 13 feet from the proposed private drive. Since the driveway on
Lot 1 is existing, and since the proposed location of the private drive cannot be
located elsewhere and must serve as a shared access, the Community
Development Director has waived the 245-foot driveway spacing distance along E.
Hardcastle to allow the 13-foot distance proposed.
VI. CONCLUSION:
Based on the information in this final order and the applicable review criteria, the
Commission finds that this proposal does not satisfy all approval criteria relating to
the subdivision and variance applications.
FINAL ORDER - SUB 01-01 VAR 01-06
Page 17
10
EXHIBIT "B"
Planning Commission Minutes
8/23/01
10
WOODBURN PLANNING COMMISSION
August 23, 2001
CONVENED The Planning Commission met in a regular session at 7:00 p.m. with Chairperson Young
presiding.
ROLL CALL
Chairperson
Vice Chairperson
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Commissioner
Young
Cox
Fletcher
Miller
Lima
Mill
Bandelow
Lonergan
P
P
P
P
P
A
P
A
Staff Present:
Jim Mulder, Community Development Director
Naomi Zwerdling, Senior Planner
Scott Clark, Assistant Planner
Chairperson Young provided an opening statement for Public Hearing.
MINUTES
A. Minutes of Auaust 9, 2001 Plannina Commission Meetina
Commissioner Bandelow moved to accept the minutes as presented. Vice Chairperson Cox seconded the
motion, which unanimously carried.
BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE
Don Bear. 375 Columbia Drive. Woodburn. OR thanked the Planning Commission for upholding the
conditions of approval requiring the block wall in the Montebello Subdivision.
COMMUNICATIONS
A. City Council Meetina of Julv 23. 2001
PUBLIC HEARING
.., A. Subdivision 01-01 and Variance 01-06. reauest to subdivide a 1.91 acres site into 5 residential
lots located t 1810 and 1820 E. Hardcastle Avenue, Quality Plus Interiors. Georae Wilhelm.
applicant.
Staff read the applicable ORS Statement and provided a presentation as reflected in the Staff Report. Staff
recommended approval of the Variances, the Subdivision application and the recommended conditions of
approval.
Commissioner Bandelow inquired whether the property directly south of the proposed project is outside the
City limits but inside the Urban Growth Boundary?
Staff answered affirmatively.
Vice Chairperson Cox requested clarification regarding the distance from the edge of the easement to the
line that abuts the driveway of the existing house?
Staff replied the distance is under 44 feet including the easement and the portion of the track of land. He
reported the private driveway pavement is proposed to be 24 feet wide.
Planning Commission Meeting - August 23. 2001
Page 1 of 6
10
Chairperson Youna asked what the criteria is for low density residential as far as units per acre?
Staff answered it is roughly six units per acre as noted in the Comprehensive Plan. He stated all the tax lots
are Single Family Residential.
Commissioner Lima questioned who will maintain the lane?
Staff responded one of the conditions is that they enter into a maintenance agreement for the private drive
and that it be required to be maintained and kept clear of obstruction. The "No Parking" signs would be
erected along the private lane.
Commissioner Lima also inquired whether the City or the owners enforce the No Parking?
Staff explained one of the conditions requires that they create a Homeowner's Association to enforce that.
He commented the City could enforce it, if need be, because it is a condition of approval.
Ex Parte Contacts
Chairperson Youna, Vice Chairperson Cox and Commissioner Lima indicated they drove by the site.
Testimony by Applicant
Georae Wilhelm, Wilhelm Enaineerina, PO Box 561, Woodburn, OR stated he is representing the applicant,
Lazar Kalugin. He commented this is an infill project where the geometry is the primary reason for the
Variances. Mr. Wilhelm further remarked they believe this is the most practical way to utilize this residentially
zoned property. He indicated Staff has provided a good review of the criteria and agrees with Staff that this
application meets all of the requirements for approval of both the Subdivision and the Variance applications.
Vice Chairoerson Cox asked Mr. Wilhelm if Mr. Kalugin owns the existing new house on the property.
Georae Wilhelm replied Mr. Kalugin owns the property but there is an offer on the property and he intends to
sell it.
Commissioner Lima requested clarification regarding the possibility of the private lane continuing south and
connect to the east at a later date. He also questioned whether the applicant has no plans on building on the
two lots at this point?
Georae Wilhelm clarified the private road may continue to the south and then it would go to the east before
reaching the southerly boundary. It was indicated by Mr. Wilhelm that the Fire Department wants a restriction
to only build on the north end of those two lots. He stated his client would agree with that because that would
allow for further development of the southerly two lots later on.
Testimony by Proponents
None
Testimony by Opponents
Henry C. JaeQer. 1830 E. Hardcastle. Woodburn. OR remarked his property is east of the proposed project.
He expressed concerns about the amount of parked cars at the four homes located on the east side of his
property. Mr. Jaeger commented since those homes were built he has had two pickups, a car and a boat
broken into. Additionally, he has had radios and about $600 worth of tapes stolen out of his vehicles. He
indicated none of this started happening until those homes were built. Mr. Jaeger questioned who would limit
the amount of vehicles that can be parked on the property so that you do not have more than one family living
in the house? He also expressed concerns regarding the "No Parking" signs and inquired who would enforce
that? In closing, Mr. Jaeger asked where will the utilities and sewer lines be located?
Chairperson Youna asked Mr. Jaeger if his property is also long?
Planning Commission Meeting - August 23, 200]
Page 2 of 6
10
Henry JaeQer answered affirmatively.
Vice Chairperson Cox questioned if Mr. Jaeger's home is located on the Hardcastle end of his track? He also
inquired whether he has any long term plans about developing the back portion of his property or selling it for
development?
Henry Jaeqer responded his home is located on the Hardcastle end. He stated he has a storage building
behind the home. Mr. Jaeger commented if he was approached right he would probably entertain the idea
of selling the property.
Rob Van Cleave. 1810 Hardcastle. Woodburn. OR remarked these lots are directly behind his home and it
is his driveway that is being talked about for the access. He commented according to the easement standard,
the applicant has the right to use his driveway to access the property in the back. However, if they make it
into a road, it makes it theirs and he can not use it. He also indicated he was approached by the applicant
for a utility easement and he turned them down. Mr. Van Cleave questioned how are they going to run those
utilities? Additionally, he remarked the main door that he uses will be right along the edge of the driveway and
he will be stepping right out onto a road if the applicant puts in a road.
Vice Chairperson Cox asked Mr. Van Cleave if his driveway comes out in the area that is part of the
easement?
Rob Van Cleave answered the driveway is an easement. He stated the easement was created before he
owned the property because the previous property owner sold the easement.
Commissioner Bandelow inquired how the easement is worded as to whether or not it was granted to allow
them access to their property or was it granted to allow the access to the rear property?
Staff interjected they got the deeds on the two properties affected by this subdivision when the applications
were received and they included the easement language for that easement. He indicated they consulted with
legal staff to make sure what it allowed access to. According to their read of the easement, it allowed access
to the rear and to the south of the property for the proposed subdivision request.
Commissioner Bandelow questioned Staff if Mr. Van Cleave's property met the setbacks if that easement
becomes part of a paved road?
Staff replied affirmatively.
Applicant Rebuttal
GeorQe Wilhem remarked he has no response to most of Mr. Jaeger's comments. However, as far as the
utilities, they will be in the private driveway. He reported the easement was created by Partition Plat 95-42
and stated a copy of such was included in the Staff Report. Mr. Wilhelm said they did not enter onto Mr. Van
Cleave's property when they did the survey work. He stated he does not know exactly where his house is in
relation to the indicated property lines.
Chairperson YounQ requested clarification as to where the asphalt lies in relationship to Mr. Van Cleave's
property.
GeorQe Wilhem referred to the blueprint and clarified there is a 24 foot easement that goes to the west. There
is a new pin which is an open circle 20 feet westerly from that enclosed circle. Mr. Wilhelm further stated the
pavement would be east of that pin. Therefore, it would not go the full 24 foot width of the easement. He said
it would probably be 8 feet easterly from the maximum width of that easement.
Vice Chairperson Cox commented Mr. Van Cleave's driveway is actually further west than the curb that is
going to be installed as part of this road and therefore, we will not be encroaching any further or closer to his
Planning Commission Meeting - August 23, 2001
Page 3 of 6
home?
Georae Wilhem replied affirmatively.
Commissioner Miller questioned what type of material is Mr. Van Cleave's existing driveway?
Georae Wilhem responded he believed a portion of the driveway is asphalt and concrete towards the back.
Rob Van Cleave interjected the area off to one side is pavement but the main driveway portion is almost all
gravel until you get to where the house is, then it is cement.
Commissioner Miller commented in essence, the applicant would be upgrading Mr. Van Cleave's driveway
and providing a better ingress/egress.
Georae Wilhem stated Mr. Van Cleave would certainly have access to this private drive and he would have
a curb cut wherever he would like.
Discussion
Chairperson Youna closed the public hearing and opened discussion to the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Bandelow expressed concerns regarding what this project will do to the Van Cleave property.
She commented most of the time easements were not given anticipating that there is going to be a roadway
across your property. She also voiced concerns regarding the manner the development is going to be done
in the rear. Commissioner Bandelow agreed in that Centennial will probably eventually continue through but
she would like to see something, if this project goes forward, to ensure that this will happen. She stated she
does not see anything in the Staff recommendations that would ensure that the access be preserved to tie
into the other streets because we do not want to create enclaves. Commissioner Bandelow suggested a
condition be placed to reflect this.
Vice Chairperson Cox shared Commissioner Bandelow's concerns. He remarked by doing this project this
way we are only accomplishing in-filling on approximately the front 40 percent of that property and we are
basically locking the back 50 percent off and making it either impossible to develop or going to require even
further Variances down the line. Vice Chairperson Cox further added this is bad planning to encourage or
allow it. He stated it is known that streets can be built on less than 50 feet because it was done by Public
Works on Vanderbeck Road. Additionally, if this remains a private driveway, it is not only a matter of the
maintenance of the pavement but the enforcement of the parking. He indicated the enforcement is very
limited. Vice Chairperson Cox stated he will vote No on all of these Variances.
Commissioner Miller expressed concerns about parking and referred to Mr. Jaeger's comment regarding the
apparent growth of a family and the number of cars. He pointed out that they are going to end up parking
on the easement which will make it difficult for all commercial vehicles that need to go in there. Commissioner
Miller also remarked private property will be difficult to enforce.
Chairperson Youna addressed the service vehicles issue and reported they are not required to go on private
streets.
Commissioner Fletcher stated Vice Chairperson Cox made a persuasive argument and therefore, he will vote
No on this project.
Commissioner Lima expressed concerns with the extension of the private lane 50 feet or more and trying to
cut off the existing property. He stated he does not think there should be a private lane to connect Hardcastle
and Centennial and it should be a City street. Additionally, he expressed deep concerns regarding parking
enforcement in an area that is already difficult to enforce and the infringement to the property owners that are
in that area. Commissioner Lima further stated he understood that there is no plan to develop Lot #3 and Lot
Planning Commission Meeting - August 23, 200]
Page 4 of 6
lOA
#4 at this pOint and as it was pointed out by Vice Chairperson Cox, this is bound to come back in the future
for more Variances. In closing, Commissioner Lima said he is against this project.
10
Chairperson Youna remarked he has concerns with the access to Mr. Van Cleave's property. He stated it
does not appear to be enough room for Mr. Van Cleave to park next to his home and be clear of the private
road that goes back to the rest of the development. Additionally, he pointed out the lots that are planned for
the development are around 6,000 square feet. He indicated Lot 3 and Lot 4 would accommodate four of
those lots each which would be a total of eight more. Chairperson Young remarked that would make it high
density zoning as opposed to low density that is currently zoned for. He commented in order for Centennial
Drive to connect you would have to go across Mr. Jaeger's property but the property that he was addressing
as well. Lastly, he expressed concerns regarding the parking situation.
Commissioner Miller questioned whether it would be easier to make this into a public street?
Chairperson Youna interjected the standards would be for a public street rather than a private drive.
Vice Chairperson Cox moved to deny Subdivision 01-01 and Variance 01-06 approval and requested that Staff
return with facts and findings to support the Commission's decision based on the comments made tonight.
Commissioner Lima seconded the motion. Motion unanimously carried.
B. Zone ChanQe 01-04. zone chanQe from Marion County UTF (Urban Transition Farm) to City of
Woodburn CG (Commercial General), 3002 Stacy Allison Way. Wal-Mart. applicant.
Staff read the applicable ORS Statement and provided a presentation as reflected in the Staff Report. Staff
recommended approval of the Zone Change request based on the information in the report.
Commissioner Miller asked if this property was missed when everything was annexed into the City?
Staff explained the zone change was not determined at the time the City annexed all of the islands into the
City limits.
Commissioner Fletcher asked what is the relationship between the applicant and the owner?
Staff replied the applicant is the legal counsel for the property owner.
Ex Parte Contacts
Chairperson Youna commented we are all familiar with the site. He stated this is the area with the most
explosive growth in the City right now.
Testimony by the Applicant
Mike Robinson. 900 SW 5th. Suite 2600. Portland. OR 97204 agreed with the Staff Report. However, he
pointed out that he typically makes the property owner the applicant because it looks odd to have the attorney
as the applicant. Mr. Robinson further stated he is representing Wal-Mart in this matter. He reported for
whatever reason, this area was overlooked when all of the property was originally annexed and developed
as Wal-Mart. He credited Planning Staff for discovering that omission and brought it to his attention. Mr.
Robinson added this application is entirely consistent with Section 4.10 of Woodburn Zoning Ordinance.
Chairperson Youna stated for the record that this property is 34.05 feet wide and 1,329.76 feet long.
Testimony by Proponents
Scott Franklin. Pacific Land Desian. 10121 SE Sunnyside Rd. Suite 215. Clackamas. OR 97015 reiterated
Mr. Robinson's statement and stated he is acting as a representative for Wal-Mart stores.
Vice Chairperson Cox questioned Mr. Franklin whether his firm is working on the plans for the expansion of
the Wal-Mart site?
Planning Commission Meeting - August 23, 2001
Page 5 of 6
,.__._.__._'~___o__~._____~"__~
Scott Franklin replied affirmatively.
Testimony by Opponents
None
Discussion
Chairperson YounQ closed the public hearing and opened the discussion to the Planning Commission.
Vice Chairperson Cox commented the request meets all of the requirements and it is more or less a
housekeeping Zone Change. He stated he favors the application.
Commissioner Bandelow agreed with Vice Chairperson Cox.
Commissioner Fletcher concurred with his fellow Commissioners.
Commissioner Lima moved to approve Zone Change 01-04 and requested Staff return with facts and findings.
Commissioner Bandelow seconded the motion, which unanimously carried.
FINAL ORDER
None
DISCUSSION ITEMS
None
REPORTS
A. Planninq Proiect Trackinq Sheet (reyised 8-13-01)
B. Buildinq ActiYity for July 2001
BUSINESS FROM THE COMMISSION
ADJOURNMENT
Vice Chairperson Cox moved to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Lima seconded the motion which carried
unanimously. Meeting adjourn~d at 8:16 p.m.
APPROVED
t)'th(ol
DAT
ON
'J-/3-0L
Date
Planning Commission Meeting - August 23, 2001
Page 6 of 6
10
EXHIBIT "C"
Planning Commission Staff Report
8/23/01
SUBDIVISION 01-01
VARIANCE 01-06
CITY OF WOODBURN, OREGON
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
August 23, 2001
I. APPLICATION INFORMATION
Applicant: George Wilhelm
Wilhelm Engineering, Inc.
P.O. Box 561
1771 Mt. Jefferson Ave
Woodburn, OR 97071
Property Owner: Lazar Kalugin
Quality Plus Interiors, Inc.
11220 Portland Road NE
Salem, OR 97305
Application Deemed Complete: June 21,2001
120 Day Rule Deadline: November 18, 2001 (includes 30-day extension)
Staff Report Available for Public Review: August 17, 2001
II. NATURE OF THE APPLICATION:
The applicant proposes to subdivide two residential properties into five lots for future
residential use. The proposed subdivision includes three variance requests: 1) to allow
five lots to access a private drive when four is the maximum permitted, 2) to allow the
private drive serving the subdivision to extend beyond the 150-foot depth maximum to
250 feet, and 3) to allow four of the lots to be created without public right-of-way frontage,
rather they would be accessed by a private drive.
III. RELEVANT FACTS:
The subject properties are located on the south side of E. Hardcastle Ave between Hwy
99E and the easterly city limit. The properties are addressed at 1810 and 1820 E.
Hardcastle Ave, further identified on Marion County Assessor Maps as Township 5 South,
Range 1 West, Section 80C, Tax Lots 6000 (1820 E. Hardcastle) and 6101 (1810 E.
Hardcastle).
The combined size of both subject properties is 1.91 acres (83,200 square feet). TL 6000
is 1.05 acres and TL 6101 is 0.86 acres. The proposed lots range in siz:e from 6,020
SUB 01-01, VAR 01-06
Page 1
Ir--
10
square feet to 29,500 square feet and will have widths of no less than 70 feet and lengths
of no less than 86 feet. Four of the five lots are proposed to be accessed by a 24-foot
wide private drive within a 39-foot wide private right-of-way. Most of this private right-of-
way is proposed to be within a separate tract of land, but portions will need to extend onto
an existing and proposed single-family lots through easements.
The site is virtually flat with no more than one (1) foot of change in elevation. The
property consists of trees and vegetation, some of which are to be removed as part of this
project. TL 6101 is currently vacant, and TL 6000 has a shed which is to be removed and
a new single-family home which is to remain. This existing home is proposed to be
located within Lot 1.
The subject site is zoned Single-Family Residential (RS) and has a Comprehensive Plan
Map designation of Low Density Residential. Adjacently located to the west is a two-
family home (duplex) neighborhood zoned Multi-Family Residential (RM) District. The city
limit is along the south of the property, and the adjacent property to the south consists of
an orchard which is under Marion County zoning of Single-Family (RS) Residential. This
is the only adjacent property that is not within the Woodburn city limit. The adjacent
property to the east is zoned RS and has a single-family home. To the north on the
opposite side of Hardcastle is also a two-family home (duplex) neighborhood zoned RM.
IV. RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA:
SUB 01-01
A. WOODBURN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
B. WOODBURN ZONING ORDINANCE
Chapter 8 General Standards
Chapter 9 Residential Standards
Chapter 10 Off-Street Parking, Loading and Driveway Requirements
Chapter 22 RS - Single Family Residential District
Chapter 39 Mandatory Parkland Dedication or Cash-In-Lieu-of
C. WOODBURN SUBDIVISION STANDARDS
D. WOODBURN SIGN ORDINANCE
E. WOODBURN TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS PLAN
F. WOODBURN ACCESS MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE
VAR 01-06
A. WOODBURN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
SUB 01-01, VAR 01-06
Page 2
lOA
B. WOODBURN ZONING ORDINANCE
Chapter 8 General Standards
Chapter 10 Off-Street Parking, Loading and Driveway Requirements
Chapter 13 Variance Procedures
C. WOODBURN SUBDIVISION STANDARDS
D. WOODBURN ACCESS MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE
v. ANALYSIS
SUB 01-01
A. Woodburn Comprehensive Plan
STAFF COMMENT: Applicable goals and policies have been satisfied through the
implementation of the Woodburn Zoning Ordinance and other applicable ordinances in
affect at the time of approval. The proposed use is residential in nature and is compatible
with the Comprehensive Plan Map designation of Low Density Residential on the subject
properties.
B. Woodburn ZoninQ Ordinance
1. Chapter 8. General Standards.
Section 8.030. Dwellings and All Other Buildings to be Accessible to Public
Streets. Every dwelling shall be situated on a lot having direct access by abutting
upon a public street or a pre-existing private driveway of a width of not less than
20 feet and a private drive shall not serve more than four dwelling units except
when approved under Planned Development....
STAFF COMMENT: Four of the five proposed lots are to be created without public right-
of-way frontage. A variance is being requested as part of this proposal from the standard
requiring all lots to abut public right-of-way (referred to as "Variance No.3" in this report).
In addition, five lots are proposed to access the private drive that would serve this
subdivision. Said access is to be located in a separate tract of land and a portion of an
existing access easement along the east side a single-family lot, which is located
adjacent to the northeast of the subject site. This lot was partitioned from TL 6101 as
Parcel 1 of Partition Plat 1995-42, herein referred to as "Parcel 1 " (see Exhibit "C"). The
existing access easement was established as part of this partition to provide access to
TL 6101. As part of this subdivision request, this existing easement is proposed to be
incorporated into the proposed private drive, continuing to provide access to Parcel 1 in
addition to the proposed four interior lots. The five lots accessing the private drive exceed
the maximum allowance of four lots. As a result, an additional variance is being
SUB 01-01, VAR 01-06
Page 3
I II
I
10
requested as part of this subdivision to allow five lots to access the private drive (referred
to as "Variance NO.1" in this report).
Section 8.040. Special Setback Distances
(12) East Hardcastle Avenue, U.S. Hwy 99E to East City Limits...............40 feet
STAFF COMMENT: The subject site abuts a section of E. Hardcastle Ave with a 60-foot
wide right-of-way. This puts the center line of Hardcastle 30 feet from the front property
line of the site. With a required 40-foot special setback distance from the roadway center
line, 10 feet of special setback is required from the site's front property line. By adding
this to the minimum 20-foot front yard setback required in the RS District, the minimum
setback distance required from the front property line is 30 feet. There is a single-family
home on the front portion of the site which is approximately 40 feet from the front property
line. The minimum special setback distance is being met in this proposal.
Section 8.190. Vision Clearance. A triangular area at the street or highway corner
of a corner lot, or the corner at any alley street intersection of a lot, the space being
defined by a diagonal line across the corner between the points of the streets rights-
of-way lines or street-alley rights-of-way lines measured from the corner. The vision
clearance area for corner lots at street intersections shall have a minimum of 30 foot
legs along each street and for alley-street intersections in said districts the vision
clearance area shall have legs of a minimum of ten feet along both alleys and streets.
The vision clearance area shall not contain any plantings, walls, structures, or
temporary or permanent obstructions to vision exceeding 30 inches in height above
the curb level, or street shoulder where there is no curb, except a supporting pillar or
post not greater than 12 inches in diameter or 12 inches on the diagonal of a
rectangular pillar or post; and further, excepting those posts or supporting members
of street signs, street lights, and traffic control signs installed as directed by the
Building Inspector, or any other sign erected for public safety.
Vision clearance shall not be required at a height of seven feet or more above the
curb level, or seven feet, six inches above the shoulder of a street that does not have
a curb.
STAFF COMMENT: Vision clearance triangles have been applied to the point where the
proposed private drive connects with E. Hardcastle Avenue. There are none of the
above-described obstructions within these triangle areas, nor are any proposed as part
of this project.
2. Chapter 9. Residential Standards.
STAFF COMMENT: At such time that building permit applications are made on each lot,
residential setback requirements will be reviewed for compliance. There is currently one
single-family home and an accessory structure on the subject site. The accessory
structure is to be removed, and the single-family home is to be located on proposed Lot
SUB 01-01, VAR 01-06
Page 4
1 of this subdivision. As discussed in the portion of this report addressing WZO Chapter
22 "Single Family Residential (RS) District", the proposed layout of Lot 1 in relation to the
location of the existing home complies with residential setback and maximum lot
coverage standards.
3. Chapter 10. Off Street Parking, Loading and Driveway Standards.
Section 10.050. Off-Street Automobile Parking Requirements.
(a) Single-family dwellings:
(1) One and one-half spaces per dwelling.
STAFF COMMENT: The applicant has indicated that the proposed lots will be
constructed with single-family homes. The existing home on proposed Lot 1 has been
provided with the necessary off-street parking spaces. At the time of building permit
submittal for said residential dwellings, each lot will need to provide the required one and
one-half off-street parking spaces.
Section 10.080. Driveway Standards.
I) Standards for driveways serving more than one dwelling unit:
(3) Minimum width of the driveway pavement shall be 24 feet.
(4) A turnaround shall be provided on all private, dead-end streets; minimum
of 40 foot radius for cul-de-sac turnarounds, minimum of two forty foot long
legs by 20 feet for a "T", "Y" or "branch" turnaround.
STAFF COMMENT: The private drive providing access to the proposed four interior lots
is to be 24 feet in width. The dead-end of the drive is proposed as a "T" turnaround with
30-foot long legs 25 feet in width. The legs are 10 feet short of the minimum length. A
condition of approval states that each leg of the turnaround shall be no less than 40 feet
in length and 20 feet in width.
(5) Maximum depth of a private street shall be 150 feet, measured from the
right-of-way line to the point where the street no longer serves more than
one unit.
(6) Private streets are designated as fire lanes so no blockage could be
allowed. "No Parking" signs shall be erected and maintained by the
property owner.
(7) Driveways serving private single family detached homes shall:
(a) Serve no more than four units;
(b) Not be allowed unless no practical development of a public street is
possible and the land cannot be otherwise utilized for urban-type units.
SUB 01-01, VAR 01-06
Page 5
lOA
I I
10
STAFF COMMENT: With regard to the maximum depth for private drives of 150 feet and
the requirement that private driveways serve no more than four single-family homes, the
applicant is requesting variances from these standards, which are further addressed in
this report under WZO Chapter 13 "Variance Procedures".
With regard to the requirement of posting "No Parking" signs, a condition of approval
states that there shall be "No Parking" signs placed along the access way to meet the
standard for a fire lane. The condition further states that maintenance of the signs shall
be the responsibility of the existing and/or future property owners within the subdivision.
In reference to subsection 8(b), a public street extension onto the subject property would
require a right-of-way width of at least 50 feet and a cul-de-sac radius of no less than 55
feet. As a result, a public street would not be practical to serve allowable development
on this site due to the long and narrow shape of the subject properties and the site's
limited frontage width along existing right-of-way.
4. Chapter 22. Single Family Residential District.
Section 22.010. Use. Within the RS Single Family Residential District no
building, structure, or premises shall be used, arranged or designed to be used
except for one or more of the following uses:
(a) Single Family Dwelling
STAFF COMMENT: The applicant has indicated that the proposed lots will be constructed
with single-family homes. The subject site is zoned Single-Family Residential (RS)
District, and single-family homes are permitted outright.
Section 22.040. Height. In an RS District, no building or structure shall exceed
35 feet or two and one-half stories in height...
STAFF COMMENT: The existing home which will be encompassed by Lot 1 is 17 feet
in height at its tallest point. At this time, there are no other residential structures on the
site. Future structures will be reviewed for compliance with height limits at the time of
building permit submittal.
Section 22.050. Rear Yard. There shall be a rear yard on every lot in an RS
District which shall have a minimum depth of 24 feet for a one-story building, 30
feet for a two-story building and 36 feet for a two and one-half story building. In
the case of a corner lot, the minimum depth shall be 14 feet for a one-story
building, 20 feet for a two-story building and 26 feet for a two and one-half story
building.
STAFF COMMENT: None of the proposed lots will be corner lots. The existing home on
the site is one story. Proposed Lot 1, which will encompass the existing home, provides
for a rear yard setback of 25 feet. Thi~ setbaok distance meets the minimum required for
SUB 01-01, VAR 01-06
Page 6
this lot. Any future homes on the site will be reviewed for setback compliance at the time
of building permit submittal. All proposed lots consist of sizes and configurations that
allow for required setbacks to be met while providing for reasonable building areas.
Section 22.060. Side Yards. There shall be a side yard on each side of the main
building on every lot in an RS District in width not less than five feet for a one-
story building, nor less than six feet for a two or two and one-half story building....
STAFF COMMENT: The existing home will have side yard setbacks of approximately 10
and 12 feet to the proposed property lines of Lot 1, meeting the minimum requirement.
All future structures within the subdivision will be reviewed for setback compliance at the
time of building permit submittal.
Section 22.070. Front Yard. Every building erected, constructed, or altered in
an RS District shall conform to the front yard setback set forth in Section 9.040.
STAFF COMMENT: Chapter 9 requires a front yard setback distance no less than 20
feet, and as mentioned, there is a required special setback distance from the front
property line of an additional 10 feet. The special setback only affects the existing home
on proposed Lot 1, which in addition to the minimum front yard setback of 20 feet,
requires a total front yard setback of 30 feet. The existing home is approximately 40 feet
from the front property line, meeting the minimum setback. The remaining lots will be
reviewed for setback compliance at the time of building permit submittal for future
structures.
Section 22.080. Lot Area and Width. In an RS District the minimum
requirements for lot area shall be 6,000 square feet for each dwelling and every
lot shall have a minimum width of sixty feet at the front building line. No dwelling
or main building other than a dwelling shall occupy more than 30 percent of the
lot area, except where an accessory building is attached to or made a part of the
dwelling, or main building, in which case 35 percent of the lot area may be
occupied by such dwelling or main building....
STAFF COMMENT: The existing home on proposed Lot 1 has an attached garage,
allowing the home and garage to cover up to 35 percent of the lot. The existing home
occupies approximately 25 percent of the proposed Lot 1, complying with the maximum
coverage allowed. Future residential structures on the other proposed lots in this
subdivision will be reviewed for compliance with maximum coverage standards at the time
of building permit submittal.
5. Chapter 39. Parkland Dedication and Cash-in-lieu
STAFF COMMENT: The System Development Charge for park purposes is $1,267.00
per lot, resulting in a total charge of $5,068.00 for the four lots without residential
structures. There will be no charge for Lot 1 since this fee was paid when the existing
house was constructed. A condition of approval specifies that the applicant shall pay the
SUB 01-01, VAR 01-06
Page 7
lOA
I II
10
required parks systems development charges in full at the time of final plat recordation,
or on a per-lot basis as building permits are issued.
C. Woodburn Subdivision Standards
Chapter III. Section 6.
(3) No final plat of a proposed subdivision or partition or replat shall be approved
unless:
(b) Streets and roads held for private use and indicated on the tentative plan
for such subdivision, partition or replat have been approved by the City.
STAFF COMMENT: The only access extension proposed as part of this subdivision
is a private access drive extending in a north-south direction from E. Hardcastle
Avenue. The access has been marked on the tentative plan through a separate tract
of land and an existing access easement along the east side of the adjacent Parcel 1.
Furthermore, a condition of approval specifies that the portions of the dead-end
turnaround that cannot fit within said tract shall be included within an access
easement(s), and said easement(s) shall be recorded with the final plat.
(6) The subdividing of land shall be such that each lot shall abut on a public
street.
STAFF COMMENT: There are no public street extensions proposed as part of this
application. Four of the five proposed lots do not abut a public street, and a variance
request is being made from the above-mentioned standard as part of this application.
Chapter III. Section 7.
A. Tentative plans for subdivisions shall include the following information:
a. Name of proposed subdivision
b. Vicinity map
c. Subdivision plan
d. Names and addresses in notification area
e. ,Diagram of water system
f. Diagram of sewage & storm drain system
g. Diagram of streets and sidewalk system
h. Legal description of subject property
I. Name of proposed streets
j. Lot numbers
k. Identification of easements, parkland dedication, and private
utilities.
SUB 01-01, VAR 01-06
Page 8
STAFF COMMENT: Sufficient information has been submitted by the applicant.
Attached with this report is a preliminary plat that indicates the proposed lots and the
applicable above-listed information.
Section 13 (B). Lots:
All lots shall have a minimum size of the zoning district in which they are located.
In cul-de-sacs the minimum lot line fronting the turnaround shall be 40 feet, and
in the case of a curved lot line where the radius of curvature is 100 feet or less
the minimum lot line fronting that curvature shall be 40 feet, and in no cases shall
the lot width be less than 60 feet at the buildinQ line. If topography, drainage, or
other conditions justify, the Commission may require a greater area on any or all
lots within a subdivision. The minimum size for various types of lots shall be as
given in the following table: .
Tvpe of Lot
Minimum Width
Interior lot (fronting one street)
60 feet
STAFF COMMENT: All lots, although not all fronting public right-of-way, are treated as
interior lots in this subdivision. Each lot has been configured on the preliminary plat to
provide at least 60 feet of width at building lines. The above standard for lot configuration
has been satisfied.
D. Woodburn Sian Ordinance
STAFF COMMENT: Other than premises identification required by the Woodburn Fire
District, there are no signs proposed as part of this application at this time. Any future
signs will require approval and/or permit from the Community Development Department.
E. Woodburn Transportation Systems Plan
STAFF COMMENT: The three variance requests further the intent of the transportation
plan by limiting the number of public right-of-way accesses serving the subdivision. In
addition, the single-family home on Parcel 1 to the northwest of this subdivision will have
access from the proposed private drive instead of direct access onto E. Hardcastle,
providing for better traffic flow. The subdivision complies applicable goals and policies
in this plan.
F. Woodburn Access Manaaement Ordinance
STAFF COMMENT: E. Hardcastle Avenue is classified as a minor arterial in this
Ordinance. Minor arterials are required to have no less than 245 feet between driveways.
This spacing distance is not met due to the existing driveway on Lot 1 and the proposed
private drive serving the remainder of the subdivision. This Ordinance allows the
Community Development Direotor to waive the spaoing requirement if it is not feasible to
SUB 01-01, VAR 01-06
Page 9
10
I fi
10
meet the requirement. The existing driveway is approximately 13 feet from the proposed
private drive. Since the driveway on proposed Lot 1 is existing, and since the proposed
location of the private drive cannot be located elsewhere and must serve as a shared
access, the Community Development Director has waived the 245-foot driveway spacing
distance along E. Hardcastle to allow the 13-foot distance proposed.
VAR 01-06
A. Woodburn Comprehensive Plan
STAFF COMMENT: Applicable goals and policies have been satisfied through the
implementation of the Woodburn Zoning Ordinance and other applicable ordinances in
affect at the time of approval. The proposed use is residential in nature and is compatible
with the designated Comprehensive Plan Map of Low Density Residential on the subject
properties.
B. Woodburn ZoninQ Ordinance
1. Chapter 8. General Standards.
Section 8.030. Dwellings and All Other Buildings to be Accessible to Public
Streets. Every dwelling shall be situated on a lot having direct access by abutting
upon a public street or a pre-existing private driveway of a width of not less than
20 feet and a private drive shall not serve more than four dwelling units except
when approved under Planned Development....
STAFF COMMENT: Four of the five lots are to be created without public right-of-way
frontage. A variance is being requested as part of this proposal from the standard
requiring all lots to abut public right-of-way (referred to as "Variance NO.3" in this report).
In addition, five lots are proposed to access the private drive that would serve this
subdivision. Said access is to be encompassed by a separate tract of land and a portion
of an existing access easement along the east side of a single-family lot, which is located
adjacently to the northeast of the subject site. This lot was partitioned from TL 6101 as
Parcel 1 of Partition Plat 1995-42, herein referred to as "Parcel 1" (see Exhibit "C"). The
existing access easement was established as part of this partition to provide access to
TL 6101. As part of this subdivision request, this existing easement is proposed to be
incorporated into the proposed private drive, continuing to provide access to Parcel 1 in
addition to the proposed four interior lots. The five lots accessing the private drive exceed
the maximum allowance of four lots. As a result, an additional variance is being
requested as part of this subdivision to allow five lots to access the private drive (referred
to as "Variance No.1" in this report).
2. Chapter 1 O. Off Street Parking, Loading and Driveway Standards.
SUB 01-01, VAR 01-06
Page 1 0
Section 10.080. Driveway Standards.
I) Standards for driveways serving more than one dwelling unit:
(5) Maximum depth of a private street shall be 150 feet, measured from the
right-of-way line to the point where the street no longer serves more than
one unit.
(6) Driveways serving private single family detached homes shall:
(c) Serve no more than four units;
(d) Not be allowed unless no practical development of a public street is
possible and the land cannot be otherwise utilized for urban-type units.
STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant is requesting three variances for this proposal, two
of which are from the standards listed in the above subsections. The private street is
proposed to exceed the maximum 150-foot depth with a proposed depth of 250 feet. In
addition, the preliminary subdivision plan shows that five lots would access the private
drive through the request of a variance. These variance requests are further addressed
in this report under Chapter 13 "Variance Procedures".
3. Chapter 13. Variance Procedures.
STAFF COMMENT: Each of the proposed variances are addressed under the following
criteria and are referenced as follows:
Variance No.1: Request to allow five single-family lots to access off a single private
street where only four are permitted;
Variance No.2: Request to allow the private street to extend 250 feet in depth from the
E. Hardcastle Avenue right-of-way when only a maximum of 150 feet
is permitted;
Variance No.3 Request to allow single-family residential lots to be created without
right-of-way frontage and to abut private street frontage when required
to abut public right-of-way.
Section 13.020. Conditions for Granting a Variance.
(a) That there are unnecessary, unreasonable hardships or practical difficulties
which can be relieved only by modifying the literal requirements of the
ordinance;
STAFF COMMENT: Variance No.1: Due to the length and relatively narrow layout of
the subject properties, a hardship and practical difficulty exist in developing the site to its
intended use. This proposed subdivision will serve as infill development, and it is the
intention that efficient use is made of infill properties. Because of the configuration of the
site, it is difficult to make such efficient use unless the current limit of lots accessing a
private drive is modified. In addition, one of the lots accessing this drive has public right-
SUB 01-01, VAR 01-06 Page 11
lOA
I I
1 A
of-way frontage along E. Hardcastle Avenue (Parcel 1, Partition Plat 95-42), thereby
reducing its impact on the private drive.
Variance No.2: Allowing a private drive to access new lots on the site is the only
practical means the applicant has at this time to further develop the properties with their
intended residential uses. To establish new single-family lots, those lots will require a
dead-end access drive that exceeds 150 feet in depth. The other alternative would be
to construct a public street which would require at least 50 feet of right-of-way width. The
existing improvements and property line configurations do not allow for this.
Although a hardship has been shown to exist by complying with the maximum private
drive depth of 150 feet, staff believes that the applicant is proposing to exceed this
maximum beyond what would be required to relieve the hardship. The private drive is
proposed to extend to 250 feet with the hammerhead turnaround on Lots 3 & 4. It would
be feasible to have the hammerhead on Lots 2 & 5 and on a small portion of Lot 3.
Access would still be made available to all proposed lots in this case, and the private
drive depth would be reduced to approximately 222 feet. A recommended condition of
approval states that Variance NO.2 shall only allow the private drive to extend to a depth
of 225 feet, and extension beyond this distance shall require a new variance application.
Variance No.3: As mentioned, further development of the subject properties with
residential lots having public right-of-way frontage is not feasible. Existing conditions of
the site do not allow for the extension of a public street from E. Hardcastle, and creating
flag lots with frontage along E. Hardcastle is not feasible since the minimum frontage
width for such lots (30 feet) is not provided. Allowing the applicant to create a limited
number of additional lots without public right-of-way frontage is necessary to relieve a
hardship in further developing the subject properties with single-family homes.
(b) That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
applying to the land, buildings or use referred to in the application, which
circumstances or conditions do not apply generally to land, buildings, or uses
in the same district; however, non-conforming land uses or structures in the
vicinity shall not in themselves constitute such circumstances or conditions;
STAFF COMMENT: Variance No.1: Allowing the five lots to access a private drive is
in response to exceptional circumstances applying to the land. This is due to the fact that
one of these lots, Parcel 1, currently has frontage along public right-of-way but utilizes an
existing access easement that will become part of the private drive serving this
subdivision. Parcel 1 will have a limited impact on the proposed private drive, and only
four of the lots will completely depend on the drive for access. This is a circumstance that
generally does not exist on properties in the RS District.
Variance No.2: Ideally, residential properties under consideration for subdivisions have
adequate public right-of-way frontage and consist of sizes and configurations that allow
them to be developed to their full potential. This site is long and narrow and has a limited
SUB 01-01, VAR 01..()6 Page 12
right-of-way frontage distance for its size, resulting in extraordinary circumstances as
compared to other residential properties. Allowing the private drive to exceed the 150-
foot depth maximum to 225 feet allows the property to be developed with additional
residential structures in light of the restricting conditions caused by the shape of the site.
Variance No.3: The applicant has demonstrated that it is not feasible at this time to
create additional lots on the site with public right-of-way frontage. Existing conditions do
not allow for the extension of a public street from E. Hardcastle due to width restrictions
and limited land area on the site. Additionally, the applicant has stated that an extension
of Centennial Drive to the south is not feasible since it would need to extend across the
adjacent property to the east, and an arrangement could not be made with the owner of
this property to do so. Furthermore, there is insufficient frontage width along E.
Hardcastle to allow for the creation of flag lots. These are extraordinary circumstances
in that they generally do not exist on other properties within the RS District.
(c) That granting the application will not be materially detrimental to the public
welfare or be injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or the
premises;
STAFF COMMENT: Variance No.1: This variance request is in keeping with the intent
of the Woodburn Zoning Ordinance in that only four of the five lots proposed to access
a private drive will fully depend on that drive for access. The fifth lot, Parcel 1, has
existing right-of-way frontage along E. Hardcastle. Consequently, it will not entirely
depend on the private drive for access even though it is proposed to continue to use the
access drive. As a result this request will not be materially detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the surrounding neighborhood or on
the subject site.
Variance No.2: It has been indicated by the Woodburn Fire District that the proposed
depth of 250 feet for the private drive will be acceptable for emergency purposes so long
as fire hydrants are placed within required distances of all structures and "No Parking"
signs are posted along the drive. Additionally, staff is recommending a condition of
approval to reduce the length of the drive to less than the proposed 250 feet since such
reduction can still provide access to all proposed lots. Since the Fire District accepts a
greater depth than what staff is recommending be approved, granting the variance with
the reduced depth of 225 feet will not compromise public safety or the protection of
property and improvements.
Variance No.3: A co~dition of approval states that the private access drive shall be
maintained and be kept clear of obstructions so that emergency access will be available
at all times. So long as this condition is met, allowing four of the proposed lots to be
created without right-of-way frontage and to be accessed by the private drive will not be
detrimental to the public welfare or property and improvements.
SUB 01-01, VAR 01-06
Page 1 3
I I
10
(d) That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of the
substantial property rights of the petitioner;
STAFF COMMENT: Since the applicant needs each of the three variances to further
develop the site as is permitted by zoning, these variances are necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of the applicant's substantial property rights. Without any
one of these variances, the applicant will be unable to add any new residential structures
to the site that are permitted in the RS District.
(e) That granting of the application will not, under the circumstances of the
particular case, adversely affect the health or safety of persons working or
residing in the neighborhood of the property of the applicant.
STAFF COMMENT: Variance No.1: Allowing one more lot (Parcel 1) than is permitted
to access a private drive, and considering that lot has public right-of-way frontage, the
safety and health of persons residing in the surrounding neighborhood of the subject site
will not be adversely affected. As mentioned, there are only four lots, equal to the
maximum number allowed, that will fully depend on the private drive for access.
Variance No.2: By meeting the requirements of the Fire District for emergency access,
and by reducing the depth of the private drive as recommended to 225 feet, protection
of health and safety of individuals residing in the immediate neighborhood will not be
adversely impacted. In addition, recommended conditions of approval have been
provided in this report to ensure convenient and unobstructed access along the private
drive, further making each lot accessible and safe.
Variance No.3: As mentioned, sufficient access will be made available to each lot
through this proposed subdivision and through certain conditions of approval
recommended in this report. As a result, allowing four of the lots to be created without
public right-of-way frontage and accessed by a private drive will not have a negative
impact on the public health and safety of the neighborhood.
(f) That the granting of the application will be in general harmony with the intent
and purpose of this ordinance and will not adversely affect any officially
adopted comprehensive plan.
STAFF COMMENT: Variance No.1: Since only four of the proposed lots accessing
the proposed private drive fully depend on the drive for access, and considering that
four is the maximum number of lots allowed to access a private drive, this variance
request is in general harmony with the intent and purpose of the Woodburn Zoning
Ordinance. Allowing one additional lot to access the private drive which is already
accessible by public right-of-way will not compromise the intent of this Ordinance.
Variance No.2. Allowing the private drive to extend beyond 150 feet in depth is
necessary for the property to be further developed with residential uses, as it is
SUB 01-01, VAR 01-06 Page 14
10
intended to be developed according to its zoning and Comprehensive Plan Map
designation. Additionally, the recommended depth reduction of the private drive to no
more than 225 feet reduces the amount of code variance needed. This recommended
depth is the minimum amount needed to relieve a hardship which is prohibiting the
future residential development on the site intended by the Comprehensive Plan.
Therefore, allowing the private drive to exceed the maximum depth to a limited distance
will be in harmony with the intent and purpose of this Ordinance.
Variance No.3: Although four of the proposed five lots in this subdivision do not abut
public right-of-way, the intent and purpose of this Ordinance and the Subdivision
Standards will not be compromised. The intent of the right-of-way frontage requirement
is so that adequate access will be maintained to every lot. The private drive as it is
proposed and conditioned will provide for such access.
C. Woodburn Subdivision Standards
Chapter III Section 6
(6) The subdividing of land shall be such that each lot shall abut on a public
street.
STAFF COMMENT: There are no public street extensions proposed as part of this
application. Four of the five proposed lots do not abut a public street, and a variance
request is being made from the above standard as part of this application.
Chapter V. Section 20. Variances to the Reaulations:
A. The Commission may consider a variance of any requirements set forth in
these standards, upon application by the subdivider. The basic
considerations for granting a variance will be proof that:
(1) Special physical conditions or circumstances peculiar to the property
under consideration make a variance necessary.
(2) That the variance is necessary for the proper development of the
subdivision and the preservation of property rights and values.
(3) That the variance will not be present or hereafter be detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to other properties or persons adjacent to or
in the vicinity of the proposed subdivision.
Consideration for a variance from these regulations shall be based upon a
written statement by the subdivider in which is given complete details of
consideration and reasons why a specific variance should be granted. A
request for a variance from these regulations shall be filed with the Planning
Commission prior to presentation of the final plat for approval. No variance
will be considered after a plat has been recorded.
SUB 01-01, VAR 01-06
Page 1 5
10
STAFF COMMENT: The above criteria for variance consideration have been
addressed previously in the report under Chapter 13 of the Zoning Ordinance. It is
specifically stated that the proposed subdivision would not be possible without the
approval of the three said variance requests. The applicant has provided a written
statement in Attachment "B" of this report. The said narrative addresses the variance
criteria and describes the reasons for requesting the variances, and these reasons are
addressed previously in this report.
D. Woodburn Access Manaaement Ordinance
STAFF COMMENT: E. Hardcastle Avenue is classified as a minor arterial in this
Ordinance. Minor arterials are required to have no less than 245 feet between
driveways. This spacing distance is not met due to the existing driveway on Lot 1 and
the proposed private drive serving the remainder of the subdivision. This Ordinance
allows the Community Development Director to waive the spacing requirement if it is
not feasible to meet the spacing requirement. The existing driveway on proposed Lot
1 is approximately 13 feet from the proposed private drive. Since the driveway on Lot
1 is existing, and since the proposed location of the private drive cannot be located
elsewhere and must serve as a shared access, the Community Development Director
has waived the 245-foot driveway spacing distance along E. Hardcastle to allow the 13-
foot distance proposed.
VI CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the findings in this report, the information provided by the applicant and the
applicable review criteria, staff recommends approval of this proposal, Case No. SUB
01-01 & VAR 01-06, su!Jject to the following conditions of approval:
Community Development Department
SUB 01-01
1 . The proposed development shall be in substantial conformance with this approval and
the attached preliminary plans provided as Exhibit "0" and dated 8-2-01, except as
herein modified by these conditions of approval.
2. The private access drive shall be named as a private street, and the name shall be
approved by the City and the Woodburn Fire District prior to recordation of the final
plat. The tract of land dedicated for the use of the private drive shall be noted on the
final plat as Tract "A".
3. The private access drive shall be maintained and be kept clear of obstructions so that
emergency access will be available at all times. There shall be "No Parking" signs
placed along the private access drive to meet the required standards of the Woodburn
SUB 01-01, VAR 01-06 Page 16
Fire District for a fire lane, and such signs shall be maintained by the existing property
owner and/or future residents of the subdivision. Said requirements shall be stated in
the maintenance agreement for the private drive.
4. The hammerhead turnaround of the private access drive shall have a minimum width
of 20 feet and legs a minimum length of 40 feet. The portions of the turnaround that
cannot fit within Tract "A" shall be included within an access easement(s), and said
easement(s) shall be reviewed by the City prior to recordation and shall be recorded
with the final subdivision plat with Marion County.
5. The applicant shall pay the required parks systems development charges in full at the
time of final plat recordation, or on a per-lot basis as building permits are issued.
6. The applicant shall establish CC&R's and a homeowner's to ensure maintenance and
unobstruction of the private access drive. The CC&R's shall be reviewed and approved
by the City prior to recordation and shall be recorded with the final subdivision plat with
Marion County.
7. Prior to recordation with Marion County, submit two paper copies of subdivision plat for
review to the Community Development Department. The applicant shall provide the
Community Development Department with a copy of the recorded subdivision plat and
the recorded maintenance agreement and CC&R's.
8. The applicant shall provide for the installation of all franchised utilities and shall provide
any required easement on final plat.
9. Prior to any construction, a reproducible mylar of the final plat shall be filed with the
Public Works Departm~nt after all required signatures have been obtained and the plat
has been recorded with Marion County.
10. On site construction shall not commence until the improvements plans have been
reviewed for compliance with subdivision and street width standards and approved by
the Public Works Department and all right-of-way permits and system development
charges have been paid.
11. Final plat shall be submitted to the City within one year of the date of land use approval
or in accordance with City Ordinances in effect at the time of submittal.
12. The property owner/applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department
a signed "Acceptance of Conditions" agreeing to all conditions of approval prior to the
issuance of building permits for the project. The signed document must be received
by the Community Development Department before the project approval shall become
effective.
SUB 01-01, VAR 01-06
Page 1 7
1
VAR 01-06
13. Variance No. 1 grants approval for five lots to access the private drive serving this
subdivision.
Variance NO.2 grants approval for the private drive to be extended to a maximum depth
of 225 feet, including the hammerhead turnaround.
Variance No. 3 grants approval for four of the proposed lots to be created without right-
of-way frontage which are to be accessed by said private drive.
Public Works Department
GENERAL CONDITIONS:
14. Final plans shall conform to the construction plan review procedures and standards.
15. On-site existing water wells and subsurface sewage disposal systems shall be
abandoned in accordance with State regulations.
16. All city-maintained facilities located on private property will require a minimum 16-foot
wide utility easement to be conveyed to the City.
17. The applicant, not the City, is responsible for obtaining permits from any State and/or
Federal agencies which may require approval and/or permit.
18. All work shall conform to the City of Woodburn standards and all State building codes.
STREET AND DRAINAGE:
19. This development shall be responsible for street improvements on Hardcastle Avenue.
The applicant shall be required to sign a non-remonstrance consent form to participate
and pay fair share cost for such improvements on Hardcastle Avenue.
20. Access improvements onto Hardcastle Avenue shall be designed to provide adequate
temporary ingress and egress for vehicles and pedestrians. A permanent concrete
approach meeting the City of Woodburn commercial standards will be required with the
improvement of Hardcastle Avenue, all expenses to be borne by the property owner.
21. The existing drainage from surrounding properties shall not be blocked by this
development.
22. Each lot served by the private roadway shall be subject to a private roadway access
and maintenance agreement. This agreement shall be provided for review by the City
and shall be recorded with Marion County with the final plat.
SUB 01-01, VAR 01-06
Page 1 8
10
23. Proper drainage system shall be provided for collection of the storm water runoff from
the private roadway and as building code may require for the proposed single-family
structures. Runoff shall not discharge across the public sidewalk to the street from the
private roadway. The drainage system shall be private and shall be a part of the
maintenance agreement.
SANITARY SEWER:
24. Sanitary sewer service can be provided from the existing 8" dia. sanitary main located
on Hardcastle Avenue. This will be a private service, not city maintained. Each lot shall
provide a separate service to the city main within Hardcastle.
WATER:
25. If a city main is required to be extended into the property to provide fire protection, it
shall be looped. A dead end line serving this facility will not be allowed. The preferred
loop would be from Hardcastle through the development and then connecting to the
existing water line at the end of Centennial Drive, which is the west boundary of the
Centennial Subdivision. Water main and water meters on private property shall be
placed within a 16 foot wide easement conveyed to the City.
If the city water main is not required to be extended into the property, then water
meters shall be placed with the public right-of-way of Hardcastle. Irrigation and fire
sprinkler system, if so installed, shall require the property backflow prevention device
to be installed.
26. Fire hydrant locations and fire protection requirements shall comply with current fire
codes and the Woodbwn Fire District standards.
VII. ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit "A"
Exhibit "B"
Exhibit "C"
Exhibit "0"
Exhibit "E"
Attachment "A"
Attachment "B"
Attachment "C"
Attachment "D"
SUB 01-01, VAR 01-06
Subdivision Application
Variances Application and Narrative
Partition Plat 1995-42
Preliminary Subdivision Plat
Zone Map
Woodburn Fire District comments
Woodburn Parks Department comments
Woodburn Public Works Department comments
Woodburn Police Department comments
Page 1 9
Exhibit "A"
~ REC'D *
AUG 02 2001
OFFIC
App. Rec. By:
Date:
Application No.
f
'YVC;. ~~
'!N COMMUNITY
:,PMENT DEPT.
SUBDIVISION PARTITION
PRELIMINARY APPLICATION
SUBDIVISION NAME:
DIRECT QUESTIONS TO:
Georae Wilhelm
(NAME)
P.O. Box 561. 1771 Mt. Jefferson Ave
(ADDRESS)
PROPERTY OWNER: (Please print or type)
ADDRESS & ZIP C
Woodburn
(C ITY)
Oreaon
(STATE)
97071
(ZIP CODE)
1.
Qualitv Plus Interiors. Inc. Mr. Laser Kaluain 11220 Portland Rd. N.E. Salem OR 973
2. Certified list with the names and addresses of property owners with 250 feet for a Subdivi i n
and 100 feet for a Partition.
3. REQUEST: Subdivide 1.86 acres in to 5 residential lots. Variance re uest to rovid a
rivate drive to serve 4 lots with a len th reater than 150 feet. Pro osed rivate drive i a
30 foot riaht of wav with 24 feet of pavina.
The arcel is zoned RS with a Com rehensive Plan desi nation of sin Ie Famil Residenti
4. The ZONE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN designation in which the parcel is located:
5. Describe the location of the property or give the address:
The ro ert is located a roximatel 580 feet east of 99E and south of Hardcastle Str
1810 E Hardcastle Street. Tax Lots 6000 & 6101' SE ~ Section 8 and NE ~ Section 17'
S; R 1 W: W.M.
6. Map No. 5S: 1W 8DC Tax Lot #(s) 6000 & 6101
7. Attach a written statement, marked Exhibit "A" which explains your reasons for subdividing e
land and provides evidence that the request conforms to the Woodburn Comprehensive PI ,
Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Policies.
The applicant bears the burden of proof that all approved criteria has been met.
P&ge 2. SUBPART=6J93
8.
l(
Attach 10 preliminary plats which contain the following information (Exhibit "8"): Preliminary!
Subdivision (Partition) Plat Checklist. .
()
()
()
Date
Vicinity Map
Subdivision Name
(The name of any proposed subdivision shall not be the same as or similar to any nan
used on a recorded plat in the County or City).
Township, range, section, tax lot number(s), acreage of the property to be divided.
North arrow, scale (one inch equals 200 feet or larger).
Locations and names of all existing streets within or on the boundary of the proposed
subdivision/partition.
Location and names of all proposed streets.
Lot (parcel) layout with approximate dimensions, lot (parcel) numbers and areas for ai'
lots (parcels). .
Zoning and Comprehensive Plan designations in the proposed subdivision (partition) !
and area adjacent to the proposed subdivision (partition).
Indicate which buildings are to remain and which ones are to be removed.
Topography within and adjacent to the proposed subdivision/partition.
Location of drainage ways, flood ways, or floodplain within and adjacent to the
proposed subdivision/partition.
The location and size of all proposed water, sewer, and storm drain lines.
The location of all proposed fire hydrants.
,
:
()
()
()
()
()
()
()
( )
()
()
()
.
Signatures of each owner (husband and wife) or contract purchaser.
~'6.6
ADDRESS AND ZIP CODE
Mr. Laser Kaluain
Qualitv Plus Interiors Inc.
11220 Portland Rd. N.E. Salem. OR 97305
<i' "-R.e" A ,OJ /~//i D u i3~~
'::-;.IfJr->Ll ~ ."
I
Page 3 . SUBPART=ElI93
!
I
I
Exhibit II B II
* REC'D *
AUG 02 2001
OFFICE
App. Rec. By:
Date:
Application No.
Receipt
1t
WOODBURN COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMHJT DEPT.
VARIANCE APPLICATION
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^~~^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ~
DIRECT QUESTIONS TO:
NAME: Quality Plus Interiors. Inc. Mr. Laser KaluQin
PHONE: 503-931-2434
ADDRESS: 11220 Portland Rd. N.E.. Salem, OR 97305
1. We, the undersigned applicants, beings owners of the property herein described, do heret
make application for permission to (list each variance separately):
A. Construct a 250 foot private drive with 30 feet of riqht of way and 24 feet of pavinq.
Access five lots from a private drive.
Create four lots without right-of-way frontage.
2. Location of the property (street address, or if not addressed, then state the distance to the
nearest intersecting street or known landmark) including the section, range and township:
Prooertv is located aooroximatelv 580 feet east of 99E and south of Hardcastle Street. 18
E. Hardcastle Street. Tax Lots 6000 & 6101: T5S: R1 W: 8DC
I !
I
i
I
3.
Legal description of the property as it appears on the deed:
Map No. T5S: R1W: 8DC Tax Lot #(s) 6000 & 6101
Lot , Block , of - SUbdivisionj
NOTE: If a fraction of the lot, then attach a full description as if it were metes and bound r
attach a metes and bounds description, marked "EXHIBIT A".
4.
Zone in which property is located: RS Sinqle Family Residential
5.
Attach a copy of the applicable Marion County Assessors Map. Mark "EXHIBIT B".
Page 3 - VARPROC=7JOO
Plot Plan to be attached, mark "EXHIBIT C" and including land uses on surrounding land1'l
notification area, site layout of subject parcel and structures with dimensions and lot lines.
shown. The plot plan should show clearly the nature of the variance. .
I
I
i
I
!
6.
7.
CONDITIONS FOR GRA~TING A VARIANCE:
I
Submit a detailed statement explaining why the request is being made. Address the vari:;lU
of adjustment approval criteria given under "Considerations., A-F. Attach and mark
"EXHIBIT 01>.
8.
NAMES AND ADDRESSES:
Submit a list of all property owners with 100 feet of the subject's property boundaries.
.
.
NAME ADDRESS AND ZIP COD~
9. THE APPLlCANTCS) ATTEST THAT:
a) The above request does not violate any deed restrictions that may be attached or i
imposed upon the subject property
b) If the variance application is granted, the applicant will exercise the rights granted in
accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the
approval by the Planning Commission.
c) All the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments and exhibi
transmitted herewith are true; and the applicant( s) so acknowledge that any permit
issued on the application may be revoked if it be found that any such statements are
false. ~. 16''''01 A'1S~t
DATE: ~ /5 (Jj day of 3'\ 6lr( ~\ ,2001
,
SIGNATURES of each owner (husband and wife) or contract purchaser.
NAME
Inc. Mr. lase
ADDRESS AND ZIP CODe
1 t220 Portland Rd. N.e. Salem OR 9730f
-
-; r).
(Jx (//1._/L.,( .....'t
I / "", I
/ iJ
-h J2X-Ut0/'v>.'
/ 7
/)D(^,.,~~
.
Application received: By
Date
Page 4 - VARPROC-71OO
I
I
i
EXHIBIT D
NARRATIVE STATEMENT - Discussion of Criteria
J
a) That there are unnecessary, unreasonable hardships or practical difficulties which can be
relieved only by modifying the literal requirements of the ordinance.
This is an in-fill development. This property is unique in that it is nearly 550 feet deep and s
a frontage on Hardcastle of 80 feet plus an easement along the westerly boundary. If the
owner is required to provide a 60 foot right of way with a cuI de sac nearly 41% of the
property would be used for road right of way. In addition the property adjacent to Parcel 11
Partition plat 1995-42 would be unusable because of the narrow width. The proposed
private drive will be constructed to provide adequate access for emergency vehicles and
restricted to no parking.
b) That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to the la
buildings, or use referred to in the application, which circumstances or conditions do not
apply generally to the land, buildings or uses in the same district; however, nonconformin
land, uses or structures in the vicinity shall not in themselves constitute such circumstanc
or conditions.
c)
The exceptional or extraordinary circumstances are the result of the geometry of the parce .
Generally property in RS zones have a depth to width ratio not greater that 3; this property
has a depth to width ratio of 6.8. Developing property with this geometry using the literal
interpretation of the ordinances would result in very inefficient use of this residential prope
That granting the application will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or be I
injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood of the premises. :
i
I
Granting this variance will allow reasonable development of this property for residential uSf .
Approval of this applicatiQn should have no detrimental effect on neighborhood properties. i i
d)
e)
f)
Granting approval of this application will provide reasonable development of this RS prope :.y.
This should have no adverse affect on the health or safety of persons in the neighborhood. I
I
That granting of the application will be in general harmony with the intent and purpose of ~ ~.s
ordinance and will not adversely affect any officially adopted Comprehensive Plan. I I
Granting approval of this application will provide reasonable development of this RS prope
Approval will allow efficient development in accordance with the adopted Comprehen. i
Plan.
t",
, .
'. .
l( .
.1
1
PARTITION PLAT NQ q5-4-2L
If( LOTS . a 2, USTVIEW .
s'E. 1/4 $Ee.e a H.E. 1/4 SEe. 17, TSS, 'UW, w....
CITY OF WOOoeuRH, ..ARION COutfTY, OREGON
SUR VEYOR'S CEIl.TIACA TE:
I. Oarcncc E. Bvl<cr, . Ilqiacrcd Professional Land Surve)'Of" in Ore,.,... do hereby
c.cnily dw , did acclll'aldy -,. and marl< wilb proper monuments the UncIs tq>l'CaoJled on
Ihc aUadacd 1Np. Ihc boundmcs bcina described as follows:
Bqillllina .. Ihc ""cial Poin. whidl i. . SII inch by 30 incIl iron rod wilb . )'dlow
plasIic; cap ~ 'PtS 636' at . point on lhc Soulb rial"-ol.way line of Hardc&stle Road a. its
inlerseclion wilb Ihc Ease 1inc of Lot 2. EASTVlEW as said subdivision is platled and recorded
in VollItnC I~. Pace ~~. 800Ic of Town Plats for Marion Counly. Oregon, said Inilial Poinl bears
Soulb 16'~5'OO' East 90.00 fcct Irom lhc Nonhcast comer of Lot 10. SUNSHINE ACIlES as
laid aubdiviaioa is plalled and RiCOrdcd in Volume 20, Page 42. Book of Town P~ts lor Marion
COUft(y. Orqon; tbcncc Soulh 3'15'00" Wesc a10nalhc East line of Lot 2 of said EASTVIEW
aubdivision, · diSCanoc of ~9.10 Icct lO an iron pipe ac the Soulhcasc CO<nCf" of said Lot 2;
chcncc ~ '7"3678' Wesc &lona the Soulb line of said Lot 2 and 1hc wcsccrly extension
Ibcrcof, · diSCanoc of 90.0 I fcct 10 an iron ",pe marl<in& lhc SouIbCUl ......ndary c:omcr of said
SUNSHINE ACRES; "- North J'15'OO" East along chc: East bocind&ry line of said
SUNSHINE ACIlES. . distance of 5SO.~5 fCClIO an iron pipe marltina lhc Nonhcast comer of
Lot 10 of said IUbdiviaioa; "- Soulb 86'.5'00' East alona lhc Soulb riahl-of-way 1inc of
said Hardc.astlc Road. . diuanc:c of 90.00 fcct .0 Ibe point of bqiMina and c:ont.aininS 1.1359
aacs of land. more or leu.
RECISTERED
PROFESSIONAL
v.NO SURVEYOR
~rd'~
Oarcncc E. Bvl<cr
Rqisccred Land Surveyor No. 636
My lic:cnsc expires Dec. 31, 1995.
~E."LP~
OIlEGON
M.'t ... ....
CLMEHCE E. IlAAKER
130
ElCPlIla 12-31-15
IIARJCER SURVI:Y1NC CO.
2035 25tH STREET S.E.
$.ILDI. OREGON .7302
I'HClHE 588-aeoo
THE WIlliIN PLAT IS HEIlEBY APPROVED:
~
2.0 't\\W-L.\\ \ \ l'a"
Woodburn Communily I Direclor Dale
Panicionina Cue No.gl-01 :J.P.
---=----<~
Marion Counly Surveyor i.lf(.
~..';%U)'1:
U~ (}. ;...,--1",
Marion County A&icuor .
4-~-tf-~
Dale
oIL 2/- fJ 5
Dlle
STATE OF OIlEGON
S.S.
COUNTY OF MAJUON
I do hcrdly c:cnify dullhcA'~hcd Panition P~l No tis - 4...2. was rcu.ived (or
ROOnl 011 lhc ~ day of ~iL I99S, al ~ o'clock --d.-.m.. and
RlCIOrdod in Record of Panition P~ts. Also, refClCftCCd in Marion Counly Dec.d Records, Il.cd
~ 'aaef.I.!L.
............ --....
"JIo~.-----
~..."~
~
LEGEND:
C<.OM. fOSlf_ S-....IoII. _
~.vr _011 GluoITY _s CM_/
t~ III CUll"
,
.
Monumcnc (ound as lOOICd.
,I
.;, ~1
jf
o
See SII inch by 30 indl iron rod ....h ~Ilow pll$uc
cap marked 'PLS 636- in March 1984
( )
8c.aring and DiSllncc o( Record
V. c Vol_
P. - PIBe
I.R. -'rO/l Rod
"P. - Iron PIf'"
C.S.- COWIly Surwy
D.R.-Dccd Recocd.
B.O.T.P. - 800lt ofTown Pill>
~
~ ~'T_..., Un"", "" ....
1.l/l. .......tOt\l co...tTT .,,'ss C., ",
Tor 01 (""'I
NARRATIVE:
Basi. o(bcarina: is on the w. line o(SUNSHINE ACRES IS pcr PIlI RCCOc"d
The purpose o( Ihis IUnfC)' was lCI pMti.ion lhe st:bJece Irlce inlo 2 ~cds .... Ipproved by
the Ci.y o(Woodbum Plannina Convni..ion in Plt1illOnlftB Cue 81-01 M.J.P.
Monuments used for conlrol arc (rom Ihc pillS o( EASTVIEW and SUNSHINE ACIlES.
This partilioninS was originally ......~ In Mlrch o( 198~. The map was prepared and
subrnilled Co Ibc Ci'y o( Woodburn and Was signed by tI-.c: PlanmnB DiTec.or and "'en Ippan:ntly
10.1.
On February 24, I99S '"" rev..ited Ihe ...e and ,.critied Ihl' Ibe monuments were .Iill in
pllce and .....dc .ies '0 lhc Globll POSllionlng S","ions .. shown On Ihe .....p.
Surveys used as refcn:nee: C.S. 2.093 and pla..,f Eastv,ew and Sunshine Aera.
Equipmenl used: T opeon EI<<tronic T oeaI Statio.,
DECLARATIO:'\:
Know all men by Ibesc prCJiCllIS .hl' wc. Val,,,. O"chinn.lov Ind Penny Ovchinnilcov,
bang Ibe owners of the land dcscrtbed In .he Surveyor'. ':cnlfiel.e her""n made and dcsiringlo
di.pose o( lhe same: In parccls have eluscd Ihc lime 10 b< paniuoned and s"",eyed as shown On
chc: act&chcd map.
We hc:ccby "t'o 1f' f ht' publfc uti I i, r eascn.etU as s.hown on th~ pl.al.
Thuc MC no W31a fights appunc:nant 10 II\( subJett property.
In wiUICss whereof we SCI ow h.1l\d. and sc.:lh Ihi, ~ day of
I99S.
Mf"(u.t.
~~
Penny chmoll..:ov
~J<qv 1,{:A.f,~~
Yakov Ovchinnllov
STATE OF OREGOto;
SS
COUNTY OF MARlON
On Ibis ~ day of /I1.,..d, . I~S. personally appeared be(Ofe me. a
Notary Publi< for ...id C....n.y and S.ale. lhe wi,hin named Yakov OvclUnnllcov and Penny
OV'Chinnilcov, personally known 10 be lhc idCltlKal pel""" described in and who CJleculed Ibe
abow: ilUU\uncnt. .and who pcnon.ally acIcnowlcdgcd 10 me dul lhey CXc:<:uled lhc same f'rccly
and volunlarily (or lhc uses and ~ therein IWftC(! .and wilhouI (car or compulsion (rom
anyone.
. k'ra~
Notary r (or econ
My cominiuion capires Y;:a.;y~,
. OFFtClAI.SEAl.
KAY """1'Ol
. NatAllY Pueuc . OREGC'
1lI'~=~:'~! !
Tilles and aucssmcn.. on lhc above descrIbed "'Openy have been paid In full Co
N '3C''f$' .
f((I! R~<JJ b".s~ loy:
~_ J-.U''(.('
Marion T... CoIkaor
q5~ 4-0
---
~
~ - Lf /tAlfDCAStU: ~ 11-4S'(IP~..t
~ taOGo" '-"U \ .eo.oo'""-..t '_ .
- I "rlS'OO'(:: I ,- '.. ,,~
~ - _:lOCI' - t~ c-....n
1/'-1" ("'-4'1 S&P4S' .
- ( COIO lOT 0() , 00 ( ~. I I - '-'45'00'( AQOO'
" --I ..It..... _t
~ i 8G~"1'j18
::: ~I ~~..
- ... l!:~
eJ
I ;l>
;_i~
:'c
~
..
c
8
~ 8
~-
\' .....5.00.( 9000' -
T et'tC to!
G:.c:Jct:)
I
...
; , I
.
I
1Ct.)(; Lof
G,,'C11
~
~-~
.0
... -.
..
.:;
~.
~.~
~~
till ~ cAnVIC...
v-'''', ,....... &o.T.f
~
..
~
..
I<
I<
...
W
~
.
'"
~
~ ~
.~ ;
~~~
ij ~ I
~~ ,
.z ;.
s.._SH,,( "'AU ~I ~I.
v.20. '.'Z,..o.t.. _
~
!:
8 I
~
I
,
7- :-
03
..
!.
';,
g I
"""en-2
37, 240 SO. "1:
"2
..
.
-..
1/2-. ~ I
S ( COOl. lOT, \
8
51
I/Z-.., ft'\.UJ I lA-t, ."lATI
100' (eO.Or'It'\.AT _' J, (ao.or'II\.U
... N,7- X.l.... tODf' _
., a'- oM' ...........T
RItGI&TEIU:O
~RO'ESSIONA.L
LAND SURVEYOft
SUINEY FOR YN/CV OVCHIHHIC(OV
l..DCATlOH: LOT 2 . Tlet: EASTEIILY 10 0' LOT I. EASTVIEW. V-I~.
,..44 l.o.T.1'
S. E. 114 SEC.' . H.t:. ~ SEe. IT CITY OF WOOOIlMH
T ~ 1\ I W W.... M"-Il
-.., ,".w ~lUftW\'INQco. e-__
b1JlS1H ITftaT U.
~~mD12
poHONE IIHIaO
OIlEaOH
..., .. ...
Cl..AMHCf: t:. 8AA<<Eft
QI
0-____.
f ,__........-
~
N
~
PARTITION #
OVCHINIKOV
-
Exhibit "e"
lOA
40
1981-01
I
N
o
~~
....
~ ...
.0 .
..... ==
12 ~
...
CD
en
~RABOlIC PRIVATE STREET SECTION
~ N.T.S.
- fA.I.(' Sllll(l 0110101 , ~
II
LOT 1
'0_-
0,
0'
o
,.,~
:! ..
~ "
LOT 2
.'
g
e
LOT:?
1
~4
4
1
II .
..
\I' II'
JO 0 Il/II
Z4' WIOTH ..
/
.../"
I
ASPHAl. tiC
COHcAf:TE
CuSS 'C' I.
I
'1
1/3 PI.
112 CAOMN
,.
--.r
\
. .
1"ISH
NOlES BASE COUA$(
I. ....SE C~' J/Zo,O' C~g ROCK . ,. O[P1..
Z nHISH - 14' -0' C ROCK . Z' O[P1..
3 ASPHAl. 1 C C R[ E - 2 I/Z" 101
_ -~i
.. -..
~ i : '
i'll
z
J I!
1':C1
~I
-'-":
TYPE C' CUAB
, GunE"
?\.'
\Nr"
_(\N
I..'
'SUNSHINE ACRES
c.'
I
~I
N3015'00"e 550.45'
t
t;i
1
!
<()
1I"[ OF HIXEO 0' 10 6
qA AND PoPlA"
IREES
136.00'
~._..~e.
\ - '..,., '...." '-' V '-' v'.....' \_' v -' v \",.- v V V
'Ill( ocn
lU1lH"'ROuNQ
PER ...r 0.510
O[UII. ...00
\
\,.... v ,_, v V.'J ...... '_.
LOT A
2~OSr
013 'IS'OO"[ 327 ".
86 00
nil( O[Pl.
1UANAAOUNO
(.oSEtoE'"
.... (L"
*
-
. r
IJ
- I~
= cr
~
~
VI
C
~ ~
/
l01 3
26638 s.r
.33" "1
EA51YIEW ADDITION
lS(\
N3'15'OO-E 5A7.91'
,
,
\~c,
10~
(.l.S
NORTH
1"=~O'
"
r- r-.. t.r:; r""'\ .. .
T. .r- f""'\r""'iI' . . ~ ~ ".. .
'.
"
'JLV j
1:. ,t
:!=~;:>. I
"'i'~'
~i't..,~~.,/ /
. ~ .:<~~.~..,
,
r[M
"~IY I
I j-ri'1 ~ //
~.'
"
.:":.~....}.,~ '- ~ .
~'
'I ;,
~.c" ~1
larr
'l.":'/'-,~:,;,: >
~., ,,~' .' ':" '. .
- -...
,
r.'
-ell
U"/
~l~
.-'~
1
),::::'-.
~--- .... /1
f-V ~WO
I /1-<
./L'..rrl
~~LlI
1)/4/ffr"!-;or-
I '1-)::71'1 I~
I ~~~-}
'I
~.,
"~!itf,~..,,.,~~!
"'~.
.~><
~. ~ ~
:/, .' RS '... 'I- ~
.~.- ',' ~~~~~~LJ~
L I 5
.~II! c:
1 "" ,.
" !-- -.., }.--
I- /~
~ .,
;~it.,\.i.: ,.
-.o!-:-:.::._ ~'i._,
'\"~.';:..\.~
. . '-\';i;~~'
.,~
-.....
CXruUll I::
LJaJL 80
I-
"
~
'- ~
1
5
I-----,
--...
rr
I'.
/#,
.f.:,
'~:
~r' .-
arv LMrs
~ c.. b~ eer ~~.. ~<.
--i
Zl
-
'--
J
/
/
D
D
II
(II
II
III
;.~~W~
.
II,
_.
/ / /
I
!
-,
--- I
I
ATTACHMENT
WOODBURN FIRE DISTRICT
Prevention Division
lOA
Site Plan Review Comments
Memo To: Scott Clark, Asst.Planner
City of Woodburn
Date: 06-29-01
08-09-0 1 Rev.
From:
Robert Benck
Fire Marshal
Facility/ Project Name: Kalugin Addition Subdivision (01-01/ Var. 01-06)
Location: 1800 BIk. East Hardcastle
Occupancy Class: R-3
A. Access:
1. Exterior of Facility:
Minimum driveable access to within 150 feet of all sides of any structures is
required. Structures placed on lots 3 & 4 must be located appropriately for this
requirement.
2. To Interior of Facility:
Not provided
B. Building Exit System: Items to be addressed when plans are submitted to Building Official.
(Information provided below is a guide and may very during the formal review.)
1. Occupant Load:
2. Number of Exits:
3. Exit Hardware:
4. Exit Signage:
,5. Emergency Lighting:
C. Fire flow/ Water Supply:
Minimum of 1000 gpm
Hydrants: No lots shall be more than 250 feet from a hydrant. City and Fire
District will recommend location for placement of hydrants on access road if
necessary. Exception: Sprinkled structures may exceed this requirement on a case
by case review.
E. Sprinkler/FDC:
Not required
F. Alarm System:
As required by housing code.
lOA
G. Premise Identijieation:
To be visible from public way and meet city of Woodburn standards. Sign required
at beginning of private road indicating address on lane.
H. Special Occupancy Requirements:
None
I. Building Size & Limitations! Type of Construction:
Unknown.
J. Fire and Life Safety Review Requirement:
Will be provided by building official.
K. Special Comments:
An onsite water supply system must be available, operational and acceptable to the
city prior to the construction of combustible buildings. Access during construction
must support the weight of Fire Apparatus and allow access to facility.
COMPLIANCE WITH THESE REQUIREMENTS DOES NOT CONSTITUTE
PERMISSION TO BUILD. BUILDING PERMITS AND PLANS REVIEWS BY THE
APPROPRIATE BUILDING OFFICIAL IS REQUIRED. PERMITS AND APPROVED
PLANS MUST BE ONSITE DURING CONSTRUCTION.
WOODBURN FIRE DISTRICT
1776 Newberg H'WY.
Woodburn, OR. 97071
(503) 982-2360 or 982-7305 ext.13
Fax (503) 981-5004
, .
~
A TT ACHMENT B
lOA
PROJECT REFERRAL
Woodburn Community Development Department
270 Montgomery Street WOOdburn, OR 97071 (503) 982-5246
DATE: June 22, 2001
TO:
- Project Applicant
_ Marion County
- Woodburn Fire District (Robert Benc
Woodburn School District
D.S.L.
_ D.L.C.D.
- Engineering Department (Randy Scott)
- ODOT (Dan Fricke/Don Jordan)
~arks Department
Woodburn P .
-
IVlsion
Water Division
Wastewater Division
-
- BUilding Department
Other
PROJECT: Subdivision 01-01 and Variance 01-06; proposal to subdivide a residential property
into seven (7) lots located at 1820 E. Hardcastle Ave
A facilities meeting has been scheduled for this project on Tuesday July 10. 2001 at 10:00 a.m. in the
Woodbum City Hall conference to address any issues/concems your department may have.
Please retum any written comments you may have to the Woodbum Community Development office
by July 27. 2001. If comments are not submitted prior to this date, it will be assumed that you have
no concerns on this proposal. Please contact Scott Clark at (503) 980-2431 for any questions.
Thank you for your assistance.
commrnts: rpo d<. s S b c. A,.,.. s u.l,j Let f (l> J e c t VV"o ..JJ. /.,-(
~ c.\..l~~ Cc-s 6 UO-JS-,
= ->0 :~~_~e:;'~(~""~~}1,~~Z~,~{t,d=~
I
~
eII'T,' 4?lS 'Z.- ~
dt ~ 0<1::>'6.00
~
~
SITE PLAN REVIEW
1810 EAST HARDCASTLE
KALUGIN ADDmON
lOA
Randy Scott
Public Works
GENERAL CONDmONS:
1. Final plans shall conform to the construction plan review procedures and standards.
2. On-site existing water wells and subsurface sewage disposal systems shall be abandoned in
accordance with State regulations.
3. All city maintained facilities located on private property will require a minimum 16 foot
wide utility easement to be conveyed to the city.
4. The applicant, not the city is responsible for obtaining permits from any state and/or
federal agencies which may require approval and/or permit.
5. All work shall conform to the City of Woodburn standards and all State building codes.
STREET AND DRAINAGE:
1. This development shall be responsible for street improvements on Hardcastle Avenue, the
applicant shall be required to sign a non-remonstrance consent form to participate and pay
fair share cost for such improvements on Hardcastle Avenue.
2.
Access improvements onto Hardcastle Avenue shall be designed to provide adequate
temporary ingress and egress for vehicles and pedestrians. A permanent concrete approach
meeting the city of Woodburn commercial standard will be required with the improvement
of Hardcastle Avenue, all expense to by borne by the property owner.
',-
3. The existing drainage from surrounding properties shall not be blocked by this
development.
4. Private driveway shall conform to chapter 10, Woodburn Zoning Ordinance. Currently the \.
turnaround provided does not meet the requirements.
5. Each lot served by the private roadway shall be subject to a private roadway access and
maintenance agreement, This agreement shall be provided for review by the city and shall ~,
recorded with Marion County with the final plat.
6. Proper drainage system shall be provided for collection of the storm water runofIfrom the
private roadway and as building code may requirefor the proposed single family structures.
Runoff shall not discharge across the public sidewalk to the street from the private
roadway. The drainage system shall be private and shall be apart of the maintenance
agreement.
SANITARY SEWER:
1. Sanitary sewer service can be provided from the existing 8" dia. sanitary main located on
Hardcastle Avenue. This will be a private service, not city maintained, each lot shall
provide a separate service to the city main within Hardcastle
WATER:
1.
If a city main is required to be extended into the property to provide fire protection the it
shall be looped, dead end line serving this facility will not be allowed. The preferred loop
would be from Hardcastle through the development and then connecting to the existing
water line at the end of Centennial Drive, West boundary of the Centennial Subdivision.
Water main and water meters on private property shall be placed within 16 foot wide
easements conveyed to the city.
If a the city water main is not required to be extended into the property, then water meters
shall be placed with the public right of way of Hardcastle. Irrigation and fire sprinkler
system if so installed shall require the proper backflow prevention device to be installed.
2. Fire hydrant locations and fire protection requirements shall comply with current fire
codes and the W oodbum Fire Districts standards.
',-
,..,.. . ........-... .,----.
WOODBURN POLICE DEPARTMENT I COMMUNITY POLICING UNIT
270 Montgomery St., Woodbum, OR, 97071
(503) 982-2345
CPTED
(CRIME PREVENTION THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN)
EVALUATION FORM
Property Name: Kalugin Addition
Property Address:
1800 Block of E. Hardcastle Ave.
Property Contact Person: Lasar Kalugin
Phone: (503) 931-2434
Date: July 21, 2001
,Private Property
o City Property
CPTED Requested By:
Scott Clark
Site Plan Review#: Subdivision 01-011 Variance 01-06
~ Construction Plan
o Existin
o Business
o Mobile Home
This evaluation will assist the City of Woodburn and you, in addressing crime prevention and livability issues. If you
have any questions in regards to this evaluation, please contact the evaluator for more infonnation.
Street Access: The plan calls for creating a new street that will access E. Hardcastle. Plan shows the
new street will be a private street.
On street parking: On street parking should be limited to one side of the street, due do to the width of
the street being 24' between the sidewalks.
Property Marker / Sign: Does Not Apply
Access lighting: Street comer lighting to be placed at the entrance of the subdivision on completion of
project. Street lighting should be dispersed on the street allowing sufficient safety lighting for the planned
new homes.
Evaluator Comments: New housing should use the CPTED gUidelines when being planned. See
attached brochure.
Evaluator Name:
~~da Hedricks
DPSST# : 20883 Shift: 11/23
I
't1.:"'--._.::.'.',,~__:.
-.-..---..----..-..
._ .~. I
The sec:o~tlng can be informal and social., or can be
about a ~ safety or neighborhood topic. Both meetings
should Inc:Iui8 refreshments. Whether potluck or coffee and
c:ookIe.S the meeting should be a time for tenants to get to
~"~ another. Building an apartment complex into a
community takes more than one crime prevention meeting
per year.
Landlords and property managers of single family dwellings
ancl.multlfamlly property having less than twelve units. They
ahaJI encourage their tenants to participate with a local
neighborhood association and provide them with crime
~ resource Materials from their neighborhood office
ancllor police agency, The landlord or property manager shall
provicle these materials a minimum of twice a year.
.'. i!f"'~140; ;::, w :,. ;, c" ,-
".' On-Golng Requirements '
Alter each phase you receive a certificate of completion.
Once aU.three certificates are received, the property Is
en~,~;~one.y~"membe'" of the program. The,
owne'Jma!lager,ls,granted the right to display the Enhanced
Sateij.~~ signs on the property and cialm _
~Jn.the program In "for-rent" advertising. A
,,~~...~for,the signs is paid by the owner or manager, with
. ~~ '*Mining the property of Enhancec:l Safety
PrOpertIea to ensure that the signs may be removed If the
Iancliold falls out of compliance with the program.
. AMu.8t,Phase III ~rtlficatlon Is required. Re-certifjcation
In.~!.lements is required on an as-needed basls,l.e.
_." ..new property manager is hired at an apartment
commUnitY'(Phase /), or a property falls below minimum
reqult8ments for landscaping or cleanliness (Phase II).
::;.;-_-~1'::l-.'y.. - .,
/In~, the owrier/manager or designee must attend at
, -1eaa.:~.Owner / Manager meeting and prosecution must be
, followed through in case of arrests made for criminal
~'!'~ t~~
j~rtt! L.-"': ..,.
Benefits of Membership
Safer living spaces
1; \ii'''' ',t> _ Incteued personal safety
A sense of community
.Involved management
Improved tenant base
Incteased occupancy rate
"0 ',{nel;ot I, .:. .' r Stabilized tenants
"';'~;;f~;:::"~';> 0;' Lower maintenance and repair costs
l.\,.o.:'.l';>'1;f,hi,"":' Improved property value
~,;if1)i.1i:~~: 1 More time for routine management and less
"~$.-:;;i;" : c'.' c on crisis control
~.",<' Appreciative neighbors
.:. >:i',," Reduction In repeat calls for service
" An8dU,CBted rental. community improves problem solving
:;~~;~~~t~Is~~elimlnating chronic problems
'!fili~.~~~nbed-'Safety Properties" prOgram won't stop
crime~., Embracing the philosophy of the program will enhance
the ~fty.Ofyou property and community.
~~';~''''''''~ . -
.~.:...-::!.:~~ ,:,;,~ ::;/..
;~':;;i\; t -
~.tit!}. ~~
Adopting the strategies of The "Enhanced Safety Properties"
program will make your property a. tougher target.
Maintaining Program Membership
The intent of the Enhanced Safety Properties program Is to
improve the livability of rental housing In our city. The purpose
of establishing it membership approach for the Program is to
encourage participation through the offer of signs and logos
that represent a positive standard of rental housing
management. Therefore, in those situations where the
practices of management are Inconsistent with the program's
Intent, we
reserve the right to revoke membership In the program and
require return of all signs posted on the property.
We want as many landlords and property managers as
possible to participate In the program and are committed to
making reasonable attempts to encourage compliance before
revoking m.embershlp. However, for those instances where
decisions must be made to revoke membership, It Is
important to establish some general gUidelines for doing so.
Examples of situations that are Inconsistent with the intent
of the program, and which could result in membership being
revoked, inciude but are not limited to:
Responsibility for property management has changed
hands and the new management has failed to attend the
Landlord Training
Program within 6 months oftaking ovet the property. The
property falls below the minimum CPTED standards required
for phase II certification and management fails to bring the
property up to phase II standards within 45 days of a request
to do so.
The landlord/manager does not hold the two required
resident meetings to meet ongoing phase III certification
requirements.
The landlord/manager has a recent record of violating the
civil rights of residents or applicants.
Failure by the landlord/manager to take reasonable steps
to pursue eviction, or otherwise abate the problem. ,when
tenants allow illegal activity on or near the property. In
particular, when the fact of such activity's existence has been
presented to the landlord/manager by a swom police officer
and the landlord/manager fails to take timely and appropriate
action to abate the activity, membership In the program will be
revoked.
For more Infonnatlon or to set up a meeting, please
contact the ESP Officer in the Community Policing
Division of the Woodburn Pollee Deparbnent.
Enhanced Saf~!Sr
PropertiesAi:1~J'
;01,"'\
.~~~~ :". -:;f~
...... .'.... ;':;
-.~: ~i:'-;~~ ~:'.
~:,' !~~~,~7;,:;--t.:";-'
. ,: ?'~:~J~'?~J~
.. .,;;,:.~~~.:~~
.;;;~nlli".",:::,\:
$.~t.fEr.t~~. "':)j.~',~a',:,,'
~ .... h., " lj-;;-' $-"~'...
- :II ..~.!'~..;~j,.--
- ~ .........<e..
~ ~ . ,;,,';,.;.~.~,.i.~.
,. P'IOGUD ,r: .';i:;"'~""'"
. IIhr~-;~~.;..tt.
;-')'~::i-
A three phase prograh1itQ'~-
improve multifamily 1i61.1m-Q~
and rental properties safe~~<:
'J '{I11i'; .
',S:'1.i;1'.~'
~~ ~j~~ ~,
. ~~~;('~?~r,.):.\~.'
.;~~~; :...~c:~:.~.:~
~~'.; ~.;-r~~::'....,
~ .('H,-\;.'~rl ,...:
.' '~;n-; .>'''~:-: !
...,,~;~
"to.:.; ~;! .;;..
. ,\.:,.,:!~j~~;
'''l~.;
::';~~"
.,..,':.~~*~'<
~~~~4:~.. - ~\ .
Woodburn Police Departmerif! '
Community Policing DivfslOij
270 Montgomery St."'''5~l''
Woodburn, OR 910'rtJ.t
Office: (503) 982-2345-'..}~;<;
Fax: (503) 982-2370.;"';';:...
.:~'~f~i~~~~\'ii~~t:~
.....~
-'~
.0
o!:;
. '_ '?"t1::
,"~:~,t:enhalJced Safety Properties A
n,:"\.~~ogram For Rental Properties
.,
The Er)hanced Safety Properties Program was initiated on
AprU 28, 1997 as a partnership between local police agencies
and area landlords.
The program Is designed to help multiple family rental
cIweUInga pffer a safer environment by improving physical site
~; promoting tenant community involvement and by
~ landlord training for managers.
..~, ....'~.._, '?,;,,:'.
..~';".~:.~ ;',;:: }.1::~.
.~, :"~i~:;.l:, '::='-
.I~~1~~~~ift en:~~~:~a~~~e~:~rtles
"\~ Safety Properties" is a three phase program
. ~l)8.dto enhaOce the safety of rental property.
..:;~-'ff8Qulres key property management personnel to
. ..~ alem1narthat covers basic property management
~Ues, with an emphas~ on proven crime fighting
........"IA......' ' ..',"
..~.~~:' "..
'Ph_~;lnvolve$ being inspected to ensure that minimum
lJCI~nts have been met in relation to CPTED and Crime
P.IOYentlOn Through Environmental Design. Creating a sense
of~~ within a complex by bringing tenants together to
.9ru.nfie an apartment watch or citizen patrol represents the
~~.: TQe department is proud to be among those
~c;Itj Involvod in Implementing this program.
:.~~~~~l~ The Enhanced Safety Properties
.;.;>~,~&~;i. Program?
Youeare about your community and want to help. The
police caMOt fight crime or build community by themselves.
Manage.. and landlords who can prevent trouble from
happen/J1g on their property save money and energy. Fewer
vac:anl unlta and less repair bills are a winning combination
for you and the communltyl A stable tenant base thinking of
your property as their community helps to save your bottom
line tor more important money decisions.
'. In addition to the obvious direct benefits of applying the
. progJlm.concepts, a benefit of maintaining membership in
.1))8 ~ram Is tile right to display Enhanced Safety
.,~ signs and to advertise your property as affiliated
WIth.,~ program. People contemplating illegal activity may
. c:Ometq.~nite such participation as a barrier to their
::~~~s and decide not to apply to rent your units as a
.". ~ the reputation of the program grows, good tenants
IOoIdng for rental housing may come to recognize benefits of
renting from program participants.
Phase 1
Landlord Trainlna
Phase I is the landlord training portion of the program. At
least one on-site manager for a multifamily property must
attend one "Keeping' .,' . ",,: .
Illegal Activity Off Rental Property" seminar, every two years
as well as landlords with single family dwellings or owner
occupied multifamily properties,
The seminar stresses how to prepare your property so it
does not attract criminal elements and teaches applicant
screening as a way to get desired tenants that are right for
your property. The seminar certiflC8te can be obtained from
any participating police jurisdiction In the state of Oregon and
may be used for certification in the Woodbum program.
Minimum Management
Standards
To maintain "Phase I" qualification for membership in
Enhanced Safety Properties the owner, or manager of a
rental property must practice the following minimum
management standards:
_ Screening practices must include Inspection of photo
1.0. and conducting a credit check for all adults who Intend to
live in the unit.
_ Rental agreements for property with common areas
must include use of the "Crime Free Lease Enabling
Provision" or approved
addendum ensuring all current and new tenants make a
commitment to stay drug and violence free.
-For property with common areas, "exclusion criteria"
must be developed and posted and local police authorized to
enforce the exclusion with non-residents.
The listing of the above minimum standards is not meant to
imply that Enhanced Safety Properties endorsement of the
above is adequate to prevent all types of illegal activity. The
landlord training prOVides a host of additional screening and
management suggestions that should also be co~si~ered.
Call the Woodburn Community Policing Division (503-) 982-
2345 to find out when and where the next seminar will be.
Phase 2
CPTEO
Landlords who wish to have their property certified as
participating in the Crime Prevention Through Environmental
Design (CPTED) phase of the Enhanced Safety Properties
program, must meet requirements designed to reduce the
likelihood of crime on the property. The following list shows
most of the minimum requirements to be certified. When you
believe your property meets these requirements, call the
Enhanced Safety Properties program coordinator and
schedule a property review. Note that, to remain certified the
property must also remain In compliance with these
requirements. For example, a 'property where graffiti is not
removed promptly or basic clean up Is not being done
consistently may lose Its certification .
M/{J/mum R~q;~/r,~~~3.
. ',_- .-f'II,. . ....~::l:-a.
_ Each Dwelling Un~ Must Have:'~ ~'. ~~-~:"
- Eye Vlewe,.," . . . "~",,,:~.p.,
_ Wide-angle eye viewers on ~ frOn~doOf;!W;.."",,
when ther~ is ~ window In, or Immed~telyadja~~-t9~.. .><
front door. . ~. '.. "~-""~3~~g:%~
_ Effective Exterior Door Locks,'S;~j"',{"~
- Deadbolts on Hinged Doors. . ,-;~:';:P~:~
-Single cylinder deadbolt locks on all exterior~"'~,:.
doors. Bolt throw at least one inch long and opposln ~r.-
plate fastened . with a minimum 3" ~crews;,~,';'::~~' '<;.
_ Sliding Glass Door Security. ,........~...'$.. n.,
Anti-slidelllft modifications Installed in addition ~!l.~.; , .'.Grid........ .'~.'.'.
security device. . ., :" 4'~~
_ Garage Door Security. .. ': .',-,.r e~~'
(All garage doors should be equip~ with Iocklpg. .
mechanisms that deter/slow entry.) . :..' ,,,,,"'\:;.'
- Secure Window Locks. . '.,:.;;. '~'~~\~~..,
. (Install on all ground floor windows an(f8ny~tlJ
upper-story windows that are easily accessible;'Slidlnlf~lO\t'o
Windows. Devices to prevent 11ft and slide simll8r'to~lilg~
glass doors, above. Double Hung Windows. ModifleCf~
pins or locks in addition to standard sash Iocl('l_oUve~~
Windows. Glass panes glued with epoxy to preventr8trioVaL
Windows that Crank Open. Must have a secondary Iocldng':.
'mechanism separate from the crank.) ."':..c ::..: ':'$1.';#.::"-,<
,'~ :.:--~7 ~~::t~:r..::~
Each DroDertv exterior must have: ..
_ Outdoor Lighting for Natural Surveillance. Adequate"~
lighting to eliminate pools of light wIth'dartmess \n-b8tWe8n,~
without creating a glare. In common areas; enough1ight~'
allow a person to read a newspaper headline or licenSe' plate
at night. '^'::',>~':1W'~....
_ Safety-Conscious Landscaping. Shrubs trimmed ~_,.
(max. height of three feet) and trees trimmed up (visUaf~'$!.
clearance below six feet in height). Eliminate adult ~.~
places near windows and doors. &.::,.:' ", ,~~~"~~i
. Visible Address Numbers. Community addressnUri\be.."lt'
and complex name posted and visible. Building and unIF~:': .
numbers posted and visible. Each breeze way shaD bt pPSted
with unit numbers or letters. Community Iocatormap<~-,\,:,.<..
directory at main entrance. ,. "., '. . }"~';~i:.;"
_ Clean Surroundings. No visible litter;:trash, or debris In the
yards and common areas':; No Graffiti. No vlsibl,e g~9'I'
any surface. Any new graffiti removed promptly. ,;:;':Y:j~':
_ Basic Exterior Maintenance Compliance. The tx1erlor of
the property must meet the basic conditions of:the conc:ept of
"territoriality" -the property must appear well-malotalned. Any
exterior structures, surfaces, fencing and other features .!n
obvious need of repair must be repaired or upgraded as
needed. :..
-Phase 3 ' ',. ~i~ . ;'.
Resident Crime prev.{l~Q~l\1fni~g
The landlord or manager of a multifamily property of twelve
or more units mU$t organize a meeting and lnv_aIl~
two times a year. The initial '!leeting shaU be ~ ~ "~'iS '
prevention meeting. Scheduling and p,..entera fo!f~.H!:'~
meeting can be arranged with the program coordlila~~. I,. .
lOA
Exhibit "0"
Notice of Intent to Appeal
dated 8/24/01
WALLACE W. LIEN
^ PROFESSION^l CORPOR^TION
lOA
Wallace W. Lien
Vance M. Croney
Kevin E. Mayne
Mary Kim Wood
Sydney Eddy Brewster
Janet K. Lien
Administrator
September 24,2001
~ REC'D *
SEP 2 4 2001
Woodburn City Council
c/o Community Development Department
270 Montgomery Street
Woodburn, OR 97071
Vi .;JDBURN COMMUNITY
'>EVELOPMENT DEPT.
Re: Wilhelm Emrineering/Ouality Plus Interiors. Inc. - Hardcastle Avenue Applications
SUB 01-01 and V AR 01-06
Dear City Council:
This firm represents the above applicants. The purpose of this letter is.to appeal the decision
of the Woodburn Planning Commission dated September 14, 2001, which denied the above
application to subdivide two residential properties into five lots for future residential use, including
three variance requests. The appeal fee in the amount of $942.00 is attached.
We will submit a detailed appellate statement to the City Council for review prior to the
meeting at which this appeal is heard. In brief, the applicant is appealing the Planning Commission's
decision because it failed to take into account the existing practical difficulties, extraordinary
circumstances and other factors that justify the requested variances. These include the narrowness
and length of the lots and the difficulty, ifnot impossibility, of placing a public right-of-way on the
property due to limitations involving existing buildings, lot sizes and the adjacent easement. In
addition, the decision is based on third-party contingencies that may never occur, such as approval
by the adjoining landowner to extend Centennial Drive.
The applicants have reviewed potential plans for this property several times with planning
staff. The submitted application was based on staff's thorough review of circumstances affecting the
property. The Commission's decision fails to take these circumstances into account, resulting in
inconsistencies in the final decision. For example, the finding of the Commission that a public right-
of-way is not practical (pg. 7) contradicts its findings that a public right-or-way should be required
(pg. 13). This appeal asks that the Council consider these circumstances.
1775 32nd Place NE . Salem, Oregon 97303-1621 ~ (503) 585-0105 office. (503) 585-0106 fax
'^/Ok ~ltello ~t "'ttt""lO/ I,uunu t iOon' ~u.' "'1"\""'"
W oodbum City Council
September 24, 2001
Page 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We ask that the City Council accept this appeal and set the matter to be heard at the next
appropriate City Council Meeting.
Yours truly,
~-x - ~--O
Kevin~-
cc: Client
Check #11091 in the amount of $942.00
lOA
10
Exhibit "E"
Appellant's Appeal Statement
dated 1 0/2/01
WALLACE W. LIEN
A PRO F E -S S ION A l- COR P 0 RAT ION
Wallace W. Lien
Vance M. Croney
Kevin E. Mayne
Mary Kim Wood
Sydney Eddy Brewster
October 2, 2001
Woodburn City Council
c/o Community Development Department
270 Montgomery Street
Woodburn, OR 97071
* REC'O *
OCT 03 2001
WOODBURN COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
Janet K. Lien
Administrator
By hand delivery
Re: Wilhelm Engineering/Ouality Plus Interiors. Inc. - Hardcastle Avenue Applications
SUB 01-01 and VAROI-06
Dear City Council:
Enclosed please find an Appellate Statement for the above application, which is intended to
supplement the appeal letter filed with the Council on Septeniber 24,2001.
Yours truly,
~( ~L)
Kevin~
.----'
Enc. Appellate Statement
cc: Client (w/enc.)
177532ndPlaceNE. Salem, Oregon 97303-1621 ~ (503) 585-0105 office. (503) 585-0106 fax
'A' _ t. .! ~ . I.. L_ I J. ...
lOA
BEFORE THE WOODBURN CITY COUNCIL
In the Matter of the Application of
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
SUB 01-01~ V AR 01-06
WILHEM ENGINEERING, INC.,
and QUALITY PLUS INTERIORS, INC.
APPELLATE STATEMENT
for a Subdivision of Two Residential Properties
Into Five Lots, Including Three Variance
Requests
Procedural History
The above application was deemed complete on June 21, 2001. After review by staff, a Staff
Report was made available to the public on August 17,2001, in preparation for the meeting of the
Planning Commission ("Commission") on August 23, 2001. The Commission meeting was held on
that date, at which time applicants appeared and presented testimony in support of the application,
including their request for three variances. The Final Order of the Commission denied all three
variances. The Order was dated and mailed September 14, 2001, and appealed by the applicants on
September 24,2001.
Nature of the Brief
The purpose of this brief is to expand on the issues presented in the applicants' appeal letter
to the City Council dated September 24, 2001. The decision of the Planning Commission ("the
decision") denied the three variances, which requested the following:
1. to allow five lots to access a private drive (four being the maximum pennitted).
2. to allow the private drive to extend beyond the 150' maximum.
3. to allow four of the lots to be created without public right-of-way frontage.
For the reasons below, applicants request that the City Council reconsider the decision and the
original staff report, which was in favor of the application and variances.
The Subject Property
The subject property consists of two adjacent lots located on the south side ofE. Hardcastle
Avenue, east ofHwy 99E. The total lot area is 1.91 acres and for purposes ofthis appeal the lots will
be discussed as one property. The property is characterized by its long depth and narrow width (170'
wide by as much as 547' long). See Exhibit 1, attached hereto.
The northwest corner of this area is a separate lot owned by another party (Van Cleave).
There is a house located on that lot, and the property is subject to a 24' easement for the benefit of
Page 1 - Appellate Statement
lOA
applicant Quality Plus.
There is an existing house located on the Quality Plus property at the northeast corner, with
frontage on Hardcastle Avenue. The rest of the property is undeveloped.
Property History
City Council members may recall that this property was the subject of an application for a
zone change and plan amendment in 1997-98, in conjunction with a request to place apartments on
the property. That application was denied in light of concerns that the impacts would be too great.
Since that time, Lazar Kalugin, owner of Quality Plus, has met with planning staff several times in
order to find a workable development plan for the property. A planned unit development was
considered and then discarded, as was an assisted living facility.
Current Proposal
The current proposal was submitted after applicants met with staff and reviewed development
options. The proposal is to construct a private drive down the middle of the property for 250', with
a turnaround for emergency vehicles at the end. The drive would be 24' paved, with a 40' right-of-
way. Lot 1, which currently accesses Hardcastle, would access the private dri~e instead, as would an
additional four lots. The rear of the parcel would not be developed at this time.
The Staff Report reflects the extensive time and consideration spent by staff and the applicants
in coming up with a workable proposal based on the unique characteristics of the property.
Specifically, the report reflects staff's belief that due to constraints on the property a public street
would not be feasible. 1 Staff took into consideration the existing features of the property in
detennining that it met the conditions for the requested variances.2 Those conclusions are discussed
below as a basis of comparison-to the Commission's Order.
Initial Findings
A key to the denial was the Commission's belief that a public street, extending to Centennial
Drive, would provide needed connectivity and frontage. The initial problem regarding this belief is
that Centennial does not extend to the subject property. Centennial ends 80' east of the site, with
the Jaeger property intervening to the east. This means that Centennial will not be extended unless
the City condemns a portion of the Jaeger property or that property is developed by the owner.
There are currently no plans by the owner to develop his property, and there is no time line as to
when. if ever, Centennial might be extended.
1 WZO 8.010 requires a minimum 60' right-of-way for through streets (34' paved) and 50'
right-of-way for cul-de-sacs (30' paved). As noted, the applicants have proposed a 40' driveway with
24' paved.
2 See pp. 11-15 of the Staff Report.
Page 2 - Appellate Statement
lOA
Since the Commission's suggestion of a public street is a key issue, it should be noted that the
Commission's findings stated the following on page 7 of the Final Order:
In reference to subsection 8(b), a public street extension onto the subject property would
require a right-of-way width of at least 50 feet and a cul-de-sac radius of no less than 55 feet.
As a result, a public street would not be practical to serve allowable development on this site
due to the long and narrow shape of the subject properties and the site's limited frontage
width along existing right-of-way.
(emphasis added).
This finding contradicts the Commission's later findings that a public right-of-way could
provide necessary frontage and access and preserve the property rights of the owner (Final Order,
pp. 13-14). Those later findings were the primary justification for denial of the requested variances.
The problem with those findings is that they did not take into account the existing circumstances on
the property, circumstances which staff had considered when it prepared its report. Those
circumstances are discussed below.
Variance Criteria
Section 13.020. Conditionsfor Granting a Variance.
a. That there are unnecessary, unreasonable hardships or practical difficulties which can be
relieved only by modifying the literal requirements of the ordinance.
The issue here is whether a private drive is the only means of allowing development of the
property. The Commission felt that in the case of all three variances, a public street would solve the
development problems by permitting additional infill and providing access and frontage. The decision
failed to consider the following:
a. Staff's review of the property showed that it is not possible to place a 50' public street
between the existing houses at the front of the property. (Staff Report, pp. 11-12). There simply is
not enough room. The owner has 80' of frontage on Hardcastle. The house, which is approximately
38' wide, sets at least 10' from the east property line. This takes up nearly 50'. Even if there were
no setbacks, there would only be 30' for a public street. That is not feasible.
What about the adjacent 24' easement? The easement could clearly be used for a private
drive. However, there is the possibility that the easement might be limited to private use only, which
could prevent any part of that easement from being used for a public street.3
The result is there is not enough room at the front of the parcel for a public street, based on
current standards. As staff concluded, "[f]urther development of the subject properties with
3 The applicants are currently reviewing the language of the easement to determine whether
this is the case.
Page 3 - Appellate Statement
residential lots having public right-of-way frontage is not feasible. Existing conditions of the site do
not allow for the extension of a public street from E. Hardcastle." (Staff Report, pg. 12).
b. The Commission decision is based on the assumption that the applicants could run the public
road south and then east, connecting with Centennial Drive. There are two problems with that
assumption:
1. As noted above, Centennial Drive does not currently extend to the subject property.
It ends 80' to the east. For Centennial Drive to extend farther west it would have to cross the
intervening Jaeger property. There is no plan for this to ever take place. Thus, the decision imposes
a condition based on a hypothetical action by a third party that may never, ever, come to pass.
2. Conversations with planning staff and public works reveal that there is no documented
plan for extension of Centennial Drive in the Woodburn Transportation System Plan. In fact, staff
has expressed its belief that Centennial will eventually extend south, not north. If that were to occur,
the applicants' access onto Hardcastle would never be used for public access.4
As a result, there are clear hardships and practical difficulties that negate the possibility of
placing a public street on the property, leaving a private drive as the only available alternative for
development of the site.
b. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to the land,
buildings or use refe"ed to in the application, which circumstances or conditions do not apply
generally to /and, buildings or uses in the same district; however, non-conforming land uses or
structures in the vicinity shall not in themselves constitute such circumstances or conditions.
Again, the Commission's Order stated the belief that a public right-of-way would resolve any
exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applying to the site.
Unlike criterion (a), which examines whether a modification of the ordinance is necessary,
criterion (b) requires no such analysis. The issue is not whether the extraordinary circumstances can
be resolved, but simply whether they exist.
The specific exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to the site
include its narrow width, long length, and the existing Van Cleave parcel. The impossibility of
placing a public street adjoining Hardcastle has been discussed. In addition, it is notable that if a 60'
through street were extended down the middle of the property, it would leave 55' deep lots on each
, side. Taking into account front setbacks of 20' (WZO 22.070) and rear setbacks of 24' (WZO
22.050), this would leave a building envelope only!!' deep.
4 A possible solution to the infill question may be to place conditions of development on the
southern lots, in the event Centennial is extended west and south. If Centennial is extended, it might
be possible to create another three lots at the southern end of the site, having direct access to
Centennial. The original five lots would continue to access Hardcastle via the private drive.
Page 4 - Appel/ate Statement
lOA
10
Staff recognized these circumstances when it found that "the applicant has demonstrated that
it is not feasible at this time to create additional lots on the site with public right-of-way frontage.
Existing conditions do not allow for the extension of a public street from E. Hardcastle due to the
width restrictions and limited land area on the site." (Staff Report, pg. 13).
c. That granting the application will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or be
injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or the premises.
The Commission stated its concerns that the City would have limited enforcement ability to
enforce parking bans on the private drive. The concern was that "allowing four of the lots to be
accessed solely by a private drive would be injurious to the public welfare since the city would have
limited assurance that the emergency access to these four lots would be maintained." (Final Order,
pg. 14).
The applicants point out that the WZO permits up to four lots to be accessed by a private
drive. WZO 8.030. Certain requirements have been written into the WZO to ensure that when a
private drive is constructed it will be done so in a manner that is not detrimental to the public welfare.
This the rationale behind requirements such as WZO 8.030(b), which state that "if parking is not
permitted along an access driveway, there shall be provided two off-street parking places in addition
to the one required for the dwelling, which parking space may include garage areas."
Ifthere is to be no on-street parking, the applicants will meet the requirements ofWZO 8.030
by providing adequate off-street parking as part of any application for building approval. By
providing adequate off-street parking, there will be no harm to the public welfare in the form of
blocked access. S
d That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of the substantial property
rights of the petitioner.
The begirming of this appellate statement reviewed how the property owner originally was
denied in his attempt to place apartments on the property. Other development alternatives in the form
of a PUD and assisted living facility have been discussed with staff and subsequently abandoned. The
current application for single-family dwellings is in harmony with the zone designation and
comprehensive plan. However, without the variances, this property cannot be developed for single-
family use. Because of the Final Order and its findings requiring infill and a public street, the result
is that the applicant is denied any economically viable use of the subject property.
As staff stated, "Without anyone of these variances, the applicant will be unable to add any
new residential structures to the site that are permitted in the RS District." (Staff Report, pg. 14).
e. The granting of the application will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, adversely
affect the health or safety of persons working or residing in the neighborhood of the property of the
applicant.
, Another possible solution is to provide additional parking at the end of the drive.
Page 5 - Appellate Statement
The Commission felt that parking, and the possibility of blocked access, raised concerns in
this area. Those concerns have been addressed under criterion ( c) and can be resolved by application
of the existing ordinances.
f. That the granting of the application will be in general harmony with the intent and purpose of
this ordinance and will not adversely affect any officially adopted comprehensive plan.
The subject property is zoned and designated for single-family development. The current
application proposes this type of development.
The Commission found the variance requests were not in harmony with the ordinance since
they exceeded the number oflots allowed to access a single private drive. However, the applicants
are requesting only one additional lot beyond the four normally permitted. In addition, the extra lot
already has access onto Hardcastle. By routing access onto the private drive rather than Hardcastle,
the number of entry points onto Hardcastle will not be increased. As staff said, "Allowing one
additional lot to access the private drive which is already accessible by public right-of-way will not
compromise the intent of this Ordinance." (Staff Report, pg. 14).
The Final Order also based its denial on the "possibility" of extending a public street through
the property. As the applicants have shown, extension of a public street is not a possibility based on
the current conditions of the site.
Conclusion
The applicants have worked closely with planning staff to present a development proposal that
is feasible based on the unique conditions of the subject property. The proposal presents the
minimum number of variances required and is in harmony with the zoning and plan designations for
the property. The applicants respectfully request that the City Council reconsider the Planning
Commission's decision, in light of the practical development constraints on the property and the
applicants' attempts to address the City's concerns.
~f.
KEVIN E.
of Wallace
Attorneys for Applicants
1775 32D4Place, NE
Salem, OR 97303
(503) 585-0105
Page 6 - Appellate Statement
"
<:>
'"
~
x::
_r
...""
"'...
co
-~~c.,,-
~i~
f~~
",O...J
<......
~'"
"'''
<->:5
i"e
U~
uv::-
, ,
';>9f\1
.
;;
'0
-co
:l.u
I""
''''''
-...-
....
_oq
'...~
u,!;
~~u
<<0<->
::>u~
o ~
<->X...J
"'.
..-X
",z.~
In C_U')
:: -0......:
o . ..
Z -1\1""
-.",
........
".."
\
I :g
1\\ B <t
\ I ...~
li\\ ~a
;0...; ~ \ :',' '"
ij+lJ
~
r
~
i
,0
:5
~~
l
I 0
<t
cI'l ...
I ..
:- :z:
, :z '0
J
::
II!
;
-aQa-
Nh~Y/l 'I:) .ot
$
.
, .
QI
Wl~
c.LEA\JeI-+
I
,.
I~
t, ,
p'
Ijl
Ll.J
Ci
\J
<t:
w Q
Z
lt1
~ ...
\:: Q
lI'l
Z It>
-., ~
--.J
IJ', <;>
~
~
,
..,
%
~
~-
Y""
"1-
O.
<-
oJ)
~
""
c:
cc
--'
"'''
_0
"'"
'-a.
a~
...r.
~, '"
~~lr
....1;""-
..
110
-~ ...
=~ 0
u'" ~
c:- III
ti: ~
It
~l
",.
C>
~r-s6 ."',, 411 I
U!~:
5SJ:l:JY ,o'n . f
oo~O(; ".DO.Sir.
,OO'OL "'..
~:g
~~2
.,....
\:18
. i!t
.,
'lI,j
"
/
.01:'09
...
...
Ill..;
-0
3$
o
.
o
..:...~
OIDO
~o~
"'-<<
:z:
...J
;~
i
,)
I)
i "\ OO'OL
g :
) ..; ---. g4"'I
; 110 ~____~~~
; .o~g) liD 00'
_%01
) ~~..::
) ~i=~
-,:,~--,
) ~~Q,.C
)
)
)
.0
~~
Q.::>-
....0%
Qc:....
...;;
~~~
.........
,
~
~~
~I!
...
... .
'"
1-0
00
..Jon
'"
'"
~ M .,; ;
- ~
... 0 oD 9
... :e :
~I
;'1
%,
)
.l~-oo
','-
9O,Ot" "'.
'.
SO.(,l
..
.20'OLT 3_a,.9E.L~
9N!IV(J~
4 Sti
11:1
.. -0'
Il. ,,:!!!E..J.S .'1
MlilOJ.S . ZI
S' ...
1'01
-I'~' ~--~
~ z
\
o
, "'f'-
II
-
01
.....
V
10
....
o
o
It')
-
~
't.
-:;.
'0
....
"2,
1'1
Z
:TAffae."
... .,
.-"
>-c
cll"lt:
2r..'
i!i:
~~~.
:iQ..
~~!;
:l~-~
i-<l!l:
",~.....
.-_<C
~"'~:
; ~5f:
.... i-,!l:
i !~l!;:
! :j~!:
C_~j
lOA
..,....
:Z
0
l-I
<t
::E
a:
D.
u..
Z
-
....l
<t
a::
w i
z ~
WI ...J
c..
Q.
c.!), ~
....... fNt>
b" (.IiN~
I>t..
lA
CITY OF WOODBURN
Community Development
MEMORANDUM
270 Montgomery Street
Woodburn, Oregon 97071
(503) 982-5246
From:
October 22, 2001
Honorable Mayor and City Council thru City Administrato~
Jim Mulder, Director of Community Developmentt
Ordinance for Zone Change 01-04
Date:
To:
Subject:
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the attached ordinance in support of approval of Zone
Change 01-04.
BACKGROUND: The City Council, at its October 8, 2001 meeting, conducted a public
hearing concerning the above referenced project. At the conclusion of that hearing, the
Council directed staff to prepare an ordinance in support of approval of Zone Change 01-
04. That ordinance is attached.
11
COUNCIL BILL NO. 2353
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION ON CERTAIN
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3002 STACY ALLISON WAY (.9 ACRE STRIP OF LAND
LOCATED ON THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF TAX LOT #1200) FROM MARION
COUNTY "URBAN TRANSITION FARM" (UTF) TO CITY OF WOODBURN
"COMMERCIAL GENERAL DISTRICT" (CG) ;
WHEREAS, the Woodburn Zoning Map has established certain land uses within the City
of Woodburn's Urban Growth Boundary; and
WHEREAS, the Woodburn Planning Commission has previously conducted a public
hearing and considered the application filed herein; and
WHEREAS, the Woodburn City Council has conducted a public hearing and reviewed
the record in Zone Map Amendment Case 01-04; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY OF WOODBURN ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The subject property is owned by Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust and is
legally described in the "parcel boundary" attached as part of Exhibit "A," which is by this
reference incorporated herein.
Section 2. That based upon the findings and conclusions contained in Exhibit "B"
attached hereto, the zone designation on the subject property is changed from Marion County
"Urban Transition Farm" (UTF) to City of Woodburn "Commercial General District" (CG).
Section 3. This ordinance being necessary for the immediate preservation of the public
peace, health, and safety, an emergency is declared to exist and this ordinance shall take effect
immediately upon passage by the Council and approval by the Mayor.
ryJA--~ to-ft-Zoo,
Approved as to form: .' 1 .., r I r"-J
City Attorney Date
Approved:
Richard Jennings, Mayor
Passed by the Council
Submitted to the Mayor
Page 1 - COUNCIL BILL NO.
ORDINANCE NO.
Exhibit II A"
'JUL-IG-D1 1.:.8
;~.
~~.f:
~&:. w.t.MIftA'*''''
:.~ ..:::-
'""
F~
'-I
,
11
Bciac~ Ca Soaioa 12. TOWDddpS Soarb. bacc 2. W~O(~ WiIbaIc:ac Maidid, MarioA~.
Orq:on. --
~ ..pain( 04 (he SoaCluiPl-<<"..y..ay 1ipo GfW~ lh.~ Stn:lct ~ bcm Nonh IS. SZ. 10"
"'cst 121.17 &dflam Cbe NORh-..cstcamcrofL<< I. B1cd69, WOODBORNSENIOIt esrA-ms NO.7,
as rc=tdcd III VoIulu.c 22. Pap 42. Book arTOWA Pbts (0(" t.bIWD~. ~ ~ SotC QI-
(J7' $0'" Wa.2I.09 foct; ~ Noc1hIr $2' tOR West 1.~9."( feet t<J <II ~lAtoa.thc WesIt:':rl;t riglu-af-
-way Iiac: atStal:y A1Iisocl Wa.r. T'beIIcc Nonh 3S- 55' IT East. ~ gid IiDe 34.05 fed 10 a po~
1'LcGce Soucb U. 52: [0"' East 1.329.16 fa::( 1.0 Ihe pafa( at'bedanUIc. bdag the ~ poiQ( a(fhe
dcI::ripCioIl GCIl\c: W AL-MART IACt as dc:saibed In Wamwy Dcx:d. ~ em. Ra:l1684, hge 753.
Deed Rt:oords otMarion 0Kucy. ~
~ 0_9 aac:s eland.
Revised May 2. 200 1
-
-
I.
~UL-I~I 14:4. rKUM-
J. fM~ L:i
,. ~:~, (
'~1~ f<<)8M\ · .,
a"
JiXBIBn" A
l'aIo:
..- 'ii 8i~
CJ -<S: \. <D..-: CJ
0 8 ~ CJ
C) C) t:"1
co ......
C) G\
t--
~
~
T-463
F-4Ss
IIA
..-
\
r--.
-,
. ,
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
f
.
,
I
I
I
.
t
.
.
.
. -
.
. .
. .
. .
. "
.
.
,
,
,
.
,
,
~:
~L ·
~-y~ "-~
x," ;s..: -.. _
~_ D~ r<)'."
}6~C)
4- % '<:i-h
. <:::l
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
..
..
,
,
"
"- ,
.. ..
""
..
,
.
.
I
.
.
.
.
,
.
.
.,.
: ..........
.
I
.
r
r
,
.
.
.
.
r-r)
_ <=:J
....~
....-
.
..
,
,
.
..
",
.
,
..
.
,
.
,
'.
-.
..
..
I
,
.
..
~<c-,
-~
..
.
-
-.
'.
..
.
..
..
..
,
..
..
"
..
..
,
''''...
'..
".
o
o
-
-
..
,
'.
,
,
-, .
..
..
..
,..
a...a....
...
,
~
~~ .:~,
...~...:-
.. .(..f:,~.
.-- ...- .
.4 ~ .. ..4 .
. r....u
FIGURE 1
-~
....
.. ...
-
": _. ... -:~~;. ~ t~ ..
. .. I .. ~"I .f.... . .
, ~=. '~'~:fi; H'" :'
EXHIBIT B
Page 1
lA
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
I. APPLICATION INFORMATION:
Applicant & Property Owner: Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust,
2001 SE Tenth Street, Bentonville, AR 72712-8703
II. NATURE OF APPLICATION:
The applicant requested a zone change for the subject site from Marion
County "UTF" (Urban Transition Farm) to City of Woodburn "CG"
(Commercial General District) on a .9 acre strip of land on the southern
portion of Tax Lot #1200 located at 3002 Stacy Allison Way.
III. RELEVANT FACTS:
The subject site is located at 3002 Stacy Allison Way. It can be identified
specifically on Marion County Tax Assessor's Map as T5S, R2W, Section
12C, Tax Lot 1200.
The subject property is zoned Marion County "UTF" (Urban Transition
Farm) and designated Commercial on the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan
Map. The properties to the north (Across Stacy Allison Road) and south
are designated Commercial on the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan Map
and zoned "CG" (Commercial General District). A Wal-Mart Store is
located to the north of the subject property. The property to the south of
the subject site is currently vacant. West Hayes Street lies to the east and
Interstate 5 to the west of the subject strip of land.
The annexation of the subject site (.9 acre strip of land located on the
southern portion of Tax Lot #1200) into the City of Woodburn was
approved by the City Council on June 11, 2001 (ref. Ordinance No. 2289
approving Annexation 01-03).
The applicant is not proposing to develop the property as part of this Zone
Change request.
IV. RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA:
A. Woodburn Comprehensive Plan
B. Woodburn Zoning Ordinance
1. Chapter 7. Public Hearings
2. Chapter 15. Zone Change Procedures
3. Chapter 16. Comprehensive Plan Amendment Procedure
4. Chapter 30. CG - Commercial General District
EXHIBIT B
Page 2
1 A
C. Woodburn Access Management Ordinance
D. Woodburn Transportation Systems Plan
v. ANALYSIS:
A. Woodburn Comprehensive Plan:
FINDING: Applicable goals and policies have been satisfied
through the implementation of the Woodburn Zoning Ordinance and
other applicable ordinances in affect at the time of approval. The
designated land use for the property is Commercial on the
Comprehensive Plan Map. The subject site is currently vacant.
This approval criteria was met.
B. Woodburn Zoning Ordinance:
1. Chapter 7 Public Hearings
FINDING: Property owners within the notification area were
noticed 20 days prior to the public hearing. This approval
criteria was met.
2. Chapter 15 Zone Change Procedure
Section 15.010. Amendments. A Zone Change is a
reclassification of any area from one zone or district to
another, after the proposed change has been reviewed and
a recommendation made by the Planning Commission.
Such change shall be by an ordinance enacted by the
Common Council after proceedings have been
accomplished in accordance with the following provisions.
Section 15.035. Hearing Before the Planning
Commission. The Planning Commission shall hold a public
hearing as described in Chapter 7 of the Zoning Ordinance.
After concluding its hearing, the Planning Commission shall
prepare a report setting forth a summary of facts and
conditions involved in the reclassification and submit the
same, together with its recommendation to the Common
Council.
Section 15.040. Hearing Before the Common Council. If
the Common Council so desires, it may hold a public hearing
on any proposed Zone Change or reclassification as
provided in Chapter 7. Any Zone Change or reclassification
of property shall be by ordinance, and shall not be passed
II
11,^
EXHIBIT B
Page 3
until after the conclusion of a public hearing held either by
the Planning Commission or Common Council. Denial of a
Zone Change or reclassification shall be by motion. The
petitioner may present written or oral information to the
Common Council at the time the rezone or reclassification is
considered. Whenever any change is authorized by the
Common Council, the Official Zoning Map shall be changed
as provided in Section 4.050.
FINDING: A zone change was requested as part of this
proposal from Marion County's UTF Zone to the City's CG
District. This zone designation is compatible with the CG
zoning on the properties to the north and south of the subject
property as well as with the Commercial designation on the
Comprehensive Plan Map. A further discussion of the zone
change criteria is included in the following section.
3. Chapter 16 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Procedure
Section 16.080 Burden of Proof. The following specific
questions shall be given consideration in evaluating
requests regarding ... zoning amendments and are as
follows:
( b ) To support a zone change, the applicant shall:
1. Show there is a need for the use proposed;
FINDING: The subject property (.9 acre strip of land located
on the southern portion of Tax Lot #1200) was an island of
unincorporated land that was recently annexed into the city.
A City of Woodburn zone designation was not established on
the subject site when the property was annexed into the city.
Thus, the site is located within the city limits but still retains
the Marion County zoning designation of "Urban Transition
Farm." The applicant requested that the proper City of
Woodburn zoning designation be assigned to the subject
property to best correspond to the Woodburn
Comprehensive Plan and Zone Maps.
The three zone designations that correspond to a
commercial designation in the Comprehensive Plan are "CO"
(Commercial Office), "CR" (Commercial Retail) and "CG"
(Commercial General). The proposed zoning designation for
the subject site should correspond to the commercial zoning
on the adjacent properties. The properties to the north and
1 A
EXHIBIT B
Page 4
south of the subject site are zoned "Commercial General"
(CG). A CG zoning on the subject site corresponds to the
Commercial designation on the Woodburn Comprehensive
Plan Map and the CG zoned properties to the north and
south. The applicant's zone change request meets this
approval criteria.
2. Show that the particular piece of property in
question will best meet that need.
FINDING: A CG zoning on this particular piece of property
best corresponds to the same CG zoning on the properties
located to the north and south. The subject property was
recently annexed into the City of Woodburn. A zone change
from the Marion County zoning of UTF to City of Woodburn
CG zoning corresponds to the subject property being in the
jurisdiction of the City of Woodburn Comprehensive Plan
and Zoning Code. The applicant's zone change request
meets this approval criteria.
C. Woodburn Access Management Ordinance
FINDING: The subject property is accessed via Stacy Allison Way.
The applicant is not proposing a new access as part of this zone
change request. The applicant's zone change request complies
with this approval criteria.
D. Woodburn Transportation System Plan
FINDING: The applicant is not requesting the development of the
subject property at this time. The applicant requested that the
proper zoning designation be assigned to the property that is
compatible with the adjacent zoning and the existing Woodburn
Comprehensive Plan designation. The applicant's zone change
request complies with this approval criteria.
VI CONCLUSION: The proposal satisfies all approval criteria relating to a
zone change.
lIB
MEMO
TO:
o
City Council through City Administrato~
Public Works Program Manager 4
FROM:
SUBJECT: Water System Development Charge Resolution
DATE:
October 12, 2001
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve the attached resolution establishing an amended schedule of Water System
Development Charges.
BACKGROUND:
Ordinance 2070, which established the water system development charge (SDC), requires
that the water system development charge schedule be established by resolution. The
new water SDC methodology and the new schedule was recommended by the Water
Master Plan Committee.
City Council received public input at the October 8, 2001 public hearing on the amended
water SOC. At the conclusion of the public hearing, council directed staff to prepare the
implementing resolution which adopts the revised water SOC methodology and the revised
water SDC rate schedule. This new water SOC schedule will be effective on January 1,
2002. Staff recommends that the resolution be approved.
IB
COUNCIL BILL NO.
2354
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A NEW SCHEDULE FOR WATER SYSTEM
DEVELOPMENT CHARGES AND AMENDING RESOLUTION 1079.
WHEREAS, ORS 223.297-223.314 authorized local governments to impose
system development charges (SDC), and
WHEREAS, the City of Woodburn passed Ordinance 2070, establishing system
development charges for water and placing certain restrictions on their use, and
WHEREAS, Ordinance 2070 provides that the amounts of system development
charges be set by a resolution, and Resolution 1079 establishes such charges, and
WHEREAS, after holding a final public hearing on October 8, 2001 the city
council accepted the recommendation of the Water Master Plan Committee to amend
existing water system development charges, and
WHEREAS, amended water system development charges are to be implemented
as set forth in the April 2001 City of Woodburn Water Rate and SDC Study, NOW
THEREFORE:
THE CITY OF WOODBURN RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That Resolution 1079 is amended so as to establish a new
schedule of water system development charges. Exhibit liB" of Resolution 1 079,
related to water, is amended as follows:
A. Residential Type
1.
Single family attached/detached,
manufactured home on separate
tax lots and multi-family unit
$2,085.00
2.
Mobil home established in a mobile
home park
$1,688.00
Page 1
COUNCIL BILL NO.
RESOLUTION NO.
B. Commercial and Industrial, based on estimated average flow of peak day.
Flow, $/gallon/day
$ 7.84
Section 2. That this resolution is effective January 1, 2002
Approved as to form~ t ~ ~
City Attorney
(0-11- C:J 0 I
Date
APPROVED:
Richard Jennings, Mayor
Passed by the Council
Submitted to the Mayor
Approved by the Mayor
Filed in the Office of the Recorder
ATTEST:
Mary Tennant, Recorder
City of Woodburn, Oregon
Page 2
COUNCIL BILL NO.
RESOLUTION NO.
~B
! I
II
! i
H+-
1 C
MEMO
DATE:
City Council through C~ '
Public Works Director ~~^"""~
-
October 15, 2001
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Approval of Agreement among Developers and Validation of Sewerage Cost
Sharing Conditions
RECOMMENDATION: It is requested that City Council approve the attached resolution that
validates the attached agreement, avoids consideration and council decision on creation of a
reimbursement district, and provides an acceptable finality to sewerage cost sharing issue.
BACKGROUND:
City approved Miller Links, Heritage Meadows and Meadow Park Subdivisions with certain cost
sharing conditions. The major cost sharing issue is related to the Vanderbeck Road
improvement, and the minor cost sharing issue is related to the sewerage system improvements.
The developers of the all three subdivisions have reached an agreement on the cost sharing
issue and will withdraw the request for creation of a reimbursement district if this agreement
meets the city's conditions and council approval.
The city does not have any interest in determining the allocation of fair share cost when the
developers have already agreed to it.
The agreement allows the following activities to take place:
1) No reimbursement district consideration would be needed
2) Widening of Vanderbeck at Boones Ferry from 24' to 34' would be completed by the
developers at their cost (Note: Construction plans have already been submitted to the city for
approval)
3) Places money in escrow or city Recorder's Trust Account so city could distribute money
according to developers' agreement after city council approval of the agreement
4) City acceptance of sewerage cost distribution is validated and finalized
5) Removes the confusion and places full responsibility on one developer of improving the
unimproved and sub-standard portion of Vanderbeck Street to city requirements.
During the implementation of this agreement, city staff will deal with only one developer of
Heritage Meadows Subdivision and no other developer will be involved. MC Builders, the
developer of Miller Links Subdivision, would have shifted its financial obligations of road and
sewerage cost issues to the developer of Heritage Meadows subdivision. Staff is quite supportive
of this arrangement. City shall collect the agreed upon amount of money prior to issuance of
construction permit for development of Heritage Meadows Subdivision.
Page 1 of 2
Ie
As a separate issue that is of interest to the city, the developer of Heritage Park subdivision has
offered to deposit his share of money for road improvement of Country Club Road and Boones
Ferry Road in the near future. A recommendation on this topic would be brought to the city
before the end of this year.
Since the terms of the agreement have been agreed upon by the developers involved, the city
staff does not have to prepare a recommendation and the city council does not have to make any
decision involving the creation of a reimbursement district.
Staff requests that the city council approve the attached resolution that validates the cost sharing
issue without involving the city too deeply in making a decision on the creation of a
reimbursement district.
GST:lg
Attachment: Map showing all three subdivisions
Resolution
Agreement
GSnVanderbeck St\Agrmt\CC
Page 2 of 2
r-!2.~ /rI
_ r-.r--. ")
= == =~ I
_ ---3 EAGLE DRIVE
-~ - - ~
~_ >- _ ~ 0 /
- -<<- t:i I.&J
~ _ ~--I.&J ~ I.&J
-::i - 0:: t; 8l T
-~=-~=~nl ~ ~ 1-M11~;~~ J
- - - ~ArlOiS: -~- I 1111"'J,~ If
-J - <( - - i~ ..... rl.l'I~~ !t
WDR r- _- ~ Q: IUNKER AVENUE i5
L ) SECTION OF
I T ~ VANDERBECK YET
;CK [. I J '~ :J 10 BE JOENED
HE ~ (r I'NL~DENcEIAVE , ~~--VJ~ :::D:U~~EE1
- [I - . ~~NDENc.rcT / ,
lJj fI I -:- ~~ C~N~_I=i ~j~
@I )/:i ...,
,;,L ~-- t; J\ ~) ,,; , -}f
).. ~L <: -'t5 /.~ ~\ ,.'\. ~ 1 R Q
~ I fL I ~ ~ ' '~' 0 /' ~ ~o:
~Cl ~ }15 Q; 8 J/~ '-=L I P1~ 7-
- fil---.. ~ MUNCTON STREET I ~ 1.:/1
~1'COUNTRYLLol ]'"1 I If 7~
~ I I , Tf------LJ=/
= 7 ~~;i-
ATTACHMENT
MAP SHDVING ALL
THREE SUBDIVISIDNS
I
~,
J~C1
tg
llC
-
7
/
II
-/~
~~
.,
11
COUNCIL BILL NO.
2355
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION ENTERING INTO A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH M-C
BUILDERS, INC., HERITAGE MEADOWS, LLC AND IDDDEN CREEK
PROPERTIES, LLC. AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN SAID
AGREEMENT.
WHEREAS, M-C Builders is the developer of Miller Links, a residential subdivision
approved by the City and located on the north side of Vanderbeck Lane, and
WHEREAS, Hidden Creek Properties is the developer of Heritage Park, a residential
subdivision approved by the City and located on the south side of Vanderbeck Lane, and
WHEREAS, Heritage Meadows owns and plans to develop Heritage Meadows, a
residential subdivision approved the City and located on the north side of Vanderbeck Lane,
immediately west of Miller Links; and
WHEREAS, M-C, Hidden Creek Properties and Heritage Meadows agree that they are
bound by the conditions of approval which apply to each of their developments and that City has
the legal authority to create a reimbursement district; and
WHEREAS, in fulfilling the conditions of approval of each of their respective
developments and instead of City forming a reimbursement district, M-C, Hidden Creek
Properties and Heritage Meadows have agreed upon the amounts to be reimbursed, upon the
timing of reimbursement payments, and now want to make a written record of their mutual
understanding in a Development Agreement;
NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY OF WOODBURN RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the City of Woodburn enter into a Development Agreement with M-C
Builders, Inc, Heritage Meadows, LLC, and Hidden Creek Properties, LLC. A copy of said
agreement is affixed hereto as Attachment "A" and is, by this reference, incorporated herein.
Section 2. That the Mayor is authorized to sign said agreement on behalf of the City.
Approved as to form?fJ f t'}/t ~ , 0 - J ~ . 2 0 t} I
N. Robert Shields, City Attorney Date
Approved:
Richard Jennings, Mayor
Page 1 -
COUNCIL BILL NO.
RESOLUTION NO.
Ie
ATTACHMENT A
Page --'- of S
DUPLICATE ORIGINAL
COPY OF
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
This Agreement is made this day of ,2001 by and among the City
of Woodburn, an Oregon municipal corporation (hereinafter "City"), M-C Builders, Inc., an
Oregon corporation (hereinafter "M-C"), Heritage Meadows, LLC, an Oregon limited liability
company (hereinafter "HM"), and Hidden Creek Properties, LLC, an Oregon limited liability
company, (hereinafter "HCP").
WHEREAS, M-C is the developer of Miller Links, a residential subdivision approved by
City and located on the north side of Vanderbeck Lane, in Woodburn, Oregon; and
WHEREAS, HCP is the developer of Heritage Park, a residential subdivision approved
by City and located on the south side of Vanderbeck Lane, in Woodburn, Oregon; and
WHEREAS, HM owns and plans to develop Heritage Meadows, a residential
subdivision approved by City and located on the north side of Vanderbeck Lane, immediately
west of Miller Links; and
WHEREAS, City is a municipal corporation with the legal authority to grant
development approvals and to create a reimbursement district; NOW, THEREFORE,
WITNESSETH
IN CONSIDERATION of the recitals and mutual covenants and agreements set forth in
this Agreement, the parties agree as follows:
Section 1. Recitals
A. M-C constructed, at its initial cost and expense, most of the easterly 1,136 lineal
feet of Vanderbeck Lane, running from the southwest comer of Miller Links in an
easterly direction along the south line of Miller Links and the north line of
Heritage Park to the intersection of Vanderbeck Lane with Boones Ferry Road.
B. Due to the perceived right-of-way constraints, the westerly 375 lineal feet of this
portion of Vanderbeck Lane was constructed by M-C to a substandard width of
24 feet.
C. The improvements to Vanderbeck Lane that have been completed by M-C as of
the date of this Agreement are hereinafter referred to as the "Vanderbeck
Improvements. "
D. The cost of improvements incurred by M-C to date to construct the Vanderbeck
Improvements (including earthwork, clearing, storm sewer, street lights, road
work, a change order regarding drainage and engineering) is $131,623.58.
Page 1 - Development Agreement
11
ATTACHJ,1ENT .AS
Page ~ of
DUPUCA TE ORIGINAL
COPY OF
E. City requires that the westerly 375 lineal feet of Vanderbeck Lane be widened to
34 feet to comply with City standards.
F. The estimated cost of widening the aforesaid 375 lineal feet of Vanderbeck Lane
to 34 feet is $22,000.00.
G. HCP proposes to widen the aforesaid 375 lineal feet of Vanderbeck Lane to 34
feet in accordance with the standards of City, with HCP to incur and pay the cost
thereof, and with HCP to be reimbursed by M-C upon completion of said
widening, as set forth herein below.
H. M-C also constructed, at its initial cost and expense, a sanitary sewer line running
in an easterly direction along the Vanderbeck Lane right-of-way approximately
1,162 lineal feet from the manhole located in the intersection of Roanoke Street
and the Vanderbeck Lane right-of-way (hereinafter referred to as "the Sewer Line
Improvement. ")
I. M -C has incurred costs and expenses of constructing the Sewer Line
Improvement totaling $92,553.78.
J. As a condition of its approval of the Heritage Park Subdivision, City has required
HCP to pay its "fair share" of the costs incurred by M-C in making the
Vanderbeck Improvements.
K. M-C, HCP and HM agree that they are bound by the conditions of approval which
apply to each of their developments and that City has the legal authority to create
a reimbursement district.
L. Upon its execution of this Agreement, making the payment to City as provided
herein, and complying with the conditions of its development approval, M-C will
have fulfilled its sewerage cost sharing requirement.
M. Upon its execution of this Agreement, making the payment to M-C as provided
herein, and complying with the conditions of its development approval, HCP will
have fulfilled its sewerage cost sharing requirement. Pursuant to the conditions
of its development approval, HCP has dedicated real property for location of a
pump station and agreed to pay $42,170.00 for the sewer lines installed by City to
benefit the Heritage Meadows Subdivision.
N. Upon its execution of this Agreement, making the payment to City as provided
herein prior to issuance of a construction permit for a sanitary sewer permit on
Heritage Meadows, and complying with the conditions of its development
approval, HM will have fulfilled its sewerage cost sharing requirement.
O. In fulfilling the conditions of approval of each of their respective developments
Page 2 - Development Agreement
ATTACHMENT A
Page.-3- of ~
1 C
DUPLICATE ORIGINAL
COPY OF
and instead of City forming a reimbursement district, M-C, HCP and HM have
agreed upon the amounts to be reimbursed, upon the timing of reimbursement
payments, and they wish to make a written record of their mutual understanding
in this Agreement.
Section 2. Parties.
All parties agree that City is executing this Agreement solely for the purpose of insuring
that the required public improvements are completed by the private parties and that City assumes
no liability for any of the development contemplated by this Agreement. M-C, HCP, HM, and
each of them, agree that City cannot be held liable for damages under this Agreement and shall
hold City and its agents harmless for any claim or legal action of any type under this Agreement
including any applicable costs and attorneys fees.
Section 3. Reimbursement Obli2ations.
A. Vanderbeck Widening. In fulfillment of their obligation to widen Vanderbeck
Lane, HCP shall widen the 375 lineal feet of Vanderbeck Lane to City standards
and M-C agrees to pay HCP the sum of$lf,OOO.OO.
B. Vanderbeck Improvements. In fulfillment of their obligation to improve
Vanderbeck Lane, HCP agrees to pay M-C the sum of$65,811.79 as its share of
the Vanderbeck Improvements which were already completed by M-C.
C. Sewer Line Improvement. In fulfillment of their obligation to construct a sanitary
sewer line in an easterly direction along Vanderbeck Lane for approximately
1,161 lineal feet, HM agrees to pay M-C the sum of $32,052.95 as its share of the
Sewer Line Improvements which were already completed by M-C.
D. Pump Station Construction. In fulfillment of its obligation to contribute to City
its fair share of the sewer pump station, M-C agrees to pay City the sum of
$34,500.00 which constitutes its share.
Section 4. Payment.
A. Three days after the Woodburn City Council approves this Agreement, HCP shall
pay to M-C the sum of$54,811.80 (which represents the HCP share amount
expended by M-C for the Vanderbeck Improvements offset by the amount agreed
to be paid by M-C to HCP for the Vanderbeck widening.) HCP shall place this
sum in escrow to the City Recorders Trust Account so that it can be paid to M-C
by HCP within three days after approval of this Agreement by the Woodburn City
Council.
B. Upon execution of this Agreement, M-C shall pay City the sum of $2,447.05
(which represents M-C's fair share contribution to the sewer pump station offset
Page 3 - Development Agreement
ATTAC~ENT J.3
Page of!j
DUPUCA TE ORIGINAL
COPY OF
by the amount M-C expended for the construction of the Sewer Line
Improvement, with the share owed by HM to M-C assigned to City to be
collected by City from HM.)
C. Prior to the issuance of a construction permit by City for the development of the
Heritage Meadows subdivision, HM shall pay to City the sum of $32,052.95
(which represents the share of the Sewer Line Improvement constructed by M-C,
which amount was assigned to City by M-C for City to collect from HM.) In
addition, City shall collect from HM interest at the rate of 6.5% on the unpaid
balance from the date of the City Council's approval of this Agreement.
Section 5. Acknowled2ment.
The parties hereby acknowledge and agree that the payment of the amounts specified
herein constitute full fair share reimbursements for the Vanderbeck Improvements, the widening
of Vanderbeck Lane, the Sewer Line Improvement, and the sewerage system upgrades required
by the development conditions. It is also acknowledged that it will be the responsibility of HM
to construct the unimproved and substandard portion of Vanderbeck Road and complete the
water line loop fronting Heritage Meadows subdivision.
Section 6. Enforcement.
The parties may enforce or compel the performance of this Agreement; provided,
however, that all parties agree that they will not seek, and do not have the legal right to seek or
recover a judgment for monetary damages against City or its elected or appointed officials,
officers, employees, or agents on account of the negotiation, execution or breach of any of the
terms and conditions of this ~greement. In addition to every other remedy permitted by law for
the enforcement of the terms of this Agreement, City shall be entitled to withhold the issuance of
building permits or certificates of occupancy for any and all buildings and structures when the
parties have failed or refused to meet fully any of their obligations under this Agreement.
Section 7. No Third Party Beneficiaries.
No claim as a third party beneficiary under this Agreement by any person, firm or
corporation shall be made or be valid against the parties to this Agreement.
Section 8. Attorneys Fees.
In the event of any suit or action to enforce this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be
entitled to, in addition to the statutory costs and disbursements, reasonable attorneys fees to be
fixed by the trial and appellate courts from the time such action is filed.
Section 9. Governin2 Law.
This Agreement shall be governed by, construed and enforced in accordance with the
Page 4 - Development Agreement
1
ATTACHMENT A
PftQO ~ of -::
IIC
DUPliCATE ORIGINAL
COPY OF
laws of the State of Oregon.
Section 10. Severability.
It is hereby expressed to be the intent of the parties that should any portion of this
Agreement be held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions of this
Agreement shall remain fully enforceable and valid.
Section 11. Entire A~reement.
This Agreement shall constitute the entire agreement of the parties to this Agreement;
and all prior agreements between the parties, whether written or oral, are merged into this
Agreement and shall be of no force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed in
their respective names effective the day and year fIrst herein above written.
CITY OF WOODBURN:
HERITAGE MEADOWS, LLC
By:
Richard Jennings Mayor
By:
Title:
Date:
Date:
M-C BmLDERS, INC.
HIDDEN CREEK PROPERTIES, LLC
By:
Title:
Date:
By:
Title:
Date:
Page 5 - Development Agreement
MEMO
To: For Council Action, through the City Adrninistrator~
From: David N. Torgeson, P.E., through the Public Works Director ~
Subject: School District Easement for Sidewalk on West Hayes Street ·
Date: October 16,2001
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council accept the Sidewalk Easement requested and prepared by
city Public Works staffand granted by Woodburn School District.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Woodburn has agreed to administer a contract for a new concrete sidewalk on the
south side of West Hayes Street, on property owned by the School District. The sidewalk will be
located adjacent to the playground fence at Nellie Muir Elementary School. The District will
reimburse the City for actual construction cost of sidewalk. (The City in the same contract will
undertake minor drainage work.)
The location of the walk will conform to future widening of Hayes Street, but because of the
present narrow right-of-way, the easement is necessary for sidewalk construction.
ATTACHMENTS
Easement and exhibit. executed by School District
11~
SIDEWALK EASEMENT
11,
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that Marion County School District 103-C, fO the
consideration of One Dollar ($1.00) and other valuable considerations to them paid, the receipt wh rj:lOf
hereby is acknowledged, hereby do forever grant unto the CITY OF WOODBURN, a Munl ipal
Corporation of Marion County, Oregon referred to herein as the CITY, a permanent right-of-waf nd
easement over and along the full width and length of the premises described as follows, to wit: .
A Sidewalk Easement
The Southerly 17.00 feet of the Northerly 47.00 feet of the Westerly 490.00 feet, less 25.00 feet III
Cascade Drive, of that tract of land conveyed to Marion County School District 103C by deed
recorded in Volume 537, at Page 176, deed records of Marion County, Oregon, all in Section 1
Township 5 South, Range 2 West, Willamette Meridian, with the right, privilege and authority, t
said City, to construct, maintain, replace, reconstruct, remove, and add to the sidewalk, with al
appurtenances incident thereto or necessary therewith, in, under and across the said premises, d
to cut and remove from said right-of-way any trees and other obstructions which may endanger t
safety or interfere with the use of said sidewalk, or appurtenances attached or connected there t ;
and the right of ingress and egress to and over said above described premises at any and all ti s
for the purpose of doing anything necessary or useful or convenient for the enjoyment of the I
easement hereby granted. ! !
THE CITY SHALL, upon each and every occasion that such sidewalk facility is construc;:t 'd,
maintained, replaced, reconstructed or removed, or added to, restore the premises of the Grantors, Od
any improvement disturbed by the City, to as good condition as they were in prior to any $ <;h
installation or work, but if not practicable, then pay to Grantors reasonable compensation.
THE GRANTORS, heirs and assigns, reserve the right to use the premises for walkWf3 s,
driveways, planting, and related purposes. .
Accepted by the Woodburn City Council i
on ,2001 !
~ .,
/
'J {'((i/.' j /'- (( \.. ~L -,
:JaCk/Reeves, Superintendent
Marion County School District 103-C
Mary Tennant, City Recorder
City of Woodburn, Oregon
5T ATE OF OREGON )
) 5S
COUNTY OF MARION )
On this the ~ day of S~rteJnbeY
personally appeared
known to me to be the same person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged t~at
they voluntarily executed the same for the purpose therein contained,
2001, before me a Notary Public in and for the County and St~te
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand and official seal.
Before me:
~~/ 7' "ffu.~
NOTARY PUBLIC FOR OREGON
My Commission Expires: q /2 :2/0Y
~-------
~'~~ OFFICIAL SEAL
,,~~.ti IRENE E. VELlCHKO
*';: NOTARY PUBlIC,OREGON
~,e(', COMr.~ISSION NO, 337303
I"Y,,' .'....'.;S,;. IYI'i1'SSIPf 22.2004
.__w_. ... _... ,.. ..__ ____.
.1
--->
i ,
, d'
X184.4
€.HENj
~B
.\:. ..J
~ -,,~ r.
-J
X 183.3
-.Q--o--<:
X183
X
1844
/JELl.Je: ftVIR SClICOL
frJ
n
182
1 R' ')
1 E
MEMO
Date:
For Council Action, through the City Administrato~7
David N. Torgeson., P.E., through the Public Works Director ~
Contract award for Sidewalk and Storm Drain Improvements - West ~~yes Street
(Near Nellie Muir School) Project No. 2001-068-20, Bid No. 22-15
October 19,2001
To:
From:
Subject:
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council award the contract for Sidewalk and Storm Drain
Improvements - West Hayes Street to the lowest responsible bidder, Gelco Construction, Inc.. in
the amount of$13,01O.00.
BACKGROUND:
The work involves alterations to an existing storm drain near Nellie Muir School, to be performed
at City expense, and construction of a sidewalk from the school, west to the intersection of W.
Hayes with Cascade Drive. The sidewalk work will be reimbursed by Woodburn School District.
The results of public bids for the project are as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Gelco Construction, Inc.
Three Sons Concrete
Zink Commercial Contractors
KJS
Axis Curb
D & A General Contractors
Engineer's Estimate:
Total Bid
$13,010.00
$14,868.00
$16,415.00
$16738.00
$17,285.00
$18,195.00
$15,925.00
Sidewalk Portion
$10,186.00
Payment Obligation:
School District $10,186.00
City $2.824.00
Total $13,010.00
Sidewalk Obligation
Storm Drain Obligation
Woodburn School District has agreed to pay their share ofthe cost ofthis project.
11
MEMO
FROM:
City Council through City Administrato~
David Torgeson, Assistant City Engineer ~
Bid Award for Used Van
TO:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
October 17,2001
RECOMMENDATION:
Award City of Woodburn Bid 22-07 for a used van to the low responsible bidder, Hubbard Chevrolet,
in the amount of$14,737.00, plus DMV & Document fees.
BACKGROUND: City of Woodburn bid number 22-07 for one 1998 or newer used minivan with
less than 40,000 miles and was opened and read at 2:00 P.M. on October 17, 2001. Results were as
follows:
Bidder
Hubbard Chevrolet (2001 Chevrolet Astro)
Canby Ford (2000 Ford Windstar)
Hershberger Motors (2000 Dodge Caravan)
Amount
$14,737.00
$15,500.00
$15,979.00
Plus DMV & Doc
Kelley Blue Book, at their Internet site, indicates that the retail value for this vehicle is approximately
$15,825, when allowances for mileage and equipment are made. The value ofa 2001 model Astro
LS van is about $17,050, according to NADA book of values. (The LS has several features not
included in the commercial passenger van offered by Hubbard Chevrolet. The comparison is made
solely to suggest that the bid price is competitive for the vehicle offered.)
This vehicle will replace a 1982 Dodge van. The old vehicle will be disposed of within 30 days of
receipt of the replacement vehicle. Standard Public Works policies will be employed in these
transactions.
Contract award for the purchase of vehicle is recommended.
11
MEMO ~
To: For Council Action, through the City Administrator;t;
From: David N.Torgeson, P.E., through the Public Works Director ~
Subject: Contract award for West Lincoln Storm Drain Project /v' /
Date: October 19,2001
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council reject all bids for West Lincoln Storm Drain Project, and
direct staff to issue a call for rebid after specification clarification.
BACKGROUND:
The contract is in conjunction with Project No.2001-047-29, Bid No. 22-16 Bids were opened
publicly on October 17,2001 at 3:00 PM. Staff received a total of twelve bids from pre-qualified
bidders, as shown below.
Contractor Bid Amount
1.) Valley Pacific Construction $221,764.30
2.) Dunn Construction 229,421.00
3.)Canby Excavating 267,850.00
4.)Robinson Construction (RCI) 288,577 .00
5.)Saunders Company 350,770.00
6.) Kasey Cooper Excavation 394,786.61
7.) Kyllo Construction 313,658.00
8.) New West Constructors 374,057.00
9.) Emery & Sons Construction 345,414.25
10.) Gelco Const 341,101.00
11.) Kerr Contractors, Inc 317,127.00
12.) R & G Excavating 346,043.00
The Engineer's Estimate, after completion of final engineering was $216,331.00. However, the
budget that was prepared with the elP Program, (prior to design completion) was only $170,000
Large diameter PVC pipe is a major element of the project. Further clarification concerning the
specification of the pipe was found to be necessary. Additionally, bidders indicated that a possible
savings to the city would result if the contract completion period were extended.
Since the project exceeds the identified resources and some clarification ofthe specificatios is
needed, it is requested that City Council reject all bids. Staffwill rebid the project in early spring
2002.
11
October 22, 2001
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Honorable Mayor and City Council ;rV
John C. Brown, City Administrator~
Contract Award for Building Modifications - 347 Front Street
Background and Discussion:
Bid Opening on the Referenced Project occurred at 4 PM on Friday, October 19,
2001. Because the agenda was prepared prior to bid opening, this item could not
be included in the agenda package. In the interest of expediting this project,
recommendations regarding bid award will be presented to the City Council at
it's October 22, 2001 meeting.
In the meanwhile, if you have any questions regarding this project, please give
me a call.
JCB
111
MEMO
To: For Council Action, through the City Administrato' <TZ
From: Randy Scott, C.E. Tech III, through the Public Works Director 4:; 7.
Subject: Contract award for Settlemier at West Hayes Street Pedestrian Crossing
Warning Signal
Date: October 17,2001
RECOMMENDA TION:
It is being recommended the City Council award the construction contract to the lowest
responsible bidder, Electrical Construction Co. for the installation of a Pedestrian Crossing
Warning Signal at the intersection ofSettlemier and West Hayes in the amount of$19,085.00.
BACKGROUND:
The contract is in conjunction with Project No. 2001-059-29, Bid No. 22-13, for the installation
of a Pedestrian Crossing Warning Signal at the intersection of Settlemier Avenue and West Hayes
Street. The device is being installed to add a level ofprotectionlsafety for school age children in
addition to normal pedestrian traffic.
The Pedestrian Warning Device will be placed via pole and mast arm over Settlemier Avenue. The
device will have an 30" illuminated pedestrian sign and 12" dia. flashers in both the north and
south direction. The warning device is similar to the one installed on Country Country Club Road
with the realignment project.
The project will be funded using following budget line item
363.631.722.013
Signal/Safety Installation
$19,085.00
Staff received a total of two qualified bids as listed below
1.
2.
Electrical Construction Co.
Cherry City Electric
$19,085.00
$23,647.00
En2ineers Estimate
$18.963.00
The low bidder is less than 1 % above the engineer's estimate, therefore staff is recommending the
contract be awarded.
Attached is a project area map
PROJECT AREA MAP
--~.
'.LS 3\.L.LO~
~
I~
I~
1:1
I~
("
'",
~~ ~ J
,.-
...
It
I
~}>lJ
+(J)m
~IO
~mm
\))IU(J)
NlJ~
t:OIU
II}>
;-tmz
/
11
PEDESTRAIN WARNING DE leI
~s
~,~
ll~ ~ i
& I
o~ = =
~(f. ? t
~11 ? I
"'l- ~ ~ J
<I '"
3-. .., ~
!lO:- ::! '" ...
G < 0 a.
l", Ii !. '" I
_ G ill it
:~~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~
[-} ; ,
'"
c G '" ~ ~
(1.0 0 ~
G~ ~ Ii (p 1)
",. ~ ~ 0 O....~;l)
m ~~U'....
~t; ~ ~ ~ ::; ()
;~~ i~ r l> ~-n "
3 (p~~~
'"
1l,g: ~
~~a '" ~Om~
G' (1. iI ~i~~
HC' -g I~ m '- 0
, IT i " (p ~ {II
~I !~ ~Il' m
~i' .. IU~
.. .
-am...
~n I ~~~
t~'i
-~ &. ~ - ~ ~
~B..1 oSo
~iH ~i~~
:i~ 0
0;'\1 'V ~ m
~" "
City of Woodburn
Police Department STAFF REPORT
IIJ
270 Montgomery Street
Woodburn OR 97071
(503) 982-2345
From:
Paul Null, Chief of Poli
Date:
October 12, 2001
To:
Mayor and City Council
John Brown, City Administrator?
Through:
Subject:
Alley Closure Request - Alley at Hayes Street
Ordinance 2225, Sec. 2, Jurisdiction. The City of Woodburn has jurisdiction and
exercises regulatory control over all public
rights-of-way within the city under the authority
of the city charter and state law.
The Woodburn Police Department received an alley closure request from Don
Hagenauer a Woodburn Elks representative. The alley closure request is for Saturday,
October 27,2001, from 4:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. The Elks are requesting to use a portion
of the alley directly behind their lodge to set up Bar-B-Ques for cooking. The event will
be a Recognition Dinner for Woodburn and Hubbard police officers and Marion County
Sheriff's deputies, sponsored by the Woodburn Elks Lodge.
Recommendation: The City Council approve alley closure at Hayes Street for
Saturday, October 27,2001, from 4:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.
cc Matt Gwynn - Street Department
Woodburn Fire Department
Woodburn Ambulance
City of Woodburn
Police Department
11K
STAFF REPORT
Woodburn OR 97071
(503) 982-2345
270 Montgomery Street
Date:
From:
To:
Through:
Subject:
Applicants:
Location:
Owners:
October 16,2001 6V
Paul Null, Chief of Polic ,',
,~
Mayor and City Council
John Brown, City AdministratorP
Liquor License Application - Elmer's Restaurant
WMC Inc
255 Arney Road Suite 100
Woodburn, OR 97071
Elmer's Restaurant
255 Arney Road
Woodburn, OR 97071
Brad Hudspeth
1755 Wickshire Av. S.E.
Salem, OR 97302
Greig D. Olson
19996 S. Meyers Rd.
Oregon City, OR 97045
Stella Olson
19996 S. Meyers Rd.
Oregon City, OR 97045
Greig E. Olson
1552 Greyback Ct. N.W.
Salem, OR 97301
Licence Type: Full On-Premise Sales - Allows for the sale of Distilled Spirts, Malt Beverage,
Wine, and Cider on premise.
Recommendation: The Woodburn City Council approve a Full On-Premise
liquor license for Elmer's Restaurant.
On October 2, 2001, the police department received an application for a liquor license from 11
WMC Inc., owner of Elmer's Restaurant. The department has completed an extensive
background and criminal records investigation on all the members ofWMC Inc. No criminal
record and nothing of a questionable nature was found in their background.
Mr. Greig E. Olson was contacted during the course of the investigation in regards to the
operational plan for his establishment. The business hours of operation are 6:00 a.m. to 10:00
p.m. Monday through Sunday. Mr. Olson advised the restaurant will have a separate, full service
lounge, offthe dinning room area. The lounge will serve approximately 36 persons. The
restaurant has applied for State Lottery and Video Poker machines. Mr. Olson advised there will
be recorded music in the lounge with no plans for live music or dancing.
The police department has received no communication from the general public or surrounding
businesses in support of or against this establishment receiving a liquor license.
cc GLCC
Applicant
11
September, 2001
TO:
City Managers, Administrators and Recorders
FROM:
JoAnn Ghelfi, Conference Manager
Enclosed are the voting delegate and equipment exchange forms for
the League's annual conference. These forms should be completed and
returned to the League office by Friday. October 26.
The equipment exchange provides you the opportunity to advertise for
sale any surplus equipment, autos, etc. you may have, as well as to make
known your interest in purchasing a specific item. Responses received
will be displayed on a bulletin board near the League's registration desk
during the conference.
The voting delegate form, when returned to the League, tells us who will
be voting for your city during the Annual Business Meeting on Sunday,
November 11. Please note that delegates may not vote without a
voting card, and voting cards will be issued only to the person listed
on the voting delegate form. Voting by proxy will not be permitted. The
voting cards will be available the morning of the 11th. just prior to the
business meeting.
Thanks!
Enclosures
JG/jlg
M:\lOC\LOCCONF\2001\equipxch deleg Itr frm.wpd
W 0 r k i 11 g tog e t b e r for I i l' a b I e () reg () J/ C 0 111 m Ii 11 i t e s
. ~_1~,'.j-"<i;o.",f";'f,.~:,"'tf/fl~'~j-r~~~'")';:1~~f:1~~;!*I1X~~_~"l/)'!";\.~~'1lt~~,~~~,~"< '''l";'_'':'''",:
League of Oregon Cities
7tJ'h ANNUAL CONFERENCE and BUSINESS MEETING
11
November 9 - 11, 2001 - Hilton Eugene & Conference Center
Designation of Voting Delegate
at Annual Business Meeting
The annual business meeting will be held Sunday, November 11, at 8:30 a.m. Each
city is entitled to cast one vote at the business meeting; however, all city officials are
encouraged to attend.
Use this form to indicate those persons who will represent your city as a voting delegate
and alternate delegate. The voting delegate or alternate should pick up a voting card at
the Conference Registration Desk on Sunday morning prior to entering the business
meeting. NOTE: Delegates may not vote without a voting card. and voting cards will
be issued only to a person indicated on this form. Voting by proxy will not be permitted.
FOR THE CITY OF
VOTING DELEGATE
Name
Title
ALTERNATE
Name
Title
Submitted by
(Signature)
Return by October 26 to:
League of Oregon Cities
P.O. Box 928
Salem, OR 97308
Name
Title
Telephone Number
M:lLOC\lOCCONF\2001lequlpxch deIeg Itr flm.wpd
14A
CITY OF WOODBURN
Community Development
MEMORANDUM
270 Montgomery Street
Woodburn, Oregon 97071
(503) 982-5246
From:
October 22,2001
Honorable Mayor and City Council thru City Administrato~
Jim Mulder, Director of Community Development ~
Planning Commission's Action on Site Plan ReVi~ 01-10, Phases II
and III of the Woodburn Company Stores
Date:
To:
Subject:
At their meeting of October 11, 2001, the Planning Commission adopted a final order to
approve the modification of Site Plan Review 00-18 for Phases II and III of the
Woodburn Company Stores to allow for (1) the elimination of the westerly driveway and
the fire department turnaround on Arney Lane; (2) the widening of the easterly driveway
on Arney Lane to 36 feet to provide for truck access to and from the Woodburn
Company Stores; and (3) the modification of conditions of approval #1 and #23 of SPR
00-18 to read as follows:
1. The proposed development shall be in substantial conformance with the
approved development plan as shown on sheets AO.1, dated 7/03/01 (as
modified by sheets I and II, dated 09/07/01), AO.2, AO.2B, A1.3, A1.4, A2,
A2.2, A3.4 - A3.6, A4.6 & A4.8, all dated 12/28/00, C-1, C-1 B, C-2, dated
12/20/00 (as modified by sheets I and II, dated 09/07/01), L 1.1 and L 1.2
dated 07/03/01; and Architectural Finishes Board, except as otherwise
amended by these conditions.
23. The east/west road identified as the Old Arney Road [Arney Lane] shall be
constructed to City of Woodburn Standards and Specifications. Minimal
cross sectional requirements shall be as a local access street as
designated within the Transportation System Plan. The minimum right-of-
way width shall be 60 feet. A full street improvement along the entire
north property boundary is required, 34 feet wide curb to curb, with the
sidewalk on the south side. A 10-foot utility easement shall be required
on the south side of the dedication for the installation of franchised utilities.
The applicant shall dedicate right-of-way adjacent to the north property
line to provide a minimum width of 60 feet, improve and dedicate the
street, and dedicate the 10-foot private utility easement. The right-of-way
dedication and road improvements may be phased. At minimum, the
applicant shall dedicate the right-of-way for the east portion of said Arney
Road to a point immediate west of the east access to Phase II and fully
Page 1
14
improve that right-of-way before the City issues occupancy permits for
Phase II. These improvements are shown on sheets I and II dated
09/07/01. If the applicant has not dedicated the entire right-of-way to the
west property line, then public easements for water, storm sewer, sanitary
sewer and any franchised utility shall also be dedicated before the City
issues occupancy permits for Phase II. All required right-of-way and street
dedications and all required street improvements shall be completed
before the City issues occupancy permits for Phase III.
The City of Woodburn will not assume maintenance responsibilities for
any portion of Arney Road that does not meet current City standards.
Arney Road shall be renamed in accordance with the City of Woodburn,
Woodburn Fire District and Marion county requirements.
APPLICANT & PROPERTY OWNER: Craig Realty Group - Woodburn LLC, 1500
Quail Street #100, Newport Beach, CA 92660
NATURE OF THE APPLICATION: The applicant requested the modification of Case
File No. Site Plan Review 00-18 for Phases II and III of the Woodburn Company Stores
listed as follows:
". ..A. Eliminate the westerly driveway and the fire department turnaround
[on Arney Lane].
B. Construct a road consisting of a 44 [foot]-wide travel surface with curb,
gutter, sidewalk and planting strip on each side of Arney Lane between
Arney Road on the east and the west end of the easterly driveway on
Arney Lane.
C. Dedicate 60-feet of right-of-way to the City of Woodburn for Arney Lane
between Arney Road on the east and the west end of the easterly
driveway.
D. Widen the easterly driveway [on Arney Lane] to 36 feet to provide for truck
access to and from the Woodburn Company Stores.
E. Dedicate a public utility easement in favor of the City of Woodburn from
the west end of the Woodburn Company Stores property to the beginning
of the Arney Lane right-of-way consisting of a width between 25 to 42 feet.
The purpose of the public utilities easement is to accommodate a public
waterline and public storm drainage line to be installed by the applicant.
F. The applicant proposes to dedicate no right-of-way for Arney Lane west of
the west end of the easterly driveway nor to make any public
improvements beyond the easterly driveway..."
Page 2
14A
RELEVANT FACTS: The applicant has completed Phase I of the Woodburn
Company Stores which totals 245,090 square feet of building area. The Planning
Commission approved with conditions Phases II and III of the Woodburn
Company Stores on July 26,2001 (Case File #s: Site Plan Review 00-18 &
Variance 01-09). Phase II includes 72,632 square feet and approximately 596
parking spaces. Phase III includes 78,947 square feet.
The subject site is located northwest of the intersection of State Highway
214/219 and Interstate Highway 5 at 1001 Arney Road. The property is identified
specifically on Marion County Tax Assessor's Maps as T5S, R2W, Section12B,
Tax Lot 101.
Page 3
OPENING STATEMENT FOR LAND USE HEARINGS
REQUIRED BY ORS CHAPTER 197
This is the time set for public hearing in the matter of Subdivision 01-01 and Variance 01-06
The nature ofthe application is an appeal ofthe Planning Commission decision to deny a five-lot
subdivision located on the south side of Hardcastle Avenue and East of Highway 99.
The applicant and appellant in this matter is Lazar Kalugin.
1. The law requires the City to list all substantive criteria relevant to each hearing. The
applicable substantive criteria is listed in the notice of public hearing and is as follows:
SUB 01-01
A. WOODBURN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
B. WOODBURN ZONING ORDINANCE
Chapter 8 General Standards
Chapter 9 Residential Standards
Chapter 10 Off-Street Parking, Loading and Driveway Requirements
Chapter 22 RS - Single Family Residential District
Chapter 39 Mandatory Parkland Dedication or Cash-In-Lieu-of
C. WOODBURN SUBDIVISION STANDARDS
D. WOODBURN SIGN ORDINANCE
E. WOODBURN TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS PLAN
F. WOODBURN ACCESS MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE
VAR 01-06
A. WOODBURN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
B. WOODBURN ZONING ORDINANCE
Chapter 8 General Standards
Chapter 10 Off-Street Parking, Loading and Driveway Requirements
Chapter 13 Variance Procedures
C. WOODBURN SUBDIVISION STANDARDS
D. WOODBURN ACCESS MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE
C:\Mulder's X-Files\Woodburn Files\Other\Opening Statement for City Council Hearing.wpd
The full text of all listed criteria is printed in the staff report which has been distributed prior
to this hearing.
2. All testimony and evidence must be directed toward these criteria or other criteria in the plan
or land use regulation which the person testifying believes apply to the decision. Please relate
your testimony to the listed criteria.
3 . The failure to raise an issue accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to afford the
City Council, and the parties, an opportunity to respond to the issue, precludes appeal to the
Land Use Board of Appeals based on that issue.
4. The failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to proposed
conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow this Council to respond to the issue
precludes an action for damages in circuit court.
5 . Any participant may request, before the conclusion of the initial evidentiary hearing, an
opportunity to present additional evidence or testimony. The City Council shall grant the
request by either:
(a) continuing the public hearing to a specific date and time at least seven days from
the date of the initial evidentiary hearing, or
(b) leaving the record open for at least seven days for additional written evidence or
testimony.
If the hearing is continued and new written evidence is submitted at the continued hearing, any person
may request, prior to the conclusion of the continued hearing, that the record be left open for at least
seven days to submit additional written evidence or testimony to respond to the new written evidence.
If the record is left open rather than continuing the hearing, any participant may file a written request
to reopen the record to respond to new evidence submitted while the record was left open and the
City Council shall grant that request. The applicant is allowed at least seven days after the record is
closed to all other parties, to submit final written arguments, but not new evidence, in support of the
application.
5 . If additional documents or evidence are provided by any party, the City Council may allow
any party to the hearing a continuance of the hearing, or leave the record open, to allow the
party a reasonable opportunity to respond.
6. Everyone addressing the City Council is requested to come forward, use the microphone, and
begin by giving your full name and address. We wish to hear from everyone who is interested
in the proposal. We will now proceed with the staff report.
C:\Mulder's X-Files\Woodbum Files\Other\Opening Statement fur City Council Hearing.wpd
MEMO
To:
From:
Subject:
Date:
For Council Action, through the City Administrator
David N. Torgeson, P.E., through the Public Works Director
Contract award for Building Modifications - 347 Front Street
October 22, 2001
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council:
1) Conditionally award the contract for Building Modifications - 347 Front Street (Two
Story Option) to the lowest responsible bidder, First Cascade Inc., in the amount of
$244,888.00.
2) Authorize the City Administrator to execute the contract after terms for fascia installation
and salvage operation are mutually agreed upon.
BACKGROUND:
The contract is in conjunction with Project No.2001-049-38, Bid No. 07-16-2110. The
solicitation asked bidders to submit on two mutually exclusive options, designated "One Story,"
and "Two Story." The work included demolition of interior partitions, construction of new
reinforced masonry walls on the east and west, and a new roof. An asbestos survey performed by
PBS Environmental revealed the presence of hazardous materials in floor covering and ceiling
texture materials. An item for asbestos abatement was included in the bid for each alternative.
The solicitation also provided a credit for salvaged materials, and an owner-established
allowance for authorized additional work. Bids were be opened publicly on October 19,2001 at
4:30 PM. Staff received a total of five bids, as indicated below. The recommended bid is shown
in bold type:
Bids For One-Story Option
Bidder
First Cascade Corp.
All Oregon Const.
CMJ Canst.
Borg Const.
Select Contracting
One StOry Allowance
$185,704.00 $20,000.00
$218,400.00 $20,000.00
223,145.00 $20,000.00
$431,608.00 $20,000.00
Non-responsive
Bids For Two-Story Option
Bidder Two Story Allowance
First Cascade Corp. $198,238.00 $30,000.00
All Oregon Const. $231,200.00 $30,000.00
CM] Const. 263,049.00 $30,000.00
Borg Const. $442,608.00 $30,000.00
Select Contracting Non-responsive
Salvage
Credit
o
$1,000.00
$500.00
o
Salvage
Credit
o
$1,000.00
$500.00
o
Asbestos
$22,650.00
$25,821.00
$23,216.00
$27,932.00
Asbestos
$22,650.00
$25,821.00
$23,216.00
$27,932.00
Total
$228,354.00
$263,221.00
$265,361.00
$479,000.00
Total
$244,888.00
$286,021.00
$315,765.00
$500,000.00
....
O~:C
..... 0 C>)
cr==
c:: ~ e:
_ 3 V> C'l:>
-p sr=;,
~g.
("">
C>)
~
N
3'V)
352-
C'l:>~
=-C'l:>
Q)'-.
c;:;-
..:<
w
s~
CO
(""> =.
=--
00
.....""l:::S
s;g
a-V"I
-3
~
~
~Q~
= -C>)
---
C>) 0 -.
~g-
=- - eo:
~ Q)V)
a::E 6i
~~-g
0' s:!-
ri'
<p
if
i i! Ii
Sl ~ .... l!I
~5t
;. -I
~(t>~ ""l"l:l-
5- ll) ::T ('ll ('ll ll)
\:0 ""l ll) ~ ;;l 3
~ ~ :. g "g ('ll
0. r:J') \:0. (') ~
(') ~ ~ ~. 0
o -.' ('ll =
I:' I:' ~. ""l
::to OQ ~ ~ JJ
I:' 0 =- <:; -.
= I:' ..... ('ll I:'
('ll ll) 3 OQ
o ~ (')
= -. (t> = -.
""l s- ~ ~ ::to
0. -. N
MI:'_I:'('ll
=. 0 ~ 0 ~
-< = ~. :. ....
_""l(')('ll0
<. 0 ~ ...... <
('ll ~ ""l (t> -.
r:J') I:' ~ ll) ('ll
~ ::s ll) "1 ~
_. ('ll S. 0 r:J')
9' ciCi' o' ~ g
OQ g: I:' ::t ::T
~ 0 : S; 5'
a::!..I:'('ll(')
0..... 0. 0 -.
o = 0.
'S8.ll)""lg
1=:' V> ::0;- V> ....
I:' ~ ('ll ('ll V>
Fn' ~ ('ll ~ ~
3 ('ll I:' ('ll -,
~ (') ~~o s-
g~~~ll)
tt ""l ('ll ~
g-g.~ ll)
g~ g
('ll 0
>-+)
~ r:J') tT1 5' 0. "l:l -
.... 3 < ~ (ii' e.. I:'
;: ll) ('ll W 0. :=.. 0....
5- = = g 0 5- p..
I:'S s- g. >-+) r:J') ~
S- 00":>ll)r:J')
('ll O"~ = a. (t>
c::: ('ll ::T:- ::T ~ (')
I:' ""l ~'''''l =r-
~. 0 S- ::T ll) Fn' I:'
('ll >-+) ('ll 0:0< ll)
0. 't:l ~ E. ('ll (t> (t
C/)('ll o.~ ~
S-;;l sf""l 0 ll) 0
(t 0 " ~ r:J') 3 ~
r:J')~S;oEio
. C'!~~('lll:'g,
<: ~ ""l -. OQ ....
::TV>ttl:'o::T
0~::fS-=('ll3
::T ('ll 0 ('ll ""l
ll)....$: (')0
~ ""l OQ ~ =:.' r:J')
JJ ::T 2. N' ~
g" _. ll) .... ('ll ::T
('ll ~(') < 8. ~ ll)
I:'....~C/).....l;:
('ll"'ll)....~1:'
:o<O'O"aoOQ
't:l ('ll (;)" ('ll 0. -.
~ V> r:J') a ~
8. ~ ~ 0 ~ Fn'
....<e:S-or:J')
o g (') ('ll I:' =
:>-e.;;l('ll~
~ ;t ~ ::T 't:l S'
>=TW('llll)('ll(')
""l < ll) < ;;l 5'
~~~~gOQ
... ('ll ::T
::;. g ~
"l:l ::I: t:l ~ ~ 'g C/) 0
""lo ('ll ('ll <:; 0 '" ~ -.
(')ll)"l:lo....n~<
('ll ;;: ll) 0 :=. ll) ('ll ('ll
0.>=T::4.!5=0.s.Y'I:'
Ei t:l 3 = ll) -. - s-
('ll ('ll ('ll 3 ::l. g (t> ('ll
V>'t:la. ~fi.l('ll""l
8~~og-~,<-~
""l 3 .... 0 s- ('ll
~ ('ll ~ '< ~ = Fn' S.
't:l ::s OQ 0 S2 (') - . :>
o .... 0 = .... ~ r:J')
1:'ll)I:'''''ls:....ll)s.
e-~ tT13 d'e.~; ~
o~ =:~('ll't:l:o<
........o('ll(') ....'t:l
""'-""l0C1('ll-00(')
~~('llt:l~3::1~
~ ~ ~ .g 5' 5 ~
><<.....~oEr('ll~
('ll .~ ~ g ~ N' a. ;,
~ '< ~ ('ll = ('ll ~ n
o Co ~ S. ~ '<0 .... 5'
~o ~ =oOQ
~ [3 :Eg-""l"l:l
~ '< ('ll 0 ::l. a ~
~ _. s. 0 n. r:J') < ~
o I:' ~ !5=~'::O;- S; 5'
= o.ll)= ('ll::+;('ll
s:~ 8.3 ~ ll)'< s-
_. ('ll .... V> 0 ('ll
.... - ::T "T1 0 -. = ,....
o 0 ('ll -. >-+) a '-<
(') 'E. 0 ~ ll)~. g.
(') ~ ""l ::to s- ('ll
Ei ~ g 0'0.
o ~
I:' n'
-
<II
o
W
-
co
co
N
I
N
W
~
(');!!
e:~
('ll ('ll
""'''''l
""d('ll
ll) -
=~
-
z
=
-
-
t:l
('ll
ll)
""l
(j
-.
....
-.
N
('ll
I:'
r:J')
o
>-+)
:E
o
o
0.
0"
=
""l
P.
tIJ'i;I
("l l>>
o ~
::+-
o~
~z
~ E:
~ .
::::()
· e:
o~
~ ....,
"0 0
~ ....,
-<~
()~
e:g
~
....,
:E~:E
000
83!:0
moo
C:Zm
:;:o-tc
ZCi)"
oiz
"gJ1J
<0-<0
.....(1)....
0...-
.....:;:00
-mm
!!1c
m
"tI
)>
"
-I
3!:
m
z
-I
i'
I\,)
::!!(I) C
E~o
a.(I):S
en_o
- 0
"0-
(I) en
o::r
..., m
'7'
"0(1)
m 0
o ...,
~(I)
<03
~"O
-
C'<
ost
:s (I)
o 0
-0
-:::::J
-.<-
-(I)
o;a.
oen
-0
(1)-
m m
:::::J :::::J
c:,<
"0 en
"OC:
o en
:E ~.
0.0
(I) -.
..., 0
en c:
o en
...,
:scn
O::r
-0
c: :E
en (I)
(I) ...,
O":E
(I);::;:
m::r
o en
::ro
o m
...,"0
a.m
(ii':::::J
S' a.
cr:E
gS,
m (I)
:::::J ...,
-m
o en
:::::J en
,<0
o 0
c: :::::J
..., m
~en
:::;. "0
~ 0
en
en
c=
(I)
C
o
~ S'~ ~
m Q.:! st
OC:-(I)
c: o.:S
m -. CC "0
_:::::JCDm
(I) <0 0
_0.0'7'
::r -. a. m
(I) 3l 0 <C
O"oUJ(I)
c: ~- (I)
=-<" 0 3
0. ...,_.
S' g- ::;; c;;
<0(1)"0(1)
m m (I) 3
:::::J st 0
0. s'~ 2-
o<o(I)~
m- (I)~
-ox::!!
CO""::r",
~ ::;; c= wCD
~2';::;:<
3 ~. iii"
(I) <C -.
en:::::JO"
men(j)
...,0_
(I)-c
en=3
~:::::JCD
O~(I)
:::::J V' w
~}no
",
~
~
(l)m;tJ
~"O (I)
o or3
o!e-o
(I) -.<
30(1)
(l)C"::r
:::::J m (I)
-<0 m
- -<
'" ::r -.
~m-<
en-o
000
:::::J m :::::J
:::::J:::::J-
(I) 0" 3
. (1)_.
en:::::J
(l)m
mm
(1)0.
0.0
~sa.
-. ::r
< -.
(I) :::::J
-<0
::rm
(I) :::::J
0"0.
m"O
<C_
_m
00
-(I)
m
:E :::::J
~
Ch
c:
UJ
""0
o
o
c:
UJ
r-
m
=1
m
:;0
o
:;0
."
)>
o
~
Q
m
...,=eno.m."
(I) cr"O 0 (I) 0
00 I (1)-""""
-omom
CE~or:::::Jeno:::::J
:. (I) - 0. - -
- m (I) -' ::r
~rm.cm~QJ
:::::JC:.co.x
m --"6' c: -._
:::::J c5 3 ~. ;a. 0
0._(1) en 0 0"
~C::::::Jm<(I)
m c5 :<0 ~ ~
-3 -. - ..., (I)
(I) ~ st m en3 g
(I) (I) - -.
;a.gena.m<
m o. (I) (I) - ~
...,....enm"O~
(I).oJ - m V'
(l)fJ~aam
::::I:::::::J=_Oo
(1)0"0(1)(1)0
~o~g.~~
<O_:::::J---I""
(I) c: o' -. --, -
. ..., _0 ::rn.
- (I) m _.-
C"en-en<o
c: en _.(1)
_m'7'en:::::J
..., -. 0.-
"Q (I) = _. ~.
o -. m 3l-
.g~5.gg
- (I) ::: !e-
o. 00"
(I)
~
o
O'::rmm~
-(I)om"O
omomo
:E st <0 <. en
I :::::J < en
c: m N' ::r c=
~. S. (1)0. ~' (I)
:::::J ::r -
<0' st=
(I) ~. (j) -. (I)
en =: <' en _
gm(l)~~
S,msten';-
o' :::::J (ii'"'E. (I)
:::::J 0. _ S2. 0
m or (ii' c:O ~
:::::J:E- (I)
o.(I)C~:E
m:::::JC"!l.::r
~O'sa.roo
-. ..., ::r"" :E
gg_o(l)
. 3::r""m
(1)"0
(I) - m -.
:::::J 0 0:::::J
-0'7'-
o m m (I)::r
-to - <0
::!l"O (I) ...,
S2.c: <. 0
mO"<o
(if o' m 3
0' 0
..., ...,
co
enl>>~
C::S,<
"0 a. 0
(I) :::::J c:
<
_.0 m
en =:...,
0-<'(1)
~,<m
0-
c: ~
..., 0
0"'"
c:~
_.-
a:-
_. ::r
:::::J (I)
<O:::::J
enm
(1)"0
go
~. ;:+
-<"-
::r
o (I)
g; S'
-.0
m -.
- 0.
o (I)
..., :::::J
m:::
:::::J 0
m-
< 0
mO
-.m
or.;-
0"0
(1)=
o
(I)
m en < '7' 0 -i"O (I) ::::;; 0 en ." m C
<"0:::;(1) ::::I::::rm:::::J,< 0 0 =en 0
I>> ""(1) - (I) _ (I) "0 < 0 :::::J 3 - en
n (I)"O::r :::::J (I) (I) - n 0 :s
Cm::r (I) ..., -0 c: (I) (I) CD 0 0
0. 0 - - :::::J -.
I>> -. '< - m CD -"0 0. - 0 - m -
S'c5gffim~QJ(I)o~stffim~
_ m ..., (il m CD en Q 5 ~ (I) 0. -.
::r:::::J::r __::r - -:::::J:E::::I::
(I) '< m m 0 ::r O"O::r '< < ;::;: st
-3'"0 :::::J :E "0 (I) ~ ~ m ~ (I) ::r (I)
O 0. m ...,..., ..... < 0 -.
3 en '< (I) 0 - @ (I) 0"0 r+"O
(I) ~:E ":-" ~ 0 !l.<o m - (I) ~
0.(1);::;: :::::J3~(I):::::J 00 '7'
or...,::r -m-:E'< g..., m
mc(I) O:::::J m;::;:o -"0 <0
o st a.:::::J ::r 0 ~. m (I)
m'<l>> (I) 0. :::::J :::::JO 0
mO-c ...,2.o.~o.r (1)'7' ...,
n. c: en 0 0 '<- -. ..., m -
-..., I>> (I)...:::::J _<c m
. or:s a CD :::::J ::r (I) 0 (I) !e-
o a. _ sa. S' -..., "0 -. (I)
(I)~ 3::r...,<ost m:::::J m
01>> (1)(1)(1)-(1) <m :::::J
...,_ :::::J0.3(1):::::J (1)"0 '<
en CD roooce.... :::::Jor en
'7'''' ...,0<." - c:
-. _ -. ..., (I) - 0 - en
:::::JO :::::J- 0< (I)=:
. <OO--CD mO en
"Q _ ..., :!. sa. ", '7' 0" m
(I) ;-. en en ::r _ m m :::::J
< ~ (I) 0 S'::r <0 <C 0
(I) "'\ g 0 <0 (I) (I) 0 (I)
:::::J -. < - 0 ...,
- 0(1) -
:::::J ~
I\,)
c
o
z
o
-I
."
)>
z
o
en-enms:
c:ffioom
oen 3 (I):::::J
~ (I) (I) <' '<
:::::J <0 ::r (I) or
S2. c: mo.o
o.a:<m=
(I) (I) (I) -.a a:
;a.=0:::T(1)
en :::::J(I) 0 ..., en
. :::::J m -.
en-x:::::J
(ii' ~. - 0
_~~o
00.(1)3
m"O s'3
oo-c:
03 :E ~ :!.
o.(I)=:
3 (I) ..., (I)
(I) -.< ~ en
:::::Jens:~
o.c:oo
"0 0" en c:
...,!e--:::::J
om:Eo.
0:::::J(1)-
(1)0...,::r
0.(1)(1)(1)
~~(I)O
m-i3g
_ ::r"O :::::J
0(1)-<"-
"""0 (1)-'<
::rC::::::J::r
m ..., < m
:::::J "0 (I) <
0.0-(1)
=eno
:::::J(1)"O
<00(1)
--~
~
en ~"O 0 0 <C :t>
"O(I)""""""m:::::J
..., m (I) -. <C en _
(I)_<:::::Jm-::r
m3(1)::r:::::J""""
0. :::::J m (ii.Q.m
-~ro(1)3;a.x
a-o.o. (1)0
3 :E m m 3 !e-ca
;::;: := en c: S' m
o::r(1)menm:::::J
:::::J _ ..., - - (ii'
(1)::r(l)::::!lO"en3
"0(1) x:::::J (1),<
(l)m"Oi!>...,!e-en
(il"OO mC: (I) 0
0"0 en (I) 0" 3 m
..., c: 0" :::::J
:::::JO""""(I)-
-"0 (1) 0 0.0 0
o...,_en ...,m
Dr 0 0 S' _ c:
m _ -. _ ::r en
:::::J(I)st~O(l)(1)
sa. m (1) 0. m - S'
::r:::::Jm 0"5-
(I) ~.:::::J 3 ~..... (I)
..., C" _ -. -..... 0
"0 -.::r !e- 0. ~ =:
(1)0...,. (I) 0
...,=:moo.-i:::::J
en ~ x _. en 0 -.
o. en en '7' 0. :::::J
:::::J ....."0 (I) -. 0 -
. ......om:::::J ::r
:::::J ..., en - en (1)
st(l)(1)enOen
...,eno:E- '7'
m C" m m st -.
X'<:::::J =(I)_:::::J
(ii' (1) 0" ~
:::::J ~ (I) (I)
0- 0.
-'< -
~
'<
o
c:
m
m
m
-
::r
o
3
CD
:e
::E:
)>
~
~
o
c
o
Z
m
~
())
0>
.......
01
-
::r
(I)
:::::J
m
"0
o
;:+
-
::r
(I)
:::::J
o
a:
(1)
:::::J
-
-
o
o
o
m
"0
o
o'
(1)
G)
c:
6
m
r"'
Z
m
UJ
mO
-z
~ ~ J:
11100
sQ:E
(1)-
~ 0 ~
0)> 0
or"'J:
0)>)>
Q)Qzc
Sl~ecn
....~J;im
~~)>~
N::E:zm
g:;o~o
~~::E:o
~~z
UJx~
)>:::0
zO
er-
e
-t
::E:
m
:;0
~
w