Loading...
Agenda - 05/13/2002 AGENDA V~OODB~ CITY CO U)~CIL MA 2002 - 7..00P. M. 270Montgomery Street ~ ~ Woodburn~ Oregon CALL TO ORD~ER AND FLAG SALUTE ROLL CALL ANNOUNCEMI~NTS AND APPOINTMENTS Announcements: Public Hearing: May 14, 2002 - 7:00 p.m. City of Woodburn 2002-2003 Recommended Annual Budget. Be Memorial Day holiday closures: City offices and the Aquatic Center will be closed on Monday, May 27. Woodburn Public Library will be closed May 26 and 27, 2002. Ce City Council meeting of May 27, 2002 will be rescheduled to Tuesday, May 28, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. due to Memorial Day holiday. ~ Appointments: D. Livability Task Force - Phyllis McKean ............................ 3D 4. PRESENTATIO~NS/PROCLAMATIONS Proclamation: A. Police Memorial Week - May 12 - 18, 2002 .......................... 4A Presentations: B. Marion COunty Public Safety Coordinating Council .................. 4B C. Marion County Urban Growth Management Project ................. 4C 5. COMMITTEE REPORTS A. Chamber of Commerce. B. Woodburn Downtown Association. 6. COMMUNICATIONS None 7. BUSINESS FRO' THE PUBLIC ~1 (This allows the public to introduce items for Council consideration not already scheduled on the agenda.) Page 1 - Council Agenda of May 13, 2002. Se 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. Ae Woodburn City Council minutes of April 22, 2002 ................... 8A Recommended action: Approve the Woodburn City Council minutes. Woodburn Planning Commission minutes of April 11, 2002 ........... 8B Recommended action: Accept the Woodburn Planning Commission minutes. Ce Livability Task Force minutes of March 26, 2002 .................... 8C Recommended action: Accept the Livability Task Force minutes. De Police Department Activities Report - February 2002 ................. 8D Recommended action: Receive the Police Department Activities report. ge Building Activity Report for April 2002 ............................ 8E Recommended action: Receive the Building Activity Report. F. Planning Tracking Sheet dated May 1, 2002 ......................... 8F Recommended action: Receive the Planning TracMng Sheet Ge Woodbur. n Public Library Monthly Report for March 2002 ........... 8G Recommended action: Receive the Library Report. He Claims for the month of April 2002 ................................ 8H Recommended action: Receive the Claims. Memo regarding Michael Culver v. City of Woodburn ................ 8I Recommended action: Receive the memo. ge Modification of Development Agreement with Hidden Creek Properties, LLC ................................................. 8J Recommended action: Authorite the Mayor to sign the Modified Development Agreement with Hidden Creek Properties, LLC. TABLED BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Zone Change 02-01 and Subdivision 02-01, a 13-lot subdivision of property located at 888 Brown Street ............................. 10A Recommended action: Conduct public hearing, receive public input and direct staff to prepare and ordinance reflecting Council's decision. Boones Ferry Road Local Improvement District .................... 10B Recommended action: Conduct public hearing, receive public input, direct staff to perform analysis on the public input received and present a recommendation for further Council action at the next regular meeting. Page 2 - Council Agenda of May 13, 2002. 11. GENERAL BUSINESS 12. 13. 14. Council Bill No. 2385 - Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2300 (the 2001,2002 Master Fee Schedule) to increase the non-resident library card fee for non-residents of the city residing inside the CCRLS s~Ystem boundaries ...................................... RecommeOded action: Adopt the Ordinanc~ llA Council B~ill No. 2386 - Ordinance adopting procedures to prepare for and carry outiactivities to prevent, minimize, respond to or recover from emergendes; providing a process for the declaration of a state of emergency; granting the authority to order mandatory evacuations; and prescribing a penalty .. ..................................................... llB Recommended action: Adopt the Ordinance. Ce Council Bill No. 2387 - Ordinance relating to improvements of E. Hardcast!e Avenue from Pacific Highway 99E to the east city boundary; adopting ~he local improvement district; directing the contract award; and providing for payment of costs through assessment of properties in the local i~nprovement district ................................... 1 lC Recommended action: Adopt the Ordinanc~ Council Bill No. 2388 - Resolution certifying the eligibility of the City of Woodburn to receive state-shared revenues during fiscal year 2002 - 20(i3 ................................................... llD Recommettded action: Adopt the Resolution. E. Contract award for E. Hardcastle street improvements .............. liE Recommended action: Award the construction contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Wayne Jeskey Construction, in the amount of $$09,09L12 for the East Hardcastie Avenue street improvemena PUBLIC COMMENT NEW BUSINESS PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS - These are Planning Commission actions that may be called up by the City Council. Variance 02-01 - Planning Commission acceptance of Planning Director's decision to approve a minor variance to reduce the required rear yard setback on a single-family residential lot located in the Heritage Park Phase 3 Subdivision ............................... 14A 15. 16. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS Page 3 - Council Agenda of May 13, 2002. 17. 18. EXECUTIVE SI~SSION To consuR with counsel concerning the legal rights and duties of a public body witll regard to current litigation or litigation likely to be filed pursuant to ORS 192.660 (1)(h). To consid~er records that are exempt by law from public inspection pursuant to ORS 192.660 (1)(0. ADJOURNMEI~ Page 4 - Council Agenda of May 13, 2002. ODBUI N ,m ; lncor?orated {889 3D May 9, 2002 TO: City Councilors From: Office of the Mayor Appointments The following appointment is made, subject to the approval of the Council. Please fqrward any adverse Comments to me prior to Council Meeting Monday 13 May 2002. 1,4o reply is required if you approve of my decisions. Livability Task Force: Phyllis McKean. Phyllis is a long time resident of Woodbum. She currently serves on the Woodbum Fire District Board of Directors. She has filed an application for service on the Task Force. I spoke with both Phyllis and Pete McCallum and am convinced that she will be an asset to the Task force. Thank you very much for your consideration of the above individual. Street · Woodlm~ Ortgon 9707~ PIt.~O.t. g82-~22S · Fax ¥ T 4A PR OCLAMA TION Poh'ce Memorial Week - May 12- 18, 2002 ~4/herea$~ The Congress and President oft he United States have designated May 15 as Peace Officers' Memo#a/Day, and the week in which May 15 fal/s as National Po/ice week; and Wherea$~ the members of the Woodburn Police Deparbnent play an essential role in safeguarding the righ. ks and freedoms of the d#~ens of Woodbum; and ~lherea~ it is important that all dtizens know and understand the duties, responsibihb'es, hazards, and saod#ces of their law enforcement agency, and that members of outlaw e~. forcement agency recogn~e their duty to serve the people by safeguarding life andProperty, b? protecting them against ~olence and disorder, and by protecting the innocent against deception and the weak against oppression; and VYherea$~ the men and women of the Woodbum Police Deparbnent unceasingly provide a vital pubh'c service; ~fow~ there£ore~ ~ Richard dennings, Mayor of the City of Woodbum, call upon all db~ens of Woodbum and upon all patnbtic, dvic and educational organizabbns to observe the week of May i2th - Mayl8th, 2002, as Police Memorial Week with appropriate ceremonies and observances in which all of our people may join in commemorating law enforcement officers, past and presen~ who, by their faithful and loyal devoObn to their responsibihb'es, have rendered a dedicated service to their communities and, in so doing, have established for themselves an enviable and enduring reputabbn for preserving the rights and security of all db~ens. I further call upon all dt~ens of Woodbum to observe Wednesday, May lSth, 2002 as Peace Officers' Memodal Day in honor of those law enforcement officers who, through their courageous dccds, have made the ultimate sacdNce in service to their community or have become disabled in the performance of du~ and let us recognize and pay respect to the survivors of our fallen heroes. In witness thereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the City of Woodburn to be afflxedthis 8'h day of May, 2002. O R E G O IN MEMORANDUM DATE~ 3anuary 31, 2002 4B MARXON COUNTY PUBLZC SAFETY COORDZNAT[NG COUNCTL TO: FROM: All County City Managers, Mayors and Council Members Commissioner Mike Ryan, Chair, Marion County Public Safety Coordinating Council Chair: Commissioner ~41ke Ryan RE: City Council Presentations Vice--Chair: Dale Penn, D.A. Membem: ~Welt #le~ T~Cm~ Admin~'a~ Back~round: Tile Marion County com~ullity is served by an inter-dependent, ~mprehe~. ire pub!ic.sa, fety s~.. tern..lts..wor~g components include effequ've city and county law enforcement police operations, earty mtervenuon aha rovers on alternatives for at-risk youth, adequate juvenile and adult detention and jail capacity, rural enforcement coverage, criminal prosecution reC~urces, essential judicial support, safe and secure incarceration and consistent community supervim%n. Through th~se efforts, both adult and juvenile offenders have been able to make a positive transition back into the community. All of the parts of this public safety system must work togethe~ in order for it to fulIy function. The actions of one l~ublic safety partner impacts other system partners. Depending on the actions, those impacts can be positive or negative. Public Safety Council~ The Marion County Public Safety Coordinating Council (MCPSCC) initiated a series of community-based meetings starting in November 20~1, focused on providing an updated public safety status report for our community. Two town hall style s~mrnit meetings have been held with four working committees developing reports and recommendations on: adult supervision; juvenile supervision, intake and assessment, and detention; patrol enforcement; and disposition. Public Safety System ~aps: We all know that gaps have existed for many years in our public safety system. Steps to fill some ofthose gaps have been taken, such as: expanded collaboration and the creation of new community partnerships, efficiency steps and cost containment actions, private-public ventures as well as local, state and national grant opportunities. However, gaps continue to widen and now are stretching the overall public safety system beyond any level of acceptability. Today we have reached a crisis point in our criminal justice system. We have convened criminal justice professionals and practitioners along with members of the public to focus attention on the county's criminal justice system as a whole. But, the gaps continue to expand. A third community meeting was held following the November summit sessions. It involved city council members, mayors, police chiefs, city managers and a wide variety of public safety professionals from throughout Marion County. Identified public safety System4~aps were discussed. PotenOo! - Public Sa(ety/Law Enforcement Ballot Measure: Each person attending voiced support for an expanded community outreach effort to communicate the severity of the identified gaps and to sVek city council input on how best to work toward filling the identified gaps. Part of that outreach effort was to iltclude the potential of developing a public safety/law enforcement measure to be referred to Marion County voters in November 2002. 4B Marion County Criminal Justice System Gaps in Service omponents of the Marion County Criminal Justice System Enforcement · Marion County Sheriff's Office · City police depa/tmenta · State police · Federal law enforcement Disposition · Marion County District Attorney's Office · Courts Offender Management/Supervision · Marion County Juvenile Department · Marion County Juvenile Detention Facility · Marion County Jail · Marion County Parole & Probation Division · Marion County Health Department-mental health Marion County Total Budeet ResoulCes - Bv Source FY 200t-20~ Budget [To~l Fum~ ~2r~4M,422 ] Marion County General F~ld Ex~enditures- By Function OMm~nt P~ ~ ~rlee Settees Hilllh & Seekl [TMII ~ $ 0.370.70'7 ] Manon County G~merel Fund Cgntrlbutions- ~bllc ~1,023 t% 11% 1% ssaa,444 Sheriff $24.i07.T28 [ ToMI $ .43,14Z,.114 ] Marion County Enforcement Services 4B Marion Coun~ Sheriff's Office Enforcement Division Purpose Statement To ensure the safety and secudty of all citizens in Madon County by vigorous enforcement of cdminal and traffic laws, cdmirtal investigation, and emergen?y response. Summary of Current Services ~ Criminal Enforcement ~ Court Security for 13 ~ Traffic Enforcement courts Civil Process v Concealed Handgun Prisoner Transport Permits Detectives ~ Search and Rescue MAGNET-Drug & Gang ~ Animal Control Enforcement Unit ~ Marine Enforcement K-9 Unit ~ Threat Management Unit Special Response ~ School Resource Officers Team ~ Reserve/Cadet Units Warrants ~ Bomb Technician Restraining Orders ~ Polygraph Examiner Forest Patrol Responsibilities StateI City County Criminal Laws Traffic Laws Civil _l~Toce~__ __- Prtsom~ Transport Soarch & Rescue Parole & Probation Warrant Managenuflt Restmlnblg Orders I ~ Marion.County Population, Calls for Service, and NuMber of SherflFs Deputies per 1000 People t! 2t,247 2%106 ess o.m i Enforcement Gaps Patrol Coverage · Staffing analysts recommends 72 more deputies be added to reach state staffing avg. · Direct services to 15 cities Calls for Service · Increased calls for service · Reactive response to calls vs. proactive · Response to calls ts delayed due to: · UflderstaMng · Some calls now handled by volunteers 4B Follow-up Investigation · Lower InvestigatlOrl clearance/resolution ra~es · Oelayed aa ·meuR of blckload · Umlted ~-'~-,'1, ng DruglGang En~orcement~ Lack of ~ has Impa~ on effective hattie against drug/gang acti~ty Limited resources - equipment, lab dean-up $, Search & Rescue · Mandated responsibility, unable to predict Incidents · Umited to response with volunteers and part-time Search and Rescue deputy Court Services· Lack of full-time staff to service all of the State, Justice and Juvenile courts · Services Include court security and all prisoner transport within Ihe county · Must rely on temp-hlres to backfill p ~ Re~oun~ Off'K~r~ · Umlted to m:hool dlsl~c~ with $ to supplement ~0 & grant funds ', · e ~ preael~ Iff all county!schools · ~dl proce$~ ia Impacted by the flmRed numbee ~ Animal Oontm4 · Reepoemlble for ~oUn~de animal oo~trol In Addition... FY 02-03 Initial Recommendations for Budget Reductions f Elimination of Animal Control P Closure of South District Office (Stayto~) Closure of Ihe North Dislrict Office (Woo~bum) P Reduction of temp-hire funds p Impact on MAGNET staffing Marion County District Attorney's Office Marion County District Attorney's Office Purpose Statement To ensure public safety and hold offenders responsible by vigorously prosecuting criminal offenses and pursuing appropriate sanctions; to assist victims of violent crime. ~ Summary of CUrrent Services Prosecution of criminal ¢ Child Abuse Review cases Team Cooperation with other P Fire Investigation criminal justice Team agencies ¢ Search warrant Victim support services review Promote accountability P Homicide Assault ~ Response Team Federal Agencies Juvenile Facilities Oregon State Police Marion County Shedff Oregon State Hospital Prisons State Agencies Victims City Police District ~kttorney Community Service Parole Probation OYA Jail Prison Work Ca~ter Maclare~ Juvenile D~t~nti?q Disposition Gaps Prosecution · 10,000 criminal cases processed annually · Unable to prosecute 3(KI felony narcotics cases and hundreds of misdemeanor cases each year, due to budget constraints Victims Services e Ovor 60 Victim Advocates · VictJm Advocates assigned to 2,336 victims · Need for more volunteers is critical ' Personnel Issues · Average caseload of a pro~,ecutor 60+ cases · Approximately 250 felony cases or 600 misdemeanor cases per prosecutor each year · Less than 6 paid hours per case Diminished Resources · Lose 2 pro~ecutom as grants end · Potential of 750 felonies or 1800 misdemeanors will not beflisd, giving immunityto 2~and 3,~ time offenders In Addition... FY 02-03 Initial Recommendations for Budget Reductions Eliminate positions · Deputy DAs · Legal Secretaries Also, will lose 2 grant-funded prosecutors Note: Each Deputy DA Pesltlon prosecutes 250 felonies or 600 misdemeanors-per year Marion County Sheriff's Office Adult Supervision Department 4 4B Marion County Sheriff's Office Adult Supervision Division Purpose St; To ensure public sari providing a maximum and supervision ( probation and parole reduce reoffendir ~upervision, educati~ employment f( ~tement ;ty and security by security jail facility .f offenders on in the community; ~g by requiring )n, treatment, and ,r offenders. Summary of Current Services Maximum secudty jail ¢ Inmate work programs with a capacity of 528 ¢ Pdsoner HUB center Work Center Faclity ~ Day Reporting Adult Parole & i, Electronic monitoring Probation Supervision .~ Medical unit Offender treatment & ¢ Forest Work Crew education programs ¢ Community service ~1,~ ~ Pdsoner transport Jail Staffing & Capaci~ Breakdown MCCF Number Lodged, Early Population Releases, and Cite & Release On average~,for etch offender broqltt'to the I b bd~ed b Adult Institutions Gaps Marion County Corrections Facility (Jail)· National Institute of Co~ections stifling analysis show an m:lditimud 12 deputies and 3 facility security aide positions are needed · Numbm' of Mmales lodged continu~ to grow · Number of offende~ released early has Increased ove~ the year~ · Loss of state release officers · In a recent study, 17-20~ of Inmate~ have a sevece meflWneed trea~meat Closure of Work Center· Loss of 144 Inmates beds within one year · Increased demand for existing Jail beds · Sanction alternatives eliminated · Interim custody releases reduced (population management} · Offender transition services diminished 5 4B ' History of Parole & Probation Caseload & Staff Rates 1994 2001 Adult Parole & Probation Gaps ii! i Staffing analysis recommends 20 more P&p deputies are needed for adequate supervision Offenders on supervision increased by 29% in the last 3 years · P The number of unreimbursed misdemeanor cases neady doubled since 1998 P Treatment ser~,ices not available for all offenders · 70'/, of offenders need alcohol and/or drug treatment · A&D treatment slots are available for 30% of the projected 2,450 offenders in need · Alcohol & Drug treatment funding at the same rate as developed in 1997 In Addition... FY 02-03 Initial R~commendations for Budget Reductions Complete closure of ~he Work Center (Total of 144 beds sihce July 1, 2001) Closure of G Pod at the Jail (128 beds) Reduction of 272 Inmate beds (within I year) Marion County Juvenile Department Marion County Juvenile Department Purpose Statement To enhance public safety and community justice by providing accountability and reformation of youth. Juvenile Department Services DetenlJon/Intake P Educalion Programs Diversion ~ Guaranteed Probation Attendance Program Alternative Programs P Day Reporting Center ~ Counseling ~ Family Support Program 4B Juvenile Department Gaps Detention/Intake · Lack community options for services · Psychiatric · Drug/alcohol detox & treatment · Number of beds/staffing I,~vel · Lack of services due to sl~ace and funding · Alternative placements . Long-term treatment · Short-term evaluaficm & treatment Diversion · Lack of staff for assessing early stages of delinquency Probation · Lack of community resources · Service delivery not seamless · Lacking parental accountability Education Programs · Inadequate facilities for classes Guaranteed Attendance Program · Insufficient number of counseling staff Altemative Work Programs · Need Incentive for employers to hire · Lad( of Integration Into tt!eJob market ~· More time needed for "emplo~e" skill Day Reporting Center · Umlted openings Counseling · Inadequate number of staff ft waiting lists Family Support Program · Inadequate number of staff ~ waiting lists In Addition... FY 02-03 Initial Recommendations for Budget Reductions Eliminate positions · PmbalJon officers · Group workers (detention & day reporting) · Youth and Family Counselor · Probalion Supervisor Closure of Stayton & Woodbum Offices Closure of day reporting center Marion County Budget Status ¢ FY 02-03 projected reductions are not final i~ Work continues to develop revenue enhancing.,and cost saving strategies Some Questions... What is the level of services expected by the public? HOW do we sustain/maintain a balanced criminal justice system in Marion County? Who should decide these issues? WHICH WAY?. 4B Contact I~formation Marion Cou~y's Web Site: www.open.orgl~marionl Mike Ryan. CommissiOner Phone: 503-588-5212 E-mail: mryan~open.qrg Raul Ramirez, Sheriff Phone: 503-588-7971 E-mall: rmmi~.org Dale Penn, District Attend'ney Phone: 503-588-5222 Larry Oglesby, Juvenil~ Department Director Phone: 503-588-5291| E-mail: Ioglesby~operl.org 8 OREGON COMr IUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 4C DIRECTOR PLANNING DMSION (503) 588-5038 mcplann¢~:)pen.org BUILDING INS.PECTION (503) 588-5147 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Randall Franke Paltl Mane . Mike Ryan COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO: Mayors, City Administrators, City Officials of Cities within Marion County FROM: Les Sasaki, Principal Planner DATE: February 28, 2002 SUBJECT: Marion County Urban Growth Management Project In 1998, tile Board of Commissidners initiated the Marion County Urban Growth Management Project in response to growth issues facing thc county and its cities, and concermf .expressedits over the 2020 population projections developed by the County as part o . coordination'wle for land use planning within the county. Over thc past three years, the County with the assistance ofaplanning consultant, has been working with thc public, the cities, a stakeholder group representing varied interests throughout thc county, and a technical advisory group to der/flop a countywide growth management framework to guide growth and future decisions about growth, over the next 50 years. The Growth Management Project planning process has been driven by a set of guiding principles identified during the initial phase of the project based on input from the citizens of the county. The emphasis of the project has been to link quality of life, economic development, and land use planning issues as way to sustain the values that residents see as important to the County's future. The growth management framework and implementation strategy relies upon a regional and collaborative approach toward finding solutions to growth issues facing the county and the cities, by engaging in and sharing information and ideas to come up with an effective approach to accommodate future growth needs. The countywide growth management and planning strategy is an on-going process that ties together the present with the future, and is intended to be flexible and a coordinated effort between the county and the cities. We would like to have the opportunity to present the project and thc Marion County Urban Growth Management Framework proposal and implementation strategy to your city. We would like to make a presentation to your city council (you may choose to include your planning commission in this as well) and also request your city's support for this regional approach to managing growth issues. The presentation can be accommodated at a regular meeting, a work session or workshop with the city, or any format which the city is comfortable with. I will be contacting thc cities to set up a presentation if desired, and look forward to your interest in learning about and participating in this regional planning strategy. 555 Court St. NE, * P.O. Box 14500 * Salem, Oregon 97309-5036 · http#www.open.org/mcplann MARION COUNTY URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK Proposed Amendment to the Urbanization Element of the Marion County Comprehensive Land Use Plan Marion County Urban Growth Management Project March 1999 - April 2002 Funding for this project was made available by a grant from The Department of Land Conservation and Development and In part with Oregon State Lottery Funds administered by The Oregon Economic and Community Development Department Matron County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page 4C DRAFT Marion County Comprehensive Plan Language: Urban Growth Management Framework URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK Future population and employment growth projected in Marion County creates both challenges and opportu,ities for maintaining the quality of life in Marion County. Resources, such as water and farmland, will be limited, and congestion and travel times will probably increase in urban areas. Without coordination among the cities, development may occmr in areas that result in even greater negative impacts on the transportation and infrastructure systems. For example, the ability to move freight and people throughout the County may be jeopardized if growth occurs in areas where the transportation system ls not adequately developed to serve additional capacity. Uncoordinated devdopment may also result in patterns of growth that are not desired by the citizens in Marion County and may ultimately reduce the quality of life in the County. However, if managed effectively, the impacts of the additional growth can be mln;mlv~S:l. Through ~.a collaborative and coordinated effort to manage growth, development can be planned ia locations that best serve the County, and the accompanying transportation and infrastru~e systems can be developed with the greatest efficiency. The quality of life can be preserved by maintaining the characteristics in each ¢ornrmmity that makes it unique, .and by directing development in each community tO be consisl/ent with each community's values. understanding the importance and need to -lessen the impacts of growth, the Marion County Board of Commissioners initiated the Marion County Urban Growth Management Project in 1998. The growth management project utiliTM a long-range 2050 planning horizon, and was undertaken to provide the data needed to address growth issues and to engage the cities and other interest groups and individuals in a cooperative effort to look at where growth is likely to occur under current development trends and where it should be encouraged or discouraged in. the future. During the various phases of the project, coordinated population projections and land capacities for the dties for the year 2050 were analyzed and a countywide growth strategy known as the Growth Management Framework was created with input from the public and the 20 cities in the County. The values driving the Growth Management Framework are a set of 24 guiding principles identified in the initial phase of the growth management project through collaboration and consensus, that provide a link between quality of life, economic development, and land use planning as a why to sustain the values deemed important by residents in their vision for the county. The guiding principles focus on regional elements of growth management that go beyond jurisdictional boundaries such as transportation, housing, environmental, and econ6mic needs and are the basis for the goals setforth in the Growth Management Framework. Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page 2 The purpose of the Growth Management Framework is to: 1. Identify common goals, principles, and tools that will lead to more coordinated planning and a collaborative approach to developing solutions to growth issues. 2. Be consistent with local plans for growth by modifying the growth projections in response to local government feedback. o Protect farm, forest, and resource lands throughout the County by considering the existing capacity of each community, fostering the efficient use of land, and evaluating urban growth boundary expansion needs. 4. Maintain physical geparation of communities by ensuring that areas between cities are not:~urbanized. : 5. Maintain community identity by allowing each community to decide how it should b ' ' grow and y prom0tmg local decision-making control. 6. Support a balanc~ of jobs and homing opportunities for communities and areas throughout the county that contribute to the needs of regional and local economies. 7. Provide transportation corridors and options that Connect and improve accessibility and mobility for r~idents along with the movement of goods' and services throughout the county. Growth Management Framework Pattern Of Growth The Growth Management Framework is designed to accommodate approximatdy 500,400 residents and 212,500 jobs within the 20 dries and tmln~corporated portions of Marion County by the year 2050. The Growth Management Framework preferred alternative growth--.-scenario focuses the majority of the growth in the County to the larger communities of Salem, Keizer, Woodburn, Stayton and Silverton, 'with growth occurring primarilY.inside the current UGBs where there is available capacity, and through inftll and redevelopment where appropriate. Specific population and employment targets were identified for each city by elected officials, and business, environmental and neighborhood leaders representing the communities. How the additional population and employment is accommodated will be at the discretion of individual communities in accordance with the goals, policies, and standards identified in this Growth Management Framework, local comprehensive plans, and the state land use laws dictating the priority of lands to be urbanized. During selection of the Growth Management Framework preferred growth alternative, participants in the process chose a land use pattern that best suited the many, sometimes conflicting goals of the County and its cities. Following this work, and using the County Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page 3 4C adopted 2020 forecasts f~r the cities, a tentative agreement was made on a group of forecast numbers for the year 2Q50. Comparing the land use patterns of the preferred alternative, the c~pacities of individual UGBs, and the original 2050 forecast numbers, revealed the need for further refinement of the 2050 forecast. The 2050 forecast in turn reveals the need for actual land consumption. The following chart depicts the capacity within each UGB, the amount of additional land needed to accommodate the 2050 forecast, and the revised proposal for a ~050 forecast that better coordinates the desired growth patterns with the empmcal data gleaned from the further analysts. The coordmated forecast is the basis for many of the GrOwth Management Framework goals, policies, and standards. .--III - --III ~ I~ 315 ~:- ..~'~;:- ' . ' I~ ~ Paul ~. :Z~:4~ ~ * The Marion County Compact Need is the acreage required in addition to that within the current Urban Growth Boundary assuming tlhat the land use effidency goals of the Compact are met. Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page 4 ~ T Marion County, like the rest of the State, is a place of changing demographics. While there are many trends that can be examined, the two with the most profound effect on growth management Strategies are age of the population, and the mi~ of ethnicity. The following data and forecasts are from the national demographics firm of Woods and Poole. Table Il:2 Age of Couney Population Age of Population I 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2025 Percent 0-19 I 37.4% 31.7% 29.7% 29.9% 28.6% 28.6% 28.8% Percentage 20-64 50.4% 55.6% 56.0% 58.1% 59.1% I 55.3% 53.7% Percentage 65 and Over i 12.3% 12.6% 14.3% 12.1% 12.3% 16.1% 17.4% The table above depicts a trend toward a growing number of older residents within the County. An older population will require changes in housing and transportation needs and preferences in the County. Additionally, alternative transportation choices becomes increasingly important~ Usually this is assodated with a decrease in the ro ~ p rtion of pe,op.? u~_,der the, age ~of, .1.9., but a countery, ailing trend m increasing family size will staomze ttle number ot] children as a proportion of the population. This is largely due to the increasing number }f Hispanic households in the County. Table #:3 County Ethnici~ E~n~c Background ! 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2~.~ Percentage White-Not His{ afiic 95.9% 93.0% 88,4% 83.5% 77.5% 72.4% 70.0% Percentage Hispanic, Any {ace 2.7% 4.3% 7.4% 11.8% t7.7% 22.7% 25.1% ~ercentage Black { . 0.3% 0.6% 0.9% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% :)ercentage Other I 1.1% 2.1% 3.3% 3.6% 3.8% 3.9% 3.9% This table describes the ~thnic makeup of the County in the past, today, and projected for the future. Both of these changes will likely lead to a shift in housing preferences, with fewer residents desiringor affording the traditional single family home, and a larger proportion desiring various forms of attached, small lot, or rental housing. In addition, the need'for affordable tiousing choices will probably remain as acute as it is today for the foreseeable future. An important part of this Framework is the ability of the County and city plans to function together to meet the housing, employment, and transportation needs of the residents. An important part of this is will be to ensure that new growth is allowed to occur in a way that matches the demands of this new and changing population, and that communities ensure that their planning efforts allows all members of Marion County to feel welcome to settle in ~ place of their choosing. GROWTH MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK GOALq The Growth Management Framework incorporates existing goals and policies found in County planning documents, the local comprehensive plans, and state land use planning Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page 5 ! 4C law. New goals and policies have been added to implement the planning principles identified in the countywide growth framework. The goals and policies also make the logical connections betWeen the common goals and values of our county's residents, and lays out solutions to the possible conflicts that may be encountered. It brings together a series of common objectives that will better coordinate the policies'of the many jurisdictions within the county. The Growth Management Framework recognizes that every community is unique. The policies should be implemented to balance local priorities with the cou,tywide goals. There are some issues, however, that cannot be effectively addressed solely at the local level as they have impacts beyond jurisdictional boundaries and are regioinal issues. For these issues, a countywide approach of the county and cities working together to manage and develop solutions is more appropriate and effective. The goals best addressed through a coordinated and collaborative regional approach include the following four key issues: 1. Transportation 2. Environment 3. Economic Development 4. Homing ; In addition to the Growth Management Framework, coordination and UGB agreements witllt'local governments ~ also reflect the general policies and specific standards, with variations incorporated to reflect the specific situation in each city and its environs. Overriding all goals and policies related to the four key issues identified above are growth management goals that must be met to protect the integrity of the Framework at the local level. These goals indude: 1. Base decisions on a 10ng-range vision for the area, incorporating both local community visions and long range plans. 2. Foster the use of creativity and innovation in planned growth and devdopment projects to maintain the unique character of all dties. 3. Provide for balanced and managed growth to ensure equity among the cities and allow for more efficient use of our natural resources. 4. Honor the unique identities of communities and preserve unique characteristics. Embrace ethnic and cultural diversity and address the needs of different cultures in land use decisions and consider ethnic and cultural differences in the long-range vision and zoning designations. 6. Rely on the strengthsi of local decision-making coordinated with a countywide vision. 7. Encourage coordination among the county, cities and special districts. Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page 6 .,TRANSPORTATION GOALS The transportation g~als that are part of the Framework address the role of transportation in providing efficient movement of people and freight throughout the county. The goals include: A. Encourage use of alternative modes of transportation including mass transit, bicycling, walking and carpooling. B. Address transportation needs appropriate to both urban and rural areas throughout the county. TRANSPORTATION POLICIES In creating a countywide framework to manage growth, it is necessary to. provide implementation measures to affect their purpose. The transportation policies can provide the greatest guidance in m~idng the land use decisions that will direct the future location of jobs and housing in the county. The mutual agreement of the titles and the County to these policies is vital to the effective coordination and cooperation necessary to create a transportation system that can move people and goods effidenfly throughout the county. Th~,~following policies and standards provide guidance as to how this transportation system can be developed. 1. Marion County shall joindy plan with communities to meet the transportation needs in the future. Standards: · The Marion County TSP will be designed to accommodate the forecast population, housing, and employment identified in this Framework, as well as the areas that are planned for urban expansion, in coordination with the communities involved. The'-lVIarion County TSP will investigate countywide alternative transportation, such as inter-city transit, van pooling, and passenger rail service serving the county and the Willamette Valley region. 2. Communities should implement street connectivity standards. Standards: · For cities forecast to be greater than 5,000 people by 2050, new subdivisions will have internal connectivity of at least 8 through streets per mile for new development, and sufficient collector and arterial systems for local access. Further, this Framework recognizes the Local Street Connectivity Element of the Salem TSP as a quality example. Adopt a map depicting future street connections for areas to be urbanized. Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page 7 4C · The County will coordinate and adopt similar standards for urban areas within its planning jurisdiction, When feasible, the County will utilize local standards such as those in the Salem TSP and Salem Revised Code, for example, for development that occurs on unincorporated lands within UGBs. 3. Enhance or add transit connections within and between cities. Standards: · Local transportation plans for the two transit systems (Woodburn Transit System and Salem Cherriots) must contain a transit element coordinated with both the Framework forecast ~md the preferred alternative. Future small transit systems should be investigated for cities that will exceed 10,000 people in the foreseeable fisture. The County will investigate and encourage intercity transit provision through a variety o£ public and private providers. 4. Allow for a complementary mix of uses. Standards: · Qities will address opportunities to provide for zoning that allows the co-location of ~ployment and resfdential uses (mi~d use development) in all communities over 5,000 persons in size, and encouraged in all communities. · Require retail land .u~-that are over 60,000 sq. ft. or 300 employees per building be located in the Urban Qrowth Boundaries of dties that are in excess of 10,000 people. 5. Encourage Traffic Calming of through traffic in neighborhoods. Standards: · Cities and the County will joindy develop recommended methods and procedures for traffic calming, developing recommended best practices for methods, locations, and processes for traffic c,lrnlng in both existing and new developments. 6. Improve key freight routes. Standards: · Cities over 10,000 and the County will jointly plan for freight movement by both rail and truck in their transportation planning activities. 7. Improve the walking and biking environment in all communities. Standards: · All cities, urban area~ within the County, and rural communities regardless of size, can develop a comfortable walking environment. The basic tools are providing pedestrian Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page 8 4C facilities, and allowing the development of some areas with a sufficient density and mix of uses to make walking a practical alternative. ENVIRONMENTAl. GOALS The environmental goals that are part of the Framework address the importance of natural resources to the local economy, as well as the carrying capacity of the land. The goals include: A. Preserve and protect agricultural and forest lands, wetlands, wildlife habitat and natural resource corridors and other natural resources through wise stewardship. B. Encourage planning that does not exceed the capacity of water, energy, air and other resources. C. Promote conservation, recycling and the efficient use of resources. ENVIRONMENTAL pOLICIES The environmental potides provide guidance in making the land use decisions that will pro_t¢ct and preserve the natural resources of Marion County. The environmental policies list~ below are minimUm requirements, often less stringent than Federal regulations and already adopted city regulations. The mutual agreement of the cities and the County to these polities is vital to the effective coordination and cooperation necessary to create a system that does not exceed the resources available in Marion County. The following policies and standards provide guidance for protection of natural resources. 1. Identify land use effidency standards that must be met before a city can amend its Urban Growth Boundary Standards: · The following chart defines efficiency standards, in housing units per gross acre, for residential development created since the adoption date of the Framework. The residential efficiency standard is a composite number of all residential development (single-family and multifamily) occurring within a community. The standards are divided into five categories in accordance with projected city size in 2050. For cities forecasted to be larger than 25,000 people the standard is Ii housing units per acre; for cities between 10,000 and 25,000 people the standard is 7 housing units per acre; for cities between 2,500 and 10,000 the standard is 6 units per acre; for cities between 1,000 and 2,500 people, the standard is 5 housing units per acre; and for cities less than 1,000 no efficiency standard would be applied. Salem, the largest city in the County has an efficiency standard of 9 units per acre which is based on results from the ~Salem Futures" project, and may be modified based on the final adopted policies. Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page g 4C Compact Land Efficiency Standard In Unlta Per Gross UGB 2050 Plopulaflon Acre Less tha~ 1,000 No Standard 1,000 t~ 2,500 5 2,500 to 10,000 6 10,000 toi 25,000 7 Greater th;tn 25,000 8 Salem (From S~tlem Future's Pro~ct) 9 2. Require buffer zoneg to protect streams, floodplains, and significant wildlife areas from the negative effects Of development. Standards: The following standards are listed as a recommended starting point for pro~ection buffers. · Streams shall be buffered at least 50 feet from the edge of banic. · Wedands shall be buffered at least 50 feet. · Devdopment in flqodplains shall be restricted to balanced cut and fill, within the parcel to be developed. 3. Require developmepts to retain vegetation along streams, lakes, and reservoirs to provide for shelter, Shade, food and nesting. Standards: · Use the state stand~d to identify locally significant wedands. · Within stream or wetland buffers, and areas within the 100~year FEMA floodplain, no more than 30 percent of natural vegetation may be removed. · In the case of non-native species, native plant species may be used to replace existing vegetation so long as the overall quantity and distribution of vegetation remain the same, as based on a 15-year growth horizon. 4. Require prese~ation of more farm and forest land over the long term. Standards: · Identify and adopt a~ rate of redevelopment and infill required for expansion of UGBs onto lands protected under Statewide Planning Goals three or four. Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page 10 · Set targets for mixed-use development. This can include a percentage of residential and employment land uses that are co-located to increase the efficiency of land within the UGBs. · The County will manage the rural areas to encourage the preservation of the rural environment, and discourage the development of new communities of housing and employment outside of urban growth boundaries. 5. Require a plan to address how resources for the forecasted employment and population will be provided. Standards: · Analyze existing vacant land for the capacity to meet future land need. A jurisdiction can consider the feasibility of rezoning vacant land to a different land use type in order to create additional capacity for the type of development a potential UGB amendment would seek to provide. · Ensure that zoning is in place to meet or exceed residential and/or employment capacity targets, as identified by the Framework. If the identified capadty is less than the population or employment allocation, an UGB expansion should be anticipated. For ciries that will!require expansions of their UGB's, monitor the attainment of the targets on a perlodie basis 6. Encourage and work with jurisdictions and private landowners to protect water resources in the county.' Standards: The County will work with watershed groups, jurisdictions, and agendes to protect environmentally sensitive areas critical to watershed health. The County will promote and target restoration efforts to critical groundwater areas and develop water management approaches such as monitoring and evaluation programs based on collaborative actions. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOALS The economic development goals that are part of the Framework address the importance of maintaining a diverse employment base with living wage jobs. The goals include: A. Encourage diversity and balance of job types (e.g., service and industry jobs). B. Promote economic opportunity for all segments of society. C. Encourage a sustainable local and regional economy D. Tailor economic development to the unique assets and needs of the county and its individual communities. 4C Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page 11 4C ECONOMIC DEVEL~)PMENT POLICIES The economic development policies can provide guidance in making the land use decisions that will provide a dive,'se employment base in Marion County that allows for each dty's employment sector to complement each other rather than compete with each other. The mutual agreement of the dries and the County to these policies is vital to the effective coordination and cooperation necessary to create an economic development plan that allows for jobs and services to remain in the County. The following policies and standards provide guidance for an economic development plan. 1. Require identification of the existing capacity of employment uses. Standards: · Create an inventory of lands suitable for employment use · Calculate capacity for jobs, categorized by land use type, of the employment lands 2. Require a phn to provide for the forecasted employment. Standards: · Examine plans and implementing ordinances .and change where necessary to ~ordlnate employment lands inventory with forecast. · Determine if the dev~lopment density allowed is too low to attract investment. If it is, consider modifications to zoning regulations that will be apPropriate. 3. Support economic growth and development opportunities in fides in rural areas that reeogno i~e their distinCt character and economic potential. Standards: The County will assist and work with the cities, economic development agendes, and major institutions to provide information to support development of a region-wide strategy promoting a sustainable economy. HOUSING GOALS The housing goals that are part of the Framework address the importance of providing a diversity and range of housing choice, both in style and affordability. The goals include: A. Encourage the availability of a wide variety of housing choices to meet the needs of a diverse population. B. Encourage access to adequate housing for all citizens, commensurate wkh their incomes. Madon County Compact Framework Page 12 Draft #2 - 02/28/02 4C C. Encourage quality design for development that is sensitive to existing communities and the natural environment. HOUSING POLICI~ The housing policies i can provide guidance in making the land use decisions that will provide enough housing to meet the anticipated demand for housing. The mutual agreement of the cities and the County to these policies is vital to the effectiv~ coordination and cooperation necessary to provide adequate housing while still protecting the unique characterisiics of each community in the County. The following policies and standards provide guidance to create a housing plan that maintains and enhances the livability of each community. 1. Require zoning of Vacant land be designed to accommodate expected housing needs. Standards: · Identify a mix of housing types in larger cities (more than 5,000 persons, single family, townhouse, multi-family and others) and ensure that the vacant buildable land is zoned to provide for that mix, understanding however, that vacant land may also used for non-residential purposes.. · .~llow diverse hoUSing types in multiple residential zones, including a variety of ownership types. · Develop a numeric goal of providing affordable housing distributed proportionally in the dries larger than 10,003 persons in the County. · Cooperate with the Marion County Housing Authority in developing affordable housing projects in areas that have good walking, biking, and transit service and access to services. · AllOw expansion of urban growth boundaries consistent with state land use planning law to provide additional land for housing consistent with the other standards listed in this section. 2. Require identification of the existing capacity of residential uses. Standard: · Determine if the development density allowed is too Iow to attract investment. If it is, consider modifications to zoning regulations that will be appropriate. 3. Ensure quality design of new construction Standard: · Adopt clear and objective Design Standards for multi-family and commercial construction in cities over 10,000, and encourage their adoption in smaller communities. Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page 13 FRAMEWORK IMPLI~MENTATION In addition to its population coordination responsibilities (ORS 195.025), Marion County has joint agreements regarding urban growth boundaries with all local cities, and participates as a decision.maker on all urban growth boundary amendments. The County will work with the citiei to project any future urban growth boundary expansion needed, and will use its authoriqr to minimize the impacts of new development. Modifications to urban growth boundaries will be addressed through State planning law and this Framework process, including the protection and monitoring of urban growth boundary expansion areas for urbaa uses. As urban growth affects many important parts of Marion County and its economy, a need to coordinate growth anti develop a consistent growth management policy among the 20 incorporated fides is essential. As many of the growth issues transcend city boundaries and are regional in nauge, coordination with and amongst the cities and engaging the cities to w0rklng, together to devdop solutions and strategies is an important coordination role for the county. It is equally important for the County to provide assistance to cities in the form of informafi0n/data collection and analysis, and develop tools that can be uriliTed by the cities in addressing growth issues or concerns. The~laoning and growth management activities of many jurisdictions affect and are affected by the actions i of other jurisdictions in the County. The future plans 'for development 'of each ~ impacts the development potential of neighboring cities. For example, a large retail operation locating in one of the smaller commttnities itl Marion County will likely have a greater market draw than the immediate town. As a result, the opportunity for the nelgliboring cities to solicit a large retail operation is gready reduced and the transportation impacts between commuokies is increased. The coordination of planning and development activities and recognition that these activities are part of an on- going and continually evolving process; is essential if urban growth management efforts are to succeed. As part of the coordination between local governments, each city's vision for the futUre must be taken into consideration and respected when neighboring dries are planning for their futures. One of the planning principles identified through the Marion County Urban Growth Management Framework is the need for each community to maintain the characteristics and qualifies that make it unique. In recognkion of each community's unique character as well as growth being an issue that crosses jurisdictional boundaries, the implementation of the growth strategy has three components: 1.) the identification of and approach of utilizing subgreas of the county to meet local needs regarding key issues and to provide links between communities; 2.) letters of agreement and support from the cities for regional growth management and planning coordination by the County and cities for the broad policies that everyone can agree to; and 3.) individual intergovernmental agreements with each city or groups of dries and the County for the specific issues relevant to each city or subarea of the county. This process will result in a growth Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page 4C strategy that provides coordination between the different entities, but also maintains the integrity of the 20 cities within the County. Countywide Growth iManagement Utilizing Subareas Growth management including key issues and strategies is a regional issue that transcends jurisdictional boundaries. The integration local planning efforts to address and manage key growth issues provides a collaborative approach and action that will be far more effective than the 20 ~ities and the county acting independently of each other. Cities within the county areilinked to each other in many ways whether it be geographically, economically, transportation, housing, resources, services or other linkages. Utilizing these connections and the knowledge that communities in an area do impact on each other, the identificatioa of subareas in the county, that is the grouping of ckies together to collectively work toward common goals and strategies on key growth issues affecting each community, is an effective way to accommodate the needs of the cities and county within a countywide approach where individually, each jurisdiction's role is limited. Letters of Agreement/Support In order to have a consistent growth management plan for the County, the County and 20 citi~ will be asked to sign a Marion County Urban Growth Management Framework Letter of Agreement. This letter references the countywide standards identified in the Framework that are applicable to all dties. Signing of the Framework letter indicates agreement and support for a countywide approach to growth management and working together to develop effective strategies to address key issues. Signing a letter of agreement also indicates support t~or the countywide goals, polities, and standards that frame the regional growth management approach, and requires efforts within a reasonable period of time to comply with the Framework. The countywide standards addressed in the Framework, will be reviewed every five years. Revisions can be made at other times if half of the cities and the Marion County Board of Commissioners agree to the change. Individual Inter-Governmental Agreements (IGAs) Each community within Marion County is unique. As a result, individual intergovernmental agreements or compacts will be signed with each city or groups of cities and the County to address the topics identified in the Framework and specific local growth issues that may effectively be addressed through such a city/county agreement. Modifications to the intergovernmental agreements can be made with the consent of both the city and the county. The intergovernmental agreements will be reviewed and modified as appropriate during the city's periodic review process. Marion County Compact Framework Draft #2 - 02/28/02 Page f5 8A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 22, 2002 TAPE READING 0001 DATE. COUN(~IL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CITY OF WOODBURN, COUNTY OF MARION, STATE OF OREGON, APRIL 22, 2002. CONVENED. The meeting convened at 7:00 p.m. with Council President Figley presiding. 0010 ROLL CALL. Mayor Councilor Councilor: Councilor! Councilori Councilor! Councilorl Jennings Absent Bjelland Present Chadwick Present Figley Present McCallum Present Nichols Present Sifuentez Present (7:14 pm) Staff Present: City Administrator Brown, City Attorney Shields, Public Works Director Tiwari, Police Chief Null, Deputy Police Chief Russell, Community Development Director Mulder, Finance Director Gillespie, Park Director Westrick, Public Works Manager Rohman~ Sr. C.E. Tech. Scott, City Recorder Tennant A) Aquatic Center Mother's Spa Day will be held on May 5, 2002, from 1:00 pm to 4:00 pm. B) Budget Committee Workshop will be held on Tuesday, April 30, 2002, 7:00 p.m., in the City Hall Council Chambers. C) Woodburn Pnblic Library: The last program of a 3-part series titled "Responding to Terrorism, Challenges for Democracy" with Dr. Gary Perlstein from Portland State University will be held on April 29, 2002 beginning at 1:00 p.m. in the Library's Multi- Purpose Room. D) Public Hearing on Zone Change 002-01 and Subdivision #02-01 will be held before the City Council on May 13, 2002 at 7:00 p.m.. The applicant's property is located at 888 Brown Street. 0181 PRESENTATION: LIVABILITY TASK FORCE PROPERTY PRIDE AWARDS Lisa Elsworth, Task Force representative, stated that the Livability Task Force is working towards providing a cleaner community that all of the residents can be proud of and, most recently, Spring Clean-up was an example ofa livability project. Quarterly, Task Force members visit neighborhoods and businesses for the purpose of selecting homeowners and businesses wino try to bring pride to their property. For the current quarter, the Task Force presented the following Property Pride Awards: Page 1 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 22, 2002 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 22, 2002 TAPE READING 1) Al's GardenlCenter - 1220 N. Pacific Hwy. Business Category recipient, Jack Bigej (owner), receiv.~d a plaque from the Livability Task Force in appreciation for all of the hard wor.k entailed in keeping his business a source of pride for the Woodburn commumty. 2) Lonergan HOuse - 245 N. 2nd Street. Ms. Elsworth stated that it was the consensus of the Task Force to honor, in the Home category, Mr. & Mrs. Frank Lonergan for their year-round displays and their gardens. Frank Lonergan was in attendance to receive the plaque. 0375 PRESENTATION: EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PLAN. Deputy Chief RUssell stated that, for several years, the City has oPerated under several different plans Within departmental levels and there was an emergency oPeration plan in place so that the iCity could deal with an emergency when it arose. The plan before the Council sets forth the strategy and integrates all of those plans into a comprehensive management system so that the City can oPerate altogether as one unit. It establishes roles and responsibilities for emergency responders from various departments and gives emergency authority by the which an individual can undertake and direct those activities. It also gives directional process to declare an emergency and assures Council control and oversight in that process. It also gives an Incident Commander direction on when, if the need arises, an emergency declaration can be given at the scene for protection of life and proPerty. The plan adopts the Incident Command System which is a National Emergency System and Command Structure that allows multiple agencies and jurisdictions to work together under a Unified command. Additionally, the plan identifies potential hazards and provides specific plans for the most likely events. City staff'members who are responsible for key positions in the Incident Command System have been provided training and have participated in tabletop exercises. This document will be updated as needed and staff training will continue in order to learn new methods and/or techniques in handling emergencies. Currently, staff is working with (1) the School District on updates to their emergency response plan, (2) on a weapons and mass destruction plan with Marion County and some of the agencies within Marion County on possible biological attack scenarios, and (3) the Fire District on a new state mandate earthquake preparedness training program. He stated that the document has been provided to the Council in order to seek any input regarding the plan and/or potential changes to the document before it is submitted to the Council for adoption by ordinance. Councilor McCallum questioned if there were any plans to do any large scale emergency exercises. Deputy Chief Russell stated that the City does participate in the County-wide exercises which involves larger scale exercises. Within the City, there is a plan underway to do an exercise with the Fire District to do an earthquake exercise since it is a state-mandated exercise and, within the last 24 months, an exercise was done that related to a windstorm. 8A Page 2 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 22, 2002 8A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 22, 2002 TAPE READING 0703 0824 PROCLAMATI~)N: DiA DEL NIlglOS / DAY OF THE CHII,D. Council President Figley read the proclamation which designated April 27, 2002 as Dia Del Nifios / Day 0fthe Child in which nations around the world celebrate their country's future (their children) by engaging in family and community activities. In his proclamation, M~yor Jennings urged citizens of our community to observe this special day of celebratiofi recognizing the children of Woodbum. CHAMBER OF iCOMMERCE REPORT. G-reg Lundeen, representing the Chamber Board, provided information to the Council on upcoming events.~ 1) On May 6~, a Special Chamber Forum will be held in the Rose Room at Woodburn Crossing, 12:00 noon, on the subject of the Marion County budget and how cutbacks will affect the WoodbUrn area; 2) On May 9~, Business Aider Hours will be held at the Woodburn Aquatic Center and, following this event, participants will be going to Lupita's Restaurant for dinner; and 3) On May 15a, the regular Chamber Forum lunch meeting will be held at the Rose Room at Woodburn Crowing and the Leadership Youth Program will be discussing their upcoming projectl which will be to install playground equipment in the N. Front Street park. He stated that Tuh'p Festival prints are still available at the Chamber office and, after Memorial Day, they will be burning any remaining prints in order to keep the value of the prints at a higher level. Lastly, new community maps are now available and copies will soon be distributed to the Council. 0985 CONSENT AGENDA. A) Approve the City Council minutes of April 8, 2002; B) Accept the Planning Commission minutes of March 28, 2002; C) Accept the Library Board minutes of April 10, 2002; D) Accept Community Center Planning Committee notes of April 4, 2002; and E) Accept the Livability Task Force minutes of February 19, 2002. NICHOLS/BJELLLAND... approve the consent agenda as presented. The motion passed unanimously. 1052 PUBLIC HEARi[NG: EAST HARDCASTLE AVENUE IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT. Council Presiden~ Figley opened the public hearing at 7:20 p.m.. Councilor Bjellami announced a potential conflict of interest, based on the advice of a representative frown Government Standards & Practices Commission, since his wife works for one of the affected parties within the proposed local improvement district and he also does some consulting work for that party. He stated that even though he declared Page 3 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 22, 2002 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 22, 2002 TAPE READING a potential conflict of interest, he did not feel that it would affect his decisions on the matter and he Will participate in the discussion on the issue. Council President Figley and Councilor McCallum stated, for the record, that they have driven the affected street to view the area under discussion. Public Works Director proceeded to present the staff report on this proposed improvement, iHe reiterated that the public hearing gives property owners in the proposed -district an opportunity to provide input to the Council on whether or not the City should move forward and/or modify the project as proposed. He stated that written :remonstrances are the official objection to the improvement district and, to date, the only written remonstrance received was submitted by Nancy R. Coffey, 1498 Greenview Drive. He reminded the Council that during this process the property owners can still speak on this isSue and staff will address the questions raised prior to the closure of the hearing. Director Tiwari stated that the E. Hardcastle Street improvement has been on the Capital Improvement Project list for several years. Over the years, the pavement has settled, numerous cuts have been made for utilities and the City has installed a sidewalk all of which contribute to the need for the improvement. He stated that improvements made to date such as the storm drain and sidewalk installation are not costs that will be borne by the benefitted property owners. The estimated project cost is $395,820 of which the City would contribute $137,000 and the benefitted property owners would be assessed the remaining $258,820. The project boundary begins at the unimproved section of E. Hardcastle Aveaue east of Highway 99E easterly to the city limits. The proposed improvement will provide for 3 lanes of which one lane is a tumlane, a 5 foot bikelane, and a sidewalk on the north side of the street since there is currently a sidewalk on the ~south side of E. Hardcastle. He stated that the City contribution will pay for the costs associated with (1) increasing the street width from 34 feet to 44 feet and (2) the additional thickness of the pavement since this street is an arterial street as designated in the City's Transportation System Plan. He reiterated that the City has used this method of determining the City's contribution in other assessment projects and have incorporated this method in determining the City's proposed contribution of the upcoming Boones Ferry Road improvement project. Director Tiwari reviewed the methodology used to determine the proposed assessments to benefitted property owners of which property area consists of 25% and trip generation is 75% of the cost distribution. The proposed district includes property abutting E. Hardcastle AvenUe in addition to properties located to the north and south of the street that utilize the street either as a primary or secondary roadway to either Highway 99E or Highway 211. He also reviewed how distance was used to determine what percent of cost would be charged to benefitted property owners since this percentage ranges from 12.5% to 100% charge. He reiterated that other calculation methods could have been used to allocate the costsi to each parcel, however, they had used this method since they felt it was Page 4 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 22, 2002 8A 8A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 22, 2002 TAPE READING ?,a,t it was a fair xpethod for cost distribution. In regards to a parcel of property owned by Al s Fruit & Shrub, this cost allocation has been modified from 100% to 75% since the direct access is off of Highway 99E and the driveway is used for access to the rear of their property. In summary, he stated that the prior sidewalk and storm drain improvements are not part of the proposed assessment. Benefitted property owners will be able to utilize the 10 yea~ payment plan under the Bancrot~ Bond program with interest proposed at 6.5%. Interim fmaneing of the construction project will be through interfund borrowing and, oace this project along with other upcoming projects are completed, the City may elect to Sell general obligation improvement bonds. The staff recommended that, unless the COuncil had modifications to be made to the proposed project, an analysis be made to see wllat percentage of benefitted properties object to the project The Comer can then make a decision to either proceed with the project, modify the project, or drop the project. Councilor MeCal!um questioned when the last local improvement district was approved by the Council anCl if the same criteria was used regarding access and distance in applying the benefit to the property. Director Tiwari s~ated that Parr Road was the most recent assessment district, however, each assessment district is unique and the benefit ratio is similar even though the criteria may be different. !The City contribution for the Parr Road improvement was based on the cost for a wider street and thickness of pavement since it is also an medal street. 28OO Dave Fischer, 160 Heritage Court (tax lot 5500), stated that they are in the 100% primary district and that he and his wife are in support of the improvement as proposed. The street is old, narrdw, broken-up, and beyond the point of repair. The road handles a lot of traffic that comes',offof Highway 211 over to Highway 99E, handles a lot of neighborhood traffic, and it handles a lot of walkers. He stated that he walks that sweet 3 or 4 times a day along with many other individuals with children. The motorists seem to drive fast down the roadway and most of the walkers walk the north side of the street rather than utiliziag the south side sidewalk. In regards to traffic, he feels that traffic on E. Hardeastle will increase once the Safeway development is operational since motorists will take Cooley Road to Highway 99E rather than waiting at an already congested intersection. He also feels that a new street with good lighting, no ditches, and improved pedestrian/bicycle travel areas will improve the area and, hopefully, make the area look safer. He expressed his appreciation to staff in how they tried to spread the cost out to property owners in the benefitted area. Jennifer Kilmurray, 1145 Orchard Lane, stated that she is in favor of this project since she has a son who walks down to Mall 99 and the sidewalk on the north side will make it safer for pedestrians. She also feels that it will make the area look nicer and inviting, however, she questioned as to how the property was assessed as it moves further to the north since it seems that more residents to the north are using E. Hardcastle rather than Page 5 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 22, 2002 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 22, 2002 TAPE READING 3226 Page 6 - going out to Hil~hway 21 I. She felt that a more equal distribution of costs should be evaluated rathe~ than looking at distance away from the street as a determining factor on the percentage ~llocation. Henry Jaeger, 1830 E. Hardcastle, stated that he owns a number of duplexes in the benefitted area find his estimated cost is $38,000. Even though he is not necessarily '~ against the proj6ct, he will have to pass on the cost to his tenants. He referred to tax lot # 1000 which is ~ small sliver of land that does not touch anywhere and is not buildable but yet the cost to that parcel is $44. On tax lot #1700, the land is currently vacant and the estimated co~t includes an approach fee of $250 but, if the property is developed, the approach will lm off of Kennedy Street rather than E. Hardcastle. He also expressed his concern about tile water over the new sidewalk during the winter months and if that water problem will continue to exist when a new roadway is constructed. James Davis, 1478 Greenview Court, questioned why the map that was displayed map as part of staff presentation does not match the published map that was distributed to his home on April 10, 2002, and why does the property owned by the Molokan Church and the City have a significant discount compared to his property. Mary Davis, 1478 G-reenview Court, stated that she was not opposed or in favor of the project but she did have the following questions: (1) why the need for 3 paved lanes since she does not feellthat there is enough traffic on the roadway to warrant the 3'~ lane; (2) why is she going to have to pay interest on money that she has not agreed to pay and not signed any document that wotfld require her to pay; and (3) why the house that sits across the borderline between the County and City is not being assessed since they use that roadway all of the time. If there is concern about an increase level of traffic due to the 'Safeway development, she suggested that Safeway also be a contributor of this 'improvement. She also felt that those residents living on Cooley Road, even though they are in the County, should pay for a portion of the cost since they also use the roadway regularly. She also questioned who is responsible for the property assessment if, as a property owner, She elects to sell her property. She expressed her opinion that, since it is the Council's choice to approve the project, it is also their responsibility to take on the interest bill. She also stated that she was unhappy as to the way this project was brought up since it was published in the newspaper before they were ever told about the proposed project. No letter was provided to them until April 8a' informing them that they would receive a letter or~ April 10o' and she strongly felt that there should have been a stronger organizational plan for this process. She reiterated that the roadway does need to be improved and she is not opposed to paying for a part of the plan, but she disagrees with the way in which this improvement project process has been handled. Warren Powers, 1120 G-reenview Drive, stated that if the City was going to put that much money into E. Hardeastle then the City needs to take a good look at the drainage problem between their home and 1130 G-reenview Drive since, during a flashflood, the water went Council Meeting Minutes, April 22, 2002 8A 8A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 22, 2002 TAPE READING 4365 clear above the c~b and it took a number of hours before the water drained away. If the drainage is not reI~aired and it continues to be a problem, there may be a potential cost in digging up E. Harflcastle in order to properly drain the surrounding area. He also expressed his concern in that continued water overflow issues will decrease his property value. He suggested that the bicycle lane be eliminated in'order to reduce cost since he has not seen any evidence that would justify the addition of the bicycle lane. Lastly, he is concerned about the traffic speed of motorists on that roadway and he will be monitoring the speed for repoi'ting to the City. Dallas Ewing, 18t0 E. Hardcastle, stated that he was surprised at the low turnout of property owners in this area since it affects their financial situation. His son, who lives in that area, is a quadriplegie on a fixed income and this project will place an additional financial burden tin him. He agreed with comments made by other property owners that the bicycle lane and turn lane would not be necessary on this project since he did not feel that the traffic was heavy enough for those two project components. He also expressed concern on the storm drain issue and questioned if more work will be necessary by the City in order to m~ke the storm drain line work. Douglas Cooper, ! 130 G-reenview, expressed his opposition in having to pay for the proposed improv~nent and he questioned why the City has to charge the property owners for the extra 10 fe~t and the thickness of the road. He agreed that something has to be done to the roadway but to require the property owners to pay for a share of the cost over a 10 year period, With interest, seems absurd to him and there is no need to build a fancy street in that area. 4540 Public Works Director Tiwari proceeded to answer questions brought up by the owners: 1) Re-evaluation 6f cost allocation to Greenview Drive: He stated that there could be different approaches to the cost allocation but the benefit to property owners will be different due to th~ distance of the property from E. Hardcastle. He briefly reviewed the method in which the percentage allocation was determined and that the block approach was used when making a change from 100% to 75%, etc.. 2) Current flooding of E. Hardeastle: He assured the Council that the storm drain is placed at the depth and direction in which it should be and the sidewalk placement and elevation is at the level it should be. Once the street is improved, it will be lower and then the drainage will work properly. He reiterated that the sidewalk was installed at the elevation for the fature so that it would not have to be replaced when the new road is built. 3) Lot 1700 approach: He stated that if this lot would have direct access off of Kennedy Street rather than E. Hardeastle, staff will make a $250.00 adjustment to the assessment cost for this parcel. He reiterated that errors brought to their attention will be corrected before any final assessment is adopted. Page 7 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 22, 2002 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 22, 2002 TAPE READING 4) Map to property owners: Director Tiwari stated that the map sent to the benefitted property ownerS should have been the same one that was displayed at this hearing. He stated that his staff will be available after this meeting to look at Mr. Davis's map and answer his question. 5) City propert3~ assessment: He stated that the City property was not assessed less than other propertiesl in the proposed assessment district. The area and trip generation 'calculations were used on all parcels of land. The trip generation number for ::playgrounds, as Published in the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation :Manual, was used and he assured the Council that they would recalculate this number to make sure that it is correct. 6) Street width for 3 lanes: Director Tiwari stated that the 3 lanes is needed to accommodate pOtential traffic flow on an arterial street. Two lanes are for regular traffic flow and the 3'~ lane provides a refuge for motorists who need to turn onto a side street. The City's Transportation System Plan, which has been for the most part been approved by the State, designates E. Hardcastle Avenue as an arterial street which carries more traffic than a local street. In regards to the City's contribution towards this project, system development funds will be used to pay for costs that are in excess of a local street improvement since system development funds can only be used for additional capacity. Bikelanes are also required when improvements are made to arterial streets and the City is paying for all of the costs associated with that portion of the improvement. Lastly, the additional thickness of the road will be paid by the City and not the property owners since the thickness is necessary to accommodate the arterial street standards. Director Tiwari reiterated that the assessment costs listed in the report are a set amount and any costs over the total project estimate will be paid for by the City. 7) Interest charge to benefitted property owners: Director Tiwari stated that the legal process for this type of improvement is being followed by the City. This hearing is the .6pportunity for benefitted property owners to talk to the Council and, as a result of the public input, the Council can give the staff direction on any modifications to be made. Interest charges will only be charged if a property owner elects to pay their share of the assessment cost over a period of time. He reminded the Council that any monies borrowed to pay for the improvement will result in interest charges being paid by the City. Therefore, interest charged on unpaid assessments will be an additional cost to the property owners in order to meet the financial obligations in paying off the improvement. 8) Non-assessment of properties located outside of the city limits: Director Tiwari stated that the City does not have legal authority to assess properties outside of the city limits. He also stated that the road improvement will not be directly in front of the house in question. 9) Storm drain issue on Greenview: Staff will look into this situation before the project begins. 8A Page 8 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 22, 2002 8A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 22, 2002 TAPE READING Tape 2 Director Tiwari reiterated that an arterial street requires the bike lane and sidewalks and the project propoSal would only assess costs to benefitted property owners based on a 34 foot local street improvement. Councilor MeCall~n requested information on how an assessment is paid off when property is sold. i Director Tiwari stated that, after the project is approved, there will be a recording at the County Clerk's office that will show that there is, or will be, a lien against the property. When a title search is completed, this lien will show up on the title search and the lien will need to be paid when the property is sold or arrangements made for the new owner to assume the lien. In more recent assessment projects, the City has listed the assessment cost as the higheS~ cost to be assessed rather than making it only an estimate which could be increamed if final costs exceeded the estimate. The City will be paying for costs in excess of the estimate. Councilor McCall~n also requested clarification of the process followed as it related to the newspaper publication and letter to property owners. Director Tiwari stated that the original notice submitted to the newspaper included all of the property infonhation, however, the newspaper did not print all of the information. In order to make sure that the process was followed correctly so that, if necessary, bends could be sold in ~ future, the newspaper made a correction and did a full reprint which included all of the. properties. The staff sent the letter to the benefitted property owners at the time the 2~ publication was made since the public hearing date was changed fi:om April 8t~ to April 22~. Councilor Bjelland questioned if the assessment to the property owners are adjusted when cost savings are rdalized by the City. Director Tiwari e:4pressed his hope that there will be some reduction but there were certain costs that Were not included in the estimate such as engineering and interest associated with the first year payments to the contractor before any assessment is levied. fi, after absorbing those costs, the final project cost is lower than the estimate, then the property owners will see a reduction in the final assessment. He reiterated that the listed cost to the benefitted properties is the maximum cost to be assessed when the Council adopts a final assessment ordinance. Councilor Sifuentez left the meeting at approximately 8:30 pm due to a work related emergency. Council President Figley declared the public hearing closed at approximately 8:31 p.m.. She stated that staffhas asked Council to allow them an opportunity to perform an analysis on the public input received and a recommendation for action would be made as part of the analysis. She suggested that the Councilors let the staff know if they have any specific directions based on the testimony received. She shared the concern expressed by Page 9 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 22, 2002 8A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 22, 2002 TAPE READING some of the individuals that the work that will be done needs to be done right and will work for the City for many years to come. Councilor NichOls commented on an issued raised by one of the speakers regarding the traffic generatio9on that roadway. He stated that the improvement project provides for a road that will allow for future growth. While on the Council years ago, he informed the group that the Council had stalled several projects like this one and, when the City did get ~around to the construction project, the property owner had to pay up to a third more for ~the same projecti because of increased labor and material costs. helCHOLS/BJELLAND... staff present Council with options and recommendations at next regular Council meeting along with an ordinance on this project. For the record, City Attorney Shields stated that, under the legally enabling ordinance for local improvement districts, the City had not received sufficient written remonstrances to delay the projeetl Councilor McCallum expressed his appreciation to the property owners who brought their testimony and concerns before the Council. Councilor Bjelland reminded the public that E. Hardeastle Avenue is a designated arterial street and the City is planning for a future population of 35,000. This increased growth will require arterials to have a 3'~ lane and, because of this need for increased capacity, the City will be paying for the improvement costs that are in excess of the local street improvement costs. On roll call vote, the motion passed 5-0 (Councilor Sifuentez had already let't the meeting). 0340 COUNCIL BILL 2383 - RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO IMPROVE BOONES FERRY ROAD }'ROM GOOSECREEK TO HAZELNIJT DRIVE, ADOPT A LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AND METHOD OF ASSESSMENT, AND ESTABLISH A pUBLIC Hle~ARING DATE. Councilor Chadwick introduced Council Bill 2383. Recorder Tennant read the bill by title only since there were no objections from the Council. Councilor McCallum stated that, on the advice of Mr. Crabtree from the Oregon Government Standards and Practices Commission, he declared a conflict of interest and he would not be participating in any further discussions or votes on that matter. He stated that he lives and owns property in the affected area and he would benefit financially from that project. On roll call vote, the bill passed 4-0 (Councilor McCallum had no part in the discussion or voting). Council President Figley declared Council Bill 2383 duly passed. The public hearing will be held on Monday, May 13, 2002, 7:00 p.m., in the City Hall Council Chambers. Page 10 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 22, 2002 8A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 22, 2002 TAPE READING 0473 COUNCIL BILI~ 2384 - RESOLUTION CONSENTING TO THE CITY ADMINISTRAT~)R'S APPOINTMENT OF SCOTT D. RUSSELL AS POLICE CHIEF AND AI~THORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN EMPLOYMENT 0538 0570 AGREEMENT. Councilor Chadwtck introduced Council Bill 2384. 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. Council President Figley declared Council Bill 2384 duly passed and congratulated!Deputy Chief Russell on his appointment which takes effect June 1, 2002. ACCEPTANCE 0F UTILITY WATER AND SANITARY SEWER FORCE MAIN EASEMENTS:Wal-Mart Expansion. Wal-Mart Businc3s Trust conveyed easements to the City for a utility water main and a utility sanitary forice main which was part of the conditions of approval relating to their expansion project. NICHOLS/MCCALLUM... accept the utility water main and sanitary sewer force main easements for the Wal-mart expansion. The motion passed unanimously. ACCEPTANCE ~)F UTILITY EASEMENT FOR FRANCHISED UTILITIES: Wal-Mart Expaqsion. 0597 Wal-Mart BusineSs Trust also conveyed a utility easement to the City for proposed and existing franchised utilities adjacent to Harvard Drive and Evergreen Road. NICHOLS/BJELLAND .... accept the utility easement for franchised utilities for the Wal-Mart expansion. The motion passed unanimously. BID AWARD: P[IASE II ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS OF CITY PROPERTY ON GATCH STREET AND PARK AVENUE. Council President Figley stated that the City is considering the sale of the City-owned property on Gateh Street and Park Avenue, however, potential issues relating to prior uses may be brought up by potential buyers and the environmental assessment will provide the City with necessary information before any sale is publicized. Bids for this project were received from the following consultants: Aspen Environmental Services, Inc., $11,900.00; Bergeson - Boese & Associates, Inc., $12,125.00; PBS Environmental Services, $14,900.00; and Creekside Environmental Consulting, LLC, $18, 800.00. BJELLAND/MCCALLUM... award the bid for Phase II Environmental Assessments for sites on Gatch Street and Park Avenue to Aspen Environmental Services, Inc. for $11,900.00. The motion passed unanimously. Page 11 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 22, 2002 8A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 22, 2002 TAPE READING 0644 0674 CONTRACT WARD: POLICE RECORDS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM SOFTWARE.I New World Sygtem submitted the only proposal for a Police Records Management System in the amount of $165,000 plus an annual standard software maintenance agreement of $15,608. NICHOLS/MCCALLUM... award the contract for Police Records Management System .software to NeW World Systems, direct staff to finalize negotiations of the contract, and -~to authorize the! City Administrator to sign the contract. The motion passed unanimously. LIBRARY FEE INCREASE FOR NON-CITY RESIDENTS. ~Isi~eHnO~La~S/BJ~L.L ,AND... authorize the increase in library services fee to out-of-city presentea. Administrator Brown stated that, if this authorization is approved, staff will be bringing back at a future meeting an amendment to the City's master fee schedule ordinance to implement the fee increase. The motion passed unanimously. 0740 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION. A) Planning Commission approval of Site Plan Review #02-03: Request fi.om Woodbum School District to install a walk-in freezer unit at Washington Elementary School located at 777 E. Lincoln Street. No action was taken by the Council on this decision. 0776 .MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORT. ~ouncilor Bjelland reminded the public that donations are still being accepted for the Flower Basket program and any contribution would be greatly appreciated. Donations are tax deductible and checks are to be made payable to Woodbum Together. The baskets are scheduled to be hung around May 15m. Council President Figley expressed her thanks to the organizers of the first Tulip Festival parade and she felt that it went very smoothly for a first-time event. The last official day of the Tulip Festival was April 21 st, however, there are still tulips blooming throughout the Woodbum community and she thanked those responsible for planting tulips around the City buildings. Councilor McCallum stated that Woodbum Together will be having their annual meeting on Thursday, April 25th, at Tukwila Center for Health & Medicine beginning at 6:30 p.m.. He stated that they will be giving out annual awards and he announced that recipients for awards this year include: Paul Null - Individual of the Year award; Woodbum Parks & Recreation - Organization of the Year award; and Farmworker Housing Development Corporation - Business of the Year award. He stated that they will also honor Randy Franke, retiring Marion County Commission member, who has been the leader of the Page 12 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 22, 2002 8A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES APRIL 22, 2002 TAPE READING 125~ Marion County Childrens' and Families Commission in promoting children and family issues in Marion County and the State. On behalf of the Livability Task Force, Councilor McCallum thanked the volunteers who turned out for the clean-up project. There were over 85 volunteers which included individuals from Chemeketa Community College, Portland General Electric, Boy Scouts, Girls Scouts, Downtown Association, Woodbum Kiwanis, MacLaren, Girls and Boys soccer teams, and the Woodburn High School Key Club. He also thanked those businesses and residents who worked in their own neighborhood to clean-up their area. Councilor NicholS stated that last month a proposal was brought before the Council to re- name Vanderbeek Lane east of Senior Estates to Tiwari Lane. As a result, he and Councilor Chadwick had spoken to the Fire Chief regarding this proposal and was told that the Fire Department knows which direction to take based on how an emergency call is toned out by dispatch. They also met with individuals from Senior Estates and it was agreed that the street name would be left as it is now. nl)JO r Tr. MCCALLUM/B,~ELLAND...meeting be adjourned. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjoin'ned at approximately 8:57 p.m.. APPROVED RICHARD JENNINGS, MAYOR ATTEST Mary Tennant, Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 13 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 22, 2002 ? T WOODBURN PLANNING COMMISSION April 11, 2002 CONVENED The Planning Commission met in a session at 7:00 p.m. with Chairperson Cox presiding. ROLL CALL Chairperson Vice Chairperson Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Staff Present: Cox P Lima P Young P Grosjacques P Mill P Bandelow A Lonergan P Jim Mulder, Community Development Director MINUTES A. Woodbum Plannin~l Commission Minutes of March 28, 2002 Commissioner Grosjacquesi moved to accept the minutes as printed. Commissioner Lima seconded the motion, which unanimously .qarded. BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE None, COMMUNICATIONS A. City Council Minutes of March 11, 2002 PUBMC HEARING None ITEMS FOR ACTION A. Final Order forZonq Change 02-01, Subdivision 02-01, request for a 13 lot subdivision Iocate,~ on 888 Brown SL, J~eff Twen~le, applicanL Commissioner Mill indicated be was not present for that meeting and although he read through the report and the minutes he will abstain f/om voting because he felt he did not have a firm enough grasp on what the decision was and everything that went into it to render an intelligent vote. Chairperson Cox thought Staff adequately handled what the Commission intended to recommend to the Council with regards to the street name. V'me Chairperson Lima moved to approve the Final Order for Subdivision 02-01 and Zone Change 02-01. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Grosjacques. Motion unanimously carded with Commissioner Mill abstaining. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Site Plan Review 0~-03, request for a freezer addition onto Washington Elementary School located at 777 E. Lir~coln St., Woodbum School District, applicant (Administrative approval). Commissioner Mill questioned whether the Commission would not be seeing administrative actions under the new Ordinance? Staff replied affirmatively. He explained under the new Ordinance administrative actions would not come Planning Commission Meeting. April 11, 2002 Page I of 2 before the Planning COmmission. If it were appealed, it would go before City Council. V'me Chairperson Lima) complimented the applicant in regards to the very thorough report. Commissioner Mill expressed concems regarding the noise from the compressors. Staff commented this was not addressed in the Staff Report and as far as he knows, it was not an issue. He could not imagine the noise would be that great and considering the distance away from the residences and from the classrooms. Chairperson Cox noted they certainly do not want to approve this and then have the neighbors come in and complain about the exCessive noise in the neighborhood but on the other hand, the School District should be given credit or enough common sense that they would not put themselves in a situation that is so noisy that it will interfere with the School. He further commented he does not think it will be a problem. Commissioner Mill stated that is a really good point and a logical conclusion. Commissioner Loner,q~ln moved to approve Staff's action on Site Plan Review 02-03. Commissioner Youn,q seconded the motion: Which unanimously carded. ' REPORTS A. Building Activ~ity for March 2002 Chairperson Cox commented the statistics and pattem continues. Staff remarked he does not anticipate building activity to be nearly as much next year as it is this year. B_.= Planning Project Tracking Sheet (revised 3-28-02) BUSINESS FROM THE COMMISSION Vice Chairperson Lima Congratulated Chief Paul Null in his retirement and thanked him for what he has done for~the City of Woodburh. Staff informed the Commission Paul Null's replacement has already been selected. John Brown already announced that he has selected Scott Russell, the Deputy Chief to become the Chief. Commissioner Youn,q announced Woodbum Yard Debris Clean-Up is coming up on Apd120~h. Yard debds and any metal can be taken to be recycled to United Disposal Service on Saturday between 7 am and 4 pm for residents of Woodbum, Hubbard, Gervais and Aurora. Commissioner Young stated the hope is to encou_mge the community to clean up their yard and get ready for Spring and Summer. ATTEST ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Loner,qap moved to adjourn the meeting. Motion carded. Meeting adjourned at 7:20 p.m. APPROVED ~_~ ~/J I M COX, C H,H,~RPERS ON A Jim Ml~(:~e-r, - - - Date Comn~u~ity Development Director City of~oodbum, Oregon Motion was seconded by Commissioner Lima. DATE Planning Commission Meeting - April 11, 2002 Page 2 of 2 Tl e City of Woodburn ' LiVability Task Force Mission Slatement: 'It is the mission of the LivabiliO/ Task Force to create and prornote programs Ihat resull in a cleaner communib/ where there is pr~de in property ownership, with a full range of commercial services, and wffh; ample recreational, cultural, and entertainment activities for all age groups. It is the Task Force'S further mission to create ahd promote an environment where all residents can feel safe, will interac~ with each other, will celebrate they unique traits and diversity, and can share a strong and common sense of community." Woodburn Livgbility Task Force Meeting Minutes - March 2002 City Hall Conference Room ~March 26, 2002 ~ 7.:00pm Call to Order Meeting called tO order in the City Hall Conference Room at 7:10. Task Force Members: Pete McCallum MiEe Bergeron Lisa Ellsworth Betty Guzman Staff: Kezia Merwin Present Jane Christoff Absent AbSent Nancy A. Kirksey Present Present Jo.Ann Bjelland Present Present Present II Approval of Februa_ry 19, 2002 Meeting Minutes Progress Reports A. Front Street Park. Betty said that the finishing work on the park was delayed until betier weather allowed; the gro::nd was too muddy to put play equipment in place. The residents in area were concerned with graffiti problems in the park. r B. Flower Baskets. The solicitation of funds letters went out on March 5'~. $7,000.00 in funds presently available. The newspaper may insert coupons for flower baskets. C. Ordinance Revision. Pete announced that the noise ordinance is £mished and going to Council in April. The Nuisance ordinance is coming before the Task Force at the May meeting. D. Farmers Market (Saturday Market). The WDA has decided that there will be rotating 'market masters~ instead of one person trying to run the market for the entire season. Mike Bergeron will remain in a consulting capacity to the L ivability Task Fon~ Minutes March 26, 2002 .~,Page I of 2 8C market and wOrk to keep the market "farmer-oriented." V. Spring Clean-up. A. Pete still needs to connect with United Disposal, Bob Sigelow. B. Mayor's PrOClalmation. Kezia completed the proclaimation which declares March 21- April 20 as ~April Clean-up Month." C. List of Contacts. The scout groups need to be confirmed. D. WDA and Bruce Thomas will lead a clean up of the downtown area. E. PGE has committed volunteers. F..Routes needito be decided. Traditional routes (99E and Hwy 214) and new routes are being considered. G. Community Action Vehicle. Kezia will obtain the vehicle from Woodburn Police Department. H. Refreshmems. Betty will coordloate refreshments again. I. Tables, Ch~, Generator. Mike and Lisa will organ{7~ these items. .. VI Ordinance Education Project. Kezia has put together an insert to the water 'bill for the month of April which states the ordinance issues of vehicle parking and yard/garden maintenance. Included in the flier is also information about the Spring Clean up. Recognition Program. Al's Garden Center and the Frank Lonergan home were selected as the recipients of the 2002 property pride awards (2~d Quarter). Award.. letters and invitations to the Council Meeting to receive the awards have been sent. VIII. Next Meeting Date. Set for April 16th to coordinate the Spring Clean up, specifically. IX Adjourn The Committee adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Li~ability Task For~e Minutes March 26, 2002 ~. Page 2 of 2 City of Woodburn Police Department 270 Montgomery Streetr STAFF REPORT Woodburn, Oregon 97071 (503) 982-2345 Date: From: To: May 1,2002 .~ :Chief of Police Mayor and Council John BroWn, City Administrato~ Subject: Police Department Activities - February 2002 8D The Consolidated Monthly Report is a monthly analysis of police department calls for service. This report lists all police department incident investigations for the month, shows year to date statistics, and comparisons to the previous year. The report is in conformance with Federal Bureau of Investigations national guidelines for crime classifications and is reported to the State of Oregon Law Enforcement Data System via the Regional Automated Information Network. ShoUld you have questions or wish further information, please contact me. SD CITY OF WOODBURN Community Development MEMORANr UM 270 Montgomery Street Woodburn, Oregon 97071 Date: May 1, 2002 To: Jim Mulder, COmmunity Development Director From: Building Division Subject: Building ActiVity for April 2002 (503) 982-5250 2000 2001 2002 Dollar Dollar Dollar No. Amount No. Amount No. Amount New Residence Value , 4 $497,314 10 $1,151,790 12 $1,464,991 Multi Faraily 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Residential Adds & Alts 5 $84,000 3 $18,000 9 $85,100 Industrial' 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Commercial Value 0 $0 0 $0 5 $346,800 Signs, Fences, Driveways , 2 $10,126 0 $0 3 $10,100 Manufactured Homes 0 $0 I $60,000 0 $0 TOTALS 11 $591,440 14 $1,229,790 29 $1,906,991 July 1 - June 30 Fiscal Year To Date $27,332,632 $13,926,346 $59,117,993 I:~Community Development~Bldg~Building Activity~uilding AclJvity - 2002V~c~ivity - April 2002.wpd 8F I F- W LU '-r' crJ WOODBURN PUBLIC LIBRARY MONTHLY REPORT FOR MARCH 2002 8(; I. CIRCULATIC~N Current: 12,726 Adult: Cl~ildren: In-House Use: 9,798 2,928 2,209 Previous: 2001 2000 1999 II. INTERLIBRA~Y LOAN Books Loaned: 997 CqRLS: In-~State Special: 990 0 All Other In-State: 7 Out-Of-State: 0 Books BorroW;: 975 CCRLS: In-State Special: 957 0 All Other In-State: 14 Out-Of-State: 4 III. REFERENCE Woodbum Referrals Other 2002 1,077 2001 1,108 2000 919 1999 1,174 IV. VOLUNTEER HOURS WORKED 75 71 41 63 169 1,498 1,268 1,079 1,364 V. LIBRARY SPONSORED PROGRAMS Adults: 4 Children: 15 No. A~ending: 116 No. A~ending: 669 VI. FINANCE ILL Postals 1.75 Fines 957.95 Lost Books 157.83 Copies 147.00 Rural Fee 855.00 Donation 5.00 Collection Fee 30.00 Other 125.78 12,288.87 - Misc. - CCRLS Used Based Reimbursement 14,224 14,275 14,454 Total 2,650 2,447 2,039 2,601 TOTAL 14,569.18 Monthly Statistics: March 2002 VII. _HOLDINGS Audio Cassette Audio Cassette Holiday Book YA-Holds Restriction Camera Compact Disc, Music Compact Disc, Sp. Cassette Player Circ SoftWare Video CaSsette Video HolUs Engraver, Fast Cat -3 Wks Fast Cat -7 Day Headphones Juvenile Grant Kit Woodbum ILL Woodbum ILL Out Of State Juvenile Audio Cassette Juvenile I~k Juvenile-Holds Restriction Juvenile Mideo Cassette Juvenile Video Holds Juvenile HOliday Book Juvenile Holiday Juvenile Pluppet Juvenile Paperback Juvenile Piedodical Juvenile Reference Juvenile Tote Bag Long New Book New Book New Periodical Pamphlet, Map Paperback Pedodical Projector Puzzles/Games Reference One Hr, Reserve Circulating Software Woodbum Stats Only Woodburn Stats Only ILL TOTAL 1,373 40 36,347 0 4 219 60 5 59 671 1,066 2 8 3 6 9 9 4 3O4 17,771 17 697 139 478 7 0 11 648 246 91 323 282 315 22 2,747 6,533 6 0 2,467 97 1 1 1 73,089 Monthly Statistics: March 2002 2 · 8(; New Adds For The Month of March: 689 VIII. PATRON LOAN TYPES Adult Resident Adult Non-Resident Senior Resident Senior Non-Resident YA Residenll YA Non-ReSident Juvenile ReSident Juvenile Non-Resident Reference ~aff Library Staff! Outreach Visitor City Department TOTAL 4,702 2,910 867 245 1,066 617 1,336 756 5 24 19 21 10 12,578 Monthly Statistics: MArc. h A/P CHECK LISTING FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL 2002 8H CHECK NO 59644 59645 59646 59647 59648 59649 59650 59651 59652 59653 59654 59655 59656 59657 59658 59659 59660 59661 59662 59663 59664, 59665 e 59666 59667 59668 59669 59670 59671 59672 59673 59674 59675 59676 59677 59678 59679 5968O 59681 59682 59683 59684 59685 59586 59687 59688 59689 5969O 59691 DEPARTMENT POST MTR*VARIOUS VOiD PAYROLL*VARIOUS PAYROLL-VARIOUS SERVICES-WATER VOID VOID VOID SERVICES-WATER SERVICES.ADMIN SUPPLIES-COURT DEPOSIT.ADMI N SUPPLIES-POLICE REFUND-PARKS SERVICE~FI NANCE REFUND-POLICE RENT-ADMIN SUPPLIES.WWTP SUPPLIES-C STORES SERVICES-ENG REIMBURSE*POLICE SERVICES*WATER SERVICES-VARIOUS SERVICES*WWTP SERVICES. POLICE SUPPLIES-STREET SUPPUES-VARIOUS SERVICES. PLANNING SERVICES-FINANCE SERVICES.POLICE SERVICES-SELF INS REIMBURSE-POLICE SUPPLIES-WWTP SUPPLIES-STREET SUPPLIES*POLICE SUPPLIES-ENG SU PPLI ES-WATER SUPPLIES-VARIOUS SERVICES-VARIOUS SERVICES-HOUSING SERVICES-WWTP SERVICES-VARI OUS SUPPLIES-STREET SERVICES-VARIOUS SERVICES-WATER S U PPLI ES .WATER SERVICES-VARIOUS SERVICES-VARIOUS VENDOR NAME VENDOR NO US POSTAL SERV 020089 VOID VOID ASSOC ADMI N 000562 OREGON PERS 014424 VALLEY MAILING 021044 VOID VOID VOID VOID VOID VOID NW NATURAL NONE UNIV OF OREGON NONE OR DMV 014240 ST LUKES CHURCH NONE OR DMV 014240 LAUREN JOHNSON NONE CAREER TRACK NONE STATE FARM INS NONE ST LUKE CHURCH NONE ABIQUA SUPPLY 000034 ADVANCED LASER 000066 AEROTEK INC 000080 JASON ALEXANDER 000120 ARAMARK UNIFORM 000534 ARCH WIRELESS 000535 AWWA 000665 BM CLEANING SERV 001030 BBC STEEL 001168 BIMART CORP 001275 ROGER J BUDKE 001580 CANBY TELEPHONE 002062 CAS E AUTO MOTIVE 002190 CIS CITY CTY INS 002488 ALLEN DEVAULT 003217 FAMILIAN NW 005030 FLINT TRADING 005178 GALLS INC 006011 GW HARDWARE 006405 HUBBARD CHEVROLET 007320 IND WELDING SUPPLY 008],00 LAWRENCE CO 011175 MARION CTY CLERK 012087 MOLALLA COMM 012563 NW NATURAL 013350 OFFICE MAX 014031 OR DMV 014240 PACIFIC NW TRANS 015038 PLATT ELECTRIC 015340 PORT GENERAL ELEC 015420 QWEST 016202 DATE 4/1/02 4/1/02 4/1/02 4/4/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 AMOUNT $1,400.00 $0.00 $120.00 $101.16 $684.40 ~.00 $0.00 $o.oo $951.06 $125.00 $1o.oo $100.O0 $175.00 $125.00 $149.00 $5.O0 $175.00 $545.o0 $335.70 $39O.O0 $150.00 $28.46 $96.8O $53.00 $4oo.oo $109.35 $121.17 $3,282.50 $39.9O $2,926.72 $23,355.85 $150.00 $84.76 $234.42 $8.28 $6.58 $3o0.60 $58.50 $200.00 $26.00 $74.85 $11,248.90 $149.99 $70.OO $7OO.5O $420.01 $39,258.75 $1,508.87 Page I , A/P CHECK LISTING FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL 2002 59692 59693 59694 59695 59696 59697 59698 59699 59700 59701 59702 59703 59704 59705 59706 59707 59708 59709 59710 59711 59712 59713 59714 59715,' 59716 59717 59718 59719 59720 59721 59722 59723 59724 59725 59726 59727 59728 59729 59730 59731 59732 59733 59734 59735 59736 59737 59738 59739 59740 59741 SERVICES-WWTP SUPPLIES-POLICE SUPPLI ES-WATER REIMBURSE-ADMIN SERVICES-VARIOUS SUPPLIES-VARIOUS SUPPLI ES-VARIOUS SERVICES.VARIOUS SERVICES-POLICE SERVICES-PARKS SUPPLIES-STREET SERVICES-WA~ER SERVICES-PUB WKS PETTY CASH-VARIOUS SERVICES-WATER VOID VOID VOID SERVICES-COURT SERVICES-WWTP SERVICES-PARKS SUPPLIES-LIBRARY SERVICES-PLAN REFUND-BUS LIC REFUND-BUS l. IC REFUND-BUS i_lC SERVICES-PLAN SERVICES-WWTP REPAIRS-DAR SERVICES-LIBRARY SERVICES-PUB WKS SUPPLIES-LIBRARY SERVICES-WATER SERVICES-WWTP SUPPLIES-PARKS SERVICES-WWTP SUPPLIES-LIBRARY SUPPLIES-POLICE SUPPLIES-STREET SERVICES-WWTP SERVICES.PARKS SERVICES-POLICE SERVICES-PUB WKS S U PPLI ES- LIBRARY SERVICES-WWTP SERVICES-WWTP SERVICES-WWTP SUPPLIES-WWTP SERVI CES-ADM IN SERVICES-WWTP SEAL TECH INC 018314 SILKE COMM 018467 SLATER COMM 018522 MATT SMITH 018569 SPRINT 0187] 2 CORPORATE EXPRESS 019100 UNOCAL:ERNIE GRAHAM 020010 UNITED DISPOSAL 020020 VALLEY PACIFIC 021046 VERIZON WIRELESS 021124 WALLING SAND 022029 WBN FAMILY CLINIC 022587 WBN INDEPENDENT 022630 CITY OF WOODBURN 015255 VALLEY MAILING 021044 VOID VOID VOID VOID VOID VOID PENNEY CLARK NONE FARMERS TOILET NONE PORT ROSE FESTIVAL NONE IDEALS NONE OCPDA NONE AIDA ALFONSO HERRERA NONE MARIE P CIBRIAN NONE JOSE DELGADO NONE OCPDA NONE WEST CENTRAL PNPCA NONE VILLAGE BY THE GREEN NONE BARB STEVENS-NEWCOME NONE WILLIAM ADAMS AMERICANA PUB AUTO ADDITIONS AT&T BIMART CORP BROWN & CALDWELL BUILDING TECH BOOK BUSHMASTER FIREARMS CANBY SAND CLACKAMAS COMM COLL CLASS SOFTWARE COMPAQ FIN SERV DE HAAS & ASSOC DEMCO INC DEPT OF ENV QUALITY EMERY & SONS CONST ENGELMAN ELEC FARM PLAN FIRST CASCADE CORP FURROW PUMP 000047 000370 000558 O0O623 001275 001573 001587 001620 002060 002550 002568 002724 003108 003110 003205 004153 004190 005062 005130 005440 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/5/02 4/10/02 4/11/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 $672.50 $31.11 $678.60 $199.99 $80.45 $2,576.58 $346.64 $2,113.95 $51.90 $58.65 $369.23 $66.00 $25.03 $129.58 $624.00 $oooo $55.00 $20.00 $431.20 $19.32 $50.00 $35.00 $35.00 $35.00 $85.00 $150.00 $173.00 $175.00 $1,500.00 $19.00 $235.18 $16.75 $129.28 $8,464.73 $4.76 $66.20 $284.83 $140.00 $1,8oo.oo $118.54 $8,717.50 $95.77 $480.01 $146.50 $10.87 $54.68 $64,381.56 $4,180.31 Page 2 A/P CHECK LISTING FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL 2002 8H 59742 59743 59744 59745 59746 59747 59748 59749 59750 59751 59752 59753 59754 59755 59756 59757 59758 59759 59760 59761 59762 59763 59764 59765" 59766 59767 59768 59769 59770 59771 59772 59773 59774 59775 59776 59777 59778 59779 59780 59781 59782 59783 59784 59785 59786 59787 59788 59789 59790 59791 SUPPLIES*LIBRARY SUPPLIES-LIBRARY SUPPLIES-LIBRARY SERVICES-VARIOUS SUPPLIES-LIBRARY SUPPLIES*LIBRARY SERVICES-STREET SUPPLIES-LIBRARY SUPPLIES-VARIOUS SUPPLIES*LIBRARY SERVICES-ADMliN SERVICES-PUB WKS SERVICES-BUILD SERVICES-LI BRARY SUPPLIES-PARKS SUPPLIES-WATER SUPPLIES-LIBRARY SERVICES-VARIOUS SUPPLIES-STREET SERVICES-VARIOUS SUPPLIES-LIBRARY SUPPLIES-LIBRARY SUPPLIES-LIBRARY REIMBURSE-COURT SUPPLIES-VARIOUS SUPPLIES-ADMIN SERVICES-ENG SUPPLIES-WATER SERVICES-LIBRARY SERVICES-MUSEUM SUPPLIES-LIBRARY SERVICES-ADMIN SERVICES-ENG SERVICES-VARIOUS SUPPLIES-LIBRARY REI MBURSE-WATER SERVICES-POLICE VOID VOID VOID VOID VOID SU PPLI ES-WATER REFUND-PARKS SERVICES-ENG SERVICES-WATER SUPPLIES-WATER SERVICES-POLICE SUPPLI ES-WATER SUPPLIES-PARKS GALE GROUP GENERAL BINDING INGRAM DIST IKON OFFICE LABRADOR FILMS LIFE BOOKS MARION CTY TREASURY MARSHALL CAVENDISH METROFUELI NG LOWES TROPHY NICOLI ENGINEERING OBEC CONSULTING OR DEPT OF CONSUMER OREGONIAN PUB 0 RI ENTAL TRADI NG US FILTER POOL & CREW PORT GENERAL ELEC PUB WORKS SUPPLY QWEST QWEST DEX RECORDED BOOKS REGENT BOOK JACQUELINE RODRIGUEZ SIERRA SPRINGS SIGN WORKS OF OREGON TEK SYSTEMS UNITED PIPE VALLEY PACIFIC VERIZON WIRELESS VISIONS WALMART STORES WDY INC WBN FAMILIY CLINIC WORLD MEDIA BEULAH JORDON US POSTAL SERV VOID VOID VOID VOID VOID ULINE LATIN AMER CLUB AEROTEK I NC ALEXIN ANALY A-1 COUPLING LANGUAGE LINE SERV AW DIRECT INC BASHORS ATHLETICS 006015 006076 008116 O08119 011020 011228 012223 012235 O12448 013009 013192 014015 014199 014653 O1466O 015065 015371 015420 015648 016202 016203 017102 017148 017288 O1846O 018465 019O46 02OO3O 021046 021124 021203 022035 022110 022587 022815 045320 020090 VOID VOID VOID VOID VOID NONE NONE 00OO80 O0O124 0OO659 000661 001156 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12 / 02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/12/02 4/17/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 $114.14 $315.00 $2,352.71 $189.48 $66.40 $34.9O $80.00 $142.81 $1,553.50 $6.00 $825.00 $3,146.00 $6,762.67 $374.01 $649.OO $4,700.00 $53.9O $18,833.82 $175.00 $2,58O.62 $57.12 $92.4o $289.12 $102.95 $223.5O $341.00 $368.00 $3,311~3 $3O.9o $57.Ol $184.37 $53.16 $829.5o $268.oo $35.oo $118.1o $o.oo $o.oo $o.oo $o.oo $o.oo $35.78 $50.0O $200.OO $375.00 $45.61 $1,022.53 $162.45 $189.57 Page 3 /VP CHECK LISTING FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL 2002 59792 59793 59794 59795 59796 59797 59798 59799 59800 59801 59802 59803 59804 59805 598O6 598O7 59808 59809 59810 59811 59812 59813 59814 59815,' 59816 59817 59818 59819 5982O 59821 59822 59823 59824 59825 59826 59827 59828 59829 59830 59831 59832 59833 59834 59835 59836 59837 59838 59839 5984O 59841 SERVICES-WATER SUPPLI ES-WATER SERVICES-WWTP SERVICES-POLICE RETAI NAGE-ADMI N SUPPLIES-WATER SUPPLI ES-WATER SUPPLIES-POLICE SERVICES-FINANCE SUPPLIES-POLICE REIMBURSE.RSvp SERVICES-PARKS SUPPLIES-LIBRARY REIMBURSE-POLICE SUPPLI ES-WATER SERVICES-VARIOUS SERVICES-MUSEUM S U PPLI ES-WATER SERVICES-VARIOUS SERVICES-ADMIN SERVICES-POUCE SUPPLIES-LIBRARY SERVICES-WWTP SUPPLIES-MAiNT SUPPLIES-PARKS SERVICES-ADMI N SERVICES-ENG SUPPUES-VARIOUS SUPPLIES-STREET SERVICES-PARKS SUPPLIES-STREET SERVICES-STREET SUPPLI ES-WATER SERVICES.WATER :PETTY CASH-VARIOUS SERVICES.WATER SERVICES.PARKS SERVICES-POLICE VOID VOID VOID REFUND-BUILDING SUPPLIES-BUILDING SERVICES-SELF INS REFUND-POLICE SERVICES-WATER REIMBURSE.WATER SERVICES-VARIOUS SERVICES-POLICE SERVICES.ENG BASIC FIRE PROTECTION BROOKS PRODUCTS BROWN & CALDWELL BULLARD,SMITH CITY OF WOODBURN CONNEY SAFETY CONSOLIDATED SUPPLY CRYSTAL SPRINGS DP NORTHWEST EMBLEM ENTERPRISES SUE FOFANA DURA FOTO MAGIC GE CAPITAL GREG GOTTSCHALK HALTON CO lOS CAPITAL JOHN PILAFIAN KARN REPAIR SERV KENTEC HEATING NEW WORLD SYSTEMS NORCOM OFFICE DEPOT OR DEPT OF CONSUMER OR TURF & TREE PEPSI COLA PROFESSIONAL VI DEO TEK SYSTEMS CORPORATE EXPRESS UNOCAL:ERNIE GRAHAM US POSTAL SERV WlLSONVILLE LOCK WOLFERS HEATING YES GRAPHICS VALLEY MAI LING CITY OF WOODBURN VALLEY MAILING ASTORIA CHAMBER WILLAMETTE ESD VOID VOID VOID THE WIETING FAMILY ICBO DIST CTR EMILY MORGAN HOTEL STATE FARM POLICE METROTECH CORP PAUL WOODLEY A&A PEST CONTROL ACE SEPTIC AEROTEK INC 001157 001561 001573 001584 002526 002760 002770 002919 003264 004140 005197 005258 006079 006236 007046 008118 009130 010029 010060 013168 013198 014029 014203 014620 015225 015552 019046 019100 020010 020090 022422 022460 024025 021044 015255 021044 NONE NONE VOID VOID VOID NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE NONE 000011 000031 OOOO80 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4118102 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4118/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4118/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/18/02 4/22/02 4/25/02 4/25/02 4/25/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 $762.00 $758.00 $744.09 $1oo.oo $1,621 .oo $165.90 $4,532.18 $63.00 $1,712.00 $783.12 $39.0O $12.69 $184.01 $18.93 $124.90 $1,109.43 $6.50 $883.10 $7,397.45 $22,536.92 $141.76 $1,2O0.OO $160.00 $598.25 $10,297.53 $920.00 $499.18 $547.95 $5OO.OO $172.00 $128.00 $8O.OO $518.80 $139.96 $46O.35 $148.00 $25.OO $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $13.41 $34.44 $875.60 $10.O0 $168.00 $187.50 $53O.35 $256.00 $315.00 Page 4 A/P CHECK LISTING FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL 2002 59842 59843 598~~. 59845 59846 59847 59848 59849 59850 59851 59852 59853 59854 59855 59856 59857 59858 59859 5986O 59861 59862 59863 59864 59865 59866 59867 59868 59869 5987O 59871 59872 59873 59874 59875 59876 59877 59878 59879 59880 59881 59882 59883 59884 59885 59886 59887 59888 59889 5989O 59891 SUPPLIES. PUB WKS SUPPLIES-WATI~R SERVICES-VARIOUS SERVICES-POLICE SERVICES-ADMIN SERVICES-VARIOUS SUPPLI ES-C GARAGE SUPPLIES-PARKS SUPPLIES-STREET SUPPLIES-VARIOUS SUPPLIES.POLICE SUPPLI ES-WATER SUPPLIES-PARKS SUPPLIES. PARKS SERVICES.WWTP SUPPLIES-VARIOUS SUPPLIES-WTR SERVICES-PUB WKS SUPPLIES-VARIOUS SUPPLIES-POLICE SERVICES.VARIOUS SUPPLIES-MUSEUM REIMBURSE-POLICE SERVICES-FINANCE SERVICES-VARIOUS SERVICES-MAINT SUPPLIES. MAINT SUPPLIE~VARIOUS REIMBURSE-STREET SERVICES-POLICE SUPPLIES.FINANCE SUPPLIES.VARIOUS SUPPLIES.STREET SUPPLIES-MAINT SUPPLIES-STREET SUPPLIES-VARIOUS SUPPLIES-VARIOUS SUPPLIES-WATER SUPPLIES-MAINT SERVICES-VARIOUS SUPPLIES-VARIOUS SERVICES.COURT REIMBURSE-POLICE REIMBURSE. MUSEUM SUPPLIES-VARIOUS SUPPLI ES-WATER SUPPLIES-VARIOUS REIMBURSE. PLANNING SERVICES-ENG REIMBURSE-BUILDING AM PUB WORKS ASSN A-1 COUPLING ARAMARK UNI FORM AUTO ADDITIONS AWARDS & ATHLETICS AT&T BATTERI ES NW HOUSEHOLD BANK BEN-KO-MATIC BIMART CORP BLUMENTHAL UNIFORM BRANOM INSTRUMENT CASCADE COLUMBIA CASCADE POOLS CHEMEKETA COMM COLL COASTAL FARM CONSOLIDATED SUPPLY CRANE & MERSETH DAVISON AUTO DAVISON AUTO DE HAAS & ASSOC DELL COMPUTER ALLEN DEVAULT DP NORTHWEST DRC ENTERPRISES ENGELMAN ELECTRIC FAMILIAN NW FARM PLAN MICHAEL FERGUSON FOTO MAGIC FRYS ELECTRONICS GW HARDWARE HARBOR FREIGHT HILLYERS MID CITY HUBBARD AUTO ELEC HUBBARD CHEVROLET I ND WELDING IKON OFFICE JOHNSTONE SUPPLY KENTEC HEATING L&L BUILDING MSI GROUP NITA MARR KEZIA MERWl N METROFUELING M I LES CH EVRO LET M R P'S AUTO PTS JIM MULDER MULTI-TECH ENG DAN NELSON 000300 000409 000534 OOO558 000580 000623 O01159 001199 001200 001275 001310 001410 002218 002226 002410 002625 002770 002896 003080 003081 003108 003113 003217 O03264 003273 004190 005030 005062 005076 005258 OO5405 O064O5 007080 007228 007315 007320 008100 008119 009139 010060 011010 012015 012232 012440 012448 012490 012510 012670 012682 013151 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/O2 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4129102 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 $135.00 $26.70 $1,059.32 $458.38 $206.45 $49.33 $445.85 $589.93 $184.54 $48o. 18 $46.95 $68.07 $1,117.50 $288.39 $110.00 $90.73 $34-1.13 $6,082.10 $123.54 $8,758.76 $158.00 $42.9O $9,425.O0 $775.49 $33.33 $7.20 $35.O0 $1,037.26 $91.74 $1,493.68 $60.97 $89.95 $200.49 $37.90 $8.97 $141.92 $2,511.50 $345.56 $125.oo $27.09 $257.76 $1,356.68 $20.30 $184.42 $641.41 $2,665.63 $125.83 Page 5 A/P CHECK LISTING FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL 2002 8H 59892 59893 59894 59895 59896 59897 59898 59899 59900 59901 59902 59903 59904 59905 59906 59907 59908 599O9 59910 59911 59912 59913 59914 59915,' 59916 59917 59918 59919 59920 59921 59922 59923 59924 59925 59926 59927 59928 59929 59930 59931 59932 59933 59934 59935 59936 59937 59938 59939 59940 59941 SERVICES-V^RIOUS SERVICES-WWTP SUPPLIES-STREET SERVICES.ENG SUPPLIES-STREET SUPPLIES-WWTP SERVICES-VARIOUS SERVICES-RECORDER SUPPLIES-PARKS SUPPLIES-PARKS SERVICES-MAINT SUPPLIES-WWTP SUPPLIES-PARKS SUPPLIES-VARIOUS SERVICES-STREET SERVICES-FINANCE SUPPLIES-PARKS SUPPLIES-PARKS SERVICES-VARIOUS SERVlCES.MAiNT SUPPLIES-WWTP SERVICES-ENG REIMBURSE-MAINT SUPPLIES-VARIOUS SUPPLIES-POLICE SUPPLIES-WWTP SERVICES-VARIOUS SUPPLIES-MAiNT SUPPLIES-WWTP SUPPLIES-POLICE SU PPLI ES-WATER SUPPLIES-PARKS SERVICES-PLANNING SUPPLIES-VARIOUS SERVICES-MAINT SUPPLIES-VARIOUS S ERVl CES- PARKS S U PPLI ES- MA[NT SUPPLIES-MAINT SERVICES-PUB WKS SUPPLIES-VARIOUS REI MBURSE-PLAN REI MBURSE-DAR REI MBURSE-DAR REIMBURSE. DAR REIMBURSE. DAR REI MBURSE-DAR REI MBURSE-DAR REIMBURSE. DAR REIMBURSE.DAR NEXTEL COMM NC ANALYTICAL NORTHSIDE FORD NW GEOTECH NORVAC ELECTRONICS NURNBERG SCIENTIFIC ONE CALL CONCEPTS OR STATE POLICE 0 RI ENTAL TRADING PEPSI COLA PIONEER GLASS PRAXAIR DIST PROMOTIONS WEST PUBLIC WORKS SUPPLY QWEST QWEST ROTHS IGA S&S WORLDWIDE LES SCHWAB TI RE SONITROL STATESMAN JOURNAL TEK SYSTEMS THOMAS TENNANT CORPORATE EXPRESS TIGERDIRECT UNOCAL:ERNIE GRAHAM VERIZON WIRELESS VIESKO QUALITY VWR SCIENTIFIC WALKERS CYCLE WALLING SAND WILL RED CROSS WlNTERBROOK PLAN WITHERS LUMBER WOLFERS HEATING WBN FERTILIZER WBN INDEPENDENT WBN RADIATOR WBN RENT-ALL WBN TOGETHER YES GRAPHICS NAOMI ZWERDLING DOROTHA BORLAND SALLY BUSE CORNELIUS DONNELLY LEONARD GIAUQUE AGNES HAGENAUER FRED HAYES ROBERT HURST BEULAH JORDAN O13188 O13216 013225 013287 013373 013435 014054 014535 014660 015225 015330 015480 015563 015648 016199 016202 017340 018017 018300 018605 018760 019046 O19058 019100 O19155 020010 021124 021140 021300 022023 O22029 022328 022438 022445 022460 022590 022630 022700 022708 022750 024025 025100 045100 045110 O45230 045290 045310 045315 045318 045320 4~29~O2 4~29~02 4129102 4129102 4129102 · 41291O2 4~29~O2 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29102 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29102 4129102 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 $710.61 $2,324.70 $420.73 $646.O0 $12.95 $255.73 $63.90 $12.00 $215.72 $124.25 $1,953.84 $15.08 $298.5o $478.57 $95.30 $227.88 $115.39 $1,029.56 $424.94 $55.O0 $167.44 $92O.OO $15.00 $946.98 $353.25 $267.06 $1,243.43 $1,568.00 $1,760.80 $219.95 $1,262.85 $199.88 $4,027.30 $6O0.54 $245.00 $1,529.39 $64.35 $125.25 $72.00 $4o0.oo $655.OO $13.75 $28.21 $35.03 $157.48 $181.04 $62.62 $146.94 $37.20 $77.81 Page 6 ¥ T A/P CHECK LISTING FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL 2002 59942 59943 59944 59945 59946 59947 59948 REIMBURSE-DAR REI MBURSE-DAR REIMBURSE-DAR REIMBURSE-DAR REI MBURSEODAR REIMBURSE-DAR SUPPLI ES-PARKS CALVl N KOLLASCH 045330 J WARD O'BRIEN 045497 GERTRUDE REES 045545 LOLA SPERATOS 045560 STEVE STURN 045585 HATTIE VANDERCOUVERI N 045670 SUBWAY 018814 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/29/02 4/30/02 $73.16 $109.74 $73.16 $10.85 $68.82 $27.28 $135.00 $375,444.48 Page 7 ,,~ w T 8I MEMO from the office of the City Attorney TO: FROM: RE: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL N. ROBERT SHIELDS, CITY ATTORNEY ~/D/~,~ MICHAEL GULVER V. CITY OF WOODBURN U.S. DISTRICT COURT NO. 99-1586 DATE: MAY 8, 2002 On November 13,200i, U.S. District Court Judge Garr King granted the City's Motion to Strike, gr~nted the City's MotiOn for Summary Judgment, denied plaintiff Culver's motion to amend his compliant, and then dismissed the case of Michael Culver v. Ci_ty of Woodbum without providing the plaintiff any option to refile. Plaintiff Culver is a former city code enforcement officer who was disciplined and suspended by the city in 1999 and was then terminated as a result of further discipline in February 2001. In his complaints Culver claimed that the City violated his statutory and constitutional fights. However, Judge King affirmed the actions of the City in all respects and ruled that it followed all of the correct procedures in suspending and terminating Culver. Plaintiff Culver then attempted to appeal the case to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. However, the Court recently dismissed this appeal because it was not filed in a timely manner. This ruling ended this extended litigation. NRS/kv ,~ REC'D APR 2002 WOODBURN CITY A'Iq'ORN EY UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FILED APR ! 7 2002 ~A...O,__TTa~N, C~K MICHAEL CULyER, Plalnuff-Appellant Vo CITY OF WOODBURN; et al., Defendants-Appellees. No. 02-35019 DC# CV-99-1367-GMK Oregon (Portland) ORDER 8I '." f~ .,3 '? td~~ ~ L. Before: BROWNING, KLEINFELD and GOULD, Circuit Judges The court hns reviewed the parties' responses to the court's February 8, 20~02, order to shdw cause why this appeal should not be' dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The court dismisses this appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal is untimely. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a). S:~lOATT~anelorcM.8.02k~3V}2-350 i 9.wpd MEMO TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City Council through City Administrato~ Public Works Directo~~ ~ May 7, 2002 MOdification of Development Agreement with Hidden Creek Properties, LLC RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor tO sign the Development Agreement with Hidden Creek Properties, LLC with section 6 (Non-liability of City) omitted. BACKGROUND: At the March 25, 2002 meeting, the City Council authorized the Mayor to sign a development agreement with Hidden Creek Properties, LLC accepting a defined amount of ~ 120,000 toward the improvement of Boones Ferry and Country Club Roads. The developer remains willing to pay the full amount as its Ufair share" of the improvements. However, the developer's attorney is now advising the developer not to execute the agreement with the inclusion of section 6 (Non- Liability of city). The City Attorney has advised the Public Works Department that while section 6 provides full protection for the city, the elimination of section 6 presents little practical risk and enables receipt of the money. 8J DUPLICATE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT This Agreement is made this __ day of ,2002 by and between the City of Woodburn, an Oregon municipal corporation (hereinafter "City") and Hidden Creek Properties, LLC, an Oregon limited liability company, (hereinafter "HCP"). WHEREAS, HCP is the developer of Heritage Park, a residential subdivision approved by City and located oni the south side of Vanderbeck Lane, in Woodburn, Oregon; and WHEREAS, Gity has initiated a Local Improvement District (LID) process to improve Country Club Road anal Boones Ferry Road; and .WHEREAS, s!nce HCP developed property which will benefit by the Country Club Road aii'd Boones Ferry Road improvements, HCP has agreed to pay a portion of the Country Club Road and Boone~ Ferry Road improvements; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows: Section 1. pA]RTIES. The parties to this Agreement are listed above. The parties agree that City is executing this Agreement solely for the purpose of insuring that the public improvements referenced herein are completed and that City assumes no liability under this Agreement. ~'~ Section 2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY BENEFITTED BY BOONES FERRY ROAD AND COUN~RY CLUB ROAD IMPROVEMENTS. The property which was developed by HCP and will benefit by the Boones Ferry Road and Country Club Road improvements is described as follows: That property subdivided, platted and recorded in Marion County Book of Town Plats; located in Section 7, Township 5 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, the City of Woodburn, Marion County Oregon. ~Property platted as HERITAGE PARK PHASE 1 Recorded in Vol. 41, Page 59 Marion County Book of Town Plats Property platted as HERITAGE PARK PHASE 2 Recorded in Vol. 42, Page 49 Marion County Book of Town Plats Property platted as HERITAGE PARK PHASE 3 Recorded in Vol. 43, Page 08 Marion County Book of Town Plats Property platted as HERITAGE PARK PHASE 4 Recorded in Vol. 45, Page 47 Marion County Book of Town Plats Section 3. CONTRIBUTION BY HCP FOR BOONES FERRY ROAD AND COUNTRY CLUB ROAD IMPROVEMENTS. Within thirty (30) days after the execution of this Agreement, HCP shall pay to City the sum of $120,000 as its fair share contribution for the property it developed which is described in Section 2 and will benefit by the Boones Ferry Road Page I - Development Agreement c:~y Doeuments~MyFilcs~kg~OMN'rg~DEV AGMT HCP.wpd DUPLICATE ORIGINAL 8J and Country Club Road improvements. Section 4. TERMINATION AND AMENDMENT. This Agreement shall be terminated upon all parties completion of the obligations hereunder and may be amended by a subsequent written agreement of all of the parties. Section 5. COMPLETE CONTRIBUTION. The City agrees that this Agreement shall satisfy HCP's complete Obligations for the Country Club Road and Boones Ferry Road improvements. Section 6. NON-~LIABILITY OF CITY. Because the parties agree that City has the legal authority to levy special assessments to require construction of public improvements, the parties agree that City calmot be held liable for damages, including costs and attorney fees, under this Agreement and shall hold City and its agents harmless from any claim or legal action of any type under this Agreement, including any applicable costs and attorney fees. Section 7. ATTORNEY FEES. In the event of any suit or action to enforce this Agreement, the prevailinl~ party shall be entitled to, in addition to the statutory costs and disbursements, reasonable attorney fees to be fixed by trial and appellate courts from the time such action is filed. Section 8. SENILITY. If any provision or part hereof is for any reason determined by a court of Competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, then such part shall be severed from this Agreement and the remainder of the Agreement shall remain fully enforceable. Section 9. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement shall constitute the entire agreement of the parties to this Agreement, and all prior agreement 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: HIDDEN CREEK PROPERTIES, LLC By: Richard Jennings, Mayor Date: By: Title: Date: Page 2 - Development Agreement c:u~y Documenls~lyFiles~k'u~.OMNTS'~DEV AGMT HCP.wpd FA>< NO. ~ S0~1 LAW OFFICPq OP SHERMAN, SHERMAN, MURCH, JOHlqNIE & HAZEL, ~, a75 ~ St. N.I~.. Suite 120 Po~t Offiee Be~ 2247 TELEPIrlONE (~03) ~64-225! TI~LEFAX (~03) S~, JK Ol~ A~E/O~NIE' ~CH JANICE ~ ~EL~ May 2, 2002 Robert Shields C/ty of WoodburnI 270 Montgomery street Woodbum, Oregon 97071 Re: Hidden Creek Propertks, LLC Draft Development Agreement Wc represent Hidden Creek Properties, and our clle~t has asked us to bring to your /~mtion ~heir con'ns with section 6 of the enclosed Development Agreement. I don't know whether you drafted this agreement or it came from someone else, but I asamne that if it's not yours, you will be able. to identlry the author. Hidden Creek Properti~ has now completed tho development of Heritage Park. It has no remaining assets, and is ready to go out of business. Its members reeognize its commitment to pay the $120,000 to the oity under section 3, as its fair share contribution to thc improvelllents on Couatry Club Road and Boones Ferry Road, and are prepared to inject sufficient funds into the LI.~ to enable it to meet this obligation.. However, it is our understanding that these improvements are a small part of a much larger project, most of the costs ofwhich will bo assessed to the owner~ of benefitted propert/~. Given those facts. Hidden Creek Properties is not willing to "hold the City and its agents harmless from any claim or legal action of any type under this Agreement, including any applicable costs and attorney fees." Hidden Creek Properties is prepared to pay the $120,000 in exchange for a simplc receipt acknowledging that its payment of this sum constitute~ its fair share contn'bution in cormection with thc devclopmcnt of Heritage Park Phases I through 4, and satisfies Hidden Creek Properties complete obligations for thc Country Club Road and Booncs Ferry Road improvements. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. I will be out of town until May 23. In my absence, if you need to discuss this with somoone in our office, please call my partner, Jim Murch. Vory Truly Yours, SHERMAN, SHERMAN, MURCH, JOHNNIE & HAZEL, LLP By: Kenneth Sheiiiian, Jr, KS$: ms IOA CITY OF WOODBURN Community DeVelopment MEMORANDUM 270 Montgomery Street Date: To: From: Subject: Woodbum, Oregon 97071 (503) 982-5246 May 13, 2002 Honorable Mayor and City Council thru City Administrator~ RECOMMENDATION: In regard to this proposal, the City Council has the following options: (1) Concur with the Planning Commission's final order and approve Zone Change 02-01 and Subdivision 02-01. (2) Modify the Planning Commission's final order. (3) Deny Zone Change 02-01 and Subdivision 02-01. It is recommended that the City Council instruct staff to prepare an ordinance to substantiate the Council's decision. BACKGROUND: At their headng of March 28, 2002, the Planning Commission considered a request by T7 Development for a zone change from Madon County "UTF" (Urban Transition Farm) to City of Woodbum 'RS" (Single-Family Residential District) on the southern portion of a 2.83 acre property and a 13-1ot residential subdivision on the property. On April 11, 2002, the Planning Commission approved a final order recommending approval of Zone Change 02-01 and Subdivision 02-01. Attachments: Exhibit A: Planning Commission Final Order, dated 4/11/02 Exhibit B: Planning Commission 3/28/02 Minutes Exhibit C: Planning Commission 3/28/02 Staff Report T IOA Exhibit "A" Planning Commission Final Order 4111102 IOA l.~or?oratezt IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF WOODBURN, OREGON SUBDIVISION 02-01 ZONE CHANGE 02-131 FINAL ORDER WHEREAS, a request was made to the Planning Commission to hear a proposal to develop a 13-1ot residential subdivision and a zone change from Marion County Urban Transition Farm (UTF)to City of Woodburn Single-Family Residential District (RS), and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the matter at their regularly scheduled meeting On March 28, 2002, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the written and oral testimony pre~ented by staff, the applicant, and other interested persons to the proposal, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission closed the headng, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission moved to recommend approval of SUB 02- 01 and ZC 02-01 and instructed staff to prepare findings and conclusions. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED BY THE COMMISSION: The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the Woodburn City Council .:approve Subdivision 02-01 and Zone Change 02-01. Said decision is based on substantial evidence presented at the hearing and the findings and conclUsions contained in Exhibit "A" and subject to the conditions of approval in Exhibit "13", which are attached hereto and by reference incorporated herein. Furthermore, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council resolve the street name for the cul-de-sac extending from the Robin Street stub. Approved: Jame~ Date FINAL ORDER - SUB 02-01, ZC 02-01 Community Development Department 270 Montgorne~ Street · Woodburn, Oregon 9707f Ph.503-982-5246 · lax 503-982-5244 Page IOA EXHIBIT "A" FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS ZONE CHANGE 02-01 SUBDIVISION 02-01 I. APPLICATION INFORMATION: Applicant: T7 Development, Inc. P.O. Box 573 Newberg, OR 97132 II. Property Owner: Rudy & Paulette Sonnen 888 Brown Street Woodbum, OR 97071 NATURE OF APPLICATION: The applicant requests to subdivide a 2.83-acre parcel into 13 single-family residential lots and change the zoning designation of the parcel's southern portion from Madon County's Urban Transition Farm (UTF) to the City of Woodbum Single- Family Residential (RS) District. IlL RELEVANT FACTS: The subject site is located north of Comstock Avenue and east of Brown Street. It can be further identified as Parcel 2 of Partition Plat No. 2001-112. The property received partition approval from the City in November of 2001 (Land Use Case No. PAR 01-06). It was divided from the property currently addressed at 888 Brown Street. The property has two zoning designations. It's southern portion was annexed into the City by Ordinance No. 2289 (approved by the City Council on June 11, 2001). This portion of the property retained its Marion County zoning of Urban Transition Farm (UTF), and the applicant requests that this portion be rezoned to the City's Single-Family Residential (RS) District. This RS designation complies with the Comprehensive Plan Map designation for the entire property which is Low Density Residential. The remainder of this property and all adjacent properties are zoned RS District. All adjacent uses consist of single-family homes. The property is currently vacant. Elevation varies by approximately six (6) feet. The applicant proposes lots that would range in size from 6,200 to 14,155 square feet. Proposed Lots 1-3 will be accessed by Brown Street to the west, and Lots 4-13 will FINAL ORDER - SUB 02-01, ZC 02-01 Page 2 IOA iv. be accessed by the existing street stub to the south (Robin Street). be extended Onto the property as a cul-de-sac to serve Lots 4-13. RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA: The stub will ZONE CHAN~E02-01 A. WOODBURN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN -- i B. WOODBURN ZONING ORDINANCF Chapter 15. Zone Change Procedures Chapter 16. Comprehensive Plan Amendment Procedure :SUBDIVISION 02-01 WOODI~URN ZONING ORDINANCF Chapter8. General Standards Chapte~ 9. Residential Standards Chapte~ 10. Off-Street Parking, Loading and Driveway Standards Chapter 22. RS - Single-Family Residential Distdct Bo ,VVOODBURN SUBDIVISION STANDARDS C. WOODBURN ACCESS MANAGEMENT ORDINANCr' D. WOODBURN TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS PLAH V. FINDINGS: ZONE CHANGE02~I A~- Woodburn Comprehensive Plan FINDING: Applicable goals and policies have been satisfied through the implementation of the Woodbum Zoning Ordinance and other applicable ordinances in affect at the time of approval. The designated land use for the property is Low Density Residential on the Comprehensive Plan Map. The applicant proposes a zone change on the southern portion of the site from Marion County's Urban Transition Farm (UTF) to the City of Woodburn's Single-Family Residential (RS) District. The RS District would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation of Low Density Residential. B. Woodburn Zoning Ordinance 1. Chapter 15 Zone Change Procedure FINAL ORDER - SUB 02-01, ZC 02-01 Page 3 IOA Section !5.010. Amendments. A Zone Change is a reclassification of any area fron~ 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 until afterithe 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 is being requested as part of this proposal from Madon County's UTF Zone to the City's RS District. This zone designation is compatible with the RS zoning on the properties to the north and south of the subject property as well as with the Low Density Residential designation on the Comprehensive Plan Map. A hearing will be required before the Council for the proposed Zone Change. A condition of approval requires the Zone Change to receive final approval by the Council prior to the proposed subdivision being recorded with Marion County. A further discussion of the Zone Change criteria is included in the following section of this final order. 2. Chapter 16 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Procedure Section 16.080 Burden of Proof. The following specific questions shall be given consideration in evaluating requests regarding plan and 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; FINAL ORDER - SUB 02-01, ZC 02-01 Page 4 I(JA FINDING: The applicant states that "The City has already identified this property to be rezoned tO meet the Comprehensive plan requirements .... "To further the applicant's statement. the Comprehensive Plan map designates this property for residential deVelopment. The subdivision proposed by the applicant is the intended use for the property, and the rezone from UTF to RS will be necessary for the subdivision. Id addition, this subdivision will serve as infill development, fulfilling the need for additional residential development within the city limits. The applicant has shown that there is a need for the proposed use of the subject property. 2. Show that the particular piece of property in question will best meet that need. FINDING: The applicant states that "This property is surrounded on 4 sides by residential deVelopment and there is no other practical use for an island of level ground within the area." As indicated in this statement, the subject property is completely surrounded by single-family residential developments. For this reason, the proposed Subdivision is the most practical and efficient use that can be made of the property. In addition, the proposed use will be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and will satisfy the intended use of this property. The applicant has Shown that the property in question will best meet the need for additional residential development in the City. SUBDIVISION ~02-01 A. Woodburn ZoninR Ordinance 1. Chapter 8. General Standards. Section 8.010. Minimum Street Width. All street right-of-way shall be not less than: (c) Cul-de-sacs, 50 feet. FINDING: Ten of the proposed subdivision lots will be served by a cul-de-sac extending from the Robin Street stub to the south. There are three lots proposed on the west side of the property that will be served by Brown Street. The proposed cul-de-sac is to be 50 feet in right-of-way width, satisfying the above requirement. 2. Chapter 9. Residential Standards. FINDING: Chapter 9 addresses standards for residential setbacks, accessory structures and fences. At such time that building permit applications are made on each lot, the applications will be reviewed against these standards for compliance. There are currently no structures on the subject property. FINAL ORDER - SUB 02-01, ZC 02-01 Page 5 IOA 3. Chaptei 10. Off Street Parking, Loading and Driveway Standards. Section il 0.050. Off-Street Automobile Parking Requirements. (a) Sin~le-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. 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. FINDING: The Subdivision is proposed with shared driveways for Lots 5 & 6, Lots 10 & 11, and Lots 12 & 13. Each ddveway will serve two single-family dwellings. A condition of approval states that these driveways shall be no less than 24 feet in width prior to occupancy of any structures on said lots. The condition further states that easements On each of these lots shall be recorded with the final subdivision plat allowing for the shared driveways, and that the easements and their descriptions shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director pdor to recordation with Marion County. 4. Chapter 22. Single Family Residential District. Section 22.010. Use. Within the RS Single Family Residential Distdct 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 majority of the subject site is zoned Single-Family Residential (RS) District, and single-family homes are permitted outright. As mentioned, the southern portion of the property is zoned Marion County's Urban Transition Farm (UTF). The applicant's proposed zone change of this portion of the subject site to the City's RS District will allow for the entire site to be developed with single-family homes as proposed. FINAL ORDER - SUB 02-01, ZC 02-01 Page 6 IOA 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 iot 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 smallest lot proposed is 6.200 square feet (Lot 7). Each lot is configured so,hat the 60 foot lot width can be satisfied at the building lines of future structures. TI)e standards for maximum lot coverage will be reviewed at the time of permit submittal for future structures on the proposed lots. Minimum lot sizes and . widths are satisfied in this proposal. · B. Woodburr~ Subdivision Standards Chapter III. Section 6. REQUISITES FOR APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION OR PARiil~ION PLANS, PLATS OR REPLATS (1) The,City shall not allow the duplication of a subdivision name unless the Contiguous property becomes that name. All subdivision plats will maintain consecutive lot numbers. FINDING: The proposed name for the subdivision is "Prospect Park". No other subdivision in the City has this name, and this subdivision would not be contiguous with any of its adjacent subdivisions. This proposed name is acceptable. The numbering of the proposed lots is consecutive. (2) No tentative plan for a proposed subdivision and no tentative plan for a proposed partition and replat shall be approved unless: (a) The streets and roads are laid out so as to conform to the plans of subdivisions and partitions already approved for adjoining property as to width, general direction and in all other respects unless the City or County determines it is in the public interest to modify the street or road pattern. FINDING: The existing Robin Street stub has a right-of-way width of 50 feet and a paved surface of 34 feet. The applicant is proposing to match these with the extension of the cul-de-sac. Sidewalk alignment is also proposed to match that of the existing Robin Street stub. The proposed improved portion of the cul-de- FINAL ORDER - SUB 02-01. ZC 02-01 Page 10A sac extension qonforms with the plans for the adjoining subdivision with Robin Street. The al~plicant is proposing.to name the cul-de-sac "Nugget Court". However, the ~;name "Robin Street has already been recorded with Marion County, and the property on the northeast comer of Comstock Avenue and Robin Street is addre~Ssed on Robin Street. In addition, there is an existing Robin Avenue located ion the north side of Miles Chevrolet. The name of the cul-de-sac and existing stub should be the same and have the street suffix "Court". The City Council should address this issue since it has the authority to modify existing street names. (6) The subdividing of land shall be such that each lot shall abut on a public street. FINDING: Each of the proposed lots will abut a public street. Lots 1-3 will have frontage on BroWn Street, and Lots 4-13 will have frontage on the future extension of Robin Street. Section 12.B. MINIMUM RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH-~: Ri.qht-of-Wav .Curb-to-Curb 4. Cul-de-sac 5. Cul-de-sac (Radius) 50 ft. 30 ft. 55 ft. 50 ft. FINDING: The Robin Street cul-de-sac extension is proposed with a fight-of-way width of 50 feet and a curb-to-curb width of 34 feet. The end of the cul-de-sac is proposed to have a right-of-way radius of 55 feet and a curb-to-curb distance that exceeds 50 feet. The minimum right-of-way and curb-to-curb distances are satisfied by this proposal. Section 12.E. CUL-DE-SAC STANDARDS: Cul-de-sac streets shall not be permitted unless a loop or through street developments would not be practical. If permitted cul-de-sacs shall be no more than 250 feet deep from right-of-way intersection to end of right-of- way. FINDING: Due to the unusual configuration of the subject property and the fact that all surrounding properties are developed, a loop or through street is not feasible. The proposed cul-de-sac is the only practical means of developing the property as it is intended to be developed. The proposed length of the cul-de-sac from the centerline of Comstock Avenue is approximately 200 feet. Cul-de-sac standards have been met. Section 13.B. LOTS FINAL ORDER - SUB 02-01, ZC 02-01 Page 8 All lots shall have a minimum size of the zoning district in which they are Iocatqd. 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 .f~et or less, the minimum lot line fronting that curvature shall be 40 feet, and ir~ no ca..ses.shall the lot width be less than 60 feet at the buildin line. If topography' drainage, or other conditions justify, the Commission may requir~ a g~eater 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 Interior Lot (fronting one street) Minimum Width Flag LOt 60 feet 30 feet FINDING: Tep of the lots would front on the Robin Street cul-de-sac extension. Some of these lots are proposed as flag lots and are no less than the minimum width of 30 feet. As mentioned in the above section, those lots that are not considered flag lots must have a frontage width of 40 feet within the cul-de-sac (radius curvature of the cul-de-sac is less than 100 feet). The remaining lots in the cul-de-sac meet this minimum. Three of the proposed lots front on Brown Street. Two of these are interior lots which exceed 60 feet in frontage width, and the other lot is a flag lot With 30 feet of frontage width. As previously mentioned, each lot is configured so that the minimum width of 60 feet at future building lines can be satisfied. Minimum lot width standards have been met in this proposal. C..WoodburniAccess Management Ordinance, FINDING: This ordinance addresses developments along state highways and roads. Neither Brown Street or Robin Street is a state road. The flag lots that front on the proposed cul-de-sac have shared driveways, thereby limiting the number of accesses within the cul-de-sac. This is a positive feature in this proposal due to the number of lots within the cul-de-sac and their limited frontage distances.' The shared driveways reduce the number of future accesses in the cul-de-sac from 10 to 7. D. Woodburn Transportation Systems Plan FINDING: Both Brown Street and Robin Street are local access roads. Both streets meet right-of-way widths and improved surface standards for residential/local access streets. As a result, this proposal complies with the goals and policies in the Transportation Systems Plan. VI. CONCLUSION: FINAL ORDER - SUB 02-01, ZC 02-01 Page 9 IOA Based on the information in this final order and the applicable review criteria, this proposal satisfies all approval criteria relating to a subdivision and zone change. FINAL ORDER - SUB 02-01, ZC 02-01 Page 10 IOA~ EXHIBIT "B" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL SUBDIVISION 02-01 ZONE CHANGE 02-01 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 1. The proposed development shall be in substantial conformance with this approval and the attached preliminary plans provided as Exhibit "B" to the staff report, dated March 7, 2002, except as herein modified by these conditions of approval. The final subdivision plat shall be submitted to the Community Development Department within the required time period after preliminary plat approval (currently one year from the date of Planning Commission approval). The appliCant shall submit a copy of any proposed CC&R's to the Community Development Director for approval prior to recordation. The subdivision shall be platted according to standard surveying practice and approved and recorded with Marion County. 5. Prior to building permit issuance the applicant shall submit one set of reproducible as-builts. 6. The shared driveways for Lots 5 & 6, Lots 10 & 11, and Lots 12 & 13 shall be constructed at a width of at least 24 feet prior to occupancy of dwelling units on said lots. Shared access easements shall be recorded with the final subdivision plat for these lots allowing for the shared driveways. The easements and their descriptions shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director prior to their recordation with Marion County. Approval of the subdivision is contingent upon final approval of Zone Change 02-01. The final subdivision plat shall not be recorded until the Zone Change has been approved by the City Council through ordinance. 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. 9. Prior to recordation with Marion County, two paper copies of subdivision plat shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review. FINAL ORDER - SUB 02-01, ZC 02-01 Page 11 IOA lO. 11. The applicant shall provide the Community Development Department with a copy of the recorded subdivision plat. Prior to any construction, a reproducible mylar of the final plat shall be filed with the PUblic Works Department after all required signatures have been obtained and the plat has been recorded with Marion County. The property owner/applicant shall submit to the Community Development Departmen! a signed "Acceptance of Conditions" agreeing to all conditions of approval prior to recordation of the final subdivision plat. The signed document must be received by the Community Development Department before the Project approval becomes effective PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT General ConditiOns: 12. The final plan shall conform to the construction plan review procedures and standards. 13. On-site existing water wells and subsurface sewage disposal systems shall be abandoned in accordance with state regulations. 14. 15. 16. All city-maintained facilities located on private property will require a minimum 16-foot wide utility easement to be conveyed to the city. Utilities of unusual depth or size or with a combination of utilities may require a larger width. The applicant, not the city, is responsible for obtaining permits from any state and/or federal agencies which may require approval or permit. The applicant shall provide for the installation of all franchised utilities and shall provide any required easements on the final plat. Street lighting shall also be installed by the applicant as per PGE plan schedule "B". 17. The owner/applicant shall be required to enter into an improvement agreement as outlined in the Woodburn Subdivision Standards Document, Chapter III, Section 6 prior to acceptance of the final plat. Also, prior to construction of the subdivision commencing, the city will require approved construction plans, a performance bond and the construction permit fee to be paid. 18. All work shall conform to the City of Woodburn Standards and all State Building Codes and regulations. 19. Any off-site, third-party agreements or easements required for this development shall be provided to city staff prior to acceptance of the approval. FINAL ORDER - SUB 02-01, ZC 02-01 Page 12 IOA Streets: 20. The minimum right of way requirements shall be 50 feet for the street serving the cul-de-sac and a 55-foot radius for the cul-de-sac. There shall be. 1. 0-foO! wide public utility easements provided on each side. The minimum ~mproved street width shall be 30 curb-to-curb for the street and 45 for th6 cul-de-sac with sidewalks each side. 21. Brown s~reet has recently been improved. The applicant, upon completion of installipg required services to Lots 1 through 3,, shall mill the existing surface qurb-to-curb at a minimum of depth of I and inlay with asphaltic concretei The extent of required milling will be determined by the city upon review of the engineers construction plan. Drainage: 22. The existing storm sewer main along the southerly and easterly line of Lot 13 can bff used to provide service to the proposed cul-de-sac street. 23. This development shall not cause storm water runoff to be impounded on adjacent properties. The existing parcel has a combination of an open and underground drainage pattern/system. A grading and drainage plan shall be submittedl for review by city prior to final plat approval. This will ensure that proper easements or maintenance agreements are conveyed on the plat. The city Will not maintained any drainage facilities on private property. Sanitary Sewer: 24. Lots I through 3 can be served by the existing sanitary sewer main within Brown Street. Separate service to each lot will need to be installed by the applicant. 25. Lots 4 through 13 can be served by the existing sanitary sewer main at the end of the existing Robin Street stub. This is, however, a shallow line and may require the site to be raise to provide gravity service to each lot. Pump stations will not be allowed. The engineer of record shall provide verification that the Iofs created can be served by the gravity sanitary sewer service prior to final plat approval. Water: 26. Domestic and fire protection can be provided by the existing 8" diameter water line Within the public right-of-way to serve cul-de-sac lots. A fire hydrant shall be installed near the shared driveway to Lot 13. The domestic FINAL ORDER - SUB 02-01, ZC 02-01 Page 13 IOA service to the remaining lots on the cul-de-sac shall be served by the installation of a 4" line to the north end of the cul-de-sac, ending with a blow off assembly. 27. Domestic service for the Lots 1 through 3 can be provided by the existing 8" diameter Water on the west side of Brown Street. Meter installation fees shall be paid by the applicant. 28. Fire protection requirements, access, fire hydrant locations and fire protection issues shall be as per the Woodburn Fire District's conditions of approval. FINAL ORDER - SUB 02-01, ZC 02-01 Page 14 IOA Exhibit "B" Planning Commission 3~28~02 Minutes WOODBURN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 28, 2002 7:00 PM _ IOA 1. ROLL CALL e Sm MINUTES A. Woodburn Planning Commission Minutes of March 14, 2002 BUSINESS 'FROM THE AUDIENCE COMMUNICATIONS A. City Council WorkShop Minutes of February 4, 2002 B. City Council Minutes of February 25, 2002. PUBLIC HEARING A. Zone Change 02-02, Subdivision 02-01, request for a 13 lot subdivision located on 888 Brown St., Jeff Twenge, applicant. ITENI~S FOR ACTION 7. DISCUSSION ITEMS 8. REPORTS 9. BUSINESS FROM THE COMMISSION 10. ADJOURNMENT IOA WOODBURN PLANNING COMMISSION March 28, 2002 CONVENED The Planning Commission met in a session at 7:00 p.m. with Chairperson Cox presiding. ROLL CALL Chairperson Vice Chairperson Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Cox p Lima p Young p Grosjacques A Mill A Bandelow p Lonergan p Staff Present: Jim Mulder, Community Development Director MINUTES A. Woodburn Planning Commission Minutes of March 14, 200? ~---ommissioner Lone .rRan mp~,ed to accept the minutes as presented. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Bandelow. Motion unanimously carried. " BUSINESS FROM THE AI~IDIENCF None COMMUNICATIONS A_=. Council Workshop Minutes of February 4, 200? City Council Minutes of February 25, 200? PUBLIC HEARING A_=. Zone Change 02-0,1, Subdivision 02-01, request fora 13 lot subdivision located on 888 Brow. St., Jeff Twencle. a~3Dlicant. EXPARTE CONTACTS Commissioner Bandelow reported this property was listed by Prudential Real Estate which is the company she works for. However, she has had no contact with the owners and does not see how this would interfere with her being able to make a decision tonight. Additionally, she reported she has no financial interest in the outcome of this project. Vice Chairperson Lima and Commissioner Loner.qan both indicated they visited the site. Staff read the applicable ORS Statement and provided a presentation as reflected in the Staff Report. He indicated the proposal satisfies all of the approval and development criteria and recommended approval of the project. Chairperson Youn.q requested clarification as to the case number of the zone change. Staff cladfied it is Zone Change 02-01 and not Zone Change 02-02 as listed on the agenda. Vice Chairperson Lima referred to condition of approval #7 and questioned why could we not name it Robin Court because the road will be a cul-de-sac and not an actual street. Planning Commission Meeting - March 28, 2002 Page I of 4 IOA Staff replied we would need to change the street name to Robin Court. He indicated he believed what happened is when the Comst~oc, k subdivision came through they did not know what was going to happen with the property north of them aSd as far as they knew they figured that street would go all the way through to Brown St. which is why they aamed it Street. However, that is not occurring here and the name would need to be formally changed and readdress the house that is already addressed as Robin Street and change it to Robin Court. Additionally, Slaff indicated it would have been named Nugget Court and commented if we are changing Robin Street to Rol~in Court we could just change the whole section to Nugget Court at that point. Staff commented that would inot be a bad idea as we already have a Robin Avenue in town located at the connection that the Factory Outlet made from Woodland to where Amey Rd. curved right behind Miles Chevrolet. Chairperson Cox stated it seems to him that having two streets named Robin would lead to all kinds of potential confusion for emergency vehicles, taxi's, etc. Staff interjected there is nothing addressed on the Robin Avenue section and there probably never will be because Miles Chevrolet is o0 the south side and on the north side is a common area or wetlands area and there will not be anything de~eloped there. Cheirporson Cox inquired if the Commission could recommend that City Council take action to resolve this situation when it comes up before them? Staff replied they could certainly recommend that. TESTIMONY BY APPLICANT ~eff Twerme. 575 NE Chehal!n Dr.. Newbe~, OR stated the subdivision was quite a challenge to come up with a_~lesign because of the ~wo triangles. The land lays nice and fiat, services are available and the streets are p~tty much done dght up to the point where they are going to come in. Mr. Twenge further slated it worked out pretty good once they figured out the layout. He explained they immediately thought of the Comstock Load in Nevada when they saw the street name Comstock. They thought it would be a nice way to go with the names Prospect Park and Nugget. However, it is really not an issue to them and whatever the Commission decides is best for the city they will be happy to go along with. Chairperson COx asked the applicant if he has any concerns regarding the conditions of approval contained in the Staff Report? Jeff Twenae answered most of the items were discussed with the staff members prior to making the application and they feel they can live with those conditions. V'me Chairperson Lima questioned when do they plan on developing? Jeff Twen,qe responded they would like to start as soon as possible. He indicated if everything goes smoothly they would be able to start sometime in June and the weather would be very cooperative at that time as well. Mr. Twenge reported this will be a single development and therefore, done all at one time. Occupancy would normally be expected within 8 to 9 weeks from development completion which would allow for the infrastructure and the comple¢ion of the utilities and final approvals. Commissioner Bandelow asked if the ground level is high enough or will they need to bring any in fill dirt? Jeff Twen.qe responded the property lays level other than Lots 7, 8, 9 which are a little bit elevated but everything else is basically fiat and they do not anticipate doing any fill. Commissioner Youn.q inquired if this is just a subdivision phase to the applicant and then he turns it over to someone else to build the homes? Planning Commission Meeting - March 28, 2002 Page 2 of 4 IOA' Jeff Twen,qe replied affirmative y Commissioner YounR als{3 stated the condition of approval to require CC&R's is probably not going to be a barrier for the developmeht because the applicant is not going to be really involved with the homeowners? Jeff Twen.qe answered N~). He further remarked he foresees that it will be opened up to either stick built or modular homes. The subdivision next to their proposed project is a mix of modular and stick built homes. Mr. Twenge explained wheat they do is develop the land and once the lots are created with services ready to hook up then they either s~ll to builders or pdvate individuals that want to build their own homes. Mr. Twenge asked Commissioner Yodng if there was something in particular in the CC&R's he would like to see? Commissioner Youn,q replied you have just a little bit more pride in ownership in the neighborhood and more of a community aspect wl~en there are CC&R's in place. He commented this project may have situations adse with the fact that thei'e are shared driveways. J_eff .T. wen,qe remarked the~, always put CC&R's on their subdivisions. One of the things the are quite proud of with this design is that! as you enter the subdivision the homes will be set back ~se of the long driveways and it will really~eate a nice feeling. Mr. Twenge further commented because it is a cul-de-sac it will be kid friendly with aidewalks going all the way around. Additionally, he indicated the lots are large which will give an open fe~ling and everybody will have privacy. Commissioner Bandelow asked if the CC&R's will include something for the maintenance of the driveways when they are shared driveways? Jeff Twen,qe responded each driveway will have a shared maintenance agreement and in addition the CC&R's usually cover things like parking recreational vehicles etc. behind the front of houses and items that they found make'the neighborhoods nice for everybody. He also remarked they will rock the driveways in advanced because of the distance of those driveways. Part of their project will be to come back and do asphalt back to the end of the shared portion once the homes are sold. TESTIMONY BY PROPONENTS None TESTIMONY BY OPPONENTS Earl Beasley, 639 Comstock Ave., Woodbum, OR reported his home is the second to the right of where the cul-de-sac goes in off Robin St. He expressed concerns as to what will happen with the existing fence behind his property where the new project is going in. Mr. Beasley explained there is woven wire fence that his developer.put up so the farmer could use that to pasture his horse. He indicated as he sees the plan, they have a double driveway behind where the fenced area would be. Mr. Beasley stated there are four homes along the side that backsides to their lot and their stakes are inside of the fence. Additionally, Mr. Beasley asked if they will have to fill in on the backside of the applicant's lots? He also expressed concerns that there are about 8-10 cars parked regularly on the little short street where Robin St. is going to be. APPLICANT REBUTTAL Jeff Twen,qe remarked it was not their intent to do anything with the fence as it provides a barrier between the existing homes. The driveway between Lots 12 and 13 will be in the middle of the lot line and therefore, that will be just an 18 foot grassy strip. Mr. Twenge further stated the City building setbacks require 24 feet for single-story homes and 30 feet for two-story homes and they would not be allowed to build in that area even if they chose to. DISCUSSION Chairperson Cox closed the public hearing and opened discussion by the Commission. Planning Commission Meeting - March 28, 2002 Page 3 of 4 IOA Commissioner Loner.qan stated he favors the zone change because the comprehensive plan calls for it, it is surrounded by residential homes and it is a good idea. Commissioner Youn,q commented he would recommend that the City Council approve the zone change as part of the movement in starldardizing that area of the city as we have more or less made it to be residential single family. Commissioner Bandelow ag[eed with Commissioner Young and remarked the applicant has done an admiral job in working out placement of the development and she would be in favor of the project. Vice Chairperson Lima also agreed with his fellow Commissioners and stated this area is surrounded by single family residences. Additionally, he commented this is the most creative development he has seen in a long time. He favored the projec! with the condition to rename the street to court, Commissioner Young moved to recommend to the City Council Zone Change 02-01 with the additional recommendation to change to 'Court' to be consistent with the rest of the city. Vice Chairperson Lima seconded the motion, which unanimously carried. Commissioner Bandelow m(Wed to approve Subdivision 02-01 with the conditions set forth in the Staff Report including deletion of Condition #7 and recommend to the City Council to review the status of the street name and designation as "Court" and Staff return with the Final Order. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Lone~an. Motion unanimo~lsly carded. ITEMS FOR ACTION None DISCtISSION ITEMS None REPORTS None BUSINESS FROM THE COMMISSION V'me Chairperson Lima reported he has been approached by several people inquiring when Woodbum will have broadband service. Staff commented the service was to be extended to Montebello subdivision and eventually throughout the City within 3-5 years. ATTEST ADJOURNMENT V'me Chairperson Lima moved to adjourn the meeting which was seconded by Commissioner Bandelow. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Date Jim .IVFuld~r, Community Development Director City o~,Woodburn, Oregon Planning Commission Meeting. March 28, 2002 Page 4 of 4 IOA Exhibit "C" Planning Commission 3128102 Staff Report IOA CITY OF WOODBURN, OREGON STAFF REPORT March 28, 2002 ZONE CHANGE 02-01 SUBDIVISION 02-0'1 I1. III. APPLICATION INFORMATION: Applicant: T7 Development, Inc. P.O. Box 573 Newberg, OR 97132 Property Owner: Rudy & Paalette Sonnen 888 Brown Street Woodburn, OR 97071 Application Deemed Complete: February 27, 2002 120 Day Deadline: June 26, 2002 Staff Report Available for Public Review: March 21, 2002 NATURE OF APPLICATION: The applicant is requesting to subdivide a 2.83-acre parcel into 13 single-family residential lots and change the zoning designation of the parcel's southern portion from Madon County's Urban Transition Farm (UTF) to the City of Woodbum Single- Family Residential (RS) District. RELEVANT FACTS: The subject site is located north of Comstock Avenue and east of Brown Street. It can be further identified as Parcel 2 of Partition Plat No. 2001-112 (attached as Exhibit "D"). The property received partition approval from the City in November of 2001 (Land Use Case No. PAR 01-06). It was divided from the property currently addressed at 888 Brown Street. The property has two zoning designations. It's southern portion was annexed into the City by Ordinance No. 2289 (approved by the City Council on June 11, 2001). This portion of the property retained its Marion County zoning of Urban Transition Farm (UTF), and the applicant is requesting that this portion be rezoned to the City's Single-Family Residential (RS) District. This RS designation complies with the Comprehensive Plan Map designation for the entire property which is Low Density Residential. The remainder of this property and all adjacent properties are zoned RS District. All adjacent uses consist of single-family homes. IOA IV. The property is currently vacant. Elevation vades by approximately six (6) feet. The applicant proposes lots that would range in size from 6,200 to 14,155 square feet. Proposed Lots 1-3 would be accessed by Brown Street to the west, and Lots 4-13 would be accessed by the existing street stub to the south (Robin Street). The stub would be extended onto the property as a cul-de-sac to serve Lots 4-13. RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA: ZONE CHAN~E 02-01 WOODI~URN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WOODI~URN ZONING ORDINANCF Chapter 15. Zone Change Procedures Chapter 16. Comprehensive .Plan Amendment Procedure SUBDIVISION i02-01 A. WOODI~URN ZONING ORDINANCF Chapterl8. General Standards Chapter 9. Residential Standards Chapter ;10. Off-Street Parking, Loading and Driveway Standards Chapter 22. RS - Single-Family Residential District B. WOODB, URN SUBDIVISION STANDARDS Co WOODB,,URN ACCESS MANAGEMENT ORDINANCF WOODBURN TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS PLAN ANALYSIS: ZONE CHANGE02-01 A. Woodburn,Comprehensive Plan STAFF COMMENT: Applicable goals and policies have been satisfied through the implementation of the Woodbum Zoning Ordinance and other applicable ordinances in affect at the time of approval. The designated land use for the property is Low Density Residential on the Comprehensive Plan Map. The applicant is proposing a zone change on the southern portion of the site from Marion County's Urban Transition Farm (UTF) to the City of Woodburn's Single-Family Residential (RS) District. The RS District would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation of Low Density Residential. IOA B. Woodburn ~:oninfl Ordinance 1. Chapter 115 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 1~5.040. 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 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. STAFF COMMENT: A zone change is being requested as part of this proposal from Marion County's UTF Zone to the City's RS District. This zone designation is compatible with the RS zoning on the properties to the north and south of the subject property as well as with the Low Density Residential designation on the Comprehensive Plan Map. A hearing will be required before the Council for the proposed Zone Change. A condition of approval requires the Zone Change to receive final approval by the Council prior to the proposed subdivision being recorded with Marion County. A further discussion of the Zone Change criteria is included in the following section of this staff report. 2. Chapter '16 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Procedure Section '16.080 Burden of Proof. The following specific questions shall be given consideration in evaluating requests regarding plan and zoning amendments and are as follows: ( b ) To support a zone change, the applicant shall: IOA 1. Show there is a need for the use proposed; STAFF COMMENT: The applicant states that "The City has already identified this property to be rezoned to meet the Comprehensive plan requirements .... "To further the ap )licant's statement, the Comprehensive Plan map designates this property for re: the intended for the subdivi.~ fulfilling the ne, applicant has property. ;idential development. The subdivision proposed by the applicant is ;e for the property, and the rezone from UTF to RS will be necessary .ion. In addition, this subdivision would serve as infill development, .~d for additional residential development within the city limits. The ~hown that there is a need for the proposed use of the subject 2. Show that the particular piece of property in question will best meet ~that need. STAFF COMMENT: The applicant states that "This property is surrounded on 4 sides by resider~tial development and there is no other practical use for an island of level ground wil;hin the area." As indicated in this statement, the subject property ~s completely ~urrounded by single-family residential developments. For this reason, the prol~osed subdivision is the most practical and efficient use that can be made of the prqperty. In addition, the proposed use would be compatible with the surrounding neiShborhood and would satisfy the intended use of this property. The applicant has shown that the property in question will best meet the need for additional residential development in the City. SUBDIVISION ~2-01 A. Woodburn Zoninq Ordinance .. 1. Chapter 8. General Standards. Section 8.010. Minimum Street Width. All street right-of-way shall be not less than: (c) Cul-de-sacs. 50 feet. STAFF COMMENT: Ten of the proposed subdivision lots would be served by a cul- de-sac extending from the Robin Street stub to the south. There are three lots proposed on the west side of the property that would be served by Brown Street. The proposed cul-de-sac is to be 50 feet in right-of-way width, satisfying the above requirement. IOA 2. Chapter 9. Residential Standards. STAFF COMMENT: Chapter 9 addresses standards for residential setbacks, accessory structures and fences. At such time that building permit applications are made on each let, the applications will be reviewed against these .standards for compliance. There are currently no structures on the subject property. ~ 3. Chapter 10. Off Street Parking, Loading and Driveway Standards. Section 1~0.050. 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. 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. STAFF COMMENT: The subdivision is proposed with shared driveways for Lots 5 & 6, Lots 10 & 11, and Lots 12 & 13. Each driveway would serve two single-family dwellings. A condition of approval states that these driveways shall be no less than 24 feet in width prior to occupancy of any structures on said lots. The condition further states that easements on each of these lots shall be recorded with the final subdivision plat allowing for the shared driveways, and that the easements and their descriptionS shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director prior to recordation with Marion County. 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 majority of the subject site is zoned Single-Family Residential (RS) District, and single-family homes are permitted IOA outright. As mentioned, the southern portion of the property is zoned Marion County's Urban Transition Farm (UTF). The applicant's proposed zone change of this portion of {he subject site to the City's RS District will allow for the entire site to be developed with single-family homes as proposed. Secfioh require every I( No dwE 30 pete to or ml of the k 22.080. Lot Area and Width. In. an-RS District the minimum 'nents for lot area shall be 6,000 square feet for each dwelling and ~t shall have a minimum width of sixty feet at the front building line. Iling or main building other than a dwelling shall occupy more than ent of the lot area, except where an accessory building is attached idea part of the dwelling, or main building, in which case 35 percent ~t area may be occupied by such dwelling or main building .... STAFF COMMENT: The smallest lot proposed is 6,200 square feet (Lot 7). Each lot is configured so that the 60 foot lot width can be satisfied at the building lines of future structure.s. The standards for maximum lot coverage will be reviewed at the time of permit~submittal for future structures on the proposed lots. Minimum lot sizes and widths are satisfied in this proposal. B. Woodbum ~Subdivision Standard~ Chapter IlL Section 6. REQUISITES FOR APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION O1~ PAR¥iii0N PLANS, PLATS OR R~PLAT,~ (1) The City shall not allow the duplication of a subdivision name unless the cOntiguous property becomes that name. All subdivision plats will maintain consecutive lot numbers. STAFF COMMENT: The proposed name for the subdivision is "Prospect Park". No other subdivision in the City has this name, and this subdivision would not be contiguous with any of its adjacent subdivisions. This proposed name is acceptable. The numbering of the proposed lots is consecutive. (2) No tentative plan for a proposed subdivision and no tentative plan for a proposed partition and replat shall be approved unless: (a) The streets and roads are laid out so as to conform to the plans of subdivisions and partitions already approved for adjoining property as to width, general direction and in all other respects unless the City or County determines it is in the public interest to modify the street or road pattern. IOA STAFF COMMENT: The existing Robin Street stub has a right-of-way width of 50 feet and a paled surface of 34 feet. The applicant is proposing to match these with the extension of the cul-de-sac. Sidewalk alignment is also proposed to match that of the existing Robin Street stub. The proposed improved portion of the cul-de-sac extension conforms with the plans for the adjoining subdivision with Robin Street. However, the applicant is proposing to name the cul-de-sac "Nugget Court". Since the name "Robin Street" has already been recorded with Marion County, and since the property on the northeast corner of Comstock Avenue and Rob!n Street is addressed on Robin Street, the same name will have to be used for the cul-de-sac extension. A condition of approval requires the cul- de-sac extension to be named "Robin Street" and that this name shall be indicated on the final subdivision plat. (6) The subdividing of land shall be such that each lot shall abut on a public street. STAFF COMMENT: Each of the proposed lots will abut a public street. Lots 1-3 will have frontage~ on Brown Street, and Lots 4-13 will have frontage on the future extension of Robin Street. Section 'I2.B. MINIMUM RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTHS: Right-of-Way Curb-to-Curb 4. Cul-de-sac 5. Cul-de-sac (Radius) 50 ft. 30 ft. 55 ft. 50 ft. STAFF COMMENT: The Robin Street cul-de-sac extension is proposed with a right-of-way width of 50 feet and a curb-to-curb width of 34 feet. The end of the cul-de-sac is proposed to have a right-of-way radius of 55 feet and a curb-to-curb distance that exceeds 50 feet. The minimum right-of-way and curb-to-curb distances are satisfied by this proposal. Section 12.E. CUL-DE-SAC STANDARDS: Cul-de-sac streets shall not be permitted unless a loop or through street developments would not be practical. If permitted cul-de-sacs shall be no more than 250 feet deep from right-of-way intersection to end of right-of-way. STAFF COMMENT: Due to the unusual configuration of the subject property and the fact that all surrounding properties are developed, a loop or through street is not feasible. The proposed cul-de-sac is the only practical means of developing the property as it is intended to be developed. The proposed length of the cul-de- sac from the centerline of Comstock Avenue is approximately 200 feet. Cul-de- sac standards have been met. IOA 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 feetI and in the case of a curved lot line where the radius of curvature is 100 fes~t or less, the minimum lot line fronting that curvature shall be 40 feet, and in lo cases shall the lot width be less than 60 feet at the building linc;. If topo raphy, 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 60 feet Interior ~ot (fronting one street) Flag Lot 30 feet STAFF COMMENT: Ten of the lots would front on the Robin Street cul-de-sac extension. Sortie of these lots are proposed as flag lots and are no less than the minimum width ~of 30 feet. As mentioned in the above section, those lots that are not considered ~lag lots must have a frontage width of 40 feet within the cul-de-sac (radius curvatur~ of the cul-de-sac is less than 100 feet). The remaining lots in the cul-de-sac meet this minimum. Three of the proposed lots front on Brown Street. Two of these are intedor lots which exceed 60 feet in frontage width, and the other lot is a flag lot With 30 feet of frontage width. As previously mentioned, each lot is configured so that the minimum width of 60 feet at future building lines can be satisfied. Minimum lot width standards have been met in this proposal. C. Woodburn Access Management Ordinanc~ S:I'AFF COMMENT: This ordinance addresses developments along state highways and roads. Neither Brown Street or Robin Street is a state road. The flag lots that front on the proposed cul-de-sac have shared driveways, thereby limiting the number of accesses within the cul-de-sac. This is a positive feature in this proposal due to the number of lots within the cul-de-sac and their limited frontage distances. The shared driveways reduce the number of future accesses in the cul-de-sac from 10to 7. D. Woodburn Transportation Systems Plan STAFF COMMENT: Both Brown Street and Robin Street are local access roads. Both streets meet right-of-way widths and improved surface standards for residential/local access streets. As a result, this proposal complies with the goals and policies in the Transportation Systems Plan. IOA vi CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: Based on the in~rmation in this report, the information provided by the applicant and the applicable review criteria, findings required to approve this Zone Change and Subdivision Can be made. Staff recommends approval of Zone Change 02-01 and Subdivision 02-01, subject to the following conditions of approval: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 1. The proposed development shall be in substantial conformance with this approval and the attached preliminary plans provided as Exhibit "B" dated March 7, 2002, except as herein modified by these conditions of approval. 2. The final subdivision plat shall be submitted to the Community Development Department within the required time pedod after preliminary plat approval (currently one year from the date of Planning Commission approval). o o The applicant shall submit a copy of any proposed CC&R's to the Community Development Director for approval prior to recordation. The subdivision shall be platted according to standard surveying practice and approved and recorded with Marion County. Prior to building permit issuance the applicant shall submit one set of reproducible as-builts. The shared driveways for Lots 5 & 6, Lots 10 & 11, and Lots 12 & 13 shall be constructed at a width of at least 24 feet pdor to oc(~pancy of dwelling units on said lots. Shared access easements shall be recorded with the final subdivision plat for these lots allowing for the shared driveways. The easements and their descriptions shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director prior to their recordation with Marion County. The cul-de-sac extension serving Lots 4-13 shall be named "Robin Street" in conformance with the existing street stub. The extension shall be labeled with this street name on the final subdivision plat. Approval of the subdivision is contingent upon final approval of Zone Change 02-01. The final subdivision plat shall not be recorded until the Zone Change has been approved by the City Council through ordinance. 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. Exhibit "A" PETITION FOR ZONE MAP C~13B~.,r) ~ I_I)A _DIRECT QUESTIoNs_ TO: JAN 0 4 ZO0;~ ~' ¢ © ~-- o 1 (TELEPHONE (ZiP CODE) To change +_.J~~ of (present zoneJprese, nt comp,._plan)_ To (d~ed zo~e/des~ed comp. r~a.) ~ by the City of ~oodbum Zoning Ordinance. 0 ER- . ;. NAME (P~E PRIN~ OR TYPE) as such zones 8ri~ defined ADDRESS & ZIP CODE Ld.~C/~TIQN ANq SI7~ OF THE PROPERTY; or if not addressed, then state ~~,~o th~ D~t ~~ ~r~ o~ _k~ow ~~ _ APPLICATION CHECKLIST OFFICE 1JSE ONLY 3. 4. Statement of Intent (Exb. A) Plot Plan (Exb. B) Legal Description of the Property Mst of All Property Ownem within 250 Feet of the Property Assessors Map YES NO IOA 10. Pdor to recordation with Marion County, two paper copies of subdivision plat shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review. The applicant shall provide the Community Development Department with a copy of the recorded subdivision plat. 11. Prior to any construction, a reproducible mylar of the final plat shall be filed with the PUblic Works Department after all required signatures have been obtained arid the plat has been recorded with Marion County. 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 recordation of the final subdivision plat. The signed document must be received by the Community Development Department before the Project approval becomes effective PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT General Conditions: 13. 14. The final plan shall conform to the construction plan review procedures and standards. On-site existing water wells and subsurface sewage disposal systems shall be abandoned in accordance with state regulations. 15. All city-rnaintained facilities located on pdvate property will require a minimum 16-foot wide utility easement to be conveyed to the city. Utilities of unusual depth or size or with a combination of utilities may require a larger width. 16. The applicant, not the city, is responsible for obtaining permits from any state and/or federal agencies which may require approval or permit: 17. The applicant shall provide for the installation of all franchised utilities and shall provide any required easements on the final plat. Street lighting shall also be installed by the applicant as per PGE plan schedule "B". 18. The owner/applicant shall be required to enter into an improvement agreement as outlined in the Woodburn Subdivision Standards Document, Chapter III, Section 6 prior to acceptance of the final plat. Also, pdor to construction of the subdivision commencing, the city will require approved construction plans, a performance bond and the construction permit fee to be paid. 19. All work shall conform to the City of Woodburn Standards and all State Building Codes and regulations. IOA 20. Any off-Site, third-party agreements or easements required for this developmpnt shall be provided to city staff prior to acceptanco of the approval. Streets: 21. The minimum right of way requirements shall be 50 feet for the street serving the cul-de-sac and a 55-foot radius for the cul-de-sac. There shall be 10-foot wide public utility easements provided on each side. The minimum improved street width shall b~ 30 curb-to-curb for the street and 45 for the cul-de-sac with sidewalks each side. 22. Brown Streel~ has recently been improved. The applicant, upon completion of installing required services to Lots I through 3, shall mill the existing surface ~":'~.curb-to-curb pt a minimum of depth of 1" and inlay with asphaltic concrete. The extent of req,~ired milling will be determined by the city upon review of the engineers construction plan. Drainage: 23. The existing storm sewer main along the southerly and eastedy line of Lot 13 can be used to provide service to the proposed cul-de-sac street. This development shall not cause storm water runoff to be impounded on adjacent properties. The existing parcel has a combination of an open and underground drainage pattem/system. A grading and drainage plan shall be submitted for review by city prior to final plat approval. This will ensure that proper easements or maintenance agreements are conveyed on the plat. The city will not maintained any drainage facilities on private property. Sanitary Sewer: 25. Lots 1 through 3 can be served by the existing sanitary sewer main within Brown Street. Separate service to each lot will need to be installed by the applicant. 26. Lots 4 through 13 can be served by the existing sanitary sewer main at the end of the existing Robin Street stub. This is, however, a shallow line and may require the site to be raise to provide gravity service to each lot. Pump stations will not be allowed. The engineer of record shall provide verification that the lots created can be served by the gravity sanitary sewer service prior to final plat approval. Water: 27. Domestic and fire protection can be provided by the existing 8" diameter water line within the public right-of-way to serve cul-de-sac lots. A fire hydrant shall be installed near the shared driveway to Lot 13. The domestic service to the remaining lots on the cul-de-sac shall be served by the installation of a 4" line to IOA VII 28. 29. the north end Of the cul-de-sac, ending with a blow off assembly. Domestic servlce for the Lots I through 3 can be provided by the existing 8" diameter water on the west side of Brown Street. Meter installation fees shall be paid by the applicant. Fire protection requirements, access, fire hydrant locations and fire protection issues shall b~ as per the Woodburn Fire District's conditions of approval. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit "A" Exhibit "B" Exhibit "C" Exhibit "D" Exhibits "El" & "E2" Attachment "A" ~ Attachment "B" Attachment "C" Zone Change Application Subdivision Application and Preliminary Plat Zone Map Partition Plat 2001-112 Sits Photos Public Works Department comments Fire District comments Recreation and Parks Department comments REQUIRED A'['rACHMEN'i'S loA .STATEMENTiOF INTENT should discuss/explain the mason this request is made. !.n_cl.u..de brief ~l~tion of a~.y proposed constru(~on or land use chan e s mat me r uest is- · . g · how eq .1) In comormance wfth the Comprehens~/e Plan; 2) there is a publi.c, need f~ thls change; 3) that need is best met by this proposal; 4) there is no omer available and appropriately zoned land In the vicinity; 5) petitioner's cannot make a reasonable use of the land as it is currently zoned. (See zone change policy consldemtions). (Mark EXHIBIT c/ PLOT PLAN: Show a~l properties within 250' from and parallel to the subject property an( he. land use of each. Mark .E~. IBIT 'B'. Draw to scale "' LEGAL OES£ I~TiON of the property in metes and bo ~u~ds (as it appears on the deed); Mark. EXHIBIT 'C', or if property is within a platted subdMsion: · Lot: , Block:. . of (SubdMsion). · NOTE: If a fraction of the lot, then attach full description as if it were metes and bounds.= ~'~N,AME$ AND ~DDRESSES OF Ali PROPERTY OWNERS (husband and wife) v~-~ 250 feet. from and parallel to the subject property. Obtain certified list and map from ~e company and attach. Mark EXHIBIT 'D". nno o C ASSESSOR'S MAP, Attach copy of Marion County Assessors map showing subject area and outlining 250" notification area. Mark EXHIBIT 'F"/~... ~o..1~ We, the underalgned, hereby Certify that all the statements in the'~'~Jp~p ¥1~1~? ~"~ attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith are true and complete, and we are _the ownem of ref~ord or contract purchasers of 13rooerh, for which the zone map _chanqe is requested: . NAME DATE IOA STATEMENT OF INTENT Show the request is: (1) In conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive plan for the City of Woodburn has designated this property RS. We wishto do a residential subdivision. (2) There is a public! need for th'~ change. The City has already identified this property to be rezoned to meet the Comprehensive plan requirements. We simply wish to have it done at the present time along with our subdivision application. (33 ...that need is best met by this proposal. This property is surrounded on 4 sides by residential development and there is no other practical use for an island of level ground within the area. (4) The is no other available and appropriately zoned land in the vicinity. The property is isolated, surrounded on 4 sides by residentially developed property and the majority of the property is already zoned RS. (5) Petitioners cannot make a reasonable use of the land as it is currently zoned. The size of the parcel not zoned RS is not large enough to viably support any other use. ~-ONCURRENT REVIEWS: ADJUSTMENT SUBDIVISION/PAR3TTION PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION SITE PLAN REVIEVV VARIANCE ----- CONDITIONAL USE R~PRESENTATIVE Of{ CONTACT PERSON: Exhibit ~r REC'D JAN 04 ZO0Z -_~ ZONE MAP AMENDMENT COMP. PLAN AM~I~t~.U~N COMMUNITY '"'-~ ~ ~[q~Ei313PMENT DEPT. (ADDRESS) (ClTYI (PHONE) (STATE) PROPERTY OWNER:(Please: print 1. RCt~L~ ~r~ ~' ~ or type] ADDRESS Ex ZIP CODE Certified list, on pre-pasted I~bels for mailing, with the names and addresses of property owners within 250 feet for a Subdivision and 1OO feet for a Partition. 3. 4 - q,03 Give the acreage, number of lots, average lot siZe and any variances being requested. For example: 'To divide 32.6 acres into 74 lots with variances to allow for lot frontage on a cul-de- sac of 38' where 40' is re(~uired.'" 4. The ZONE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN designation in which the parcel is located. qZLiT_ __ (ZIP CODEI ~. Describe the location of the property or give the address: .~.~Map No. - I - I ' 0 - Tax Lot ~O 7. Attach a written statement, marked ~_hJJZ[.~,~ whlch explains your reasons for subdividing ~he land and provides evidence that the request conforms to the Woodbum Comprehensive Plan, Zoning 0rdinance,-and SUbdivision Policies. ' · Attach a preliminary plat and narrative which contains the following information (Exhibit The aPp~',aat beam l~le I~rdea of proof ~fra( al/approved cdtezia.l-ms bee~ met. (d"'Vloinity Map ~e ~ of any pro~s~ su~iv~ion shall not be the sa~ as or similar to any name Used on a re~rded plat on ~e ~unW or ~(~To~shlp, range, semi, n, t~ lot number(s), acreage of the prope~ to be divided. ~~Rach a legal de~ripfi0n(s} of the pro~. ~o~h arrow, s~le (one'inch equals 2~ feet or ~rger}~ ~ ~tions and names o~ ali exi~in~ streets within' or on the bounda~ of the proposed -~ivision/pa~ition. - ~ ~ · · ~~tions and na~s'of~all proposed streets. ~ ~ ~ (~ot (parcel) layout ~th approximate di~nsions, lot(Parcel) numbers and areas for all lots ~_--~parcels). ~ ~p ~ ~' .(~Pro~ide a fOotprint of the buildable aFea for each lot ......... · ~ .. . · -~ ~ (~Zonmg and Comprehensive Plan designations in the proposed su~ision (pa~ition) and area  cent to the propose~ subdivision (pa~ition).~ te ~ich buildings~ are to [e~in and ~ich are t6 be removed.-~ ~~o~gmphy whhin and adja~nt to the pro~sed subdi~mionlpa~ition. ~ ~ ~tio~ of drai~ge ~ys, fl~ ~s, or fl~dplain ~in and adjacent to the proposed ~ubdNlsio~pa~kion.~ ~p ~e Io~tibn and s~e of ~a~l proposed water, sewer, and storm drain lines. (~e 10~tiop of all propped fire hydrant. Signatures of each owner (husband and wifel or contract purchaser. ADDRESS AND ZIP CODF ~£¥ T l TLE,'~EWBE~G LEQAJ. gllC~JlnlON Earn ~ of B~n ~tmet 6~.1e fe~ ~m or Mss to tM Noffh fine of~~nd . ~t~n ~n~ C~; ~enm 8o~ 8~ 35 ~l alo~ Mid N0~ I~e 910.50 feat mom or less point ~ ~ginn~g. *~ ~d and w~e, T~shlp 5 ~, ~snge I West W~llam~e Manolan, Ma~n ~un~. Omg~;.~nM N~ 1~0 ~st 45,78 feet to a po~ ~en~ No~h 610 We~ 10,19 ~lns ~ an e~ke ~M ~e ~; ~int of ~gl~i~ of ~e ~a~ to ~ d~d; mnnl~ ~uffi 41~ 15' W~t 90.~ ~tto a ~ln~ ~n~ ~ 61" ~et ~.~ ~ b a ~int; ~en~ N~h 41~ IF 90.~ Met ~ a poh t~ ~nm N~ 81" W~ ~,00 f~t m the ~e ~t of ~gin~. 8~ ~ ~ Begln~ at t~ No~a~ ~ ~ ~ ~MUon ~ Qa{m of Peter ~n~, ~; ~n~ ~ 11' ~st 45.?8 ~t to a ~ln~ ~n~ N~ 61~ We~ 10.19 ~N~ ~ m I~ ~ke;',~ ~ 41' 15' W~ 1~.~ ~t ~d ~e ~e point of ~nni~ of ~ ~ ~ de~d; ~enm ~ 41~ 18' We~ ~,M ~e~ ~ 80~ 61~ Ea~ 100.00 ~m N~ 41" t6' E~ ~,~ feet ~ a ~1~ ~e~ N~h 61· West I~,00 feet ~ ~e NM ~ave aN! Except: B~ginntr~ mt ~e N~I~ ~r ~ ~ ~n ~M ~im ~ P~ ~ aM ~ ~ ~P 6 ~, ~ I West ~ ~e ~11~ Me~n · Ma~n ~.~; ~n~ 1t" ~mt 46,1B ~ ~ m ~ ~ No~ 61a West 10.t9 ~ to an ~ 8~0; ~ ~ 41a 16' W#t I~.~ ~et; ~ ~ 61e E~ 1~.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~t ~ b~lnnl~ ~ ~e ~ ~ ~ des~b~: ~n~ Seth 41° 15' W~t ~ ~ ~ 61* East 100.~ ~e~ the~ No~h 41' 16' E~t ~.00 feet to a ~ then~ N~ 61~ W~t 1~.00 f~t ~ ~e ~t ~ ~1~1~. F~r.~ve end ~Mpl any ~ of the above pa~! ~1~ ~in M~d~od Su~Nlsion, MaCon ~un~, O~0~ I~oe 3 Report NO, 16-10028 Serving Oregon for Over 35 Year.; Exhibit "C" I PA I I I II II II II II II II II II II '~OUNDARY II II II I CITY LIMITS ,.~:~ I, · .pi, · II~l:l~l,l~ . I y ~ .~ I~ . -- ~---~ ~ ~ I / o IOA IOA o '~ _~ ~.. IOA I Exhibit "El" IOA Exhibit "E2" IOA SITE PLAN REVIEW PROSPECT PARK SUBDIVISION ATTACHMENT ,A ]0A PUBLIC WORKS o Bo GENERAL CQNDITIONS: Final plan shall Conform to the construction plan review procedures and standards. On-site existing water wells and subsurface sewage disposal systems shall be abandoned in accordance with state regulations. All city-maintaiaed facilities located on private property will require a minimum 16-foot wide utility easement to be conveyed to the city. Utilities of unusual depth or size or with a combination of utilities may require a larger width. The applicant, nOt the city, is responsible for obtaining permits from any state and/or federal agencies which may require approval or permit. The subdivision ~hall be platted in accordance with standard surveying practice, approved and recorded with Marion County. The applicant shall provide for the installation of all franchised utilities and shall provide any required eas~raents on the final plat. Street lighting shall also be installed by the applicant as per I~GE plan schedule 'B'. The owner/appliCant shall be required to enter into an improvement agreement as outlined in the Woodbum Subdivision Standards Document, Chapter III, Section 6 prior to acceptance of the final plat. Also, prior to construction of the subdivision commencing, the city will require approved construction plans, a performance bond and the construction permit fee to be paid. All work shall conform to the City of Woodbum Standards and all State Building Codes and regulations. Any off-site, third-party agreements or easements required for this development shall be provided to city staff prior acceptance of the approval. STREET: Thc minimum right of way requirements shall bca 50-fool wide Ibr thc slrccl serving thc cul-de-sac and a 55-1bo1 radius Ibr the cul-de-sac. Provide 10 lbot wide public ulility cascmcnls each side. Thc minirnum improved street width shall be 30 curl's-to-curb for Iht IOA o Ce street and 45 for the cul-de-sac, with sidewalks each side. Brown Street has recently been improved. The applicant, upon completion of installing required services to Lots I through 3, shall mill the existing surface, curb-to-curb at a minimum of depth of i" and inlay with asphaltic concrete. The extent of required milling will be determined by the city upon review of the engineer's construction plan. DRAINAGE: The existing storm sewer main along the southerly and easterly line of Lot 13 can be used to provide service to the proposed cul-de-sac street. This development shall not cause storm water runoffto be impounded on adjacent properties. The existing parcel has a combination of open and underground drainage pattern/system. A grading and drainage plan shall be submitted for review by city prior to final plat approval, This will ensure proper easements or maintenance agreements are conveyed on the plat. The city will not maintained any drainage facilities on private property D. SANITARY SEWER Lots 1 through 3 can be served by the existing sanitary sewer main within Brown Street. Separate service to each lot will need to be installed by the applicant. o Lots 4 through 13 can be served by the existing sanitary sewer main and the end of Robin Street. This is, however, a shallow line and may require the site to be raise to provide gravity service to each lot. Pump stations will not be allowed. The engineer of record shall provide verification that the lots created can be served by the gravity sanitary sewer service prior to final plat approval. E. WATER Domestic and fire protection can be provided by existing 8" diameter water line within the public right-of-way to serve cul-de-sac lots. A fire hydrant shall be installed near the shared driveway to Lot 13. The domestic service to the remaining lots on the cul-de-sac shall be served by the installation of a 4" line to the north end of the cul-de-sac, ending with a blow off assembly. Domestic service for Lots I through 3 can be provided by the existing 8" diameter water on the west side of Brown Street. Meter installation fees shall be paid by the applicant. Fire protection requirements, access, fire hydrant locations and fire protection issues shall bc as per the Woodbrun Fire l)islricl's condilions of approval. ' WOODB URN FIRE DISTRICT Prevention Division Site Plan Revie}v Comments ATTACHMENT B 10A Memo To: Scott clark. Assr. Planner City of Woodburn From: Robert Benck Fire MarShal Date: 03-04-02 Facility/Project Nam'~: T-7 Development Location.. 888 Brown St. Occupancy Class: R-3 A. Access: 1. Exterior of FaCility: Minimum ~lriveable access to within 150 feet of aH sides of any structures is required. Lots 3,5,11,12,13. will need unobstructed 20 foot drive widths long enough to get within the listed access requirement. ~' 2. To Interior of Facility: Meets code requirements 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 dqow/ Water Supply: Minimum fire flow for single family residence under 3600 sq. fi. is 1000 gpm. Hydrants: One hydrant within 250 feet of the property, on or more additional hydrants will be required for cul-d-sac. Existing hydrants on Brown St. are acceptable as long as no lot is more than 250 feet from current hydrants. E. SprinMer/FDC: Residential sprinklers may bc used in place of access requiremenl on llag lois. F. Alarm System: As would be required tbr single Ihmily residence G. Premise Identification: To be visible from public way and meet city of Woodburn standards. Flag lots shall have the address posted at the intersection of the private drive and public road. H. Special Occupancy R~quirements: NA L Building Size & Limitations/Type of Construction: NA. J. Fire and Life Safe.tv Review Requirement: Will be provided by building official. Special Comments: An onsite water supply system must be available, operational and acceptable to the city prior tO the construction of combustible buildings. Access dud~ 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. 10A WOOD'URN FIRE DISTRICT 1776 Newberg Hwy. Woodburn, OF. 97071 (500 9s2-236o Fax (503) 981-5004 Woodtx~rn Recreatio~ and Parks Department · 270 Montgomeqt Strcet· Woodlx~rn. OR 97071 (503) 982-5264 · Fax (503) 982-5244 Memo To~. Scott Glad(, Community Development Department \ D. Raddall Westdck, Recreation and Parks Director Februa~ 28, 2002 Recreation and Parks Department Comments - Zone Change 02-01 & SubdiVision 02-01 - Prospect Park Parks and Recreatidp Facilities Systems Development Charges for single family residential con~ruc'tion on sito ~11 bo as $1,386/single family ~velling unit x 13 units = $18,018 This fee is quoted aS~ of the date on this memo. The City reviews and adjusts these rotes in January of each year. Therefore, this amount could be different when building permits for projects on these parcels are ob[ained. ?, ATTACHMENT MEMO To: For Council Action, through the From: Public WorkS Director ~ Subject: Public Heating on Boones Ferry Road Date: May 8, 2002 RECOMMENDATIOn: Upon completion of the public hearing, direct staffto perform analysis on the public input received and present a recommendation for further council action at the next regular scheduled meeting. 10B BACKGROUND: The City Council initiated the LID process for Boones Ferry Road improvements, instructed staff to prepare the engineering report, which has been reviewed and approved. Council proceeded with the LID process by adopting the resolution of intent to improve. The resolution of intent to im.m'ove established this meeting, May 13, as the date to receive public input from the benefited property owners in the LID. The~ublic hearin8 was properly published in the local newspaper in accordance with Ordinance No. 2105. In addition to lhe legal requirements of notification, notice of the hearing was sent by regular mail to the benefiting property owner of record. After the public hearing has been closed, a determination needs to be made on the percentage of properties that are against the proposed assessment project. Based on this determination the city council will be presented w/th a set of options that the council may consider in their future decision making. Therefore, it is recommended that the city council direct staff to perform analysis on the public input and present the council with options and a recommendation in the next regular meeting of the council. Attachments 1. Out line of LID process PROCESS FORLOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (LID) 1. PROJECT INITIATION: Project is initiated by petition or by action of the City Council lOB RESOLUITION AUTHORIZING AN ENGINEERING REPORT: City Council, by approval of a resolution, directs staff'to prepare an engineers report for the impro?ement ENGINEER!NG REPORT APPROVAL: Engineers report contains, project m need, ethod!ofassessment, cost estimate based on preliminary engineering, Local Improvement District (LID) boundary. The City Council may at this stage direct stafftolprepare a "Resolution of Intent to Improve". RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO IMPROVE: LID boundary and assessments are defined for public process. Public hearing date set with council approval of resolution. ADVERTISEMENT OF PUBLIC HEARING: The City Recorder gives notice meeting legal !equirements of advertising for public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING: City Council holds a public hearing on the project and~Ve Are Here) receives input ifrom the affected property owners. Note: Project can proceed unless the oWners of a majority of the land in the LID file written remonstrances. Ifa sufficient nUmber of written remonstrances are filed, the project must be suspended for ~six months. However, if two thirds (+67%) of the property owners support the improvements, and project was initiated by petition, then City Council can not stop it. CITY COUNCIL DECISION: a. Direct staff to prepare an assessment ordinance b. Direct staffmake modifications to the LID c. Abandon or postponement of the LID "ADOPTION OF THE ASSESSEMENT ORDINANCE: Funding defined. ~!:~COMPLETION OF FINAL ENGINEERING: Final engineering plans, specifications and contract documents are completed. 10. ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS AND 'BID AWARD., The project is advertised and bids are received. The City Council reviews staff recommendation and awards the contract for construction to the lowest responsible bidder. (Note: City may receive bids earlier but contract award can not take place until assessment ordinance has been adopted) II. CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES: Construction takes place under the supervision of the City Engineer. ( Note: This is the time when the public sees project action) 12. FINAL ASSESSMENT ORDINANCE: Upon completion of the improvements the final assessment process is followed. The process requires another public hearing and explanation of payment plan time lines. llA May 13, 2002 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Honorable Mayor and City Council ~/,4~ John C. Brown, City Administrator-''z~'' Maste~r Fee Ordinance Amendment Recommendation: It is recommended the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance Amending Ordinance No. 2300 (The 2001-02 Master Fee Schedule) To Increase the Non- Resident Library Card Fee for Non-Residents of the City Residing Inside the CCRLS System Boundaries. Background: On April 22, 2002, the City Council authorized an increase in the Library fee for non-City residents from $40 per year per household to $60 per year per household. The recommended increase is consistent with the fees that will be ~cl~c~ged by other member libraries in the Chemeketa Cooperative Regional l~ibrary Service (CCRLS) system, effective July 1, 2002. Additional background is contained in the report provided to you by the Library Director in your April 22, 2002 agenda package (Attachment 1). Discussion: Fees for City services, including the Library Fee for non-City residents, are established pursuant to the City's Master Fee Schedule. The Master Fee Schedule Ordinance is updated annually, by Ordinance, typically in the early fall. Because the increase in non-City Library fees has been authorized effective July 1, 2002, an amendment of the Master Fee Schedule is necessary at this time. The attached ordinance amends the schedule to increase the Library fee pursuant to your April 22, 2002 authorization and is provided to you for your consideration and approval. JCB · v ,N Incorporated t889 MEMORANDUM Attachment llA TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and 'rCity Councilors through ~ John Br~wn, City Administrator"'/-/'~'(~ Woodburn ~Public Library Board through Linda Sp~auer, Library Director April 16, 2002 RE: Library Feeifor Non-City Residents BACKGROUND INFORMATION. ~..' For the past 25+ years city libraries in Polk, Yamhill and Madon counties have provided library serviC~es to out-of-city residents through a contract with the Chemeketa Cooperative Regiona! Library Service (CCRLS). This service is supported by city and out-of-city residents through property taxes of eight cents (8¢) per $1,000 assessed valuation, or $8 a year for a $100,000 home. In addition, city residents supporting a public library within CCRLS pay an average of sixty-two cents (62¢) per $1,000 assessed valuation or $62 a year for a $100,000 home. This tax inequity has prompted the larger cities in CCRLS to institute a user fee for out-of-city residents. The CCRLS Advisory Council, library governing boards and city councils, have endorsed this fee. EXPLAINATION: In 1999, several CCRLS libraries, including Woodburn's, began to charge a $10 fee to adjust for the disparity between the amount city and Silver Falls Library District residents were paying for library service when compared to residents of unincorporated areas. The intention during the past three years in moving from $10 per year per household to $25 per year per household, and then to $40 (approx. 75%), was that the library would continue to increase the fee gradually and then move to 100% of parity (approximately $60 per year) in fiscal year 2002-2003. These increases allowed Woodburn to remain consistent with other libraries within CCRLS thus reducing confusion of patrons who encounter different amounts being charged by libraries for essentially the same services and also to bring the library closer to 'equity' with the amount paid by city residents through their taxes for this level of library services. The Woodburn Public Library, along with most other CCRLS libraries, issue Kid's Cards to out-of-city resident youth, ages infant through age 14 instituted as of July 1, 2001. Woodburn Public Library i~.,fO3-g&Z.~1,&J · Fax 50J-9~Z.5.ZS$ RECOMMENDATION: The Woodburn Public Library Board recommendation: The fee Charged for library service to out-of-city residents, beyond the Chemeketa Cooperative Regional Library Service (CCRLS) basic service (one item checked out and one hold at a time per card holder), be increased from $40 per household to $60 per household effective July 1, 2002 for the fiscal year of 2002.2003. To increase me fee, Council will need to amend the 2001-2002 Master Fee Schedule. IlA ll, A COUNCIL BILL NO. 2385 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE A~IENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2300 (THE 2001 - 2002 MASTER FEE SCHEDULE) TO INCREASE THE NON-RESIDENT LIBRARY CARD FEE FOR NON- RESIDENTS OF THE CITY RESIDING INSIDE THE CCRLS SYSTEM BOUNDARIES AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, libraries in the Chemeketa Cooperative Regional Library Service (CCRLS) area are coordinating an, increase in the non-resident library card fee for non-residents of their jurisdiction living inside the CCRLS system boundaries; and WHEREAS, the Woodburn Public Library Board has recommended the fee increase to the City Council of this fee; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF WOODBURN ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Ordinance No. 2300 (the 2001 - 2002 Master Fee Schedule) is hereby amended to increase the non-resident library card fee applicable to non-residents of the City residing inside the CCRLS system boundaries from $40.00 to $60.00 per household for use of the full range of library services. Section 2. 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. Approved as to fonn.~~,('~~ .~"_ ~L.. ~'o O ~ City Attorney 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, City Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page I - COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. City of Woodburn Police Department 270 Montgomery Street STAFF REPORT Woodbum, Oregon 97071 (503} 982-2345 liB Date: From: To: Thru: April 16, 2002 _/ Scott Russell, Deputy Chie[~ Mayor and City Council ,,~ John Brown, City Administrato Subject: Emergency Management Ordinance Recommendation: The City Council adopt the Emergency Management Ordinance Background: City smafl~in cooperation with Marion County Emergency Management and surrounding emergency mervi~viders has developed an Emergency Management Plan as permitted in ORS Chapter 401 and now seeks the enabling of the plan by ordinance. The Ordinance enables the Emergency Management Plan which staff provided to you previously. The plan is a living document that must be reviewed, trained on, and updated on a frequent basis. The plan sets forth a strategy to integrate all emergency preparedness, response, and recovery efforts into a comprehemive emergency management system. It describes the roles and respons~ilities of emergency responde~ and managers fi-om various departments and disciplines. The Ordinance establishes the emergency authority of the City to undertake and direct emergency operations through the plan by: defining an emergency, creating an Emergency Management Agency within the City, implementing the Emergency Plan, designating an Emergency Plan Manager, giving direction on declaring an emergency, assuring City Council oversisht and control in the emergency declaration and emergency management efforts, providing a process for Incident Commanders to make emergency declarations in the field when necessary to save lives, authorizing mandatory evacuations in the rare event they should be required City staff members who are responsible for key positions within the Incident Command System OCS) have been provided base training and will continue to update theh' training and experience by engaging in exercises and training as required in the plan. The plan assures that emergency preparedness and management is perpetual and consistent within the City regardless of changes in staff or programs. llB COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. 2386 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING PROCEDURES TO PREPARE FOR AND CARRY OUT ACTIVITIES TO PREVENT, MINIMIZE, RESPOND TO OR RECOVER FROM EMERGENCIES; PI~OVIDING A PROCESS FOR THE DECLARATION OF A STATE OF EMERGENCY; GRANTING THE AUTHORITY TO ORDER MANDATORY EVACUATIONS; PR~SCRIBING A PENALTY; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, ORS Chapter 401 provides that cities may establish an emergency management agency; and -_".WHEREAS, city personnel have been trained in emergency procedures and have conducted training exe~ises to simulate actual emergencies; and WHEREAS, the Woodbum Emergency Management Plan has been developed and specifies the rules and ~sponsibilities of emergency responders in the city; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the residents of the City of Woodburn to pass this ordinance in accordance with the Woodbum Charter and state and federal law; NOW, THrg EFORE, THE CITY OF!WOODBURN ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Title~ This ordinance shall be known as the Emergency Management Ordinance of the City ot~ Woodburn. Section 2. Purl~ose. The purpose of this ordinance is to provide procedures to minimize injuries to persons and pi'operty and to prepare for, respond to, and recover from any emergency within the incorporated area of the City of Woodburn. This ordinance is implemented by the City of Woodburn Emergency Management Plan. The authority to enact this ordinance is granted by-the Woodburn Charter and ORS Chapter 401. Section 3. Definition of Emergency. "Emergency" is defined pursuant to ORS 401.025(4) as "any man-made or natural event or circumstance causing or threatening loss of life, injury to person or property, human suffering or financial loss, and includes, but is not limited to, fire, explosion, flood, severe weather, drought, earthquake, volcanic activity, spills or releases of oil or hazardous material as defined in ORS 466.605, contamination, utility or transportation emergencies, disease, blight, infestation, crisis influx of migrants unmanageable by the county, civil disturbance, riot, sabotage and war." Section 4. Emergency Management Agency. Pursuant to ORS 401.305, an "Emergency Management Agency" for the City of Woodbum is hereby established as specified Page 1 - Council Bill No. Ordinance No. llB in the City of Woodbum Emergency Management Plan which is incorporated herein by reference. The functions of the Emergency Management Agency include, but are not limited to, program development, fiscal management, coordination with government and nongovernmental agencies and organizations, public information, personnel training and development and implementation of exercises to test the system. Section 5. Eme~ency Management Plan. The procedures to prepare for and carry out any activity to prevent, minimize, respond to or recover from emergencies within the City of Woodburn are set out in the City of Woodburn Emergency Management Plan which is incorporated herein by reference. Section 6. Emergency Program Manager. The City Administrator shall appoint an Emergency Program Maaager who shall be responsible for the organization, administration, and operation of the agency and coordination of emergency activities with county, state, and other governments and private Organizations, subject to the direction and control of the City Council and City Administrator. Section 7. Decla~'ation of State of Emergency. The authority to declare a state of emergency is delegated tO the City Administrator. If the City Administrator is unable to act due to absence or incapacity, the Emergency Program Manager is delegated authority. If in the judgment of the Incident Commander, time does not permit access to the others authorized, the Inci{lent Commander may declare a state of emergency. The City Council shall convene as soon as practical to ratify the state of emergency declaration. The declaration must include a description of the situation, existing conditions, and must delineate the geographic boundaries involved. Section 8. Conditions Required to Declare a State of Emergency. A state of emergency may be declared whenever an event or circumstance exists within the City of Woodburn that meets the definition of an emergency and requires a response under the City of Woodburn Emergency Management Plan. Section 9. Authority_ to Order Mandatory Evacuations. After a state of emergency has been declared, the City Administrator or Incident Commander may order mandatory evacuations of residents and other individuals pursuant to the City of Woodburn Emergency Management Plan if necessary for public safety or the efficient conduct of activities that minimize or mitigate the effects of the emergency. Section 10. Penalty. A. Any person, firm, corporation, association or entity who violates any emergency measure taken under the authority of this ordinance shall be subject, upon conviction, to a fine of not more than $500 per offense. B. Each day of violation shall be deemed a separate offense for purposes of imposition Page 2 - Council Bill No. Ordinance No. I1B' ofpenalty. C. The penalty provisions contained in this ordinance are in addition to and not in lieu of any other procedure~ and remedies provided to the city by law, including equitable relief and damages. Section 11. Se?'erability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is, fo~ any reason, held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such porti{~n shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision, and such holding shall not ~ffect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 12. Emereenc¥ Clause. This ordinance being necessary for the immediate preservation of the public ~eac~, health and safety, an emergency is declared to exist and this ordinance shall take eff~ect immediately upon passage by the Council and approval by the Mayor. Approved as to form'~~m ~D~te7 - ~ O0 '~... ey Approved: Richard Jennings, Mayor Pas$~xl by the Council Submitted to the Mayor~, Approved by the Mayor Filed in the Office of th~ Recorder ATTEST: Mary Tennanti City Recorder ' City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 3 - Council Bill No. Ordinance No. MEMO To: For Council Action, through From: Public Works Director Subject: East Hardcasfle Avenue Improv~nent~)rdinance Date: May 8, 2002, RECOMMENDATIOI~: Approve the attached Ordinance ordering improvements to East Hardee Avenue from Pacific Highway 99E to the East City Boundary and adopting the Local Improvement District for said improvements. llC BACKGROUND: The City Council at the regularly scheduled meeting held on April 22, 2002, closed the public hearing and by motion dhtected staff to analyze the public input received and prepare an ordinance adopting the Local ImprOvement District. Staff tabulated non-remonstrating properties within the district to total 83%, remonstrating properties total 17%. It should be noted that the testimony of all the property owners who had que~ions were counted a~ being against the improvement and they were tabulated as an opponent to the project and included in the remonstrance percentage. Properly advertised public heafiag on the project was held and the governing body received input from the benefiting property owner~ within the Local Improvement DisUict. All legal requiremems have been met and staff analysis indicates the number of remonstrance's received are not sufficient to stop the project. The council options are to 1) Approve the assessment ordinance as presented, or 2) Postpone the decision and/or modify the terms of the ordinance, or 3) abandon the improvement. Staff is recommending Option 1 be chosen by the dty council. COUNCIL BILL NO. 2387 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RI~ AVENUE FROM PAt ADOPTING THE LO CONTRACT AWAR1 ASSESSMENT OF PI DECLARING AN E1V. .LATING TO IMPROVMENTS OF EAST HARDCASTLE ~IFIC HIGHWAY 99E TO THE EAST CITY BOUNDARY, CAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, DIRECTING THE ); PROVIDING FOR PAYMENT OF COSTS THROUGH ~OPERT1ES IN THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT; AND ~ERGENCY. WHEREAS, the City Council considers the improvement of East Hardcastle from Pacific Highw~ 99E to the East City Boundary to be necessary and beneficial; and :~Wi~IEREAS, Tl~e City Council has authority to initiate the Local Improvement District improvement and procedure process as per Ordinance No. 2105, and Wl~REAS, Tl~e City Council instructed the City Engineer to prepare the engineering report for the improvements; and ~ WltERF~S, file City Council reviewed and approved the engineering report on the imln'ovement of East I-lardca,~e on February 11, 2002; WI~.REAS, The City Council by Resolution No 1670, declared it intent to improve though a Local Improvement District process, adopted the method of assessment; and established a date for the public hearing; and WllF~REAS, a public hearing was held on April 22, 2002 to receive input from affected property owners and insufficient remonstrances were received in either written or oral form to prevent such improvemont; NOW, TI~EREFORE, ~ CITY OF WOODBURN ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council deems it necessary and hereby declares its intention to order the following improvements on East Hardcastle. The improvements to be assessed through the Local Improvement District procedure start approximately 295 feet East of Pacific Highway 99E to the East City Boundary. The street is proposed to be widened to 44 feet in width providin8 two travel lanes, one turn lane and a bikelane in each direction. The improvement will be complete with curbs, drainage improvements, installation of the sidewalk on the north side thereby, providing sidewalks on both sides, ADA ramps at all intersections and street lighting. The improved portion, the first 295 lineal feet from Pacific Highway 99E, will also be widened to acco~odate bike lanes however will not be assessed. PAGE 1- COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. llC llC SECTION 2. BOUNDARY OF THE PROPOSED LOCAL IMPROVEMENT D ST CT: The property subject to the assessment of this district will be to those properties within the city boundary, which utilize East Hardcastle for the primary access or a secondary access from a point 295 feet east of the intersection of East Hardcastle and Pacific Highway 99E more particularly ~escribed as follows: Beginning at a point 295 feet east of the intersection of East Hardcastle and Pacific Highway 99E, engineers station 2+95 in the center of East Hardcastle Avenue, said point also being the northwest comer of tax lot 6200, being situated in Section 8, Township 5 South, Range 1 West of the Willamette Meridian, Marion County, Oregon and north of the city boundary~ Thence south along the west line of tax lot 6200 to the southwest comer thereof~ Thence easterly along the south line of said tax lot to the west line of the Sunshine Subdivision; Thence southwesterly along the west line of said subdivision to the southwest comer thereof~ said point also being on the city boundary line. Thence easterly along the city boundary line to the southeast comer of the Greenview Subdivision_ Thence northeasterly along the city boundary line to point on the south line of East Hardcastle; Thence following the city boundary line along the south line of East I-Iardcastle to a point intersecting the southerly extension of the west line of tax lot 4400; Thence northerly along the west line to the northwest comer of tax lot 4400; Thence leaving said city boundary, northerly to the most southeasterly comer oflot 17, block 3, Country Acres Estates; Thence northeasterly along outside boundary line of said subdivision to angle point in the northeasterly line of lot 16, Block 3; Thence northeasterly to the southwest comer of lot 4, Block 3; Thence continuing northeasterly to the southwest comm' of lot $, Block 3, Thence north along the west line of said lot $, to the northwest comer thereo~ Thence southwesterly to the most northwest comer of lot 7, Block 3; Thence northeasterly to the southeast comer of said lot 15, Block 3; Thence northeasterly to the north east comer of said lot 15; Thence northwesterly along the north line of said subdivision to the Northwest comer oflotl2, Block 3; Thence Southwesterly along the west boundary of said subdiv/sion to the southwest comer of lot l, Block 3, Country Acres Estates; Thence southeasterly to northwest comer of the C-reenview Acres . Subdiv/sion; Thence southeasterly along the north line of tax lot 2400 and 1200 to point of intersection with the westerly line of tax lot 900; Thence southwesterly to the southwest comer of tax lot 900 on the south line of East Hardcastle; Thence southwesterly along extension of the west line of tax lot 900 to a point on the centerline of East Hardcastle; Thence east along the centerline of East Hardcastle to the place of Beginning. A map showing the above described district boundary is attached as Exhibit I and those properties within that boundary are identified in Section 3. PAGE 2- COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANC]i NO. SECITON 3 I OPERTIES INCLUDED IN THE LOCAl. PROVEMENT DISTRICT llC MARION COUNTY TAXLOT PROPTERY OWNER MAP # # PROPERI~I=S WlIH PRIMARY ACCESS ASSESSED AT 100% BASED ON BENEFIT 051W08CD 6200 ........ JOH.H R MCKENNEY, TERRY & GLORIA 051W08DC 300 BIGEJ,JACK R & DEANNA 051W08DC 900 JAEGER,CATHERINE M 051W08DC 1000 JAEGER~CATHERINE M 051W0'81DC 1200 JAEGER~HENRY C & JOY L 051W08DC 1300 JAEGER~HENRY C & JOY L 051W08DC 1400 JAEGER~HENRY C & JOY L 051W08DC 1500 JAEGER~HENRY C & JOY L 051W08DC 1600 JAEGER~HENRY C & JOY L 051W08DC 1700 JAEGER~CATHERINE M-TR 051W08DC 1800 JAEGER~HENRY C & JOY L 051W08DC 1900 JAEGER~HENRY C & JOY L 051W08DC 2000 JAEGER~HENRY C & JOY L 0~W08DC 2100 JAEGER~HENRY C & JOY L 051W08DC 2200 JAEGER~HENRY C & JoY L 051WO8DC 2300 JAEGER~HENRY C & JOY L 051W08DC 2400 JAEGER~HENRY C & JOY L 051W08DC 3400 :ALCAZAR~ANACLETO & MARIA 051W08DC 3500 IONKO~PAVEL & KORN~=I ~, 051W08DC 3600 SHUBIN~GEORGE JR & TANYA N 051W08DC 4400 KILMURRAY~MICHAEL & PAMELA 051W08DC 4500 KOROBEINIKOV~IVAN & EUGENIA 051W08DC 4600 MORALFS~SALVADOR D & AMBROClA C 051W08DC 4700 GONZALF~BENJAMIN A 051W08DC 4800 DA GE I I .JAMES L & CAROL L 051W0.8DC 5500 ASCENClO~ROSA M-I= I AL 051W08DC 5700 VALENZUELA~JOSE & LEOBARDA 051W08DC 5800 SAMOILOV~MIKE 051W08DC 5801 CORTFT_~JOAQUIN R & 051W08DC 5802 CONI'~ERAS~GULLERMO & MARIA S 051W08DC 5803 SAMOILOV~MIKE 051W08DC 5900 JAEGER, HENRY C & JOY L 051W08DC 6000 QUALITY PLUS INTERIORS INC 051W08DC 6100 VAN CLEVE, ROBERT ET AL 051W08DC 6101 QUALITY PLUS INTI=RIORS INC 051W08DC 6300 SAMARIN~MICHAEL & TANIA B 051W08DC 6400 SAMARIN~MICHAEL & TANIA B. PAGE 3- COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. MARION COUNTY TAXLOT PROPTERY OWNER MAP # # PROPERITES WITH PRIMARY ACCESS ASSESSED AT 100% BASED ON BENEFIT 051W08DC 6600 SAMARIN~MICHAEL & TANIE B 051W08DC 6700 S^MARIN~MICHAEL & TANIA B 051WO8DC 6800 SAMARIN,MICHAEL & TANIA B 051W08DC 6900 SAMARIN~MICHAEL & TANIA B 051W08DC 7000 SAMARIN~MICHAEL & TANIA B 051W08DC 7100 SAMARIN,MICHAEL & TANIA B 051W08DC 7200 SAMARIN~MICHAEL & TANIA B 051W08DC 7300 SAMARIN~MICHAEL & TANIA B 051W08DC 7400 SAMARIN~MICHAEL & TANIA B 051W08DC 7500 SAMARIN~MICHAEL & TANIA B 051W08DC 7600 HAGENAUER~DONALD L & AGNES 051W08DC 7700 AFANASIEVtVLADIMIR & NATALIA 051W08DC 7800 SANCHEZ~ROSAUO & ROJAS~SILVIA & 051W08DC 7900 SOLANO~LUCIA & 051W08DC 8000 SORIANOrARON P & NORA 051W08DC 8100 BARTOLOtJORGE H & MARIA SARA & 051W08DC 8200 STELLE~SUC~..q .v. DAVIDSON~ LEROY 05'[W08DC 8300 WINDSOR-SMITH 051VV08DC 8400 LOPEZ~ANTIMO .& MA~BEL 051W08DC 8500 HERRERA~HERMEUNDO ET AL 051VV08DC 8600 VASQUEZ-CRUZ~JESUS E & 051W08DC 8700 MENDOZA~CHARLENE A 051W08DC 8800 WINDSOR-SMITH 051W08DC 8900 WINDSOR'SMITH 051W08DC 9000 3OUCHAIN~JORGE LUIS & 051W08DC 9100 SMITH,JUNE E 051W08DC 9200 GREENWELLrJANET M & FLOYD W 051W08DC 9300 HAGENAUER~KAREN ET AL 051W08DC 9400 STONE,FLURRY D & JUANITA 051W08DD 3000 GOODE,JEFFREY F 051W08DD 3100 SUTTER, FRANK A & KAREN J 051W08DD 3200 RIVERA,JOSE 051W08DD 3300 RIVERRA,JOSE & RIVERA~RAUL 051W08DD 3400 MITSUK, ALEXEY & NADF..ZHDA 051W08DD 3500 HURLBERT~JERAN J & REBECCA L 051W08DD 3600 MINGEAR~CLINT A & 051W08DD 3700 GEORGIEFF~ALEX & ANNA 051W08DD 3800 BEST~CHRIS C & KATHLEEN JM 051W08DD 3900 VALIHOV~FEODOR & EVFIMIA 051W08DD 4000 BROWN~SANDRA F 051W08DD 4100 .IVINGSTON~GARY L & CAROLYNE 11C PAGE 4- COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. llC MARION COUNTY TAXLOT PROPTERY OWNER MAP ft # PROPERITES WITH PRIMARY ACCESS i ASSESSED AT 100% BASED ON BENEFIT 051W08DD 4200~ SANDOVAL,VICTORIA 051W08DD 4300 FIRST REFORMED CHRISTIAN MOLOKAN 051W08DD 4600 WYA"I I ~WILLIAM E & SUSAN L 051W08DD4700 ELDREDGE,VESSIE T & RUTH F 051W08DD 4800! DA IS,EDWIN WI~ ~ IS ET AL 051W08DD 4900 SIMPSON,CHARLES L & ELFANOR C 051W08DD 5000 MOREJON,GREG & TANIA R 051W08DD 51001 LISOFF,SOLOMEYA 051W08DD 5200! i ALLISON~JAMES L & CAROLE J 051W08DD 5300 TAYLOR~ELITABP_~H A 051VV08DD 5400~ PEARCE~GARRY A & FRANCES JOYCE 051W08DD 5500', FISCHER~DA ID G & MARY JEAN 051W08DD 5600i KIRSCH~JAMES P & REBECCA J i PROPER¥i~S WITH SECONDARY ACCESS i ASSESSED AT 75% BASI=D ON BENEFIT 051W08DC 2800 i GROSJACQUES~LAWRENCE R & 05~W08DC 2900; THOMPSON~JOSEPH E ET AL , 051W08DC 3000 i HAND, PHILIP J & KATHI_?_I=N M 051W08DC 3100 i LEOStJOSE ISIDRO & ROSALINDA 051W08DC 3200 1 DISHON~TOMMY R & LINDA L 051W08DC 3300, i MARKHAM~JAMES D & 051W08DC 3700 ~ HUTCHINSON~DA ID L & RACHEL B 051W08DC 3800 POWERS~WARREN L & KATHY L 051W08DC 3900 ! COOPER, DOUGLAS L & E! 17_ABETH M 051w08Dc 4000 ',MCPHERSON, DENI$ C ',PROPERTIES WITH SECONDARY ACCESS ASSESSED AT 50% BASF__n ON BENEFIT 051W08DC 2500 CITY OF WOODBURN 051W08D~ 2600 ',IBANEZ, MARIO ULLOA & 051W08DC 2700 , CHAPELLE, FRANK A & LUClLE METAL 051W08DC 4100 , JAMISON,DA LENE J 051W08DC 4200 CARR,KENNE! H H & ELLAMAE 051W08DC 4300 ORANGE,RALPH E 051W08DD 2900 CASTILLO~ARCADIO JR & MISTY LEE PROPERTIES WITH SECONDARY ACCESS ASSESSED AT 25% BAs;=n ON _RENEFIT 051W08DD 700 EATONrROSEMARY 051W08DD 800 HOWELL~LINDA H 051W08DD 900 , SUPINO,EDWARD J & MARY V PAGE 5- COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. llC MARJON COUNTY TAXLOT PROPTERY OWNER MAP # # PROPERTIES WITH SECONDARY ACCESS ASSESSED AT 25% BASED ON BENEFIT 051W08DD 1000 RAYON, ROY E 051W08DD 1100 GUBKIN,ANDREY & 051W08DD 1200 BROWN,EWART F & LINDA G 051W08DD 1300 SCHMIDT~GREGORY L & SHARON P PROPERTIES WITH SECONDARY ACCESS ASSESSED AT 25% BASED ON BENEFIT 051W08DD 1400 RICHARDSON~FAY K 051W08DD 1500 CABALLERO~AMADOR M & JOLINE L 051W08DD 1600 DA IS~JAMES D & MARY M 051W08DD 1700 li SANCHEZ~JESUS E & ROSEMARIE B 051W08DD 1800 RABIMOV~SUKHROB U & MAVJUDA R 051W08DD 1900 DE DIOS~GENARO & SANJUANITA 051W08DD 2000 FARRELL~NANCY J 051W08DD 2100 WYATT~WILLIAM E & SUSAN L 051W08DD 2200 STIGNEI~FEODOR 051W08DD 2300 CITY OF WOODBURN PUBEC PARK 051W08DD 2400 REYES~MARCIAL & CORTE~MARIA 05tflN08DD 2500 CHAVEZ~FRANK C & MARIA C 051W08DD 2600 RIVERA,ANTONIA ET AL 051W08DD 2700 SPARRE~RAYMOND P & PAMELA R 051W08DD 2800 M,,ELLONrFRED WILLIAM & IANTHA 051W08DA 6100 GARDINERtROBERT J & BRENDA J 051W08DA 6200 MURAVIOVtNASTASIA ET AL 051W08DA 6300 CHEREMNOVrSERGEY & MARIA 051W08DD 4300 (CITY PARK) MOLOKAN CHURCH PROPERTIES WITH SECONDARY ACCESS ASSESSED AT 12.5% BASED ON 'BENEFIT 051W08DA 5300 SAMARIN,TANIA B & SPRINGERrV B 051W08DA 5400 RADY,ANDREW A TRUSTEE 051W08DA 5500 CITY OF WOODBURN 051W08DA 5600 CITY OF WOODBURN 051W08DA 5700 DILSAVER,JILL E 051W08DA 5800 MOORE,JULIA D 051W08DA 5900 !MOLODIH~MARK-ETAL 051W08DA 6000 'RENTERIA~JOSE & MAR~ 051W08DA 6400 KOPEIKIN,VASILY O & LUBA 051W08DA 6500 SCHINDLER~DENA M 051W08DA 6600 KEYMOLEN~FRANCISCA & SHEYLA 051W08DA 6700 COFFEY~NANCY R PAGE 6- COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. , llC, SECTION 4 ,P, ROPOSED METHOD OF FUNDING The funding mechanism to accomplish this project includes the following: A. CITY SUPPORT: All cost of improvements beyond the standard 34 feet wide local residential street is proposed to be funded by the city. B. ASSESSMENT AGAINST THE PROPERTIES: Limited to the COst associated with a 34-foot wide residential street in the Local Improvement District. :SECTION PROPERTY BENEFIT DETERMINATION .AND COST ALLOCATION A. PROPERTY BENEFIT DETERMINATION: PRIMARY ACCESS: Properties which have no other route then East Hardcastle to obtain access to their property, shall be defined to have primary access and will be assessed at 100 percent value. SECONDARY ACCESS: Properties which can access their property using East Hardcastle although there is an alternate route other then East Hardcastle for access to there property shall be defined to have secondmy access and the assessment value will vary. DIRECT ACCESS: Properties, which have direct ingress and egress access onto East Hardcastle, shall be assessed an additional cost for approach installation B. PROPOSED METHOD OF ASSESSMENT The proposed method of assessment will be based on a combination of property area, vehicle trips (impact) generated. Secondary access properties will be assessed a prorated cost based on the benefit received, which is based on the location of the property block from the proposed improvements. A fair and equitable method of assessment does need to consider the area of the property, possibility of future development, and the trip generation by the housing units. It is PAGE 7- COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. llC proposed that 25% of the project cost be distributed against the properties based on area, (square footage of property). The remaining 75% of the project cost be distributed to all properties within ~he district based on vehicle trips generated, property impact. PRIMARY ACCESS: Since these properties must utilize the proposed improvements for access 100% of the time, it is proposed that these be assessed 100% of the calculated assessment amount. The assessment amount for properties with primary access will be calculated using the combination of property area and trip generation method stated earlier SECONDARY ACCESS: Since these properties do have another alternate route available, the assessment is proposed to be prorated based on the amount of reduced benefit. The prorated reduced benefit is proposed to be calculated at 75%, 50%, 25% and 1215% of primary access properties based on the location ofthe property block distance from the improvements. DIRECT ACCESS: Primary access properties, that have direct access onto East Hardcastle, are proposed to be assessed a fiat rate amount for the installation of the driveway approach to their property. SECTION 6 Estimated cost of the improved portion to be widened and not assessed. $ 33,223 Bo Estimated cost of the remaining portion to be reconstructed. $ 362,597 TOTAL PROJECT COST Note: Estimated costs include 10 % for contingency SECITON 7 DISTRIRUTION OF PROJECT COST Ae PROJECT COST TO BE FUNDED BY THE CITY Costs which are not to be assessed Estimated capacity cost for additional 10 feet of width and additional structural Thickness $ 79,551 PAGE 8- COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. Estimated cost of the currently improved portion 9fEast Hardcastle to be widened, approximately the first 295' from Pacific 3. Estimated cost of other miscellaneous improve~nents = TOTAL TO BE FUNDED BY THE CITY B. STREET COST TO BE ASSESSED AGAINST THE B~NEFITED PROPERTIES Cost to l~e assessed against the Benefiti0g Properties for a Standard Residential Section Estimat~ Project Cost = Exclude i~imated cost for capacity improve~nent for extra 10 feet of width and strucltural thickness Exclude estimated cost of the currently improved portion to · 1 be vndened, approximately the first 295'from Pacific Highway 99E $ 33,223 3. Other miscellaneous improvements $ 24,226 $ 395,820 -$ 79,551 = -$ 33,223 = -$24,226 STREET COST TO BE ASSESSED (Includes 20 approaches (~ $250 each) SECTION 8 BREAKDOWN OF COST TO BE ASSESSEI~ A. UNIT DETERMINATION FOR METHOD OF ASSESSMENT. DEVELOPED AND UNDERDEVELOPED PROPERITIES 1. AREA UNIT: Based on total square PAGE 9- COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. llC footage of individual parcel or lot. Calculated thq same for both developed or underdeveloped property. TRIP UNIT: Trip units are based on the trip generation rates as de~ermine~.~ by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manuel, 6~ Edition. Developed property is assigned a trip rate based on the current use. Underdeveloped property is assigned a trip rate based on its cu~ent use, at a minimum one single family dwelling or multi family unit depending on the zone. Single Family Residential = 9.57 trips/unit MUlti Family/Duplex = VACAN~ UNDEVELOPED PROPERTIES 6.63 trips/unit ARF~ UNIT: Based on total square footage of individual parcel or lot. Calculated the same for both developed or undeveloped property. TRIP UNIT: Trip units are based on the trip generate rates as Determined by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Goneration Msnuek 60' Edition. Vacant undevdoped property is assigned a trip rate based on one single family dwelling or multi family unit depending on the property zoning. A. AREA COST Total adjusted area of properties within the district 1,239,608.25 sq. ff. The project assessment cost to be distributed using property area. (25% of project cost to be assessed) $ 63,445 3. Cost per square foot = (1)/(2) = $0.05/sq. ft. B. VEHICLE TRIP COST Total number vehicle trips generated Within the entire district. PAGE 10- COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. 1067.59 trips The project assessment cost to distributed using vehicle trips (75% of project cost to be assessed) $190,365 3. Cost per vehicle trip  241,237/1094.16 trips = $178.31/trip ,~NDIVIDUAL ESTIMATED PROPERTy ASSESSEMNTE PROPi~RTIES WITIt PRIMARY ACCESS; 100% ASSESSMENT BASED ON AR~A OF PROPERTY AND TRIPS GENERATED. SECTION 9 T.R.S. TAX dWNER AREA APPROACH TRIP RATE TOTAL MAP# LOT # COST COST COST ASSESSMENT 051W08CD 6200 M. ILLER, J'NHN M,-.~,..,JENNEY 051VV08CX~ 300 BIGEJ,JA~"~R&DEANNA $1,119.41 $250.00 $1,706.45 $3,075.86 $1,868.42 $250.00 $1,182.21 $3,300.63 051W08DC 900 JAEGER, C~THERINE M $936.51 $250.00 $1,182.21 $2,368.7? 051VV08DC. ,1000 JAEGER, C~THERINE M $44:59 $0.00 051W08DC' 1200 JAEGER, HE:NRY C & JOY L $490.55 $2,364.42 $2,854.97 051W08DC 1300 JAEGER, HENRY C & JOY L $490.55 $2,364.42 $2,854.97 -. 051VV08DC 1400 JAEGER, HE:NRY C & JOY L $490.55 $2,364.42 $2,854.97' 051W08DC 1500 JAEGER, HEiNRY C & JOY L $490.55 $2,364.42 $2,854.97 051W08DC 1600 JAEGER, HE NRY C & JOY L $468.23 $2,364.42 $2~832.65 051W08DC 1700 JAEGER,C,~THERINE M-I ~ $~?.5.96 $250.-r"'J $1,182.21 $1,628.17 051W08DC 1800 JAEGER, HE~NRY C & JOY L .$0.00 $0'.00 $0.00 051W08DC 1900 JAEGER, HENRYC&JOYL $651.64 $1,182.21 $1,833.86 051W08DC 2000 JAEGER, HENRY C & JOY L $511.08 $2,364.42 $2,875.50 051W08DC 210.0_~ JAEGER, HENRY C & JOY L $511.08 $2,364.42 $2,875.50 051W08DC 2200 JAEGER, HENRY C & JOY L $511.08 $2,364.42 $,2,875.50 051W00DC 2300 JAEGER, HENRY C & JOY L $472.68 $2,364.42 $2,837.1 '1 051WO8DC 2400 JAEGER,HENRY C & JOY L $579.72 $1,182.21 $11761.93 !051W08DC 3400 ALCAZAR.ANACLETO & $333.'14 $250.00 $1,70~.4.5 $2,289.59 ,'IARIA 051W08DC 3500 IONKO,PAVEL & KORNELA $309.44 $1,706.45 $2,015.89 051W08DC 3600 SHUBIN,GEORGE JR & $365.19 $1,706.45 $2,071.64 'ANYA N 051W08DC ~-,4~00 KILMURRAY, MICHAEL& $354.03 $1,706.45 $2,060.48 ~AMELA 051W08DC 4500 KOROBEINIKOV, IVAN& $402.55 $1,706.45. $2,109.01 2UGENIA ' PAGE 11- COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. llC T.R.S. TAX OWNER AREA APPROACH TRIP RATE TOTAL MAP~ LOT # COST COST COST ASSESSMENT 051W08DC 4600 MORALES,S[ALVADOR D & $313.64 $1,706.45 $2,020.09 ~MBROCIA C GONZALEZ,~ENJAMIN A $317.78 $1,706.45 $2,024.24 051W08DC 4700 051W08DC 4800 DA G~ I,JAMES L & $352.85 $1 $2,059.30 :AROL L 051W08DC 5500 ASCENCIO, I~OSA M-ETAL $847.29 $250.00 $1,706.45 $2,803.74 051W08DC 5700 VALENZUELA,JOSE & $347.58 $250.00 $1,706.45 $2,304.03 ;EOBARDA 051VV08DC 5800 SAMOILOV, I~IIKE $356.79 $1,706.45 $2,063.24 051W08DC 5801 COR¥1=Z,JOJ~QUINR& $468.28 $1,706.45 $2,174.73 051W08Dc 5802 CON I KERA~,GULLERMO & $713.53 $250.00 $1,706.45 $2,669.98 i051W08DC 5803 SAMOILOV, MIKE $1~337.89 $1~706.45 $3~044.34 051W08DC 5900 JAEGER, HEI~IRYC&JOY L $2~241.33 $250.00 $1,706.45 $4,197.79 051W08DC 6000 QUAUTY PL~JS INTERIORS $2,244.15. $250.00 $1,706.45 $4,200.60 NC 051W08DC 6100 VAN CLEVE,~ROBERT ET $624.36 $250.00 $1,706.45 $2,580181 051W08DC 6101 QOAUTY PLUS INTERIORS! $1,917.56 $1,706.45 $3,624.01 NC 051W08DC ~i6300 SAMARIN,MICHAEL & $506.78 $2,364.42 $2,871.20 'ANIA B 051W08DC 6400 SAMARIN,MICHAEL & $460.71 $2,364.42 $2,825.13: 'ANIA B 051W08DC 6500' SAMARIN,MICHAEL & $460.71 $2,364.42 $2,825.13 'ANIA B 051W08DC 6600 SAMARIN,MICHAEL & $525.72 $2,364.42. $2,890.14 'ANIE B 051W08DC 6700 SAMARIN,MICHAEL & $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 'ANIA B 051W08DC 6800 SAMARIN,MICHAEL & $941:68 $2,364.42 $3,306.11 'ANIA B 051VV08DC 6900 SAMARIN,MICHAEL & $633.27 $2,364.42 '$2,997.691 FANIA B 051W08DC 7000 SAMARIN,MICHAEL & $825.28 $2,364.42 $3,189.70' FANIA B 051W08DC 7100 SAMARIN,MICHAEL & $153.57 $0.00 $153.57 rANIA B 051W08DC 7200 SAMARIN,MICHAEL & $562.06 $2,364.42 $2,926.49 rANIA B 051W08DC 7300 SAMARIN,MICHAEL & $491.42 $2,364.42 $2,855.84 ~ANIA B 051W08Dc 7400 SAMARIN,MICHAEL & $460.71 $2,364.42 $2,825.13 ~ANIA B 051W08DC 7500 SAMARIN,MICHAEL&TANIA $506.78 $2,3~,.42 $2,871.20 PAGE 12- COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. 11C T.I~S. TA~ OWNER AREA APPROACH ~i ~JP RATE TOTAL MAP# LOT # " COST COST COST ASSESSMENT '051W08DC 7600 HAGENAUI~R,DONALD L & $920.90 $250.00 $1,706.45 $2,877.35 ~GNES 051W08DC 7700 AFANASlE~/,VLADIMIR & $307.14 $1,706.45 $2,013.59 NATALIA ; 051W08DC 7800 SANCHEZ ~OSALIO & $307.14 $1,706.45 :$2,013.59 =,OJAS,SIU /IA & 051W08DC 7900 SOLANO,LIJClA & $307.14 $1,706.45, $2,013.5(2 051W08DC' 8000 SORIANO,/~RON P & NORA $307.14 $1,706.45 $2,013.59 051W08DC 8100 BARTOLO,,IORGE H & $307.14 $1,706.45 $2,013.59 MARIA SAR A & 051W08DC 8200 STELLE,SLS.~.N DAVIDSON $307.14 $1,706.45 $2,01.3.59 051W08DC 8300 WINDSOR-:~MITH $320.70 $1,706.45 $2,027.15 051W08DC 8400. LOPEZ,AN'I'IMO & MARIBEL $327.61 $1,706.45 $2,034.06 051W08DC 8500 HERRERA, IJERMELINDO $327.61 $1,706.45 $2,034.06 · .-r AL 051W08DC 8600 VASQUEZ-(:RUZ,JESUS E $511.90 $1,706.45 $2,218.35 051W08DC 8700 MENDOZA/:HARLENE A $358.33 $1,706.45 $2,064.78 .051W08DC 8800 WINDSOR~MITH $348.09 '$1,706.45 $2,054.54' 051W08DC 8900 WINDSOR-,'~MITH $320.96 $1,706.45 $2,027.41 051W08DC ,9000 BOUCHAINiJORGE LUIS & 051W08DC 9100 SMITH,JUN~EE $348.09 $1,706.45 $2,054.54 $358.33 $1,706.45 $2,064.78 051W08DC 9200 GREENWEEL,JAN=I M & F $532.37 $1,706.45 $2,238.82 051VVTJSDC 9300 HAGENAU~R,KAREN ~ I $563.09 $250.00 $1,706.45 $2,519.54 051W08DC 9400 STONE, FLIJRRY D & $767.59 $250.00 $1,706.45 $2,724.04 UANITA 05~,?.~32_r~C ~0~. u~=~== ~,~,~^,~, ~!~.RIE $22.32 en ~ e,~,~ 32 '051W08DD' 3000 $302.12 $1,706.45 $2,008.57 051W08DD 3100 SIjI ~R, FR~NKA & $360.58 $1,706.45 $2,067.03 r~,R EN J 051W08DD 3200 RIVERA,JO~E $383.46 $1,706.45 $2,089.91 051W08DD 3300 RIVERRA,JOSE & $111.49 $0.00 $111.49 '~VERA, RAUL, 051W08DD 3400 MITSUK, ALEXEY & $672.99 $1,706.45 $2,379.44 ~ADEZHDA 051W08DD 3500 HURLBERT,JERAN J & $400-15 $1,706.45 $2,106.60 [EBECCA L 051W08DD 3600 MINGEAR,CLINT A & $323.26 $1,706.45 $2,029.71 '051W08DD 3700 GEORGIEFF,ALEX & ANNA $356.69 $1,706.45 $2,063.1~. 051W0SDD 3800 BEsT,CHRIS C & $361.71 $1,706.45 $2,068.16 (ATHLEEN JM 051W08DD 3900 VALIHOV, FEODOR & $314.41 $1,706145 $2,020.86 -'VFIMIA PAGE 13- COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. llC T.R.S. TAX OWNER AREA APPROACH TRIP RATE TOTAL MAP~ LOT # COST COST COST ASSESSMENT 051W08DD 4000 BROWN,SAI~IDRAF $350.90 $250.00 $1,706.45 $2,307.36 051W08DD 4100 LIVlNGSTOI~,GARY L & $302.94 $250.00 $1,706.45 $2,259.39 ',AROLYNE i 051VV08DD 4200 SANDOVAL,~/ICTORIA $359.45 $250.00 $1,706.45 $2,315.90 051W08DD 4300 FIRST REFdRMED $4,260.92 $250.00 $1,706.45 $6,217.37 ;HRISTIAN MOLOKAN 051W08DD 4600 WYAI I,WlL[IAM E & $694.'~.4 $250.00 $1,706.45 $2,650.89 3USAN L 051W08DD 4700 ELDREDGE,~/ESSlE T & $691.21 $1,706.45 $2,397.66 ~UTH F !051W08DD 4600 DA IS,EDWlN WILLIS ETAL $569.13 $1,706.45 $2,275.58 051W08DD 4900 SIMPSON,CI~ARLES L & $550.65 $1,706.45 $2,257.10 -'LEANOR C 05~VV08DD 5000 MOREJON,G~REG & TANIA $708.98 $1,706.45 $2,415.43 051VV08DO 5100 USOFF,SOL,OMEYA $588.68 $1,706.45 $2,295.13 051W08DD 5200 ALMSON,JAMES L& $1,057.37 $1,706.45 $2,763.82 ~AROLE J 051W08DD 5300 TAYLOR, EU~ABETH A $722.95 $1,706.45 $2,429.40 051W08DO 5400 PEARCE,GAJ~RY A & $718.80 $1,706.45 $2,425.25 ;RANCES JOYCE 051W08DD ~5500 FISCHER, DA ID G & MARY $754.74 $1,706.45 $2,461.19 F_AN 051W08DD 5600 KIRSCH,JAMES P & $860.65 $250.00 $1,706.45 $2,817.10 [EBECCA J SUB TOTAL $55,108.02: $5,000.00 $158,999.48 $219,107.50 Be PROPERTIES WITH SECONDARY ACCESS, 75*/. PRORATED ASSESSMENT BASED ON AREA OF PROPERTYAND ON TRIPS GENERATED. T.I~S. TAX OWNER AREA TRIP RATE TOTAL MAP Il LOT # COST COST ASSESSMENT 051W08DC 2800 GROSJACQUES,LAWRENCE R & $309.90 $1,279.84 $1,589.74 051W08DC 2900 THOMPS0,JOSEPH E ET AL $241.91 $1,279.84 $1,521.75 051W08DC 3000 HAND, PHILIP J & KATHLEN M $241.91 $1,279.84 $1,521.75 051WOSDC 3100 LEOS,JOSE ISIDRO & ROSALINDA $241.91 $1,279.84 $1,521.75 051W08DC 3200 DISHON,i'OMMY, R & LINDA L $323.65 $1,279.84! $1,603.48 051W08DC 3300 MARKHAM,JAMES D & $307.37 $1,279.84 $1,587.21 051W08DC 3700 HUTCHINSON,DA ID L & RACHEL B $233.81 $1,279.84 $1,513.65 PAGE 14- COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. . llC, T.I~S. TAX OWNER AREA TRIP RATE TOTAL MAP # LOT # '~ COST COST ASSESSMENT 051W08DC 3800 POWE :~S,WARREN L & KATHY L $234.73 $1,279.84 $1,514.5~ 051W08DC 3900 COOPE!R, DOUGLAS L & ELIZABETH $234.35 $1,279.84 $1,514.18 "051W08DC 4000 MCPHE'.RSON,DENIS C $233.65 $1,279.84 $1,513.49 .SUB TOTAL , $2,603.18 $12,798.38 $15,401.56 C. PROPI~RTIES WITH SECONDARY ACCESS, 50% PRORATED ASSESSMENT BASED ON AREA OF PROPERTYAND ON TRIPS GENERATED. T.I~S. TAX ! OWNER AREA TRIP TOTAL MAP # ::LOT # ' COST RATE ASSESSMENT , COST O'51W08DC: 2500 CITYO~WOODBURN $183.85 $853.23 $1,037.07 051W08DC 2600 IBANF-Z~MARIO ULLOA & $177.70 $853.23 $1,030.93 O51WO8DC 2700 CHAPEI~LE, FRANKA & LUClLE M $268.31 $853.23 $1 121.541 ETAL i , 051W08DC 4100 JAMISON,DA LENE J $174.07 $853.23 $1,027.30 051W08DC 4200 CARR, KENNI-i H H & ELLAMAE $177.37 $853.23 $1,030.60 O51W08DO 4300 ORANGI-_',RALPH E $149.73 $853.23 $1,002.9~ 051WO8DC 2900 CASTILI~O,ARCADIO JR & MISTY LEE $200.54 $853.23 $1,053.7t~ SUB TOTAL ~ $1,331.57 $5,972.58 $7,304.15 PROPERTIES WITH SECONDARY ACCESS, 25% PRORATED ASSESSMENT BASED ON AREA OF PROPERTYAND ON TRIPS GENERATED. T.I~S. TAX OWNER AREA TRIP RATE TOTAL MAP~ LOT # ~ COST COST ASSESSMENT 051W08DD 700 EATON,ROSEMARY $95.66 $426.61 $522.27 051W08DD 800 HOWELL, LINDA H $83.18 $426.61 $509.80 051W08DD 900 SUPINO, EDWARD J & MARY V $83.18 .$426.61 $509.80 051WO8DD 1000 RAYON, ROY E $83.18 $426.61 $509.813 051W08DD 1100 GUBKIN,JkNDREY & $82.52 $426.61 $509.13 051W08DD 1200 BROWN, EWART F & LINDA G $76.82 $426.61 $503.~.~ PAGE 15- COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. ' ' IlC T.I~S. TAX OWNER AREA TRIP RATE TOTAL MAP # LOT # ~ COST COST ASSESSMENT 051WO8DD 1300 SCHMIDI',GREGORY L & SHARON P $90.57 $426.61 $517.18 051W08DD 1400 RICHAR[~::)N,FAY K $118.64 $426.61 $545.26 051W08DD 1500 CABALLf:~ROJ~dADOR M & JOLINE $92.40 $426.61 $519.01= 051W08DD 1600 DA IS,JAIdES D & MARY M $82.25' $426.61 $508.86' 051W08DD 1700 SANCHI=~JESUS E & ROSEMARIE 051W08DD 1800 RABIMO*,SUKHROB U & MAVJUDA $83.18 $426.61 $509.813 $83.18 $426.61 $509.80 051W08DD 1900 DE DIOSiGENARO & SANJUANITA $83.18 $426.61 $509.80 051W08DD 2000 FARREL[.NANCY J $95.66 $426.61 $5~?.27 051V~08DD 2100 WYAI i,¥~ILLIAM E & SUSAN L $89.58 $426.61 $516.19 051WO8DD 2200 STIGNEI, =EODOR $89.58 $426.61: $516.19 051W08DD 2300 ClTY OF ~I/VOODBURN PUBLIC PARK $17173.89 $149.56 $1~323.45 051VVO8DD 2400 REYES,I~ClAL & CORiP. Z, MARIA $89.58 $426.61 $516.19 051W08DD 2500 CHAVP--z4FRANKC&MARIAC $89.58 $426.61 $516.19 !051W08DD 2600 RIVER~ANTONIA~I AL $89.58 $426.61 $516.19 051W08DD 2700 SPARRE,~J~YMOND P & PAMELA R $89.58 $426.61 $516.19 051W08DD 2800 MELLON,FRED WILLIAM & IANTHA $84.78 $426.61 $511.40 051VV08DA 6100 GARDIN~R, ROBERTJ & BRENDAJ . $89.58 $426.61 $516.19 051WO8DA 6200 MURAVlOV, NASTASIA ETAL $89.58 $426.61 $516.19 051W08D~ 6300 CHEREMNov, SERGEY & MARIA $89.58 $426.61 $516.19 051W08DD 4300 (CITY PARK) MOLOKAN CHURCH $589.88 $73.24 $663.12 SUB TOTAL $3,888.41 $10,461.50 $14,349.91 PROPERTIES WITH SECONDARY ACCESS, 12.5% PRORATED ASSESSMENT BASED ON AREA OF PROPERTY AND ON TRIPS GENERATED. T. ES. TAX OWNER AREA TRIP TOTAL MAP~ LOT # COST RATE ASSESSMENT COST 051W08DA 5300 SAMARIN,TANIA B & SPRINGER,V B $82.54 $213.31 $295.85 051W08DA 5400 RADY,ANDREW A TRUSTEE $37.32 $213.31 $250.62 051W08DA 5500 CITY OF WOODBURN $3.15 $0.00 $3.15 051W08DA 5600 CITY OF WOODBURN $3.03 $0.00 $3.03 051W08DA 5700 DILSAVER,JILL E $48.55 $213.31 $261.85 051WO8DA 5800 MOORE,JULIA D $57.65 $213.31 $270.96 051W08DA 5900 MOLODIHiMARK-ETAL $46.13 $213.31 $259.44. 051W08DA '6000 RENTERIA,JOSE & MARIA $44.79 $213.31 $258.10 PAGE 16- COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. . llC T.R.S. TAX OWNER AREA TRIP TOTAL - MAP # LOT # ~ COST RATE ASSESSMENT ! COST 051W0eDA' 6400 KOPEII~IN,VASILY O & LUBA $51.16 $213.31 $264.46 051W08DA 6500 SCHINI~LER, DENA M $44.79 $213.31 $258.10 051W08DA 6600 KEYMOLEN,FRANCISCA & SHEYLA $47.09 $213.31 $260.40 051W0aDA 6700 COFF~'~,NANCYR $57.62 $213.31 $270.93 SUB T(:J)TAL $523.82 $2,133.06 $2,656.89 SECTION 10 ~PAYMENT PLAN FOR ASSESSMENT A ten~year (10)ipayment plan is proposed for the assessment obligation. 11 ~NTEREST RATE ~SECTION The Finance Di~'ector be authorized to develop a schedule and charge an interest rate, which does not ~i~xceed one-half (1/2) percent above the estimated net effective rate of bond sale. Curr¢~ntly this interest rate is estimated at 6.5 percent. SECTION 12 ~gD ,ING METHODS The improvemeht costs for the project will be supported utilizlqg two funding sources, the LID property as,sessments and council approved city support. SECTION 13 I~UNDING SUMMARY PROJECT FUNDING REQUIRED A. CITY SUPPORT $ 395,820 Street CIP East Hardcastle Improvement Traffic Impact Fees Hardcastle: 99E - Cooley $ 70,000 $ 67,~00 SUB TOTAL B. LID PROPERTY ASSESSMENTS $ 253,820 C. LID APPROACH ASSESSMENTS $ 5,000 SUB TOTAL= FUNDING TOTAL = PAGE 17- COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. 7¸ T SECTION 14 MAXIMUM LIMIT OF ASSESSMENT AMOUNT It is proposed that the assessment amounts shown in this document be fixed as the maximum amount to be assessed against the properties for the said improvement. Any cost over runs will be absorbed by the city. SECTION 15 CONTRACT METHOD The contract awed will be in conformance with public contracting laws of the State of Oregon as outlined in ORS Chapter 279 and the laws, regulations of the City of Woodburn SECTION 16 AUTHORIZATION OF BOND SALE The Finance DireCtor is hereby authorized to proceed with the sale of bonds and/or the issuance of general improvement warrants to finance the assessment portion of the project. Staff is further authorized to utiliT~ interfund borrowing until bond sale is needed. SECTION 17 DE~G AN EMERGENCY 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. City Attorney Date Approved: Passed by Council Submitted to the Mayor Approved by the Mayor Filed in the office of the Recorder Attest: Mary Tennant, City Recorder City of Woodbum, Oregon PAGE 15- COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. Richard Jennings, Mayor llC 11D COUNCIL BILL NO. 2388 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE ELIGIBILITY OF THE CITY OF WOODBURN TO RECEIVE STA'rE-SHARED REVENUES DURING FISCAL YEAR 2002-2003. WHEREAS, Oregon Revised Statutes 221.760 provides that the officer responsible for disbursing funds to cities under ORS 323.455,366.785 to 366.820 and 471 .g05 shall, in the case of a city located within a county having more than 100,000 habitants according to the most recent federal decennial census, disburse such funds only if the City provides four or more of the following services: (I) Police protection, (2) Fire protection, (3) Street construction, maintenance, and lighting, (4) Sanitary sewer, (5) Storm sewers, (6) Planning, zoning, and subdivision control, and (7) one or more utility services, and WHEREAS, City officials recognize the desirability of assisting the state officer responsible for determining the eligibility of cities to receive such funds in accordance with ORS 221.760, now, therefore, f~ollowing four THE CITY OF WOODBURN RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the City of Woodburn hereby certifies that it provides the or more services enumerated in ORS 221.760: (1) (9_) (3) (4) (5) (6) Police protection; Street construction, maintenance, and lighting; Sanitary sewers; Storm sewers; Planning, zoning, and subdivision control; and One Utility service. Approved as to Form: City Attorney 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, City Recorder City of Woodbum, Oregon Page I - Council Bill No. Resolution No. s T MEMO To: For Council Action, through the City Administrator~ From: Subject: Date: Randy Scott, Senior Engineering Technician, though the Public Works Director Contract award for East Hardcastle Street Improvement May 8, 2002 RECOMMENDATION1 Upon passage of the East Hardcastle Avenue Improvement Ordinance; It is being recommended the City Council award the construction contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Wayne Jeskey Construction in the amount of $309,091.12, for the East Hardcastle Avenue Street Improvement. BACKGROUND: The contract is in conjunction with Project No. 2001-011-45, Bid No. 22-22, for Street improvements to East Han:lcastle Avenue from State Highway 99E to the East City Boundary. East Hardcastle will be constructed 44 feet in width, providing two travel lanes, one turn lane and a bikdane in each direction. The improvement will be complete with curbs, drainage imptx:wements, installation of the sidewalk on the north side thereby, providing sidewalks on both sides, ADA ramps at all intersections and street lighting. The bid award includes system expansion of the existing water main and sanitary sewer main. The improvements are identified in the Capital Improvement Program. The project will be funded through budgeted city funds and LID property assessments. Staffreceived a total of fourteen qualified bids as listed below 1. Wayne Jeskoy Construction $309,091.12 2. G-~lco Constnx~on $336,670.00 3. D & D Paving $341,092.16 4. C R Woods Trucking $342,959.49 5. Parker Northwest Paving $350,249.10 6. Emery & Sons $356,895.25 7. Valley Pacific Construction $365,054.90 8. Morse Bros. $366,359.00 9. North Sanfiam Paving $369,395.50 10. Kerr Contractors $393,349.25 11. Roy Houck Construction $401,414.20 12. Canby Excavation $409065.09 i 3. Salem Road & Driveway Co. $440,068.70 14. Dirt & Aggregate $489,761.60 Engineers Estimate $395, 820 The low bidder is 23% below the engineer's estimate (excluding the 10% contingency and including $46,081 for system expansion) as identified in Section 6 of the Resolution 1670, Intent to Improve; therefore staff is recommending the eonUaet be awarded. llE Attadunent "A~ is a Proje,~t Location Map // CITY OF WOODBURN Community Development 270 Montgomery Street MEMORANDUM Woodburn, Oregon 97071 (5O3) 982-5246 Date: May 13, 2002 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council thru City Administrator From: Jim Mulder, Director of Community Development ~/'~/ // Subject: PI.anning Commission's Action on Variance 0~Y-01, a request for a minor variance to reduce the required rear yard setback on a single- family r~idential lot. At their regularly-scheduled meeting on April 25, 2002, the Planning Commission accepted the Planning Director's decision to approve a minor variance to reduce the required rear yard setback on a single-family residential lot located in the Heritage Park Phase 3 Subdivision. This decision is final unless the City Council calls this decision up for review. Applicant: Melin & Associates 265 Commercial St SE, Suite 250 Salem, OR 97301 Property Owner: Hidden Creek Apartments, LLC P.O. Box 13427 Salem, OR 97309 NATURE OF APPLICATION: The applicant requests an adjustment (i.e. minor variance) to reduce the required rear yard setback on a single-family residential lot from 24 feet to 20 feet. The request was made so that a home of reasonable size could be placed on an odd-shaped lot. The Woodburn Zoning Ordinance only allows a four (4) foot rear yard adjustment for a single-story home. RELEVANT FACTS: The subject property is located on the southwest corner of the Heritage Park Phase 3 Subdivision (Lot 96) at 2503 Roanoke Street. It can be further identified on Marion County Assessor Maps as Township 5 South, Range 1 West, Section 7BA, Tax Lot 11000. The subject lot is 6,254 square feet in size and is currently vacant. The lot is zoned Single-Family Residential (RS) District. The adjacent lots to the north, south, and east (opposite side of Roanoke) are zoned RS, and the adjacent lots to the west are zoned Residential (RIS) District. The lots to the west are part of the Senior Estates 14A Subdivision. All surrounding uses consist of single and two-story homes on single- family lots. With the rear yard Setback reduced to 20 feet, the applicant will construct a home approximately 1,460i square feet in size with an attached garage approximately 500 square feet. The home is proposed to be a single-story. 14A 2 o MARION COUNTY URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROJECT March 1999 - June 2002 Outline of Presentation to Cities Background on the Countywide Growth Management Project ao County coordination role Cities, unincorporated communities, rural service centers in the County Projected County growth and the growth management planning effort Public Involvement and Engaging the Cities in the Planning Process ao Stakeholder group, technical committee, and city participation Coordination of planning efforts and growth projects by the cities Citizen involvement (workshops, surveys, focus groups) Marion County Growth Management Framework a° Co Preferred alternative growth scenario Growth focus issues (transportation, environment, economy, housing) and goals, policies, and standards Subareas, boundary expansions, land efficiency, population/employment forecasts Implementation Strategy a° City support for countywide approach to growth management County adoption of growth management framework as part of comprehensive plan Intergovernmental agreements or compacts between county and cities Adoption of applicable growth management elements during periodic review County coordination and monitoring of growth management framework Questions and Answers Funding for this project was made available by grants from DLCD and OECDD. · · · · · · · 0 0 Z < < o~ mo oo ~Z DO O~ <~ ©Z · · · · · · · · · · · · · Comparison of population projections and potential effecl on Urban Growth Boundaries Acres Needed for Framework Proposal 1997 (Includes Population estimated base 2000 From 2020 Framework employment UGB 3opulation Census forecast Proposal need) Aumsville 2,820 3,083 5,010 8,000 346.38 Aurora 675 655 930 1,500 (7.16) Detroit 380 262 535 605 (4.07) Donald 630 608 1,050 2,200 169.21 Gates 489 429 800 1,100 (78.03) Gervais 1,220 2,009 2,168 3,572 186.09 Hubbard 2,205 2,483 3,105 3,300 74.10 Idanha 200 1~4 230 250 (98.06) Jefferson 2,300 2,487 2,895 3,700 23.64 Mill City 310 313 420 426 (14.67) Mt. Angel 3,020 3,121 4,365 4,755 (3:94) SalemlKeizer 137,295 151,337 215,874 342,387 1,669.00 Scotts Mills 315 312 420 430 (23.35) Silverton 6,675 7,414 9,965 13,500 (26.73) St. Paul 350 354 475 47~5 (55.61) Stayton 6,290 6,675 9,250 10,600 (218.59) Sublimity 2,145 2,148 3,590 3,836 0.01 Turner 1,330 1,199 2,363 2,451 71.60 Woodb urn 16,150 20,100 26,290 38,000 548.60 Totals - Marion County Portion Only - Excluding Salem 47,504 53,786 73,861 98,700 1,419.62 :subregional :snaring - Flexible Target I S% Above or Below n ! I Low Target IHigh Target Marion County Criminal Justice System Gaps in Service Components of the Marion County Criminal Justice System p Enforcement · Marion County Sheriff's Office · City police departments · State police · Federal law enforcement P Disposition · Marion County District Attorney's Office · Courts P Offender Management/Supervision : Marion County Juvenile Department Marion Count y Juvenile Detention Facility · Marion County Jail · Marion County Parole & Probation Div islon · Marion County Health Department-m ental health MAR[ON COUNTY Marion County Enforcement Services Marion County Sheriff's Office Enforcement Division Purpose Statement To ensure the safety and security of all citizens in Marion County by vigorous enforcement of criminal and traffic laws, criminal investigation, and emergency response. Summary of Curr ent Services ~ Criminal Enforcement ~ C~ourt Security for 13 ~ Traffic Enforcement cpurts ~, Civil Process ~ C~oncealed Handgun ;, Prisoner Transport ,ermlts P Detectives ~ flearch and Rescue ~ MAGNET-Drug & Gang ~ ,~nimal Control Enforcement Unit ~ Marine Enforcement K-9 Unit P Threat~ Management Unit Special Response ~ ~chool Resource Officers Team ~ Reserve/Cadet Units Warrants ~ Bomb Technician Restraining Orders t~ Polygraph Examiner Forest Patrol Responsibilities State City County Criminal Laws Traffic Laws Crime Prevention ~ ~) ~ ) Jail/Work Center Civil Process Prisoner Transport Court Security Search & Rescue Animal Control Parole & Probation Marine Enforcement Warrant Management Restraining Orders ~ ~) Marion County Population, Calls for Service, and Number of Sheriff's Deputies per 1000 People 93,345 94,O68 27,261 28,~47 29,708 1.6 Pop Served 1.6 1.6 I 3~E Calls Service [~ State Avgll000 [] Depuflesl~ 000 Enforcement Gaps Inadequate Number (~f Staff · Staffing analysis recommends 72 more deputies be added to !reach state patrol staffing avg · Reactive response to calls vs. proactive · Direct countywide services · Patrol to 15 cities · Court services to 13 courts · Prisoner Transport · Civil process What Does this Means for You? ¢ Increased crime and victimization · Delayed response to calls · Avg 9+ minutes response to high priority calls · Low investigation clearance/resolution rates · In 2001 only 8.2% of cases have been closed · Less services with dwindling resources · Patrol · Drug/Gang Enforcement-MAGNET · School Resource Officers · Animal Control In Addition... FY 02-03 Initial I~, commendations for Budget Reductions Elimination of Animal Control Closure of South Distdct Office (Stayton) Closure of the North District Office (Woodburn Reduction of temp-hire funds Impact on MAGNET staffing Marion County District Attorney's Office 4 Marion county District Attorney'S Office Purpose Slatement To ensure public safety and hold offenders responsible by vigorously prosecuting criminal offenses and pursuing appropriate sanctions; to assist victims of violent cdme. Summary of Current Services Prosecution of criminal t~ Child Abuse Review cases Team Cooperation with other ¢ Fire Investigation criminal justice Team agencies ¢ Search warrant Victim support services review Promote accountability ¢ Homicide Assault Response Team Federal Agencies Oregon State Police Juvenile Facilities Marion County Shedff Oregon State Hospital Prisons State Agencies Victims City Police District, tAttorney Community Service Parole Corrections Jail OY A Work Center Prison i~¥enile Detention Probation Maclaren Disposition Gaps Prosecution · 10,000 criminal cases processed annually · Unable to prosecute 300 felony narcotics cases and hundreds of misdemeanor cases each year, due to budget constraints Victims Services · Over 60 Victim Advocates · Victim Advocates assigned to 2,336 victims · Restitution in 3,336 cases ~ [ · Need for more volunteers is critical~~ 5 Personnel Issues · Average caseload of a piosecutor 60+ cases open at all times Approximately 250 felony cases or 600 misdemeanor cases pertprosecutor each year Less than 6 paid hours per case Diminished Resources · Lost 1 lawyer & 1 secret~ry to current cuts · Potential of 750 felonlesior 1800 misdemeanors will not be filed, giving immunity to 2~ and 3'd time offenders In Addition... FY 02-03 Initial Recommendations for Budget Reductions Eliminate positions · Deputy DAs · Legal Secretaries Note: Each Deputy DA position prosecutes 250 felonies or 600 misdemeanors per year Marion County Sheriff's Office Adult Supervision Department Marion County Sheriff's Office Adult Supervision Division Purpose Statement To ensure public safety and security by providing a maximum security jail facility and supervision of offenders on probation and parole in the community; reduce reoffending by requiring supervision, education, treatment, and employment for offenders. 6 Summary of Current Services Maximum security jail ¢ ~nmate work programs with a capacity of 528 ¢ prisoner HUB center Work Center Facility ¢ Day Reporting Adult Parole & ¢ Electronic monitoring Probation Supervision ¢ Medical unit Offender treatment & ¢ Forest Work Crew education programs ¢ Community service Adult Jail Gaps Marion County Corrections Facility (Jail) . National Institute of Corrections staffing analysis show an additional 12 deputies and 3 facility security aide positions are needed · Loss of state release officers · In a recent study, 17-20% of inmates have a severe mental Illness and need treatment · Number of Inmates lodged continues to grow · Number of offenders released early has increased o¥~ MCCF Number Lodged, Early Population Releases, and Cite & Release 16,120 1&~480 16, S95 '1 On average, for each ~ offender brought to the jail I is lodged and I is released ·Admitted J'u199-Jun DO 4c Jul O0-Jun Ol · Cite & Relea~ Pop Release *Begin 528 Capacity Mgmt Plan Jail Staffing & Capacity Breakdown 528 528 528 290 295 295 ..... '~- ....... & ........... a,- ........ ~- .... 11'5 6 124'8 436.4..t38.4...lJ4G,4 1020 101 5 '105.9 406.9 107.9 .-,* .....H--t----H'--' ' 11.38 11.84 11.4 6.87 6.8 7.65 8.44 8.5 9.32 Closure of Work Center · Loss of 144 inmates I~eds within one year · Increased demand fo~ existing jail beds · Sanction alternatives ~ellmlnated · Interim custody releases reduced (population management) i · Offender transition sdrvices diminished Adult Parole & Probation Gaps Staffing analysis recommends 20 more P&P deputies are needed for adequate supervision Offenders on supervision increased by 37% in the last 7 years Treatment services not available for all offenders · 70% of offenders need alcohol and/or drug treatment · A&D treatment slots are available for 30% of the projected 2,450 offenders In need · Alcohol & Drug treatment funding at the same rate as developed in 1997 History of Parole & Probation 3681 Caseload & S~aff Rates 2714 1994 1995 1996 1997 1B98 1999 2000 2001 -.~-#ofQlen~onSuper~4slon --'~lr~#ofParole/PmbadonOfficem In Addition... FY 02-03 Initial Recommendations for Budget Reductions. Complete closure of the Work Center (Total of 144 beds since July 1,2001 ) Closure of 50% of G Pod at the Jail - (64 beds) Reduction of 208 inmate beds (within 1 year) 8 Marion County Juvenile Department Marion County Juvenile Department Purpose Statement To enhance public safety and community justice by providing accountability and reformation of youth. Detention/Intake Diversion Probation Alternative Programs Juvenile Department Services ¢ Education Programs ¢ Guaranteed Attendance Program ¢ Day Reporting Center P Counseling ¢ Family Support Program Juvenile Department Gaps Detention/Intake · Lack community options for services · Psychiatric · Drug/alcohol detox & treatment · Number of beds/staffing level · Lack of services due to space and funding · Alternative placements · Long-term treatment · Short-term evaluation & treatment Diversion · Lack of staff for assessing early stages of delinquency Probation · Lack of community resources · Service delivery not s~amless · Lacking parental acco~Jntability Education Programs · Inadequate facilities fc~r classes Guaranteed Attendanc~ Program · Insufficient number o¢ counseling staff Alternative Work Programs· Need incentive for employers to hire · Lack of integration into the job market · More time needed for "employee" skill development Day Reporting Center · Limited openings Counseling · Inadequate number of staff ~ waiting lists Family Support Program · Inadequate number of staff ~ waiting lists In Addition... FY 02-03 Initial R~commendations for Budget Reductions Eliminate positions · Probation officers · Group workers (detention & day reporting) · Youth and Family Counselor · Probation Supervisor Closure of Stayton & Woodburn Offices Closure of day reporting center Marion County Budget Status ¢ FY 02-03 projected reductions are not final ¢ Work continues to develop revenue enhancing.and cost saving strategies 10 Some Questions... What is the level of services expected by the public? How do we sustain/maintain a balanced criminal justice system in Marion County? Who should decide these issues? WHICH WAY? Contact Information Marion County's Web Site: www.open.orgl~marion/ Mike Ryan, Commissioner Phone: 503-588-5212 E-mail: mryan@open.org Raul Rarnirez, Sheriff Phone: 503-588-7971 E-mail: rramirez@open.org Dale Penn, District Attorney Phone: 503-373-4373 Larry Oglesby, Juvenile Depa'tment Director Phone: 503-588-5291 E-mall: Ioglesby@open.org From: To: Date: Subject: "welcome" <welcome@woodburnchamber.org> "Walt Blornberg" <wblomberg@woodburn. k12.or, us> Fri, May 10, 2002 2:53 PM City Council meeting Hi Walt! This is a reminder about thb City Council meeting Monday evening at 7:00 Do you still have the office S, tabst~cs from the Board meeting? That was a great idea to tell the council how busy we are. Upcoming events are: Annual Golf outing on Friday, May 17, at Senior Estates. Shotgun start at 1:00pm, lunch and dinner are provided. Three chances to win a car from the Big Three Auto Dealers, Hershberger's, Hillyer's and Miles. Lots of prizes and businesses will be giving away gifts at every hole. Tuesday, May 21, the Leadership Youth will be building playground equipment at the City's Front Street Park for their community serVice project and on Wednesday, May 22, they will graduate at the Forum Lunch, Rose Room of the Woodburn Crossing Conference Center. Thanks for all you do- Rhonda Judson Woodburn Area Chamber of Commerce MEMO To: For Council Action, through the Ci~( .Adc_n~strato ~ From: Public Works Director ~.. ~ Subject: Public Hearing on Boones F~'~ Road~LID ~ Date: May 8, 2002 RECOMMENDATIOi~: Upon completion of the public hearing, direct staffto perform analysis on the public input received and present a recommendation for further council action at the next regular scheduled meeting. BACKGROUND: The City Council initiated the LID process for Boones Ferry Road improvements, instructed staff to prepare the engineering report, which has been reviewed and approved. Council proceeded with the LID process by adopting the resolution of intent to improve. The resolution of intent to improve established this meeting, May 13, as the date to receive public input from the benefited property owners in the LID. The public hearing was properly published in the local newspaper in accordance with Ordinance No. 2105. In addition to the legal requirements of notification, notice of the hearing was sent by regular mail to the benefiting property owner of record. After the public hearing has been closed, a determination needs to be made on the percentage of properties that are against the proposed assessment project. Based on this determination the city council will be presented with a set of options that the council may consider in their future decision making. Therefore, it is recommended that the city council direct staffto perform analysis on the public input and present the council with options and a recommendation in the next regular meeting of the council. Attachments 1. Out line of LID process ¥ 1' MEMO From the office of the City Attorney TO: FROM: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL CITY ADMINISTRATOR N. ROBERT SHIELDS, CITY ATTORNEY BOONES FERRY ROAD LID CONTENTS OF HEARING RECORD DATE: MAY 13, 2002 RECOMMENDATION: After the receipt of public testimony, pass a motion to leave the record open until 5:00 p.m. on May 22, 2002 to allow Planning and Engineering staff to supplement the record in the manner described below. BACKGROUND: Under Oregon land use law, road construction accomplished through the formation of a local improvement district (LID) is sometimes held by courts to be a "land use decision." Even when there is no direct application of land use regulations, a court can find a "significant impact land use decision" when the decision creates an actual, qualitatively or quantitatively significant impact on present or future land uses. After reviewing the material included in your May 13, 2002 City Council packet, I discussed it with the Engineering and Planning Departments. The road improvement contemplated by the Boones Ferry Road LID does not appear to be a significant impact land use decision because it involves the planned improvement of an existing road in a largely developed area. However, in my opinion, the present record is legally deficient because it does not address this. Rather than simply leaving the record deficient, the Council has the option of taking testimony and leaving the record open so that Engineering and Planning staff can adequately address these issues. Council discussion would then occur at your next meeting. NRS/kv Public Hearing A. Zone Change 02-01 Subdivision 02-01 - A ! 3-1or subdivision of property located ar 888 Brown Street PUBLIC TESTIMONY SIGN-IN SHEET PROPONENTS PLEASE PRINT YQUR NAME AND ADDRESS IF YOU WISH TO TESTIFY IN FAVOR. NAME ADDRE_$S Public Hearin~ B. Boones Ferry Road Local lmprovemen~ Dis~ric~ PUBLIC TESTIMONY SIGN-IN SHEET//~ OPPONENTS PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS IF YOU WISH TO TESTIFY IN OPPOSITION. NAME ADDRESS ,/ PROCESS FORLOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (LID) PROJECT INITIATION: Project is initiated by petition or by action of the City Council RESOLUITION AUTHORIZING AN ENGINEERING REPORT: City Council, by approval ora resolution, directs statTto prepare an engineers report for the improvement ENGINEERING REPORT APPROVAL: Engineers report contains, project need, method 0fassessment, cost estimate based on preliminary engineering, Local Improvement District (LID) boundary. The City Council may at this stage direct stalTto prepare a "Resolution of Intent to Improve". RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO IMPROVE: LID boundary and assessments are defined for public process. Public hearing date set with council approval of resolution. ADVERTISEMENT OF PUBLIC HEARING: The City Recorder gives notice meeting legal requirements of advertising for public hearing. PUBLIC HEARING: City Council holds a public hearing on the project and ~{We Are Here) receives input from the affected property owners. Note: Project can proceed ~ unless the owners of a majority of the land in the LID file written remonstrances. Ifa sufficient number of written remonstrances are filed, the project must be suspended for six months. However, if two thirds (+67%) of the property owners support the improvements, and project was initiated by petition, then City Council can not stop it. CITY COUNCIL DECISION: a. Direct staffto prepare an assessment ordinance b. Direct staff make modifications to the LID c. Abandon or postponement of the LID 8. ADOPTION OF THE ASSESSEMENT ORDINANCE: Funding defined. COMPLETION OF FINAL ENGINEERING: Final engineering plans, specifications and contract documents are completed. 10. ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS AND 'BID AWARD: The project is advertised and bids are received. The City Council reviews staff recommendation and awards the contract for construction to the lowest responsible bidder. (Note: City may receive bids earlier but contract award can not take place until assessment ordinance has been adopted) 11. CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES: Construction takes place under the supervision &the City Engineer. ( Note: This is the time when the public sees project action) 12. FINAL ASSESSMENT ORDINANCE: Upon completion of the improvements the final assessment process is followed. The process requires another public hearing and explanation of payment plan time lines. I Sel!l~ g'O g~:'O I I 0 g~'0 /eMq6!H el~lS N elelsJelUl N S~SMq6!H pu ep, eNvJe^!~/ue!Jed!~i/JeleM ~ U!eldpool:l ~ deels slu!eJlSUOO lelueLuuoJ!^u~l I'1:1/~1~1 ~ I'1_-I:1 ~ spue-I leJn~l uo 6u!uoz iueJJno SlOlXe.L uo!suedx3 BE)lq JO,~ peJep!suoo eeJ¥ :~,;:~ B~DI'I 6u!ls!x~ ~ ~t:~o~:~m~cI ;u~m~U~l~ ql~o:~D /aunoD uo.t~I~I t ~'""e e~'~o '-,e(~.....,,: ' ' o~ _. __.. 3 -I~ ~_--'.~.,'" o E] u) I:: _--.G J;) el) ~.Cl) '0 ~ ::3 ~'- (,,,-,_.~)o O~o ~.~ ~ ~. o~ 0~0 _-~ ~0' _~n,~ ~ ~ 0 =e =o~e '~' W e O~ n~ ~---- _.. _-_..o~. =.. ~' o_. o o~=~ 8 ~ 0 ~ ~ ~. 0 O0 ~00 0 o o -- ..~ (D 0 o 0 0 cf o ~ 0 0 0 0