The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda - 01/27/2003 WOODBURN CiTY COUNCIL AGENDA JANUARY 27, 2003 7:00 PM CALL TO ORDER AND FLAG SALUTE ROLL CALL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND APPOINTMENTS Announcement: A. Author lecture and book signing, February 2, 2003, 12:00 to 4:00 p.m. at City HalIL K. P. Burke of Salem has written a book, "Proof Through the Night," about her father's experiences as B-29 fighter pilot and a prisoner of war id Japan during WW II. This book is an Oregon Book Award Finalist. Special Election, January 28, 2003: Woodburn City Hall is a designated Marion County ballot drop site during regular business hours. On election day, ballots can be dropped off until 8 p.m. Co · - High School Teen Scene opens February 18, 2003, 3:15 p.m., at Legion Park. · - Middle School Teen Scene opens March 3, 2003, 3:30 p.m., at Settlemier Park. Details on ribbon cutting ceremonies will be announced at the February 10, 2003 City Council Meeting. Appointments: None PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS Proclamations: A. Catholic Schools Week, January 26-February 1, 2003 ................................... 1 Presentations: B. Livability Task Force Property Pride Awards - 1445 Alexandra Avenue C. Tax Increment Revenue Projections, Woodburn Urban Renewal Area .......... 2 Council Agenda of January 27, 2003 Pagei "[ ! 5. COMMITTEE REPORTS o 10. A. Chamber of Commerce B. Woodburn Downtown Association COMMUNICATIONS None BUSINESS FROM THE PUBLIC (This allows the public to introduce items for Council consideration not already scheduled on the agenda.) 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 file request of a Council member. Bo Woodburn City Council minutes of January 13, 2003 regular ........................ 14 and executive sessions Recomn~ended Action: Approve the Woodburn City Council minutes. Status of Alley Sewer Project ........................................................................ 32 Recommended Action: Receive the report. TABLED BUSINESS None. GENERAL BUSINESS Ao Council Bill 2430 - Ordinance granting Portland General Electric ................ 33 Company, an Oregon Corporation, a nonexclusive franchise for ten years to operate an electric light and power system within the corporate limits of the City of Woodburn, fixing the terms and conditions; providing an effective date; and repealing Ordinance No. 2109. Recommended Action: Adopt the ordinance. Bo Council Bill 2431 - Ordinance denying Comprehensive Plan Map ................ 59 Amendment Application Case No. 01-03 and Zone Change Application Case No. 01-07 affecting property located at 373 Gatch Street. Recommended Action: Adopt the ordinance. Council Agenda of January 27, 2003 Page ii 11. 12. 13. Council Bill 2432 - Ordinance approving Residential Architectural .............. 79 Standarc~ Substitution Application Case No. 02-02 affecting property Iocated~t 1084 Comstock Way. Recommended Action: Adopt the ordinance. Council Bill 2433 - Resolution authorizing execution of a Mobile .................. 87 Data SyStem Agreement between the City of Woodburn and the City Of Silverton. Recommended Action: Adopt the resolution. Eo Council I~ill 2434 - Resolution authorizing execution of a Police ................... 94 Records Management System Agreement between the City of Woodburrn and the City of Mt. Angel. Recommended Action: Adopt the resolution. Council Bill 2435 - Resolution authorizing City of Woodburn to .................. 102 Participate in the League of Oregon Cities 2003 PERS Rate Challenge. Recommended Action: Adopt the resolution and authorize the City Recorder as the City's contact person for information regarding the City's participation as a PERS employer. Go Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreement- City of Woodburn ................. 109 & Woodburn School District. Recommended Action: Authorize the City Administrator to sign the Intergovernmental Agreement with the Woodburn School District. Acceptance of Public Rights of Way, Arney Lane ....................................... 114 Recommended Action: Accept the public rights of way for the future extension of Arney Lane. Acceptance of Utility Easement, Harvard Meadows Apts ............................ 118 Recommended Action: Accept the water line easement. Position Allocations - Part-time Teen Scene Staff ...................................... 122 Recommended Action: Allocate two part-time Program Manager and six part-time Recreation Leader positions funded through the Woodburn Together OJJDP Drug Free Communities grant. PUBLIC HEARINGS None. PUBLIC COMMENT NEW BUSINESS Council Agenda of January 27, 2003 Page iii 14. 15. 16. 17. PLANNING CQMMISSION OR ADMINISTRATIVE LAND USE ACTIONS - These are Plan~ning Commission or Administrative Land Use actions that may be called tip by the City Council. Ao Planning Commission's denial of Subdivision 02-06 and ............................ 124 Variance 02-07 applications to subdivide the property (2.01 acres) into 7 lots and a variance to allow for no street improvements on Ogle street (W.F. Ringnalda). CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS EXECUTIVE sEssION None 18. ADJOURNMENT Council Agenda of January 27, 2003 Page iv ODBURN In c o rpo rat e d I 8 8 9 PROCLAMATION CATHOLIC SCHOOLS WEEK JANUARY'26 - FEBRUARY 1, 2003 WHEREAS, Ek'ERY YEAR THE CATHOLIC SCHOOLS THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES CELEBRATE THEIR IMPORTANT CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE EDUCATIONAL ENDEAVORS OF OUR NATION DURING A WEEK OF SPECIAL ACTIVITIES; AND WHE~,~ EWERYONE HAS A STAKE IN EDUCATION AND EVERY CITIZEN IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FUTURE OF THIS COUNTRY AND THAT FUTURE WILL BE DETERMINED BY HOW WELL V¢E EDUCATE OUR CHILDRENj AND WHERF~, THE ADMINISTRATORS AND TEACHERS AT ST. LuKE's SCHOOL ARE DEDICATED TO THE CHILDREN AND CAN TAKE GREAT PRIDE IN THE FACT THAT THE SCHOOL I-L~S SERVED THE WOODBURN COMMUNITY SINCE 1903; NOW, THEREFORE, I, KATHRYN FIGLEY, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF WOODBURN, DO HEREBY PROCLAIM THE WEEK OF JANUARY 26-FEBRUARY 1, 2003 TO BE CATHOLIC SCHOOLS WEEK IN THE CITY OF WOODBURN AND ASK OUR CITIZENS TO RECOGNIZE AND APPRECIATE THE MANY CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE CATHOLIC SCHOOLS. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I HZVE HEREUNTO SET MY HAND AND CAUSED ... THE SEAL OF THE CITY OF WOODBURN TO BE AFFIXED THIS 22ND DAY OF JANUARY ./."'"'___ 2003.~ ~ -2 - Office of the Mayor 270 Montgoraery Street ° Woodburn, Oregon 9707 ~ Ph. 503-982-5228 o Fax 503-982-5243 1 ~ T~ ~r T January 27, 2002 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: HonOrable Mayor and City Council~ John ~C. Brown, City Administrator ~'' UrbaB Renewal Status Update Recommendation: It is recommended the City Council receive oral and written reports regarding tax increment revenue projections for the Woodburn Urban Renewal Area. Background: The City Council adopted the Woodburn Urban Renewal Plan and established an urban renewal project in August 2001. The plan and supporting assumptions were based on valuation information available and tax law in effect in 2001. The Council's decision was referred to voters, and was validated on March 12, 2002. In the meanwhile, the State Supreme Court decided the Shilo v Portland case in December 2001. That decision altered the law pertaining to division of taxes among urban renewal and other taxing agencies. The Department of Revenue (DOR), however, d.id not adopt regulations implementing a methodology for imposing the Court's decision until May 23, 2002. Discussion: The attached report provides, based on updated information and assumptions, revised short-term tax increment revenue projections for the Woodburn Urban Renewal Agency. Projections include the value of new construction in the renewal area since 2001, and reflect the effect of the Shilo case and DOR implementing regulations. The report also provides an estimate of short term borrowing capacity. This information is provided to update the Council (and accordingly the Urban Renewal Agency), in anticipation of capital planning for the 2003-04 budget, and receipt of the Agency's first allocation of tax increment later this year. Mr. Jeffrey Tashman, urban renewal consultant, will make a presentation regarding his report at your January 27, 2003 meeting. In the meanwhile, if you have any questionS, please give me a call. JCB 9. la Tashmar Johnson L,c Consultants in Policy, Planning & Project Management TAX INCREMENT REVENUE PROJECTIONS WOODBURN URBAN RENEWAL AREA I. INTRODUCTION This memo presents ~lraft projections of tax increment revenues for the Woodburn Urban Renewal Area ("Area"). The projections incorporate estimates of the minor Measure 5 compression losses tl~at result from implementation of the December 20, 2001 Oregon Supreme Court decision in the Shilo v. Portland case. In response to the ShIlo ruling, the Oregon Department of Revenue (DOR) adopted, on May 23, 2002 an Administrative Rule (OAR 457.440(9)) that governs tax increment calculations for FY 2002/2003 and thereafter. The methodology for these projections is based on this rule. II. SUMMARY Table 1. shows the projected urban renewal "division of tax" revenues and Measure 5 compression losses for the five year period from FY 03/04 through FY 07/08. (All of Woodburn's urban renewal revenues are division of tax revenues. Some older urban renewal plans have an additional source of revenue.) The projections show that in FY 03/04, the Urban Renewal Agency could reasonably expect to issue short term bonds that would allow for $80-90,000 in project expenditures. In FY 04/05 or 05/06, the Agency could reasonably expect to issue long term bonds that would allow for project expenditures of $1 million and $1.3 million respectively. III. SHILO V. PORTLAND The Shilo case pertains to the division of taxes for urban renewal. Prior to Shilo, taxes were first imposed on individual properties in conformance with the Measure 5 limits on local government and school taxes. (Taxes for GO bonds are not limited.) Then the county assessor allocated the amount equal to the taxes on the increment (including taxes resulting from local government, school and bond levies) to the urban renewal agency and allocated the amount equal to the taxes on the certified base to the taxing districts. Thus taxes were first imposed and then divided. In its December 20, 2001 decision, the Supreme Court found that property taxes must first be divided for urban renewal and then measured against the Measure 5 limits. The Court found that taxes divided for urban renewal, irrespective of whether they originated as a result of local government levies, school levies or a bond levies, must be considered general government taxes, subject to the $10.000 per $1,000 real market value (RMV) of Measure 5. Jeffrey Tashman 503.245.7828 · Nina Johnson 503.245.7416 · Fax 503.245.3171 6585 S.W. Parkhill Drive · Podland, Oregon 97239 PROJECTED TAX REVENUES, INCREMENT ~WOODBURN URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY The Court's decision meant that the division of tax amount attributable to each property had to be calculated. Then this amount had to be added to the other local government taxes on the propertyl and the total amount of taxes had to be tested against the Measure 5 limit for local government and reduced or "compressed" if necessary. The Court did not provide direction regarding how the amount of taxes divided for urban renewal from an individual property Was to be determined. Under the decision, the total amount of urban renewal division of tax revenues is the same as it was before. It is an amount equal to the property taxes extended on the increment by all overlapping taxing districts. To determine how much each individual property contributes io the division of taxes, this amount becomes, in effect, an "urban renewal division of thx levy." Then this levy is spread over a certain geographic area. Three alternatives were considered for defining this geographic area. The smallest was the urban renewal area itself. A second was the entire area within the city that adopted the urban renewal pl0n. The largest was throughout the taxing districts that levy taxes within the urban renewal area. (For the urban renewal revenues resulting from Marion County's levies, properties throughout the County would have their taxes divided.) The DOR administrative rule followed the second alternative, and defines the area that is subject to the urban renewal division of tax levy as the "shared property." This is the area shared by a taxing district that levies taxes in an urban renewal area and the municipality which adopted the urban renewal plan. In Woodburn, the shared property for all the taxing districts is the entire city of Woodbum, with the exception of the Marion Soil & Water Conservation District which only levies taxes in the western part of the urban renewal area and city. As result of the rule, all property tax payers within the City of Woodburn will see the urban renewal division of tax as a line item on their tax statement. However, for almost all Woodbum prope~y_ owners, the urban renewal division of taxes will not increase the amount of taxes paid. For these property owners, taxes shown for urban renewal will be balanced by an equal amount of lower taxes shown for the taxing districts. IV. METHODOLOGY This section describes the methodology used for the projections. A. Urban Renewal Rate Calculation Starting with the urban renewal division of tax levy for each levy of each "overlapping taxing district" (a taxing district that levies taxes within the urban renewal area), the assessor now calculates "urban renewal rates" for individual properties by dividing the levy into the assessed value (AV) of the shared property area. These rates, when applied to a property's AV determine the amount each property contributes to the urban renewal division of taxes. The urban renewal rates, when applied to all the AV within the shared property area produce the liaxes that are allocated to the urban renewal agency. Tashman Johnson LLC 2 January23,2003 ]~ROJECTED INCREMENT REVENUES, TAX ~WOODBURN URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY The rates that apply to a property for the taxes allocated to the taxing district ("taxing distr~ct effective rates") are calculated by subtracting the urban renewal rate from theloriginal taxing district levy rate. The taxing district effective rate, when applie~ to the appropriate properties, produces the taxes on the frozen base and the remainder of the AV in the shared property area. For each property, the urban renewal rates for each taxing district are then totaled and added to [other local govemment effective rates to produce the total local government rote. This rate and a property's AV determines the total amount of local government taxes on the property. Table 2. shows the rate calculations for FY 03/04 for the part of the City that is within the Marion Soil & Water Conservation District. B. Calcglation of Compression Losses The total loc~tl government taxes are then tested against the Measure 5 local government 1limit and reduced if necessary to meet the limit. Because the limit is expressed as ~a rate per $1,000 of RMV, it is necessary to know, for each property, its AV and it,S RMV. A rate of ov~ $10.0000 per $1,000 AV will exceed the Measure 5 limit if a property is assessed at 100% of its RMV, but may not exceed the limit if it's assessed at 10ss than 100% of its RMV. On the other hand, a local government rate of less than $10.00 per $1,000 AV will never cause taxes to exceed the Measure 5 limits because no property can be assessed at more than its RMV. Because an actual property-by-property analysis of compression losses would be unmanageable, the properties in the City of Woodburn were grouped within seven percentiles of AV to RMV - properties whose AV was more than 90% of its RMV, 80 - 90%, 70 - 80%, 60 - 70%, 50 - 60%, 40-50% and less than 40% of their RMV). Then the total amount of AV in each percentile was calculated, as well as the percent that each percentile's total AV is of the total AV in the shared property area. (For example, properties whose AV was more than 90% of their RMV might comprise 32% of the total AV of the shared property area.) Each percentile then had a single RMV, and 1% or $10.00 per $1,000 of this RMV constitutes the Measure 5 limit on local government taxes. For FY 2003/2004 and on, the total assessed value in the shared property area was projected, and then distributed in percentiles according to the FY2001/2002 distribution. (E.g., property worth 32% of the projected assessed value was assumed to be assessed at more than 90% of real market values.) Then, for each percentile, the total local government taxes were compared to the Measure 5 limit. If the total local government taxes exceeded the limit, the Tashman Johnson LLC 3 January 23, 2003 pROJECTED TAX INCREMENT REVENUES, WOODBURN URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY amount by which they would have to be reduced was calculated as a compression percentage. The compression percentage was then applied to the taxes imposed in each percent!lc to determine the compression losses. The total compression losses in the local government category were calculated and then proportionately assigned to the urban renewal division of tax revenues and local governments. It is importaqt to note that while urban renewal increases the amount of compression ~to local government tax revenues, it doesn't cause compression in and of itself. The table below shows the projected increase in compression loss percentages (percent of taxes prior to compression that are lost to compression) due to urban renewal, assuming for this purpose that the assessed value within the city grows at the same rate as projected with urban renewal. ! FY Ending June 30, 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Total Local Government Compression Losses With urban renewal Without urban renewal Additional Compression Losses from Urban Renewal 2.1% 2.2% 2.3% 2.4% 2.4% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 0.1% 0.3% 0.3% 0.4% 0.4% C. Key Assumptions Some key assumptions used for the analysis are as follows: (1) the distribution of the AV of properties as a function of the relationship between assessed values and real market values will remain constant, and (2) the levy rates within each tax code area in the city will remain constant at the FY 2003 figure. (A tax code area is an area in which all the property is taxed by the same taxing districts. Woodburn has five tax code areas. Two are taxed by the Marion Soil & Water District - one tax code area is within the urban renewal area and the other is not. Two are not taxed by that district - again one tax code area is within the urban renewal area and the other is not. One tax code area contains only utility property and is not taxed by the Woodburn Fire District.) PROJECTED INCREMENT The value of the Urban Renewal Area when an urban renewal plan comes into effect is called the "frozen base" or "certified base". Growth in AV over this amount is called "increment". Tashman Johnson LLC 4 January23,2003 6 VI. I~ROJECTED TAX INCREMENT REVENUES, WOODBURN URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY After the City Council adopted the Urban Renewal Plan in August of 2001, the County Assessor certified the value within the area, based on the then-current (FY 2000/2001) t4x roll. However, when the ordinance adopting the plan was referred to voters, the effective date of the Plan was delayed until March 22, 2002. The frozen base of the urban renewal area will have to be recalculated based on the FY 2001/2002 tax roll, which has not yet been done. These projections include an estimated value for the updated frozen base, which is 2.5% higher than the FY 2001/2002 value. The actual frozen base can be determined by further research with the County's property tax database. The projecte~ increment within the Area is shown in Table 3. The basis for the projection was an increase in the value of property of 2.5% plus "exception value" from new development, based on input from City staff. (Exception value is assessed value resulting from changes to the property such as new development, expansion, remodeling, or subdivision that is excepted from the 3% limit on increases in assessed value.) Major new development includes the Safeway shopping center on North Pacific Highway anti Highway 214 and the Wal Mart expansion at the Woodbum 1-5 Interchange. ! Additional development in both of these areas is projected for future years. No major new development was projected for the downtown area. PROJECTED TOTAL LOCAL GOVERNMENT RATES AND DIVISION OF TAXES iMPOSED The total local government rates were projected for all tax code areas in the City. The highest of these rates range from $10.80 to $11.00 per $1,000 AV. Though for most properties this rate will not exceed the Measure 5 limits, there will be some Measure 5 compression losses from those properties whose AV is at or near 100% of their RMV. Table 3 shows a sample of the calculation of the taxes "extended" (pre- compression) and taxes "imposed" (post-compression) for division of tax revenues. The total compression losses of $151,900 is divided between the urban renewal agency and the taxing districts. The urban renewal share of the loss is only $1,696, because the urban renewal share of the total tax rate is low. VII. DEBT CAPACITY The projects in the Urban Renewal Plan may be funded by a combination of long-term and short-term debt. Tax increment revenues may not be spent directly on urban renewal projects or administrative costs, but rather must be used to pay principal and interest on bonds or loans. Short tem debt can be for a short a period as one day, and is issued primarily for the purpose of converting tax increment revenues into loan proceeds which can then be spent. (Typically, urban renewal agencies work with a bank to issue these short term bonds. There is a fee charged by the bank for processing the loan, but the interest cost is not Tashman Johnson LLC 5 January 23, 2003 7 ~ROJECTED TAX INCREMENT REVENUES, WOODBURN URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY critical because the bond is repaid so soon. The fee is typically higher for the first borrowing because the bank will usually want to review the urban renewal plan for legal sufficiency.) During the first year of collection of tax increment revenue - next fiscal year - it will probably not be practical to issue long term debt. However in the following fiscal years it may well be a possibility. Short term debt would allow for expenditures on projects next year. With projected revenues of $105,000, a short term bond could be issued for $80 - 90,000. The long term debt capacity of the tax increment revenues in any one year is a function of the interest rate, the term or duration of the debt, and the "coverage ratio." The coverage ratio is the relationship between the revenues and the amount to be paid on the debt. A higher ratio means that the lender requires a larger "cushion" between projected revenues and required debt payments, in case of adverse circumstances. Table 4. shows the d~bt capacity of the projected revenues in FY 04/05 and 05/06 based on interest rates of5.~%, a 10 year term and a coverage ratio of 1.3. All of these factors must be evaluated bY the lender at the time of the borrowing. The capacity shown is the "par amount" or the gross amount of the bonds. The costs of issuing the bonds are estimated at 3% of the gross amount. A reserve amount equal to one year's payment of principal and interest is shown, leaving "net proceeds" of just over $1 million in FY 05 and $1.3 million in FY 06. Tashman Johnson LLC 6 January 23, 2003 8 0 U U 0 © g ,-,1 0 r.~ © 10 Z~ 11 Z~ ©m 1.2 ~.~ o 8A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 13, 2003 TAPE READING 0001 DATE. COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CITY OF WOODBURN, COUNTY OF MARION, STATE OF OREGON, JANUARY 13, 2003. CONVENED. The meeting convened at 7:00 p.m. with Mayor Figley presiding. 0010 ROLL CALL. Mayor Figley Present Councilor Bj elland Present Councilor' Cox Present Counciloi' McCallum Present Councilor Nichols Present Councilor Veliz Present Councilor Sifuentez Present (7:03 pm) Staff Present: City Administrator Brown, City Attorney Shields, Public Works Manager Rohman, CommUnity Development Director Mulder, Finance Director Gillespie, Park & Recreation Director Westrick, Deputy Police Chief Youmans, Finance Director Gillespie, City Recorder Tennant 9049 ANNOUNCEMENTS. A) Holiday Cio~ures: City offices and the Library will close at noon on Monday, January 20th, in observance of Martin Luther King Jr. holiday. The Aquatic Center will be open on January 20th. B) As of the first of this year, the Library Board has changed their meeting time to the 2nd Wednesday of each month at 7:00 p.m.. However, for the month of January, they will be meeting the 3~a Wednesday (January 15th) at 7:00 p.m.. C) A ballot drop box for the statewide Special Election is located in the City Hall lobby. 0150 APPOINTMENTS. Mayor Figley stated that she had an additional memo for a Library Board appointment which was distributed to the Council just prior to the meeting. She appointed the following individuals to serve on various boards, commission, and committees: Budget Committee: Richard Jennings, Position HI, term expiration date of 12/31/2005 Stanley Milna, Position IV, term expiration date of 12/31/2003 (fills vacant position) Grayce Higgins, Position VI, reappointment with term expiration date of 12/31/2005 Planning Commission: David Vancili Position III, term expiration date of 12/31/2003 (fills vacant position) Ellen Bandel0w, Position VI, reappointment with term expiration date of 12/31/2006 Royce Young, Position VII, reappointment with term expiration date of 12/31/2006 Page 1 - Council Meeting Minutes, January 13, 2003 14 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 13, 2003 TAPE READING Recreation and Parks Board: Herb Mittmantk Position VII, reappointment with term expiration date of 12/31/2005 Library Board: Marie Brown, Position I, reappointment with a term expiration date of 12/31/2006 Mary Chadwic~k, Position II, term expiration date of 12/31/2006 Colleen Vancil, Position IV, term expiration date of 12/31/2003 (fills vacant position) Museum Commilltee: Hazel Smith, reappointment with a term expiration date of 12/31/2006 Donna Gramme, appointment with a term expiration date of 12/31/2006 Mayor Figley sta~ed that there is still a partial term on the Park Board and a partial term on the Library Board yet to be filled and she encouraged citizens interested in either one of those positions to apply. NICHOLS/IVICCALLUM... approve the appointments. The motion passed unanimously. 0336 PRESENTATIONS: Kiwanis/Chamb~er of Commerce Christmas Lights Contest Awards - Richard Jennings~ representing the Kiwanis, and Kristi Olson, representing the Chamber, presented the awards to the following individuals and businesses: 1) Residential Lights Only: 1st Place - Austin Burleson (Willow Avenue); 2na Place - Cameron Koffler 2) Residential Lights and Display: 1st Place - Edwin & Beverly Davis (Heritage Court); 2~ Place - Glen & Carol West (Willow Avenue) 3) Residential Neighborhood: 1 st Place -Jana Court; 2nd Place - Alexandra Court 4) Commercial with 15 employees or less: Taylor Honda 5) Commercial with 16 employees or more: Cascade Park Retirement Center 6) Commercial Neighborhood with 3 or more businesses: Woodburn Downtown Association 7) Conservation - creative ways to decorate to save electricity: Woodbum RV Park. 0699 CHAMBER OF COMMERCE REPORT. Kristi Olson, representing the Chamber, provided information on the following upcoming Chamber events: 1) The State of the City Address with Mayor Figley will be held at the Tukwila Center for Health on Wednesday, January 15th; 2) The annual Chamber dinner will be held on Friday, January 17'h, at the Orchards Grill at Tukwila OGA Golf Course; 3) Business after Hours will be held on February 13th, 4:30 pm - 6:00 pm, at the Woodburn Pet HOspital. Page 2 - Council Meeting Minutes, January 13, 2003 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 13, 2003 TAPE READING She also reported~ that the Visitors Center had over 3600 visitors in 2002 which is up 36% from 2001, and telephone calls were up over 30% from the previous year (4500 calls). O8O2 WOODBURN ,OWNTOWN ASSOCIATION. Bruce Thomas, representing the WDA, requested that the City consider closing First Street between Ghrfield and Arthur so that vendors from the Saturday Market can display their products onthe street facing Library Park. Vendors would not be on the grass but it would provide a park like setting for visitors. He also stated that the WDA will be celebrating the installation of the downtown lights on Thursday, January 30th, with more information to be, made available later this month. Administrator Brown stated that the Police Chief has the authority to make decisions regarding temporary closure of city streets and, if Council action is necessary, it will be brought back at a later date. 0957 Richard Jennings, 595 Filbert Street, stated that the additional signage on the stop signs in the downtown area were an excellent idea and he expressed his appreciation to the staff member who suggested the signs. Public Works Manager Rohman stated that Julie Moore is credited with this suggestion. 1027 CONSENT AGENDA. A) Approve the Council regular and executive session minutes of December 9, 2002; B) Accept the Library Board minutes of December 11, 2002; C) Accept the Planning Commission minutes of November 14, 2002; D) Accept the Planning Commission minutes of November 21, 2002; E) Accept the draft Planning Commission minutes of December 12, 2002; F) Accept the Museum Committee minutes of October 17, 2002; G) Receive the Library Monthly Report for November 2002; H) Receive the Annual Audit Report for 2001-2002; I) Receive the Annual System Development Charge (SDC) Report; J) Receive the memo on the Government Law Section Election; K) Approve the claims for November 2002; L) Approve the claims for December 2002; M) Receive the Building Activity Report for December 2002; N) Receive the Planning Project Tracking Sheet dated December 30, 2002; and O) Receive the letter'to Oregon Public Employees Retirement System regarding the draft rule on ActUarial Equivalency Factors. Mayor Figley requested that typographical errors in the Council minutes of December be corrected one of which is on page 3, tape reading 0991, the spelling should be Kika Garcia, and on the last page, Mayor Figley's first name is misspelled. Page 3 - Council Meeting Minutes, January 13, 2003 16 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 13, 2003 TAPE READING The Mayor also congratulated City Attorney Shields on his election as Chair of the Government Law Section of the Oregon State Bar. MCCALLUM/B~JELLAND... accept the Consent Agenda with the corrections noted by the Mayor. The motion passed unanimously. 1254 COUNCIL BILl 2429 - RESOLUTION SETTING AMOUNT OF PARK & RECREATION SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE. Councilor Sifuenlez introduced Council Bill 2429. The bill was read by title only since there were no obj, .,ctions from the Council. Councilor Bjelland stated that he was surprised that the construction cost index had decreased from last year which is why the SDC's for parks are either flat or slightly less. On roll call vote for final passage, the bill passed unanimously. Mayor Figley declared Council Bill 2429 duly passed. 1341 PARK MASTER PLAN DESIGN CONSULTANT. NICHOLS/SIFUENTEZ... authorize the Recreation and Parks Director to sign an agreement with Moore Iacofano Goltsman, Inc., (MIG) for Community Park Master Plans for Legion and Settlemier Parks in an amount not to exceed $15,000.00. The motion passed unanimously. 1382 BID AWARD: WATER TREATMENT AND STORAGE PACKAGE 2. Schedule A: Bids for two well houses and pumping equipment were received from the following contractors: Schneider Equipment, Inc., $476,810.00; J.W. Fowler Company, $487,592.00; CORP, Inc., $521,362.00; Stellar J Corporation, $555,865.00; and Emery & Sons Construction, $628,000.00. Schedule B: Bids for construction of a water treatment and storage system control center were received from the following contractors: Nomarco Inc., $622,000.00; Schneider Equipment, Inc., $777,000.00; CORP, Inc. $783,494.00; Stellar J Corporation, $802,463.00; Grady, Harper and Carlson, $821,000.00; Emery and Sons Construction, $1,050,000.000; and J.W. Fowler Company, $1,379,848.00. NICHOLS/BJELLAND... award Schedule "A" for two well houses and pumping equipment to Schneider Equipment, Inc., for $476,810, and award Schedule "B" for construction of a water treatment and storage system control center to Nomarco Inc. for $622,000.00. The motion passed unanimously. 1433 BID AWARD: IjlYDRAULIC IRON WORKER. Bids for a hydraulic iron worker were received from the following vendors: Industrial Welding Supply, :$5,730.00; Industrial Source, $8,970.00; American Machines, $8,977.00; Indusffial Welding Supply, $9,875.00; and MCK Tool Supply, $12,349.00. Staff recommended that the bid from Industrial Welding Supply be rejected since it was Page 4 - Council Meeting Minutes, January 13, 2003 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 13, 2003 TAPE READING not in compliance with the bid specifications, and the bid from Industrial Source be accepted since their bid met or exceeded bid specifications. NICHOLS/COX .... reject the bid from Industrial Welding Supply for not being in compliance with lhe specifications and award City of Woodbum bid number 23-08 for a hydraulic iron wOrker to the lowest responsible bidder, Industrial Source, for $8,970.00. The motion passed unanimously. 1486 1901 CONTINUATI£ AMENDMENT Mayor Figley dec The Mayor declm neighborhood ant scheduled. ~N OF PUBLIC HEARING: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP {}1-03 AND ZONE CHANGE 01-07 (Applicant: Tim Doman). lared the continued public heating open at 7:25 p.m.. ed that she was familiar with the property and the surrounding she has also looked at the property knowing that the public hearing was Councilor Cox stated that he was on the Planning Commission when this issue was before them. He has checked with legal staff and been advised that there is no legal impediment for him to be sitting as a Councilor unless he is prejudiced. For the record, Councilor Cox stated that he has on open mind on this issue and will make his decision based on the information before the Council. Councilor McCallum also stated that he has looked at the property and he is also quite familiar with the owners involved. Recorder Tennant read the opening land use statement required by ORS Chapter 197. Community Development Director Mulder stated that the Planning Commission had approved a final order recommending denial of these applications on July 11, 2002. The applicant had subsequently requested an opportunity to provide additional evidence and argument to address the findings for denial and staff granted the request since the comprehensive plan amendment application is not subject to the 120-day rule. The applicant submitted its supplemental evidence and arguments on November 5, 2002 and the heating was scheduled for December 9, 2002 but continued to January 13, 2003. The property is located north of Young Street on the west side of Gatch Street (373 Gatch Street) and is approximately 1 acre in size with 1 house on the property. Current zoning is residential single family with a Comprehensive Plan map designation of low density residential. He outlined the area on the map to show where the subject property is located in relation to other multi-family and single family districts in the adjacent area. He stated that this application was processed under the Woodburn Zoning Ordinance rather than the Woodbum Development Ordinance since the application was submitted prior to the adoption of the Development Ordinance. He stated that the following four criteria must be met before a plan amendment can be made: 1) complies with all applicable state-wide goals and guidelines; 2) complies with remaining goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; 3) there is a clearly demonstrated public need for the proposed amendment; and 4) the proposal best satisfies the public need. Page 5 - Council Meeting Minutes, January 13, 2003 18 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 13, 2003 TAPE READING Director Mulder Stated that the proposal does not comply with Statewide Planning Goal 10 since recent s~dies indicate that the City will likely have a significant deficit of both low and high density residential land over the next 20 years. During the next year, staff plans on bringing alternatives before the Council to accommodate this additional need for low and high density plans. In regards to the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan, the proposal does not comply with G-l-1 and G-l-2 relating to sufficient land to accommodate growth for both low and high density residential developments. In regards to public need, there may be a need for high density residential housing, the applicant does not specific~ally address this criteria which concerns the supply of land designated for high density residential use, not the supply of high density residential housing. The City has been required to plan for the population forecast that it has been officially allocated which provides for a 20-year supply of land sufficient to meet long-range housing needs. Even if it is detemained that additional land will be needed in the City's 20-year future urban growth boundary, it does not prove that there is currently insufficient land to provide for current housing needs. He provided examples of locations in the City which are currently vacant land zoned high density residential which could be used for a high density residential development. Lastly, the applicant has not provided evidence to show the short term demand for high density residential uses exceeds the capacity of existing high density residential designated land in the City. The applicant has not shown that this lot is the best lot in the City's urban growth boundary to change to high density residential designation. Allowing the Comprehensive Plan amendment would result in an encroachment of land designated for high density residential into a low density residential area. Currently, the line is a fairly straight line between the two land designations and approval of the amendment would result in a significant jog of the line to the north which could have an adverse impact on surrounding low density property. Director Mulder also reviewed the criteria relating to Burden of Proof. The current version of the Comprehensive Plan contains sufficient land to meet housing needs for a year 2014 population of 28,000. The City is currently in the process of periodically reviewing the Comprehensive Plan. Population projections allocated to the City for year 2020 by Marion County (26,290) differ substantially from a projection prepared by our Consultant ECOnorthwest (range from 31,674 to 38,477). The periodic review process will result in a final adopted population projection and potential plan amendments so that sufficient land is available to meet our projected year 2020 population. In regards to the zone change, the applicant must show there is a need for the proposed use and that the particular piece of property in question will best meet that need. These criteria are similar to the criteria for a comprehensive plan amendment relating to public need and demonstrating that the site best satisfies the need, therefore, the comments on those criteria would apply to these criteria also. In conclusion, staffbelieves that all relevant approval criteria relating approval of the comprehensive plan amendment and zone change from low density residential to high density residential have not been Page 6 - Council Meeting Minutes, January 13, 2003 19 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 13, 2003 TAPE READING satisfied. TherefOre, staff recommends that the Council deny Comprehensive Plan Amendment 01-03 and Zone Change 01-07. 3101 Wally Lien, attorney representing applicant Tim Doman, stated that the property has been owned by the Doman's for a long time and it sits contiguous and at a right angle to Heritage Arms which is also owned by the Doman's. The property has a house and garage on the Gaich Street side and the idea is to take the garage off but leave the single family dwelling and create a driveway on the south side of the house and construct a set of two-story tow~house apartments similar to Heritage Arms running east and west. A conceptual site plan is included in the Council's packets. The key element is that it allows connectivity at the end of where the two pieces come together there will be a connection between Heritage Arms and the new apartments. This will allow an entrance/exit onto Young Street and an entrance/exit onto Gatch Street. He stated that the area to the south of the subject property is already designated high density residential even though it has some mixed zoning in the area. On the north side in the RS zone is a 3-plex which shows that the area can be characterized as mixed and is predominant in the apartment and plex zone. In this whole area, there is only one owner-occupied single family residence, the other two single family residents are rentals. There are homes along Gatch Street but there is nothing behind the homes. He stated that the Doman family has been a longtime positive contributor to this community and they have done a good job with the apartments. Whenever there has been a problem, they have cooperated with the City and cleaned up graffiti. He proceeded to review mathematical calculations based on new information that was available last spring but not given to the Planning Commission. He stated that the applicant had originally proceeded with the application process on his own but retained his services at the last minute before the Planning Commission to let them know that he needed time to put information together. He stated that there were two issues to be addressed - 1) traffic and 2) land use inventory. The applicant commissioned a Traffic Impact Study that resulted in a finding that there would be no impact on traffic. In regards to land use inventory, he contended that there is a deficit in available land for the planning period to 2020 based on the interim 2002 population projection of 34,919. Since need is based on population, the numbers show that there is a need for another 106.82 acres of high density residential to take care of the population that the 2000 Buildable Lands Inventory did not take into consideration. Based on his calculations, there is also a deficit of 23.25 acres of low density residential land. He stated that his client has 1 acre of land that would solve this problem but would help reduce the deficit of land under his calculations. Based on the numbers he presented to the Council, he expressed his opinion that there is a public need that is short and long term, and meets the criteria on both the zone change and comprehensive plan. He contends that this is the right piece to help solve the land deficit problem since this parcel is not shaped right to provide for proper utilization of land for a low density residential purpose. The 110 foot Page 7 - Council Meeting Minutes, January 13, 2003 2O COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 13, 2003 TAPE READING width is not a significant jog and, during the periodic review process, the City will be looking at potentially re-designating other Iow density residential land in the adjoining area to high density residential. In regards to burden of proof, he was not sure where staff was coming from on their recommendation since the new data and traffic impact analysis indicate that they have met this criteria. The community has changed dramatically from 1978 when the original Comprehensive Plan was adopted and there has been a change in the fundamental process of land use planning within the community. This would then mandate the Council to look at the City's comprehensive planning scheme. The Planning Commission did hot have the information which is now before the Council when they made their decisibn. He also referred to an earlier staff report which included a reference to residential policy A-10. Staff did not give an oral presentation on that policy at this meeting and he hoped that it means that staff has abandoned that policy since he believes it is not an apprC~val criteria and he disagreed with the interpretative language and information provided by staff. The orientation of the property eliminates noise, visual aesthetics, and other concerns related to two-story apartment complexes. He reiterated that population numbers were derived from consultant reports and felt that the Planning Commission should have been given the information in order to make a decision based on the new numbers. He stated that this application provides connectivity along with the highest and best use of land, and he urged the Council to approve the application. 6266 Tape 2 Councilor Bjelland stated that there is an agreed upon population forecast with Marion County of 26,290 and just recently there has been discussion to increase the population forecast to a higher number. Under existing State land planning reviews the City needs to use the negotiated population forecast for defining the Comprehensive Plan and Urban Growth Boundary. He referred to the mathematical calculations that were submitted by Attorney Lien and stated that he comes up with a different set of numbers that would show a significant deficit in single family residential rather than multi-family residential. He reviewed the calculation method he used to arrive at the deficit he believed the City would be facing in the future. Attomey Lien stated that even if Councilor Bjelland's calculations are used, which show a lesser amount of multi-family residential land, there is still a land deficit which shows public need. Councilor Bjelland stated that the City is in the process of a periodic review and the City will be negotiating for an agreed upon population for 2020. He feels that this property, along with the adjoining properties, may be something that should be considered at the point in time the City looks at the total picture and comes up with an exact finding as to how much land the City needs of additional multi-family and single family residential land. Attomey Lien expressed his opinion that Planning staff, former Mayor Jennings, and Page 8 - Council Meeting Minutes, January 13, 2003 21 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 13, 2003 TAPE READING Marion County have all agreed that there is a new population number for 2020 and they have, in fact, agreed that the population figure of 26,290 is gone. He also disagreed with the percentage figure used by Councilor Bjelland in determining how much high density residential occuples the housing mix. He also objected to information brought forth by Councilor Bjelland that differs from the consultant's report. 0329 Richard Jenningsb 595 Filbert St., spoke in opposition to the application. He stated that he lived in Johnson Addition which has an access onto Gatch Street and Young Street. In regards to Gatch Street, it is a narrow street and he does not feel that a valid traffic study can be done on a Loncept. He did not agree with approving a zone change on a concept since it was like writing a blank check and plans can change. The owners would still be required to go before the Planning Commission for development approval but there the property owner has a right to change their plans once the zone change is approved and a site plan is presented to the Commission. It has been the Council's policy in the past to deny a zone change based on a conceptual design and it has been the policy of the Council not to allow any further encroachment into the single family residential zone. Gatch Street has no parking on the east side of the street and, if a motorist meets a bus on that street, there is barely enough room for a car and bus to pass in different directions if a car is parked on the west side of the street. If the apartment complex is built, it would provide for 20 units plus it would provide an entrance/exit for 25 more apartments which will greatly increase the traffic problem on Gatch Street. The Church property was purchased for its own use and he did not believe that they would have purchased the property for the purpose of building a housing development. He stated that apartments tend to have more cars parked along the streets since there tends to be inadequate parking spaces available for the number of apartment residents. He disagreed with the City's position that there would be no traffic impact if the conceptual proposal does become a reality. He also felt that high and low density residential zones should not be mixed. In his opinion, the staff report was excellent and he feels that staff made a logical, very well- thought out decision in recommending that application be denied. Claudio Lima, 1415 Alexandra Court, stated that the application had been before the Planning Commission and he felt that it was preposterous that the City had data that they would not share with the Commission. A lot of statistics were brought before the Council, some of which have been contested, and consultants are asked to provide an opinion in the area of their expertise. 0921 Attorney Lien stated that the packet before the Council included a memo from Public Works Manager ROhman agreeing with the Traffic Impact Analysis performed by the consultants. In regards to the site plan, the City's rules envision that there will not be a site plan with an application of this kind and make provisions for subsequent site planning. In his opinion, the criteria is out of the City's code based on numbers provided Page 9 - Council Meeting Minutes, January 13, 2003 29- COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 13, 2003 TAPE READING by the City's conSultant that show that the City has a deficit of high density multi-family acreage. He reminded the Council that constitutional rights are at stake in a land use quasi-judicial prgcess. In his opinion, the applicant has met all of the criteria and the Council has no choice but to approve the application. Mayor Figley declared the hearing closed at 8:50 p.m.. The Council tool~ a short recess at 8:50 p.m. and reconvened at 8:57 p.m.. Councilor Cox slated for the record that the exhibit sheets Mr. Lien referred to during his presentation have been marked and are a part of this hearing. He stated that he did sit on this issue at the planning Commission but he is looking at this proposal with an open mind. Different People can come up with different numbers by putting in numbers in statistics and he felt it would be a mistake for the Council to take Mr. Lien's version just as it might be a mistake to take Mr. Bjelland's version. All of the numbers are being generated as par~ of the City's periodic review process which will ultimately result in appropriate amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan. This has not been done yet and, until it is dOne, all of the reports from consultants are just reports still be handled at staff level and not adopted by the Council. He feels that it would be premature to use those numbers aS the basis of granting a specific application on a particular 1 acre piece of property. He reiterated that the periodic review process should be completed before a change is considered. He stated that Mr. Lien has done an excellent job in presenting this case but, on the other hand, he does not criticize staff for the work they did. Mr. Doman did not have professional help at the time the application was submitted but asked that the record be kept open so that he could bring forth further evidence. In his opinion, very little additional evidence was brought before the Council. The hearing was left open for new evidence and it would have been inappropriate for the staff to share new letters or documents received since the record was closed except for Mr. Doman's presentation. He stated that the Comprehensive Plan is only supposed to be changed if there was an obvious mistake or as part of the periodic review process. In his opinion, the Council should wait for the periodic review process to be completed. Councilor Bjelland stated that when putting in the entire perspective of land requirements for the City, the whole concept of urban growth boundary and 20-year supply of land is to make sure that there is enough land to immediately satisfy your short term building requirements. The whole process of periodic review is to revisit every 5 to 7 years the Comprehensive Plan to determine whether or not the City needs to move forward another 5 to 7 year plarming period to meet estimated requirements. The reports show that the City has approximately 111 acres of high density multi-family land so them is no immediate compelling need that the City have a short term supply of high density land. In fact, it will take a number of years before all of that land is utilized. He did not feel that piecemealing a Comprehensive Plan is appropriate and the Council should approach the total land needs requirements in a structured manner after having all input from all Page 10 - Council Meeting Minutes, January 13, 2003 23 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 13, 2003 TAPE READING 1900 interested parties and doing a detailed analysis of the City's population, determining the density that the City is going to plan to achieve on its various land use types, and then compare that wit§ the existing land inventory. He felt that it was premature to undertake this process on a Small parcel at this point in time. Councilor Nichols agreed with comments made by Councilor Cox and expressed his opinion that the Comprehensive Plan does not need to be changed just because an applicant wants tO change the plan for their benefit. Councilor Sifuentez stated that the staff report was well written and agreed with the I . findings and conalus~ons that the Planning Commission and staff have come forward with to the Council. Councilor McCaHum stated that the applicant's representative said it very well in that if there is a problem this one acre will not solve the problem. He also felt that there were some very compelling arguments presented and statistics are always a hard thing depending on the criteria and, as pointed out, sometimes the criteria is self-selected which does concern him. Consultants are beneficial but the Council has to take the information and evaluate it which is part of the process outlined by Councilor Cox. He was also disappointed on Comments made about staff since he has always found them helpful and heard from other people their praise in the staffs willingness to help people through this process. Mayor Figley stated that the criteria developed cited for the Comprehensive Plan amendment and Zone Change were very clear and she did not feel that the criteria had been met. In the case of the Comprehensive Plan amendment, she also felt it was premature since the City has begun the periodic review process and, if the argument is accepted that there is currently enough low and high density residential but will not have enough of either, then it would not persuade her that a change in the planning or growth policy would trigger the change at this particular time on this one acre parcel. She also does not see a need to change the zone at this time other than the applicant would like to have it re-zoned. COX/MCCALLUM... Council deny the application and direct staff to prepare an ordinance setting forth findings and conclusions to support the denial based on the matters that have come before the Council at this meeting and the discussion from the Council. On roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously. 2040 PUBLIC HEARING: RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURAL STANDARD SUBSTITUTIOcN 02-02 (Meadowwood Subdivision). Mayor Figley declared the public heating open at 9:12 p.m. No declarations Were made by the Council on this issue. Recorder Tennant read the land use statement required by ORS Chapter 197. Director Mulder ~tated that he had approved an application to allow two alternate architectural elements to substitute for not meeting one residential architectural standard Page 11 - Council Meeting Minutes, January 13, 2003 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 13, 2003 TAPE READING on December 5, 2002. The Council had elected to call this decision up for review at this meeting. The architectural standard requires a 25-year architectural style roofing. The applicant proposed the following two alternate architectural elements to substitute the required roofing: 1) 8:12 roof pitch which exceeds the minimum 4:12 roof pitch standard; and 2) a 95 square foot covered porch which exceeds the minimum 48 square foot standard. The applicant is proposing to install 3-tab composition roofing on the home which does not meet criteria for architectural style roof with a certified performance of at least 25 years. The home is located at 1084 Comstock Way and this is the final lot for a home to be built *Pon in this subdivision. The existing homes in this subdivision do not meet the 25 year performance standard and the 3-tab composition roofing is consistent with the existing homes. The Woodbum Development Ordinance has setup four approval criteria to be considered in this type of application. The criteria consideration are as follows: 1) incorporates design elements and materials that reflect a custom design; 2) reflects character of existing housing within the subdivision or within 250 feet of the subject property; 3) incorporates materials that in substance and visual appeal are of equal or greater quality; and 4) assures that needed housing is not discouraged through unreasonable cost. Director Mulder reviewed the findings on each criteria which provided the basis for his approval of the application. Councilor McCallum stated that one of the reasons he wanted this application called up for the hearing is to try and understand the aI?plication of the criteria and the substitute. He questioned if comparable cost was considered in reducing the quality of the roof as opposed to the larger covered porch and roof pitch. Director Mulder stated that he did not look at cost since the appearance of the structure should be comparable or better than what would have been built by strictly applying the standards. Councilor Cox stated that, after reading the staff report, he had no particular concerns with this application. However, the whole idea of having architectural standards is new in the Development Ordinance and the focus group spent a lot of time trying to determine the minimum standards. The substitution provision was incorporated into the ordinance to take some of the impact away of having strict minimum standards. He does have some concerns as to whether this was the right approach to take or if this provision needs to be amended when the Council looks at proposed amendments to the ordinance later this year. He is also a little concerned about (1) the degree of discretion the Community Development Director has in allowing the substitution and 2) the interpretation of the criteria that the Director is to follow. He questioned if the substitute architectural standards were the bigger porch and the steeper pitch roof or was the substitute standard the type of roof. Page 12 - Council Meeting Minutes, January 13, 2003 215 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 13, 2003 TAPE READING 3349 3765 Director Mulder stated that the bigger porch and steeper pitch roof were the alternatives analyzed in the staff report. Don Comstock, 12020 SW 118th, Tigard, stated that construction in Meadowwood began about 5 years ago at which time they had implemented architectural standards from the beginning. Most manufactured homes come with a 3:12 roof pitch, however, all but one in Meadowwood have a 4:12 roof pitch or better. All but two of the homes have an attached double a;ar garage. They set architectural standards for themselves to make sure that they had a subdivision that would fit within the surrounding areas. The homes were also set on solid Concrete foundations and set to the FHA standards. Even though the homes were brought in as manufactured, they are now sitting on the lot as a site built home. When manufactured housing took a turn for the worst, they lost their supplier so they decided to build site-built homes on the remaining lots. The same profile of 4:12 roof pitch, 3-tab roofing composition (25 year), and lap siding was followed. The new development ordinance standards require an architectural style of roofing. They would like to maintain the architectural designs that they had originally set so that homeowners will feel that they are part of the neighborhood. No one in the audience spoke either for or against the application. Mayor Figley closed the public hearing at 9:35 p.m.. Mayor Figley thanked Director Mulder and Mr. Comstock since, for the most part, this hearing is taking place not because of anything odd or misguided about the application, but for the reason that the Council is dealing in uncharted territory with an exception to the rules in the development ordinance. For her part, she feels very comfortable with the common sense used by the Community Development Director and by the quality of the design submitted by Mr. Comstock. Councilor Cox stated that when the development ordinance was being drafted, there was a concept agreed upon that the ordinance needed to have, as much as possible, clear and objective standards. The City's basic architectural standards are fairly clear and objective standards but those standards become subjective when substitutions are allowed. He has no quarrel with how this application was handled but is more concerned about future substitution applications. He feels that Director Mulder does not have anything specific to guide him on what substitutions can or should be allowed, therefore, the Director needs to use his commOn sense when making decisions on these applications. If the Council does not like the decision, then it can be called up for a hearings process. After talking to him and hearing his report at this hearing, he is satisfied that he will do a good job in making decisions on architectural standard substitution applications. He felt that the Council needs toi keep on top of this issue for the next year or two to see how it will work out to make sure that it does not become an excuse for a developer to get rid of meeting Page 13 - Council Meeting Minutes, January 13, 2003 26 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 13, 2003 TAPE READING 4403 4877 the minimum standards. Councilor McCallum concurred with comments made by Councilor Cox. He felt that developers need tb follow the standards as much as possible and the Council needs to pay attention to this process. He feels comfortable with Director Mulder's explanation and appreciated the effort in giving the Council some education on this ordinance provision. Councilor Veliz also agreed with comments made but stated that subjectivity can pose some problems. Developers need to know that standards are to be followed as much as possible rather than their applying for substitutions on a routine basis. Councilor Bjelland stated that it was his understanding that this was an exception and the developer would }not be able to come in and swap standards without building a case as to why there shouldlbe deviation from the architectural standards. In this case, this is the last lot in the subdivision and the substitution would provide the same type of roof as all of the other hom~s. The intent for setting architectural standards was to prevent a box with no architectural detail being built in Woodbum. He also recognized that there will be situations that need some type of deviation because of a peculiar situation that exists. It should also be looked at in only rare circumstances that substitutions would be allowed and a periodic report from the Director would keep the Council abreast of how many applications for s~lbstitutions are being submitted and/or approved so that the Council can re-visit this ordinance provision if the need arises. Councilor Nichols stated that the City is taking a step in the right direction and there will be changes as time moves forward. Administrator Brown stated that the standards were selected to create a better looking home and a better constructed home than some built in the past. Staff's application over the last several months has been pretty stringent. One other application had been submitted but had not been approved. The overall goal of the Council is to try and raise the bar and it would be the direction the staffwould continue to follow. Staffhas a set of criteria that needs to be evaluated before a decision is made on a substitution. Staff has also come to the opinion that the ordinance does not intend that one standard can be bigger so that another standard can be smaller with the two standards balancing out. Each standard needs to evaluated on its own basis. The Council may also want to think about which standards are more important so that staffwill not make changes in that standard at all. He anticipates meeting with the Council in the late spring in a workshop setting to discuss this issue along with any other provisions in the development ordinance that may need to reviewed by the Council. NICHOLS/MCCALLUM... instruct staff to prepare an ordinance to concur with the Community Development Director's decision and approve the residential architectural standard substitUtion 02-02. On roll call vote, the motion passed unanimously. Councilor Bjelland questioned the need for preparing an ordinance each time this would come up before the Council. City Attorney Shields stated that this Council has acted by special ordinance whereas the Page 14 - Council Meeting Minutes, January 13, 2003 27 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 13, 2003 TAPE READING Planning Commission acts by final order. In certain types of land use cases, the Council is required to act by ordinance but, in other instances, an order could be adopted in lieu of the ordinance. 5184 PLANNING CO~VIMISSION OR ADMINISTRATIVE LAND USE ACTIONS. 5326 A) Planning Commission's approval of application (Subdivision 02-05) to subdivide 10.2 acres into 71lots located at the northwest corner of intersection of Mt. Hood Avenue and Highway 99E (North Park Plaza). No action was tal~en by the Council on the Planning Commission's decision. B) Planning Commission's approval of application (Subdivision 02-02) to subdivide an approximatelY 103-acre parcel into 14 lots that range in size from 1.8 to 20.01 acres (Capital Development). No action was taken by the Council on this application approval. CITY ADMINI~;TRATOR'S REPORT. A) At the December 9th Council meeting, some discussion was held regarding potential filing of a LUBAi appeal relating to the County's Growth Management project. On December 20, 2002, the City did file Notice of Intent to appeal to LUBA. After reviewing the Notice of Decision from Marion County Commissioners, it became known that it was being handled as a periodic review task so the appropriate methodology for protesting a periodic review work task is to file an objection with the Director of the Dept. of Land Conservation & Development (DLCD). Staff believes that there are issues that go beyond the periodic review process which is why both the appeal and objection were filed. The objection was filed on December 26, 2002. Staff has had contact with the Director's office to try and set a meeting date which would include the cities of Stayton, Silverton and Woodburn in order to talk to the Director about the cities' concerns and hopefully get a decision from the Director on the objection. The Director could choose to forward the objection to the Land Conservation Development Commission in which case staff would be going to a Commission meeting to argue the decision as late as July 2003 since the Commission meets at various locations around the State. B) In November 2002, consideration of the tree ordinance was moved to the second regular meeting in January 2003. He believes that there are some internal issues that need to be resolved before it is set for a public heating. Therefore, the hearing will not be held on January 27th but it will be held once the additional work on the draft ordinance has been completed by staff. Page 15 - Council Meeting Minutes, January 13, 2003 28 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 13, 2003 TAPE READING 5659 MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS. Councilor McCallum stated that the Woodbum Fire District had a very successful bond sale following passage of their bond levy in November. The District is looking at new equipment and are starting to look at the process of remodeling of the main station. He also congratulated City Attorney Shields on his election as Chair of the Government Law Section of the Oregon State Bar. Councilor Bjelland stated that he had been elected as Vice-Chair of the Mid-Willamette Area Commission on Transportation (MWACT). Hopefully, he will be able to take a more active role On the Commission in pursuing Woodburn's interest on transportation issues. Additionally, he stated that Governor Kulongoski has put transportation as a fairly high item on his agenda of issues to be addressed in Oregon. He also stated that MWACT had identified the Newberg-Dundee bypass and the Woodburn interchange projects to be putup for federal earmarking of project funds. Region II accepted the projects and recommended the projects to ODOT. Senior staff members of ODOT will soon be making al final decision as to which projects they will be recommending to the Oregon Transporllation Commission meeting scheduled for January 15~h. In his discussions with ODOT staff, they did not think either one of the MWACT projects would get the final recommendation due to the limited amount of monies that might be available. He suggested that it make take involvement of Congressional Representative Hooley and Senator Courtney to put pressure on the decision makers so that the Woodburn transportation interests involving the interchange does not become forgotten. Lastly, he asked the Mayor to designate an MWACT alternate in case he is unable to attend an MWACT meeting. Mayor Figley requested that Councilors interested in being appointed to let her know and she will make an appointment at the next meeting. Mayor Figley stated that the City's website is being upgraded since it is a valuable source of information to the interested members of the public. She stated that all of the Councilors have e-mail boxes with the City and all are linked to the City's website. She has put her biographical information and her Welcome on the webpage, with a shortened version of her State of the City Address soon to be placed on the webpage. She requested that the Councilors write a short biography on themselves and submit the biography along with any other information to be posted to Administrator Brown or Matt Smith. She would like to see a City website in which people can effectively use the website as a means of communication and in getting information. Page 16 - Council Meeting Minutes, January 13, 2003 29 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 13, 2003 TAPE READING Tape 3 0010 EXECUTIVE SI~sSION. Mayor Figley entertained a motion to adjourn to executive session to 1 ) consult with counsel concernin;g the legal rights and duties of a public body with regard to current litigation or litigation likely to be filed pursuant to ORS 192.660(1)(h); and 2) to consider records that are e:~empt by law from public inspection pursuant to ORS 192.660(1)(0. MCCALLUM/S!FUENTEZ... adjourn to executive session under the statutory authority cited by the Mayor. The motion passed unanimously. The Council adjourned to executive session at 10:08 p.m. and reconvened at 10:45 p.m.. 0050 Mayor Figley stated that no decisions were made by the Council during executive session. NICHOLS/SIFUENTEZ .... meeting be adjourned. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:46 p.m.. APPROVED KATHRYN FIGLEY, MAYOR ATTEST Mary Tennant, Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 17 - Council Meeting Minutes, January 13, 2003 3O Executive Session COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES January 13, 2003 ROOM, CITY HALL, CITY OF WOODBURN, COUNTY OF DATE. CONFERENCE MARION, STATE OF OREGON, JANUARY 13, 2003. CONVENED. The Council met in executive session at 10:10 p.m. with Mayor Figley presiding. ROLL CALL. M~tyor Figley Present COuncilor Bjelland Present C0uncilor Cox Present COuncilor McCallum Present Councilor Nichols Present Cguncilor Sifuentez Present COuncilor Veliz Present Mayor Figley reminded the Councilors and staffthat information discussed in executive session is not to be discussed with the pul~lic. Staff Present: City Adminis!rator Brown, City Attorney Shields, City Recorder Tennant The executive session was called under the follow statutory authority: 1) to consult with counsel c0nceming the legal rights and duties of a public body with regard to current litigation or litigation likely to be filed pursuant to ORS 192.660(1)(h); and 2) to consider records that are exempt by law from public inspection pursuant to ORS 192.660(1)(f). ADJOURNMENT. The executive session adjourned at 10:44 p.m.. APPROVED KATHRYN FIGLEY, MAYOR ATTEST Mary Tennant, Recorder City of Woodbum, Oregon Page 1 - Executive Session, Council Meeting Minutes, January 13, 2003 31 8B Memorandum To: Mayor and City Council, through Public Works Director From: David N. Tolgeson, P.E., Assistant City Engineer Date: January 23,[2003 Subject: Alley Sewer Project Status Report The two-block reach, between Garfield Street and Cleveland Street, has been the scene of underground construction. Work began January 13, 2003, and contract work is expected to conclude about January 27, 2003. The objectives of the project included replacement of deteriorated sewer pipe, replacement of old masonry manholesi at three locations, and corrections to service line connections. The Work followed extensive TV investigation, dye and smoke testing. Tests revealed that only about half of the service connections were presently working. The remainder were either improperly abandoned, or were damaged and leaking. Because workspace in the alley is limited, the sewer pipe was replaced using "pipe bursting" methods. This method allows installation without excavation, except where service connections are made. (A seamless length of polyethylene sewer line and mandrel are pulled through the old, providing a new line of the same size as the old with a minimum of surface disruption.) Old brick manholes at Garfield, Arthur, and Cleveland have been replaced with pre-cast concrete structures. Installation of the manholes required the contractor to occupy the intersections, detouring traffic during work hours. This was necessary for safety of the public, and of the workmen. Because relocation of other utilities was also needed, the contractor was allowed to block Cleveland and Arthur overnight until others were finished with their work at these locations. (The Garfield location was open to traffic when possible, by use of steel plates covering the manhole excavation.) One of the unexpected but necessary relocations involved a city watermain in Cleveland. City forces performed the work (that was not included in the sewer contract) in two phases. The final step, which will include disinfection, reconnection, and surface restoration will be completed after the contractor has left the site. After completion of the sewer rehabilitation work, design and construction of another project is planned, involving storm drainage and surface improvements in the alley, utilizing the LID process. The ultimate goal for this section of alley is that it will resemble the section north of Hayes Street, unless urban renewal plans require it to be different. 32 IOA January 27, 2003 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council .~ FROM: John C. Brown, City Administrator ,,~C ~' SUBJECT: PortlandiGeneral Electric Franchise Recommendation: It is recommended the City Council adopt the attached ordinance granting Portland General Electric Company a non-exclusive franchise to operate an electric light and power system within the corporate limits of the City, fixing the terms and conditions thereof, providing an effective date, and repealing Ordinance 2109. Background: A franchise agreement with Portland General Electric (PGE) was approved in 1993, effective through Decexnber 31, 2002. On December 9, 2002 the City Council adopted Ordinance 2327, and egtended the franchise agreement until February 28, 2003. Ordinance 2109 (Attachment 1) established the relationship between PGE and the City related to the company's operation within city rights of way and for franchise and privilege tax payments. Pursuant to the franchise, PGE has a non-exclusive right to use City rights-of-way to deliver electricity to Woodburn customers. PGE is required to coordinate and receive city approval before excavating or working in the rights-of-way, and must relocate its facilities if requested. The agreement also dictates restoration of disturbed rights-of-way and provides for under-grounding of overhead lines. PGE is required to pay franchise fees equal to 3.5 percent of its gross revenues collected in the franchise area and is subject to privilege tax charges. Privilege tax charges amount to an additional 1.5 percent of the company's gross revenues collected in the franchise area. Discussion: PGE initiated franchise negotiations last summer, anticipating the December 31, 2002 franchise expiration. The Company's concerns focused on duration of the agreement; language regarding relocation and under-grounding of facilities, providing language that reflects the City's ability under SBl149 to calculate franchise fees and privilege taxes on either a "volumetric" or "revenue-based" basis; and clarifying audit requirements. City concerns focused on retaining maximum control over City rights of way, greater flexibility in under-grounding facilities, and continuity of service given the uncertain nature of PGE's future ownership. Although serious negotiations with PGE lasted nearly three months, the attached ordinance reflects little substantive change from the previous franchise. The City Honorable Mayor and City Council January 27, 2003 Page 2. continues to maintain control over the rights of way, can require relocation and under- grounding, and will approve work prior to work being undertaken. PGE will still restore disturbed rights of way in a manner and within the time required by the city, and is subject to both the 3.5 percent franchise fee and the 1.5percent privilege tax. PGE continues to be subject to audit requirements, and cannot transfer the franchise without City permission. Provigions regarding location and relocation of PGE facilities are modified to formalize Current City/Company coordination, and establish responsibility for obtaining additional rights-of-way from private parties to accommodate placement of PGE facilities based upon the interest being served. Provision regarding third party requests for temporary relocations is removed, and provisions regarding revocation of the franchise, and continuity of service following a transfer of ownership or termination of franchise are added. Franchise fee provisions are modified to reflect the city's calculation choices under SBl149, and insurance provisions have been updated to reflect current indemnification requirements. Other minor changes were also made to satisfy considerations of form, to reference applicable standards, and to recognize the overriding role the Oregon Public Utilities Commission plays in regulating PGE's operation and practices. The attached ordinance was negotiated in good faith and to the greatest extent possible addresses the concerns of both parties. Your approval of the franchise is, therefore, respectfully recommended. Financial Impact: PGE will pay an estimated $540,000 in franchise fees and privilege taxes to the City in FY 2002-03. JCB COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE GRANTING PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, AN OREGON CORPORATION, A NONEXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE FOR TEN YEARS TO OPERATE AN ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWER SYSTEM WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF WOODBURN, FIXING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 2109 THE CITY OF WooDBURN ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 - Fran~:hise Granted Portland General Electric Company, an Oregon Corporation ("Company"), is hereby granted a non-exclusive Franchise to operate an electric light and power system within the corporate limiis of the City of Woodburn ("City"), subject to the terms and conditions of this ordinance, A. DefinitionS. As used in this ordinance: "City" means the City of Woodburn, a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon, and its duly authorized officers, employees, agents or assigns. "City Engineer" means the duly appointed City Engineer of Woodbum, Oregon. "City RecOrder" means the duly appointed City Recorder of Woodburn, Oregon. "Company" means Portland General Electric Company. "Company facilities" means all poles, wires, fixtures, equipment, underground circuits, conduit, and other property necessary or convenient to the supply of electric energy owned or operated by the Company within the corporate limits of the City. "Corporate limits of the City of Woodburn" means the City boundary as it now exists or may be amended during the term of this Franchise. "Franchise to operate an electric light and power system" includes the right and privilege to erect, construct, repair, maintain and operate poles, wires, fixtures, conduit, equipment, underground circuits and other property necessary or convenient to supply the City, its inhabitants and other persons and territory with Page 1 - Council Bill No. Ordinance No. electric energy for light, power and other purposes, upon, over, along, under and across the streets, alleys, roads and any public right-of-way, property or place. "Gross revenue" includes any revenue earned by the Company within the City from the sale of electric energy after adjustment for the net write-off of uncollectible accounts computed on the average annual rate for the entire Company. excluding existing sales of electric energy sold by the Company to any public uti!ity when the public utility purchasing such electric energy is not the ultimate c~nsumer. Gross revenue shall include revenues from the use, rental or lease of the Company's operating facilities of the utility other than residential- type space and water heating equipment under tariffs filed with and approved by the Oregon Public Utility Commission (OPUC). Gross revenue shall not include proceeds from the sale of bonds, mortgages or other evidence of indebtedness, securities or stocks, revenue from joint pole use, or revenue paid directly by the United States of America or any of its agencies. The meaning of "gross revenue" as used in this ordinance shall be amended and interpreted consistently with regulations prescribed by OPUC for determining the amount of franchise fees allowed aS operating expenses of a utility for ratemaking purposes. "Person" !ncludes any individual, group of individuals, or legal entity. "OPUC" means the Oregon Public Utility Commission, and any successor or additional agency empowered by the State of Oregon to regulate public utilities. "Public project" means any project for work in the right of way that is not undertaken to benefit a specific development or redevelopment project on private property and that is not undertaken to benefit a public utility or service provider other than the City. "Public right-of-way" includes the public streets, alleys, roads, dedicated rights- of-way, easements, and other public property, way or place within the corporate limits of the City, and further includes that portion of private property upon which a preliminary subdivision or partition plat has been approved by the City for provision of public utilities within the corporate limit of the City, which is expected to be dedicated to the City and over which the City shall have administration, ownership and control. "Public utility" means any individual, partnership, cooperative, corporation or government agency buying electric energy and distributing such electric energy to other customers or users. Facilities Subject to Ordinance. All Company facilities within the City limits shall be deemed to be covered by the terms of this ordinance. Page 2 - Council Bill No. Ordinance No. 156 Compliance with Laws. The Company shall at all times be subject to all laws, statutes, ordinances, codes, rules, regulations, standards, and procedures regarding the Company's facilities, whether Federal, State or local, now in force or which, hereinafter, may be promulgated (including but not limited to zoning, land use, historic Preservation ordinances, safety standards, and other application requirements) ), unless specifically exempted. Unless otherwise specified in this ordinance, any action authorized or required to be taken by the City may be taken by the Woodburn City Council or its designee. Section 2 - Term of Franchise and Effective Date This ordinance sl~all become effective March 1, 2003, and shall terminate on December 31, 2012. Section 3 - RevOCation Ao General. In addition to any rights set out elsewhere in this document, the City reserves the fight to declare a forfeiture or otherwise revoke this Franchise, and all fights anti privileges pertaining thereto, under certain circumstances. Conditions of Revocation. The grounds for which the City may declare forfeiture or revoke the Franchise are the following: If the Company is in substantial violation of any material provision of the Franchise agreement and fails to correct the violation after written notice of the violation and proposed forfeiture and a reasonable opportunity thereafter to correct the violation; The Company becomes insolvent, unable or unwilling to pay its debts, or is adjudged bankrupt; The Company is found by a court of competent jurisdiction to have engaged in fraud or deceit upon the City; or The Company fails to obtain and maintain any right granted by any state regulatory body, required in order to provide electric service to customers within the City or to construct, maintain and operate the system; provided, however, that the Company shall be allowed a reasonable time to cure failure to obtain any permit. Due Process. Upon the occurrence of one of the events set out above, following 30 days written notice to Company of the occurrence and the proposed forfeiture and an opportunity for Company be heard, the City may by ordinance declare a forfeiture, In a hearing, the Company shall be afforded due process rights. Findings t~rom the hearing shall be written, and shall stipulate the reasons for the City's deCision. In the event the Company believes the City improperly has Page 3 - Council Bill No. Ordinance No. declared a forfeiture, the Company may file such proceeding as is appropriate in a court of competent jurisdiction. Do The City reserves the right to cancel this Franchise at any time upon one year's written notice to the Company in the event that the City decides to engage in public ownership of light and power facilities and the public distribution of electric energy to customers throughout the City. Section 4 - ConStruction to be Approved by City A. Before the Company may conduct underground work involving excavation, new construction or major relocation work in any public right-of-way, the Company shall first notify the City, furnish appropriate maps and drawings, and provide not less than i forty-eight (48) business day hours notice, except in the case of an emergency. The City will not sell or transmit Company maps or data to third parties unless permitted by the Company. The City shall upon request make available to the Company any City prepared maps or data which are a matter of public reCOrd, to facilitate permitting or the Company's capital planning. These maps or data shall be made available to Company upon payment of the applicable public records fees. Bo In the case of an emergency the Company shall file maps and drawings with the City Engineer showing any construction work done by the Company within the corporate limits of the City, within thirty (30) days after completion of the work. Co Such construction work shall be done in a reasonably safe manner in accordance with requirements of applicable ordinances, State laws, and rules. In all circumstances pertinent to this Franchise, any actions by the Company's contractors shall be the responsibility of the Company. Any contractor of the Company shall be bound by all terms and conditions of this Franchise. Section 5 - Location and Relocation of Company Facilities City Approval Required for Company Installations, Excavations and Restorations. Subject to City approval, the Company may make all necessary excavations in any public right-of-way for the purpose of erecting, locating, installing, constructing, repairing, maintaining, removing and relocating Company facilities. The location of Company facilities in the public right-of-way shall be at places approved by the City. Except in emergencies, the City may require the Company to obtain a permit prior to commencing any work pursuant to this section pursuant to the City's ordinances or regulations. In emergencies, the Company shall take reasonable measures to notify the City Engineer prior to commencing work. Bo Removal or Relocation - Temporary or Permanent. In accordance with ORS 221.420, the City may require the Company to remove and relocate transmission and distribution facilities maintained by the Company in any public rights of way, property 0r place of the City by giving notice to the Company. The Company Page 4 - Council Bill No. Ordinance No. Do shall, upon ten (10) days written notice from the City, respond and begin the design process to relocate such facilities. Both parties will, to the greatest possible extent, agree on a relocation plan that provides for a suitable location for both ground and aerial transmission. In the event of a disagreement regarding suitable location, the City's determination shall be final subject to state law and regulations including, but not limited to, the National Electrical Safety Code. If the City's determination of a location requires the acquisition of easements or right-of way, the required easements or right-of way from private property owners for such relocated facilities sufficient to maintain service will be obtained by the City. If acquisition of easements or right-of-way is required to satisfy Company's location requirements, the required easements or rights-of-way will be obtained by the Company from private property owners. The cost of removal or relocation of its facilities for public projects shall be paid by the Company. When the City requires the Company to relocate the same facilities that were previously relocated on another public works project that was completed within the past two years, thel cost will be borne by the City. This provision shall apply only to fully completed projects, and shall not apply to phases of the same project and minor relocation work. Overhead to Underground Conversion. As permitted by law, administrative rule, or regulation, the City may require the Company to remove any overhead facilities and replace those facilities within underground facilities at the same or different locations. Both parties will, to the greatest possible extent, agree on a relocation plan that provides for a suitable location. In the event of a disagreement regarding suitable location, the City's determination shall be final subject to state law and regulations including, but not limited to, the National Electrical Safety Code. If the City's determination of a location requires the acquisition of easements or right-of way, the required easements or right-of way from private property will be obtained by the City. If acquisition of easements or right-of-way is required to satisfy Company's location requirements, the required easements or rights-of-way will be obtained by the Company from private property owners. The expense of such a conversion shall be paid by the Company subject to OAR 860-022-0046 and the conversion itself shall be accomplished in the manner described by the rules of the OPUC. The Company shall collect conversion costs in accordance with OPUC rules. Nothing in this paragraph prevents the City and the Company from agreeing to a different form of cost recovery on a case-by-case basis. Notice Required. Except in an emergency, the Company shall provide not less than forty-eight (48) business day hours notice to the City Engineer prior to any work by the Company which involves excavation In the public right-of-way or relocatioa of Company facilities. The Company shall exercise all reasonable efforts to provide advance notice of such work so as not to disrupt City services or any other person using the right-of-way and to enable the City to inspect the work. Page 5 - Council Bill No. Ordinance No. 39 Company to Minimize Disruptions. Whenever work is performed in any public right-of-way, the Company shall take all reasonable precautions to minimize interruption to traffic flow, damage to property or creation of a hazardous condition.~ Restoration Required. When the Company makes any excavation or installation pursuant to this ordinance, the Company or its contractors shall restore the affected public right-of-way to the same condition which it was in prior to the excavation. All work done shall be subject to the reasonable rejection or correction requirements of the City Engineer and subject to the City Engineer's approval. If the Company fails to promptly restore the affected portion of the public right-of-way, the City may restore the right-of-way and charge all costs to the Company. If the Company inadequately restores the right-of-way, the City may repair the restored area to correct the defect and charge the cost to the Company~ provided that the City gives the Company notice of the defect and ten (10) days opportunity to correct the defect. All excavation and restoration work shall be !done in strict compliance with applicable rules, permits issued, regulations, ordinances or orders of the City and other applicable laws and regulations which may be adopted from time to time during the continuance of this Franchise by the City Council or as may otherwise be provided by law. Section 6 - Public Facilities and Improvements All Company facilities shall be placed so that they do not interfere with the use by the City or the public of any public right-of-way and in accordance with any requirements adopted by the City Council. Nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to prevent the City from severing, grading, paving, planking, repairing, widening, altering or doing any work that may be desirable on or in any public right-of-way. If possible, all such work shall be done so as not to obstruct, injure or prevent free use and operation of the electric light and power system of the Company. Bo Whenever the City performs or contracts for work in the right-of-way that may disturb but does not require the relocation of Company facilities, the City shall take reasonable measures to notify the Company in advance to enable Company to take measures to protect its facilities from damage or injury to the public. In such case, the Company shall furnish field marking to the City or contractor showing the approximate location of all of its facilities in the area involved in the construction. Co If space is available, the Company shall permit the City to run wires on Company poles or conduit for municipal purposes and to attach city alarms and police signals to Company poles, subject to the following conditions: Page 6 - Council Bill No. Ordinance No. 40 Such wires and signals shall be strung so as not to interfere with the wires of the Company and to conform to the provisions of the National Elgctrical Safety Code and any other applicable building code. City shall submit applications for permits for such attachments; The City shall not lease or sell space on Company poles or conduit to third parties, or in its facilities attached to Company poles or in conduit. The ' City may provide space in its facilities at no charge to entities using such space for a public purpose as long as such entities' use will cause no additional burden to Company poles or conduit or require any separate attachment on or space in Company poles or conduit; and o To the degree permitted by Oregon Law, the City shall defend, indemnify and hold the Company harmless from loss or damage resulting from damage to persons or property or injury or death to City employees, COmpany employees, or the public arising from the use of said poles by the City. The Company shall by permit allow the City to attach banners or other civic beautification or information items to poles of the Company subject to the following: The attachments shall not interfere with the wires of the Company and shall conform to the provisions of the National Electric Safety Code and any other applicable Federal, State or PUC regulation. The Company may regulate the location of such attachment or may deny requests for such attachments on a case-by-case basis if the attachment would violate the requirement of this subsection. In addition, all such attachments shall be in accordance with PGE's banners and attachments policy; and To the degree permitted by Oregon Law, the City shall defend, indemnify and hold the Company harmless from loss or damage resulting from damage to persons or property or injury or death to City employees, Company employees, or the public arising from the use of said poles by the City. The City shall maintain general liability insurance in the amount of at least $1,000,000; which shall name the Company as an additional insured, during use of the poles by the City pursuant to Sections 6 (c) and (d). Section 7- Continuous Service: Safety Standards Ao The Company shall furnish adequate and safe service for the distribution of electrical energy in the City. The Company shall use due diligence to maintain continuous 24-hour a day service which shall at all times conform at least to the standards: common in the business and to the standards adopted by the State. Under no circumstances shall the Company be liable for an interruption or failure Page 7 - Council Bill No. Ordinance No. of service caused by an act of God, unavoidable accident, or other circumstances beyond the control of the Company. The Company shall comply with all the applicable rules and regulations of the OPUC. Section 8 - Acceptance of Franchise Fees The rights and privileges granted by this Franchise are granted upon the conditions herein contained and alsr) upon the following conditions: mo PGE shall, within thirty (30) days from the effective date of this ordinance, file with the City Recorder its written acceptance of this Franchise (Exhibit "A". AcceptanCe of Franchise), subject to all the terms and conditions of this Franchisel If Company has not unconditionally accepted this ordinance within the above noted acceptance period, this ordinance shall become void. Bo In consideration of the rights and privileges granted by this Franchise, the Company shall pay to the City a franchise fee each calendar year during the life of this Franchise of three and one-half (3-1/2) percent of the gross revenue as defined herein for the immediately preceding calendar year. If the Company pays a franchise fee of more than 3.5% to another municipal corporation or the OPUC permits the Company to pay any municipality a percentage rate of compensation exceeding that provided for herein as an operating expense of the Company, the Company shall inform the City. The City shall have the right to immediately require and receive the same percentage fee permitted by the OPUC or paid by the Company to another municipal corporation. In consideration of the agreement of the Company to make such payments, the City agrees that no license, permit fee, tax or charge on the business or occupation of the Company shall be imposed upon the Company by the City during the term of this ordinance, except: This provision shall not exempt the property of the Company from lawful ad valorem taxes, local improvement district assessments, or conditions, exactions, fees and charges which are generally applicable to the Company's real property, use or development as required by the City's ordinances and regulations. The City shall retain the power to impose a privilege tax on the Company as permitted by Oregon law, so long as the combined franchise fee and privilege tax assessed against the Company does not exceed five (5) percent of the Company's gross revenue from within the City as defined in this ordinance. If the City decides to enact a privilege tax, the City shall provide the Company with sixty (60) days notice prior to the effective date of the ordinance enacting the tax. Page 8 - Council Bill No. Ordinance No. 42 Eo Fo Go On or before the first day of March of each year during the term of this Franchise, beginning in 2003, the Company shall file with the City Recorder a statement under oath showing the amount of gross revenue of the Company within the City on the basis outlined in paragraph (B) for the calendar year immediately preceding; the year in which the statement is filed. The annual franchise fee (and any privilege tax that may be assessed) for the year in which the statement is filed shall be computed on the gross revenue so reported. Such franchise fee (and any privilege tax that may be assessed) shall be payable annually on or before the first day of April, beginning in 2003. Any privilege tax enacted by the City shall be paid by the Company to the City beginning with the annual payment following enactment of the tax. The City Recorder shall issue a receipt for such annual payment, which shall be the full acquittance of the Company for the payment. Any dispute as to the amount of the Company's gross revenue within the meaning of this ordinance shall be resolved by the Public Utility Commission of Oregon after examination of the Company's records. Any difference of payment due the City through error or otherwise shall be payable within fifteen (15) days of written nOtice of discovery of such error. If the Company fails to pay any part of the annual payment for thirty (30) days after such payment is due pursuant to this ordinance, and after thirty (30) days written notice from the City, the City may either continue this Franchise in force and/or proceed by suit or action to collect said payment or declare a forfeiture of this Franchise because of the failure to make such payment but without waiving the right to collect earned franchise paymentsi Any overpayment to the City through error or otherwise shall be offset against the next payment to the City. The City may, consistent with state law and regulations, direct that the franchise fee and privilege tax, be calculated on volume-based methodologies as specifically described in ORS 221.655 instead of the gross revenue formula set out in Section 8 (B). Notice must be given to the Company in writing, by October 30th of each calendar year for implementation of volume-based methodology beginning January 1st of the following year. The volumetric calculation must remain in effect for an entire calendar year (January 1 to December 31 billings). No notice is necessary if the City chooses to remain on the gross revenue-based calculation. The City reserves the right to cancel this Franchise at any time upon one year's written notice to the Company in the event that the City decides to engage in public ownership of light and power facilities and the public distribution of electric energy. The Company shall not unjustly discriminate or grant undue preference to any users of the services provided by the Company pursuant to this Franchise. Page 9 - Council Bill No. Ordinance No. '1 4-3 Section 9 - Franchise Non-Transferable No TranSfer Without Consent. This Franchise may not be sold, assigned, transferred, leased, or disposed of, either in whole or in part, either by involuntary sale or by voluntary sale, merger, consolidation, nor shall title thereto, either legal or equitable, or any right, interest, or property therein pass to or vest in any person, nor may actual working control of the City be changed, transferred or acquired without the prior written consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. Notification. The Company shall promptly notify the City of any proposed change in, or transfer of, or acquisition by any other party of control of the Company. Co Request for Approval. The Company shall make a written request to the City for its approval of a sale or transfer of this Franchise and furnish all information required by law and the City. City Inquiry into Qualifications. In reviewing a request for sale or transfer of this Franchise~ the City may inquire into the legal, technical and financial qualifications of the prospective transferee, and Company shall assist the City in so inquiring. The City may condition said sale or transfer of this Franchise upon reasonable terms and conditions related to the legal, technical, and financial qualifications of the prospective transferee. mo Filing Evidence of Transfer. Within thirty (30) days of any transfer or sale of this Franchise, if approved or deemed granted by the City, Company shall file with the City a copy of the deed, agreement, lease or other written instrument evidencing such sale or transfer of ownership or control, certified and sworn to as correct by City and the transferee. Approval Not Waiver. The consent or approval of the City to any transfer by the Company shall not constitute a waiver or release of any rights of the City, and any transfer shall, by its terms, be expressly subordinate to the terms and conditions of this Franchise. Exceptions. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Section, the prior approval of the City shall not be required for any sale, assignment or transfer of the Franchise to an entity controlling, controlled by or under the same common control as Company provided that the proposed assignee or transferee must show financial responsibility as may be determined necessary by the City and must agree in writing to comply with all provisions of the Franchise. Page 10 - Council Bill No. Ordinance No. Section 10 - Continuity of Service Mandatory As long aS the City is included in the service territory allocated to the Company by the Oregon Public Utility Commission ("OPUC") pursuant to ORS 758.400 et seq., the Company shall provide electric service to customers within the corporate limits of the City in accordance with state statutes and regulations. Bo In the event of purchase, lease-purchase, condemnation, acquisition, taking over and holding of plant and equipment, sale, lease or other transfer to any other person, including any other Grantee of an Electric Light and Power System Franchise, the Company shall cooperate with the City and such person or other Grantee to make sure that customers within the corporate limits of the City continue to receive electric service during any period of transition. Section 11 - Books of Account and Reports The Company shall keep and maintain accurate books of account at an office in Oregon for the purpose of determining the amounts due to the City pursuant to Section 8 of this ordinance. The City may inspect the books of account, including computer retrieval information, at any time during the Company's business hours and audit the books from time to time. The City Council may require periodic reports from the company relating to its operation and revenues within the City. Section 12 - Utility Rates Set by the OPUC The rates charged by the Company for electric energy shall be as fixed or approved by the OPUC. Section 13 - Changes in Statutes or Rules If the State of Oregon or the OPUC amends or adopts a state statute or administrative rule that would affect a material term, condition, right or obligation under this Franchise, either party may reopen Franchise negotiations with regard to such term, condition, right or obligation in order to address the change required or allowed by the new or amended state statute or administrative rule. Section 14 - Indemnification The Company shall indemnify, defend and save harmless the City and its officers, agents and employees from any and all loss, cost and expense, including reasonable attorneys fees, arising from damage to property and/or injury or death of persons or any other damage resulting in whole or in part from any wrongful or negligent act or omission of the Company, its agents or employees in exercising the rights, privileges and franchise hereby granted. Page 11 - Council Bill No. Ordinance No. 415 Section 15 - Insurance Company shall be self-insured for any tort liability for the first $2 million of coverage or maintain an equivalent insurance policy. Beyond the $2 million retention, Company shall maintain liability ~overage in excess of $2 million for bodily injury and property damage, including liability assumed under contract. Section 16 - Franchise Nonexclusive This Franchise shall not be exclusive and shall not be construed as any limitation on the City to grant rights, privileges and authority to other persons or corporations similar to or different from those herein set forth. Section 17 - Rights not to be Construed as Enhancement to Company Property The City and the Company understand and agree that the privileges granted to the Company by this Franchise in the streets, alleys, roads and other public places of the City are not to operate so as to be an enhancement of the Company's properties or values or to be an asset or item of ownership in any appraisal thereof. Section 18 - Remedies and Penalties not Exclusive All remedies and penalties under this ordinance, including termination of the Franchise, are cumulative and not exclusive. Failure to enforce shall not be construed as a waiver of a breach of this Franchise. A specific waiver shall not be construed to be a waiver of a future breach or of any other term or condition of this Franchise. Section 19 - Severability Clause If any portion of this ordinance is deemed unlawful or void by a Court or regulatory body of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 20 - Prior Ordinance Repealed Ordinance No. 2109 is hereby repealed, and upon acceptance by the Company of this Franchise, all rights and obligations arising under Ordinance No. 2109, as amended, shall terminate. Page 12 - Council Bill No. Ordinance No. 4.6 Ciiy Attorney Approved: 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 Date Kathryn Figley, Mayor Page 13 - Council Bill No. Ordinance No. COUNCIL BILL NO.' 1486 ORDINANCE NO. 2109 ATTACHMENT Page I of__ AN ORDINANCE GliNTING PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, AN OREGON CORPORATION, A NON-EXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE TO OPERATE AN ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWER SYSTEM WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY, FIXING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. THE CITY OF WOODBURN ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Frar~chise Granted. Portland General Electric Company, an Oregon Corporation ("Company"), is hereby granted a non-exclusive franchise to operate an electric light and power system within the corporate limits of the City of Woodburn ("City"), subject to the terms and conditions of this ordinance, A. Definitions. As used in this ordinance: "City" means the City of Woodburn, a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon, and its duly authorized officers, employees, agents or assigns. "City Engineer" means the duly appointed City Engineer of Woodburn, Oregon. "City Recorder" means the duly appointed City Recorder of Woodburn, Oregon. "Company" Corporation. means Portland General Electric Company, an Oregon "Company facilities" means all poles, wires, fixtures, equipment, underground circuits and other property owned or in possession of the Company, directly used in connection with the transmission and distribution of electricity and located within the corporate limits of the City. 'Corporate limits of the City of Woodburn" means the city boundary as it now exists or may be amended during the term of this Franchise. "Franchise to Operate an Electric Light and Power System" includes the right and privilege to erect, construct, repair, maintain and operate poles, wires, fixtures, equipment, underground circuits and other property necessary or convenient to supply the City, its inhabitants and other persons and territory with electric energy Page I - Council Bill No. 1486 Ordinance No. 2109 48 ATTACI-J,MENT Page '..~.., of ! '~ for light, power and other purposes, upon, over, along, under and across any public right-of-way, property or place. "Gross irevenue" includes any revenue earned by the Company within the City from the sale of electric energy after adjustment for the net write-off of uncollectible accounts computed on the average annual rate for the entire Company, excluding existing sales of electric energy sold by the Company to any public utility when the public utility purchasing such electric energy is not the ultimate consumer. Gross revenue shall include revenues from the use, rental or lease of Operating facilities of the utility other than residential-type space and water heating equipment. Gross revenue shall not include proceeds from the sale of bonds, mortgages or other evidence of indebtedness, securities or stocks, revenue from joint pole use, or revenue paid directly by the United States of America or any of its agencies. The meaning of "gross revenue" as used in this ordinance shall be amended and interpreted consistently with regulations prescribed by PUC for determining the amount of franchise fees allowed as'operating expenses of a utility for rate-making purposes. "Person" includes any individual, group of individuals, or legal entity. "PUC" means the State of Oregon, Public Utility Commission, and any successor or additional agency empowered by the State of Oregon to regulate public utilities. "Public right-of-way" includes the public streets, alleys, roads, dedicated rights-of-way, easements, and other public property, way or place within the corporate limits of the City, and further includes private property upon which a preliminary subdivision or partition plat has been approved by the City for provision of public utilities within the corporate limits of the City. "Public utility" means any individual, partnership, cooperative, corporation or government agency buying electric energy and distributing such electric energy to other customers or users. B. Facilities Sub!ect to Ordinance. All Company facilities shall be deemed to be covered by the terms of this ordinance. C. Unless otherwise specified in this ordinance, any action authorized or required to be taken by the City may be taken by the Woodburn City Council or its designee. Section 2. Terms of Franchise. This ordinance shall become effective pursuant to the Woodburn Charter, is retroactive to January 1, 1993, and shall terminate on December 31, 2002, except: ' Page 2- Council Bill No. 1486 Ordinance No. 2109 4.9 ATTACHMENT. Page ~ of A. If the Co~mpany fails, neglects or refuses to perform any or all of its obligations or requirer~ents pursuant to this Franchise for thirty (30) days following written notice by the ~;it¥ demanding such performance, then this Franchise may be terminated by the City Council and the Company shall forfeit all rights and privileges hereby granted. B. If the State of Oregon or the PUC amends or adopts a state statute or administrative rule that would affect a material term, condition, right or obligation under this Franchise, either party may reopen Franchise negotiations with r. egard to such term, condition, right or obligation in order to address the change required or allowed by the new or amended state statute or administrative rule. C. If the COmpany is found guilty of providing fraudulent financial information to the City or fails to obtain or maintain any permit required by federal or state law. D. The City reserves the right to cancel this Franchise at any time upon one year's written notice tO the Company in the event that the City decides to engage in public ownership of ligiht and power facilities and the public distribution of electric energy. Section 3. Construction to be Approved by City. A. Before thee Company may conduct underground work involving excavation, new construction or major relocation work in any public right-of-way, the Company shall first notify the City, furnish appropriate maps and drawings, and provide not less than forty-eight (48) business day hours notice, except in the case of an emergency. B. In the case of an emergency the Company shall file maps and drawings with the City Engineer showing any construction work done by the Company within the corporate limits of the City, within thirty (30) days after completion of the work. C. Such construction work shall be done in a reasonably safe manner in accordance with requirements of applicable ordinances, State laws, and rules. In all circumstances pertinent to this Franchise, any actions by the Company's contractors shall be the responsibility of the Company. Any contractor of the company shall be bound by all terms and conditions of this Franchise. Section 4. Location and Reloc0tion of Company Facllitle.~. A. City APProval Reauired for Company Installations. Excavations end Restoration~. Subject to City approval, the Company may make all necessary excavations in any public right-of-way for the purpose of erecting, locating, Installing, constructing, repairing, maintaining, removing and relocating Company facilities. The location of Company facilities in the public right-of-way shall be at places approved Page 3- Council Bill No. 1486 Ordinance No. 2109 BO ! ATTAC.H, MENT_ Page H of, I I by the City. All poles of the Company shall be erected at the outside edge of the sidewalk unless oth~erwise directed by the City. Except in emergencies, the City may require the Company to obtain a permit prior to commencing any work pursuant to this section pursuant to the City's ordinances or regulations. In emergencies the Company shall take reasonable measures to notify the City Engineer prior to commencing work if the emergency occurs during working hours, if the emergency occurs after working hours or on the weekend, the Company shall notify the City by calling NORCOM Dispatch Center (982-5340) prior to commencing work. B. Notice Required. Except in an emergency, the Company shall provide not less than forty-eight! (48) business day hours notice to the City Engineer prior to any work by the ComPany which involves excavation in the public right-of-way or relocation of Company facilities. The Company shall exercise all reasonable efforts to provide advance notice of such work so as not to disrupt City services or any other person using the right-of-way and to enable the City to inspect the work. C. ComDar~v to Minimize Disruotion~. Whenever work is performed in any public right-of-way, the Company shall take all reasonable precautions to minimize interruption to traffic flow, damage to property or creation of a hazardous condition. D. Restoration Reauir~d. When the Company makes any excavation or installation pursuant to this ordinance, the Company or its contractors shall restore the affected public right-of-way to the same condition which it was in prior to the excavation. All work done shall be subject to the reasonable rejection or correction requirements of the City Engineer and subject to the City Engineer's approval. If the Company fails to promptly restore the affected portion of the public right-of-way, the City may restore the right-of-way and charge all costs to the Company. If the Company inadequately restores the right-of-way, the City may repair the restored area to correct the defect and charge the cost to the Company, provided that the City gives the Company notice of the defect and ten (10) days opportunity to correct the defect, All excavation and restoration work shall be done in strict compliance with applicable rules, permits issued, regulations, ordinances or orders of the City and other applicable laws and regulations which may be adopted from time to time during the continuance of this Franchise by the City Council or as may otherwise be provided by law. Section 5. Company Reauired to Relocate Fpcilities Uoon Noticc. A. Whenever the City finds it necessary to relocate any I~ompany facility, the Company shall, upon ten (10} days written notice from the City, relocate such equipment at the Company's expense. If the Company fails to do so, the City may relocate such equipment at the expense of the Company. Prior to any such relocation the City agrees to provide for suitable location for such relocated facilities sufficient to maintain services. Page 4- Council Bill No. 1486 Ordinance No. 2109 51 ATTACHMENT Page _-~._ of B. Subject to Oregon law, the City shall have the right to require the removal of overhead electric facilities and require the replacement of those facilities with underground electric facilities at the same or different locations. The expense of such a conversion Shall be paid by the Company subject to OAR 860-22-046. The conversion shall be accomplished in the manner described by the rules of the PUC, or in another manner which is mutually agreeable to both the Company and the City. Section 6. TemPorarY Rearrangement of Facilities. On seven (7) days written notice from a person desiring to move a building, machinery or other object, the Company shall temporarily rearrange or remove aerial cables, wires or other apparatus of the Company to permit the passage of such object. The notice shall: (1) bear the approval of the City Engineer, (2) detail the route of movement of the building, machinery or other object; (3) provide that the costs incurred by the ComPany in making such rearrangements of its aerial plant will be borne by the person giving the notice; and (4) provide that the person giving such notice will indemnify and hold the Company and the City harmless of and from any and all damages or claims of whatsoever kind or nature caused directly or indirectly from such temporary rearrangement of the aerial plant of the Company. The Company may require that the notice be accompanied by a cash deposit or a good and sufficient bond to pay any and all such costs as estimated by the Company. Section 7. Public Facilities end Improvements. A. All Company facilities shall be placed so that they do not interfere with the use by the City or the public of any public right-of-way and in accordance with any requirements adopted by the City Council. Nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to prevent the City from sewering, grading, paving, planking, repairing, widening, altering or doing any work that may be desirable on or in any public right-of- way. If possible, all such work shall be done so as not to obstruct, injure or prevent free use and operation of the electric light and power system of the Company. B. Whenever the City performs or contracts for work in the right-of-way that may disturb but d~)es not require the relocation of Company facilities, the City shall take reasonable measures to notify the Company in advance to enable Company to take measures to protect its facilities from damage or injury to the public. In such case, the Company shall furnish field marking to the City or contractor showing the approximate location of all of its facilities in the area involved in the construction. C. The Company shall permit the City to string wires on poles of the Company for any municipal purpose and to attach to the top of any pole city firc alarms and police signals, subject to the following conditions: Page 5 - Council Bill No. 1486 Ordinance No. 2109 ATTACHMENT Page _.(,g- of ~ (1) Such wires and signals shall be strung so as not to interfere with the wires of the Company and to conform to the provisions of the National Electrical Safety Code and any other applicable building code; and (2) TO the degree permitted by Oregon Law, the City shall defend, indemnify and hold the Company harmless from loss or damage resulting from damage to property or injury or death to City employees, Company employees, or the public arising from the use of said poles by the City. D. The COmpany shall permit the City to attach banners or other civic beautification or information items to poles of the Company subject to the following: (1) The attachments shall not interfere with the wires of the Company and shall conform tothe provisions of the National Electric Safety Code and any other applicable Federal, State or PUC regulation. The Company may regulate the location of such attachment or may deny requests for such attachments on a case-by-case basis if the attachment would violate the requirement of this subsection. (2) To the degree permitted by Oregon Law, the City shall defend, indemnify and hold the Company harmless from loss or damage resulting from damage to persons or property or injury or death to City employees, Company employees, or the public arising from the use of said poles by the City. The City shall maintain general liability insurance in the amount of at least $1,000,000, which shall name the Company as an additional insured, during use of the poles by the City pursuant to Section 7(D). Section 8. Continuous Service; Safew ,Standards. A. The Company shall furnish adequate and safe service for the distribution of electrical energy in the City. The Company shall use due diligence to maintain continuous 24-hour a day service which shall at all times conform at least to the standards common in the business and to the standards adopted by the State. Under no circumstances shall the Company be liable for an interruption or failure of service caused by an act of God, unavoidable accident, or other circumstances beyond the control of the Company. B. The Company shall comply with all the rules and regulations of the Oregon Public Utility Commission. Section 9. Acceotance of Franchise Fee-_,. The rights and privileges granted by this Franchise are granted upon the conditions herein contained and also upon the following conditions: Page 6- Council Bill No. 1486 Ordinance No. 2109 53 T-" [ ATTACHMENT Page ~'~_ of A. Portland General Electric Company shall, within thirty (30) days from the effective date of this ordinance, file with the City Recorder its written acceptance of this Franchise (Exhibit "A". Acceptance of Franchise), subject to all the terms and conditions of this Franchise. If Company has not unconditionally accepted this ordinance within the above noted acceptance period, this ordinance shall become void. B. In consideration of the rights and privileges granted by this Franchise, the Company shall pay to the City a franchise fee each calendar year during the life of this Franchise of three and one-half (3½) percent of the gross revenue as defined herein for the immediately preceding calendar year. In the event that the Company shall agree to pay a franchise fee of more than three and one-half (3~) percent to any city or municipal corporation served by the Company or in the event that the PUC permits the Company to pay any municipality a percentage rate of compensation exceeding that provided for herein as an operating expense of the Company, however, the Company shall immediately so inform the City of Woodburn. The City shall have the right to immediately require and receive the same percentage fee or compensation as that agreed to for the other municipality or provided for by the PUC. C. In consideration of the agreement of the Company to make such payments, the City agrees that no license, tax or charge on the business or occupation of the Company shall be imposed upon the Company by the City during the term of this ordinance, except: (1) this provision shall not exempt the property of the Company from lawful ad valorem taxes, local improvement district assessments, or conditions, exactions, fees and charges which are generally applicable to the Company's real property, use or development as required by the City's ordinances and regulations. (2) The City shall retain the power to impose a privilege tax on the Company as permitted by Oregon law, so long as the combined franchise fee and privilege tax assessed against the Company does not exceed five (5) percent of the Company's gross revenue from within the City as defined in this ordinance. If the City decides to enact a privilege tax, the City shall provide the Company with sixty (60) days notice prior to the effective date of the ordinance enacting the tax. D. On or before the first day of March of each year during the term of this Franchise, beginning in 1993, the Company shall file with the City Recorder a statement under oath showing the amount of gross revenue of the Company within the City on the basis outlined in paragraph (b) for the calendar year immediately preceding the year in which the statement is filed. The annual franchise fee (and any privilege tax that may be assessed) for the year in which the statement is filed shall be computed on the gross revenue so reported. Such franchise fee (and any privilege tax that may be assessed) shall be payable annually on or before the first day of April, beginning in 1993. Any privilege tax enacted by the City shall be paid by the Page 7 - Council Bilt No. 1486 Ordinance No. 2109 ATTACHMENT Page '~_ of Company to the City beginning with the annual payment following enactment of the tax. The City Recorder shall issue a receipt for such annual payment, which shall be the full acquittance of the Company for the payment. Any dispute as to the amount of the Company's gross revenue within the meaning of this ordinance shall be resolved by the PUblic Utility Commission of Oregon after examination of the Company's records. Any difference of payment due the City through error or otherwise shall be payable within fifteen (1§) days of written notice of discovery of such error. If the Company fails to pay any part of the annual payment for thirty (30) days after such payment is due pursuant to this ordinance, and after thirty (30) days written notice from the City, the City may either continue this Franchise in force and/or proceed by suit or action to collect said payment or declare a forfeiture of this Franchise because of the failure to make such payment but without waiving the right to collect earned franchise payments. Any overpayment to the City through error or otherwise shall be offset against the next payment to the City. E. The City reserves the right to cancel this Franchise at any time upon one year's written notice to the Company in the event that the City decides to engage in public ownership of light and power facilities and the public distribution of electric energy. F. The Company shall not sell, assign, transfer or convey this Franchise without the consent of the City Council. G. The Company'shall not unjustly discriminate or grant undue preference to any users of the services provided by the Company pursuant to this Franchise. Section 10. Books of Ac~oljnt end Reoorts. The Company shall maintain accurate books of account at an office in Oregon for the purpose of determining the amounts due to the City under Section 9 of this ordinance. The City may inspect the books of account, including computer retrieval information, at any time during the Company's business hours and may audit the books from time to time. Section 11. UtiliW Rates Set by PUC. The rates charged by the Company for electric energy shall be as fixed or approved by the PUC. Section 12. Indemnification. The Company shall indemnify, defend and save harmless the City and its officers, agents and employees from any and all loss, cost and expense, including reasonable attorneys fees, arising from damage to property and/or injury or death of persons or any other damage resulting in whole or in part from any wrongful or negligent act or omission of the Company, it agents or employees in exercising the rights, privileges and franchise hereby granted. Section 13. Insurance. Company shall be self-insured for any tort liability for the first $1 million of coverage or maintain an equivalent insurance policy. Beyond the $1 million retention, Company shall maintain liability coverage in excess of $1 Page 8 - Council Bill No. 1486 Ordinance No. 2109 ATTACHMENTI Page_.~_ of I { million for bodily injury and property damage, including liability assumed under contract. Company shall defend or negotiate any claims against the City, its officers, agents and employeeS, arising out of Company's exercise of its rights and privileges granted by this Franchise. Section 14. Franchise Nonex~;Iu~iv~. This Franchise shall not be exclusive and shall not be construed as any limitation on the City to grant rights, privileges and authority to other persons or corporations similar to or different from those herein set forth. Section 15. Rights not to be Construed as Enh{~ncement to Company PropertY. The City and the Company understand and agree that the privileges granted to the Company by this FranChise in the streets, alleys, roads and other public places of the City are not to operate so as to be an enhancement of the Company's properties or values or to be an asset or item of ownership in any appraisal thereof. Section 16. Remedies and Penalties not Exclusive. All remedies and penalties under this ordinance, ~ncluding termination of the Franchise, are cumulative and not exclusive. Failure to enforce shall not be construed as a waiver of a breach of this Franchise. A specific Waiver shall not be construed to be a waiver of a future breach or of any other term or condition of this Franchise. Section 17. SeverabiliW Clause. If any portion of this ordinance is deemed unlawful or void by a Court or regulatory body of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not effect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 18. Prior Ordinance Repealed. Ordinance No. 1333, as amended by Ordinance 2096, is hereby repealed, and upon acceptance by the Company of this Franchise, all rights and obligations arising under Ordinance No. 1333, as amended, shall terminate. Section 19. Emeraencv Clause. 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. Appr°vedastoform'~'~'~ ~ 7Jt ~_'Z~ ~'~ e City Attorney APPROVED: (~ ~~ LEI~ KELLE~', MAY~R Passed by the Council. July 26, 1993 Page 9 - Council Bill No. 1486 Ordinance No. 2]09 56 Submitted to the Mayor Approved by the Mayor Filed in the Office of the Recorder Mary ~z, 'y Recorde~ City of Woodburn, Oregon ATTACHMENT P~e ..4.R_ of July 27, 1993 July 27, 1993 July 27, 1993 Page 10 - Council Bill No. 1486 Ordinance No. 2109 5"/ ATTACHMENT Page ~ of EXHIBIT 'A' ACCEPTANCE OF FRANCHISE WHEREAS, the City of Woodburn, Oregon under date of July 26, 1993, passed Ordinance No. 2109 entitled as follows: AN ORDINANCE GRANTING PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, AN OREGON CORPORATION, A NON-EXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE TO OPERATE AN ELECTRIC LIGHT AN POWER SYSTEM WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY, FIXING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned, Portland General Electric Company, the grantee named in said Ordinance does for itself and its successors and assigns accept the terms, conditions and provisions of Ordinance No. 2109 and agrees to be bound thereby and comply thereWith. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Portland General Electric Company has caused this instr~ent to be executed by its officer as below subscribed this ~-~ day of ~~ ~ ,1993. PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY Fr Lamoureaux Vice President, Utility Services Received by the City of Woodburn, this 1993. CITY OF WOODBURN Ch~s Ch~[ds c~[y Ada~n~s[~a~o~ day of f:\wpdata\franchis\woodburn 10B CITY OF WOODBURN Community DevelOpment MEMORANDUM 270 Montgomery Street Woodbum, Oregon 97071 (50~ 982-5246 Date: To: F rom: Subject: January 27, 2003 Honorable Mayor and City Council through City Administrator Jim Mulder, Director of Community Development' :~J? OrdinanCe Denying Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment 01-03 and Zone Change 01-07 (Doman) Recommendation: Approve the attached ordinance denying Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment 01-03 and Zone Change 01-07. Background: The City Council, at its January 13, 2003 meeting, directed staff to prepare an ordinance to deny the above referenced applications. That ordinance is attached. 59 COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE DENYING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT APPLICATION CASE iNO. 01-03 AND ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION CASE NO. 01- 07 AFFECTING PROPERTY LOCATED AT 373 GATCH STREET; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, the applicant, Tim Doman, submitted Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment ApplicatiOn Case No. 01-03 to amend the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan Map designation on property located at 373 Gatch Street from Low Density Residential (less than 12 units per acre) to High Density Residential (greater than 12 units per acre) and Zone Change Application Case No. 01-07 to change the Zone Map designation from Single-Family ReSidential (RS) District to Multi-Family Residential (RM) District; and WHEREAS, the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan Map and Woodburn Zoning Map have established certain land uses within the City of Woodburn's Urban Growth Boundary; and WHEREAS, the Woodburn Planning Commission has previously conducted a public hearing and considered the applications filed herein; and WHEREAS, the Woodburn City Council has conducted a public hearing and reviewed the record in Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment Application Case No. 01- 03 and Zone Change Application Case No. 01-07; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF WOODBURN ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That based upon the findings and conclusions contained in Exhibit "A" which is affixed hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment Application Case No. 01-03 and Zone Change Application Case No. 01-07 are denied. 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. City Attorney Date Page 1 - COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. 60 Passed by the Council Submitted to the Mayor Approved by the Mayor Filed in the Office of the Recorder Approved: Kathryn Figley, Mayor ATTEST: Mary Tennant City Recorder City of Wbodburn, Oregon Page 2 - COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. 6! EXHIBIT "A" FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT APPLICATION CASE NO. 01-03 ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION CASE NO. 01-07 I. APPLICATION INFORMATION: Applicant: Tim Doman 2 Progress Way Woodburn, OR 97071 Property Owner: Earl & Donna Doman 2 Progress Way Woodburn, OR 97071 I1. NATURE OF APPLICATION: The applicant requests to change the Comprehensive Plan Map designation on a residential property from Low Density Residential (less than 12 units per acre) to High Density Residential (greater than 12 units per acre) and change the Zone Map designation from Single-Family Residential (RS) District to Multi-Family Residential (RM) District. No site plan review application has been made for development on the property. The applicant submitted a conceptual site plan showing proposed multi-family apartment units on the subject property. III. RELEVANT FACTS: The subject site is located north of Young Street on the west side of Gatch Street. It is addressed at 373 Gatch Street, further identified on Marion County Assessor Maps as Township 5 South, Range 1 West, Section 18AA, Tax Lot 6300. The property is currently zoned RS (Single-Family Residential) District with a Comprehensive Plan Map designation of Low Density Residential. The property is one acre in size and is virtually fiat. There is currently a single-family home on the site with a detached garage and mature trees. Although the applicant provided a conceptual site plan for an apartment complex on the property, a formal site plan review application was not submitted as part of the Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zone Change applications. The applicant intends to develop the property in the future with a multi-family complex that would connect to the existing Heritage Arms apartment complex at 669 Young Street. The owner of the subject property also owns this adjacent apartment complex. The adjacent properties to the north and west are zoned RS District and are designated on the Comprehensive Plan Map as Low Density Residential. The property to the north currently has a 3-plex multi-family building, and the property to the west is undeveloped. The adjacent properties to the east (across Gatch Street) are zoned RM (Multi-Family Residential) District and RS District, and they are designated on the Comprehensive Plan Map as High Density Residential and Low Density Residential; these properties consist of single-family homes, duplexes, and 3-plexes. The adjacent properties to the south are zoned RS and RM District and are designated on the Comprehensive Plan Map as High Density Residential; these properties consist of single-family homes, a vacant lot, and an apartment complex (Heritage Arms). IV. RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA: Comprehensivei Plan Map Amendment 01-03 A. Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines B. Woodbum Comprehensive Plan 1. Residential Land Development Policies 2. Housing Goals and Policies 3. Public Service Goals and Policies 4. Growth and Urbanization Policies C. Woodburn Z~ning Ordinance (WZO) 1. Chapter 16. Comprehensive Plan Amendment Procedure Zone Change 01-07 Bo Woodburn Zoning Ordinance Chapter 15. Zone Change Procedure Chapter 16. Comprehensive Plan Amendment Procedure Woodbum Access Management Ordinance Woodbum Transportation System Plan V. FINDINGS: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT 01-03 A. Statewide Planning Goals Goal '1 -Citizen Involvement FINDING: Goal 1 calls for "...the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process..." The citizen involvement procedures and policies for Woodbum are established in the Woodbum Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. This goal was met through the appropriate notice and public hearing procedures. CPA 01-03, ZC 01-07 Find~gs 2 63 Goal 2- Land Use Planning FINDING: Goall 2 outlines the basic procedures of Oregon's statewide planning program. It says that land use decisions are to be made in accordance with a comprehensive plan, and that suitable "implementation ordinances" to put the plan's policies into effect must be adopted. The Woodburn Comprehensive Plan is acknowledged as complying with Statewide Planning Goals. This application is being processed under the provisions set forth in the City's Comprehensive Plan. This goal has been met. Goal 3- Agricultural Lands FINDING: Goal 3 defines "agricultural lands." It then requires counties to inventory such lands and to "preserve and maintain" them through farm zoning. The subject property is currently within the city limits and urban growth boundary. Therefore, this goal is not applicable. Goal 4- Forest Lands FINDING: This goal defines forest lands and requires counties to inventory them and adopt policies and ordinances that will "conserve forest lands for forest users." The suibject property is currently within the city limits and urban growth boundary. Therefore, this goal is not applicable. Goal 5 - Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Resources, and Natural Resources FINDING: Goal 5 covers more than a dozen natural and cultural resources such as wildlife habitats and wetlands. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to allow more intensive uses on the property does not affect any open space, scenic, historic, or natural resource. Wetlands are not identified on the subject property in the Local Wetlands Inventory. In addition, the site is outside of the 500-year floodplain. The applicant has shown compliance with this goal. Goal 6 - Air, Water and Land Resources Quality FINDING: This goal requires local comprehensive plans and implementing measures to be consistent with state and federal regulations on matters such as groundwater pollution. The site has no significant natural vegetation. Public water, sewer, and storm drainage are already available to the property, and the City's systems are designed to comply with the Department of Environmental Quality standards for environmental quality. CPA 01-03, ZC 01-07 Findings 3 64. There is the potential of an increase in auto trips to and from the property if it is developed with Uses permitted in the RM District. This could increase the level of air pollutants in the area. However, this type of air pollution is a result of land that has been designated for residential development in the City's Comprehensive Plan. The applicant has shown compliance with this goal. Goal 7 - Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards FINDING: Goal 7 deals with development in places subject to natural hazards such as floods or landslides. There are no known hazards associated with the subject site. The site is relatively fiat and is located outside of the 500-year floodplain. The applicant has shown compliance with this goal. Goal 8 - ReCreational Needs FINDING: This goal calls for each community to evaluate its areas and facilities for recreation and develop plans to deal with the projected demand for them. The subject sit(~ is designated for residential development. The City's existing codes and ordinances ensure that recreational needs could be met if the property were developed for high density residential uses. The applicant has shown compliance with this goal. Goal 9 - EcOnomic Development FINDING: Goal 9 calls for the diversification and improvement of the economy. The proposed change from the Comprehensive Plan Map designation of Low Density Residential to High Density Residential would allow higher density residential development on the subject property, which would generate construction jobs and could increase property tax revenue. The applicant has shown compliance with this goal. Goal 10 - Housing FINDING: This goal specifies that each city must plan for and accommodate needed housing types. It requires each city to inventory its buildable residential lands, project future needs for such lands, and plan and zone enough buildable land to provide an opportunity to meet these needs. The City proposed an inventory and housing needs projection when it adopted the acknowledged Comprehensive Plan. The Plan remains in compliance with Goal 10 until conclusion of periodic review work tasks related to Goal 10. While undertaking its pedodic review Woodburn has caused several studies to be done. One of those studies is the Woodbum Buildable Lands and Urbanization Project, February 7, 2000. Another is the Final Economic Opportunity Analysis CPA 01-03, ZC 01-07 Findings 4 and Economic Development Strategy Report, June 27, 2001. The City Council has adopted neither of these reports. The applicant relied on data from these reports to claim that there is a projected need for additional multiple family housing in Woodburn. The City is continuing its periodic review analysis, including a housing needs analysis being prepared by Winterbrook Planning. The final buildable lands inventory and housing needs project rely on data that have not been reconciled and completed. The numbers in the reports may or may not be indicative of Woodburn's future needs. The data, projections and policy choices will be resolved through the periodic review planning process. The 2000 Woodburn Buildable Lands and Urbanization Project Final Report shows a surplus of existing high density residential land in the City that could be used to provide a wide variety of housing types without redesignating the subject property. However, information generated through recent and on-going studies pertaining to the City's Periodic Review Work Program, including the Economic Opportunities Analysis and updated population projections prepared by ECOnorthwest and the updated buildable lands inventory and housing needs analysis currently being prepared by Winterbrook Planning, indicates that the City will most likely have a significant deficit of both Iow and high density residential land over the next 20 years. During the next year, City staff proposes to bring before the City Council alternatives for accommodating this additional need for Iow and high density housing. These alternatives will likely include a combination of increased land use efficiency within the city and an expansion of the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). It is premature at this time to determine how this proposed land use change will coincide with those alternatives. The City cannot at this point determine whether it would be appropriate to eliminate Iow density residential on the subject site to increase the inventory of high density residential land since there will be a need for additional Iow density residential land also. The applicant has not shown compliance with this goal. Goal 11 - Public Facilities and Services FINDING: Goal 11 calls for efficient planning of public services such as sewers, water, law enforcement, and fire protection. The subject site is an infill property, and all necessary public services and facilities are available to serve the subject site and future uses allowed under the High Density Residential designation. Future development on the property would be required to conform to the City's public facility and services requirements. The applicant has shown compliance with this goal. CPA 01-03, ZC 01-07 Findings 66 Goal 12 - Transportation FINDING: This goal aims to provide "a safe, convenient and economic transportation system." The subject site has access to Gatch Street and is near its intersection with Young Street. Gatch Street is classified as a service collector, and Young Street as a minor arterial. These are existing improved roadways. The applicant has submitted a traffic impact analysis prepared by Associated Transportation Engineering & Planning, Inc., dated September 19, 2002. The traffic impact analysis indicates that the proposed change in land use designation on the subject property from single family to multiple family residential will result in a slight increase in delays drivers will experience at the studied intersections if the proposed 20 apartments are constructed instead of four additional single family homes. This traffic impact analysis was reviewed by the Woodburn Public Works Program Manager. In a memo dated December 10, 2002 he concluded that the analysis is an accurate analysis of the project's potential traffic impacts and the difference in impacts from the two potential uses is minimal with no impact on the 20-year projected level of service. Based on this information, the applicant has provided substantial evidence that a change in the Comprehensive Plan Map designation from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential would not adversely affect planned facilities of the Transportation System Plan (TSP). The applicant has shown compliance with this goal. Goal 13 - Energy Conservation. FINDING: Goal 13 declares that "land uses developed on the land shall be managed and controlled so as to maximize the conservation of all forms of energy, based upon sound economic principles." Current state building codes for energy efficiency would ensure that future structures on the property would maximize the conservation of all forms of energy. Goal 14 - Urbanization FINDING: This goal requires cities to estimate future growth and needs for land and then plan and zone enough land to meet those needs. It calls for each city to establish an "urban growth boundary" (UGB) to "identify and separate urbanized land from rural land." The subject site is located within the Woodburn UGB. In the applicant's hearing statement the applicant argues that Goal 14 does not apply. This decision concerns a potential increase of density on land within the UGB and consequently Goal 14 does not apply. Goals 15- 19 CPA 01-03, ZC 01-07 Findings 6 67 FINDING: Goals 15 through 19 address the Willamette Greenway, estuarine resources, coastal shorelands, beaches, dunes and ocean resources. These goals are not applicable to the City of Woodburn. B. Woodburn Comprehensive Plan Residential Land Development Policies A-1 Residential areas should be designed around a neighborhood concept. Neighborhoods should be an identifiable unit bounded by arterial non-residential uses, or natural features of the terrain. The neighborhood should have a community facility, such as a school, park, or privately owned community facility to allow for interaction within the neighborhood. FINDING: The change from a Low Density Residential designation to a High Density Residential designation would allow uses on the subject site that would not create a neighborhood but would become part of an existing neighborhood. The nearest school to the subject property is Washington Elementary, and the nearest park is Wyffel Park, both of which are near the Lincoln Street/Gatch Street intersection. The applicant has shown compliance with this policy. A-2 Living Environment - Developments in residential area be constructed in such a way that they will not seriously deteriorate over time. Zoning ordinances should be strictly enforced to prevent encroachment of degrading non-residential uses. Construction standards in the State Building Code shall be vigorously enforced, and if necessary, additional standards the City determines should be imposed to insure non-degrading housing units, should be encouraged by the City. FINDING: High density residential uses on the subject property would be required to be developed in conformance with the City of Woodburn Zoning Ordinance. The uses that would be allowed on the property through the Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment from a Low Density Residential designation to a High Density Residential designation would also be required to comply with other applicable City standards and the State of Oregon building codes. This policy is not a criterion for quasi-judicial land use decisions. A-3 Development should promote, through the use of moderate density standards and creative design, a feeling of openness and spaciousness with sufficient landscaped area and open space to create a pleasant living environment. CPA 01-03, ZC 01-07 Findings 68 FINDING: The uses allowed under the proposed High Density Residential designation are required by zoning regulations to be provided with landscaping and open space to mitigate the impacts of increased density. Future development on the property would be required to comply with these regulations.. A-4 Streets in residential areas should be used by residents for access to collectors and arterials. Residential streets should be designed to minimize their use for through traffic, however, whenever possible dead-end streets and cul-de-sacs should be avoided. FINDING: The street pattern is already established in this neighborhood. Gatch Street is designated as a service collector in the Woodburn Transportation System Plan. Gatch Street connects to Young Street to the south, which is a minor arterial. Young Street provides direct access to Hwy 99E, a major arterial. Existing street access to the subject property is adequate for the proposed high density residential designation. This policy has been met by the applicant. A-5 Residential developments should strive for creative design which will maximize the inherent values of the land being developed and encourage slow moving traffic. Each residential development should provide for landscaping and tree planting to enhance the livability and aesthetics of the neighborhoods. FINDING: No new streets are proposed as part of this project. Gatch Street has been fully improved and provides adequate right-of-way access to the site. Future development of the site with high density residential uses would be subject to design and landscaping requirements to enhance the aesthetics and livability of the neighborhood. A-6 to A-9 FINDING: Residential Policies A-6 to A-9 address non-residential uses in residential areas. They are therefore not applicable to the applicant's Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment request since non-residential uses are not proposed as part of this request. A-10 High density residential areas should be located so as to minimize the possible deleterious effects on adjacent Iow density residential developments. When high density and Iow density areas abut, density should decrease in those areas immediately adjacent to Iow density residential land. Whenever possible, buffering should be practiced by such means as landscaping, sight-obscuring fences and hedges, and increased setbacks. CPA 01-03, ZC 01-07 Findings 8 69 FINDING: The adjacent properties to the north and west are designated on the Comprehensive Plan Map as Low Density Residential. Low density residential parcels almost completely surround the subject property. High density residential parcels are intermixed with the Iow density residential parcels to the south. The Iow density residential parcel directly to the north has a 3-plex on it (Tax Lot 6200), although it has the appearance of a single-family home. The Iow density residential parcel to the northwest of the subject property (Tax Lot 3300) is currently vacant. The parcel directly to the east (across Gatch Street) has a single-family home on it. Three Iow density residential designated parcels (Tax Lots 3600, 3900 & 4000) are located adjacent to the south property line of the subject site. Tax Lots 3600 and 4000 have single-family homes on them, and Tax Lot 3900 is currently vacant. The applicant first notes that the first sentence concerns possible deleterious effects on adjacent Iow density residential developments. The applicant argues that for this policy to apply to an adjacent property, the property must be developed. The City Council does not construe this policy that narrowly. The policy concerns potential deleterious effects on present and future developments on adjacent Iow density residential land. The applicant, correctly, notes that the meaning of the term "deleterious effect" was not identified. Synonyms for the term "deleterious" include, harmful, detrimental, bad, and destructive. The policy inherently assumes that high residential uses may have deleterious effects on Iow density uses. This policy does not require that there be no such effects. Rather, it requires those effects to be minimized when high density residential areas are located adjacent to Iow density areas. The applicant has the burden to prove that the deleterious effects of the plan amendment are minimized because this comprehensive plan policy concerns extending the location of high density residential land adjacent to an area designated Iow density residential land. The fact that the terms to be addressed may be imprecise or undefined does not alter that responsibility. The applicant has not provided any evidence on minimization of effects as required by this policy. Consequently this policy is not satisfied. No plan policy prohibits the designation of high density land adjacent to Iow density land and because there is no intermediate designation, high density lands commonly are adjacent to Iow density lands. This plan policy concerns the site design of high density development which is adjacent to Iow density land, and provides the basis for zoning regulations to protect against such deleterious effects. The second sentence in the policy, requiring decrease in density immediately adjacent to Iow density land, would apply when a site design were applied for, if the plan amendment were approved. The third sentence concerning buffering requirements is authority for the City to adopt zoning CPA 01-03, ZC 01-07 Findings 9 7O standards addressing buffering when development is proposed. It does not contain a standard applicable to the comprehensive plan amendment. The new Woodburn Development Ordinance (WDO) was adopted by the City Council on April 9, 2002. The WDO requires a wall between high density and Iow density residential uses to minimize adverse impacts between the potential and existing uses. The WDO has additional development guidelines and standards for buffering, landscaping and setbacks that would minimize the deleterious effects between the proposed high density residential development and adjacent Iow density residential developments. 2. Housing Goals and Policies (IX-G): G-1-1 The City will insure that sufficient land is made available to accommodate the growth of the City. This requires that sufficient land for both high density and Iow density residential developments is provided within the confines of the growth and development goals of the City... FINDING: See findings under Goal 10. The City has provided sufficient land within its UGB with designation to meet the City's projected housing needs for a twenty-year planning period. It is insuring sufficient land will continue to be available by periodically reviewing its projected needs. G-1-2 It is the policy of the city to encourage a variety of housing types to accommodate the demands of the local housing market. FINDING: See findings under Goal 10. Changing the Comprehensive Plan designation and zoning on this one parcel from Iow to high density residential does not necessarily affect the variety of housing types within the City. Its affect is rather on the mix or ratio of single family to multiple family housing units. This policy does not apply to the proposed amendments. 3. Public Services Goals and Policies: H-1 Public Facilities and services shall be appropriate to support sufficient amounts of land to maintain an adequate housing market in areas undergoing development or redevelopment. FINDING: The subject site has access to all public facilities and services, which are currently available within the Gatch Street right-of-way. These facilities currently have sufficient capacity to serve potential uses under the proposed High Density Residential designation. The proposal complies with this policy. CPA 01-03, ZC 01-07 Findings 10 71 4. Growth and Urbanization Policies (IX-M): FINDING: At the time of future development on the subject property, the developer would be required to pay systems development charges for impacts on the infrastructure. The subject property is within the City limits and is available for infill development. Public services are available to the site for high density residential uses. This policy can be met. C. Woodburn Zoning Ordinance Chapter 16 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Procedure Section 16.050. Plan Amendment Criteria. Before a Plan Amendment can be made, the Common Council must find that the proposal meets the following criteria: (a)The proposal complies with all applicable Statewide Goals and Guidelines. FINDING: Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines 1 through 2 and 5 through 14 apply to this proposed Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential. As previously discussed, the applicant has not demonstrated that Statewide Planning Goal 10 is satisfied. The applicant has not met this criterion. (b) The proposal complies with the remaining Goals and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan FINDING: As previously discussed, the proposed Plan Amendment does not comply with Woodburn Comprehensive Plan policies G-1-1 and G-1-2. (c) There is a clearly demonstrated public need for the proposed amendment. FINDING: The applicant argues that the amendment is necessary because there is a need for high density housing in Woodburn. The applicant does not specifically address the above criterion which concerns the supply of land designated for high density residential use, not the supply of high density residential housing. However, the City is required to plan for the 20-year population forecast that has officially been allocated to it and to provide land sufficient to meet its long-range housing needs. Even if the applicant is correct that additional lands will be needed in the City's 20-year future urban growth boundary, that does not prove that there currently is insufficient land to provide opportunity to meet current housing needs. CPA 01-03, ZC 01-07 Findings 11 '72 The applicant has stated that the applicant desires to expand its existing apartment complex. To prove a need to add this lot to the high density residential land inventory the applicant has established its own private criteria for determining what type of property would satisfy that need. The applicant's criteria include its need for a parcel of one acre in size to allow the applicant to develop a 20-unit apartment complex. The need that the applicant for a plan amendment must demonstrate is a public need, not an individual private need. The applicant's criteria are inconsistent with criterion (c) that requires the demonstration of a general public need and not a demonstration of a specific need of an individual applicant. The applicant did not provide a complete inventory of developable land already designated for high density residential uses and has not demonstrated why these sites could not be utilized to satisfy a demand for high density residential housing, but rather, has chosen to inventory sites only meeting the applicant's own specific criteria. There is currently significant acreage of high density residentially zoned land in the city. For example, there are over 18 acres of vacant and available RM (Medium Density Residential) zoned land at the southwesterly terminus of Evergreen Road. In fact, an apartment complex was recently developed adjacent to this available land. This area would be the most logical location for the applicant to develop its proposed apartment complex. The applicant has not shown compliance with this criterion. (d) The proposal best satisfies the public need. FINDING: The applicant states, "A recent trend of manufactured homes being abandoned because of unreasonable contracts and value, will certainly effect the housing projections used in Woodburn City's Comprehensive Plan (CP). A shift away from manufactured homes will impact demand for apartments." The applicant has not provided any evidence that there is a trend of manufactured homes being abandoned in the City of Woodburn. Furthermore, the applicant has not provided any evidence that shows the demand for apartments in the City of Woodburn has increased due to a recent trend of manufactured homes being abandoned. Such evidence should include a discussion of the effect of the alleged abandonment of manufactured homes on apartments as well as other types of housing such as home rentals because these dwellings could also be utilized by the people who are allegedly manufactured homes. The applicant has provided no evidence to show the current demand for high density residential uses exceeds the capacity of existing high density residential designated land in Woodbum. CPA 01-03, ZC 01-07 Findings 12 73 Even if the applicant could provide sufficient evidence to justify a present need for additional land for high density residential uses, the applicant has not demonstrated that this lot is the best lot in the City UGB to change to high density residential designation to meet that need. The supporting arguments concern the applicant's individual private development needs or desires, budget constraints and existing development. Allowing the proposed amendment would result in an encroachment of land designated for high density residential into an area designated for Iow density residential. The line separating Iow and high residential designations is more or less a straight line running parallel with Young Street. Approving this proposal would result in a significant jog of this line to the north that could have an adverse effect on surrounding Iow density designated property. In addition, as discussed previously, there are other properties within the city's urban growth boundary that better provide for a need for additional high density residential land. The applicant has not demonstrated how other properties within the urban growth boundary cannot better provide additional high density residential land than the subject property. Also, as discussed previously, during the next year, City staff proposes to bring before the City Council alternatives for accommodating an anticipated additional need for Iow and high density housing. This will most likely include a combination of increased land use efficiency within the city and an expansion of the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). However, it is premature at this time to determine how the proposed land use change will coincide with those alternatives. The City cannot at this point to determine whether it would be appropriate to eliminate Iow density residential land on the subject site to increase the inventory of high density residential land since there will also be a need for additional Iow density residential land. The applicant has not demonstrated compliance with this criterion. 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: (a) To support an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, the applicant shall: (1) Prove that the original plan was in error; (2) Show that the community has changed since the original plan was adopted; or (3) Show that there has been a change in the planning and growth policy of the City. CPA 01-03, ZC 01-07 Findings 13 74- FINDING: The applicant argues that the original comprehensive plan was in error and that the community has changed since the plan was adopted. The applicant's argument that the plan was in error is based on an alleged error in the PSU population estimates for the year 2000. The comprehensive plan map was adopted in 1978 and, other than amendments for individual applicants, has not been amended. Even if PSU made an error in estimating the Woodburn population for the year 2000, from which the year 2020 population forecast was derived, this error could not be the basis for an error in the original plan. The original urban growth boundary contained an excess of both Iow density and high density residential land in an amount approximately 30% more than needed to ameliorate the effect of the UGB on land costs. The current version of the Comprehensive Plan text projects the City's population to the year 2014 at 28,000 people. It contains sufficient land to meet the housing needs for an excess of 28,000 people. The City's official population estimated by PSU in 2001 was 20,014. The applicant's argument is that the community has changed. What has changed is the rate of growth. To address changes in the City's rate of growth and projected land needs the city is currently in the process of periodically reviewing its comprehensive Plan. Conclusion of the periodic review planning process will result in final adopted population projections and potential plan amendments to assure that the city has sufficient land to meet its projected year 2020 population. Marion County has responsibility for allocating to the City of Woodburn a year 2020 population of 26,290. Population projections prepared for the city by ECOnorthwest establish a range of projections from a Iow of 31,674 to a high of 38,477 for year 2020. For interim planning purposes, Marion County and the State Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) have agreed to allow the city use a middle range projection of 34,919. The applicant's argument is really that the community has changed since the original plan was adopted. What has changed is the rate of growth. That change will require additional land to satisfy housing needs. However, the need is a projected need beyond the year 2014. It is not an existing need. ZONE CHANGE01~7 A. Woodburn Zoning Ordinance Chapter 15 Zone Change Procedure Section 15.010. Amendments. A Zone Change is a reclassification of any area from one zone or district to another, after the proposed change CPA 01-03. ZC 01-07 Findings 14 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 15.055. Site Plan Required. A site plan approved by the Planning Commission may be required and if such requirement is made in the resolution of intent, the same shall be binding upon the property .... Any approved site plan may be amended or a Variance therefrom obtained, or it may be released from the restrictions of such site plan by Resolution of the Common Council on recommendation from the Planning Commission. No other changes shall be made constituting a departure from the approved site plan except by amendment or Variance as herein provided unless the same has been released from the site plan. FINDING: The above sections cover the procedure for a zone change. As mentioned, a formal site plan review application has not been submitted as part of the Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zone Change applications. The applicant did submit a conceptual site plan for the property. However, since a formal application has not been made, this conceptual plan cannot be reviewed under the site plan review criteria at this time. 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; FINDING: See findings under Section C relating to Comprehensive Plan Amendment. 2. Show that the particular piece of property in question will best meet that need. FINDING: See findings Amendment. CPA 01-03, ZC 01-07 Findings under Section 15 C relating to Comprehensive Plan '76 B. Woodburn Access Management Ordinance FINDING: The applicant has indicated that the subject property will be developed with a multi-family complex that will connect to the existing Heritage Arms apartment complex, which is under the same ownership as the subject property. This would allow a through access from Young Street to Gatch Street by a connecting drive aisle. It is the applicant's request to provide a through access by constructing a drive aisle from Gatch Street (as part of the intended future apartment complex on the subject property) to the existing drive aisle on the Heritage Arms site, which provides access to Young Street. Since there is no site plan review application for development of the subject site or additional information on the details of access, such a through access cannot be adequately analyzed at this time. C. Woodburn Transportation System Plan FINDING: As mentioned, Gatch Street is classified as a service collector in the Transportation System Plan. The nearest intersecting street to the subject site is Young Street, which is classified as a minor arterial. The proposed change to the High Density Residential designation would allow more density on the subject site than permitted under the current Low Density Residential designation. The higher density designation has the potential to generate more traffic, depending on how the property is developed. The applicant has submitted a traffic impact analysis prepared by Associated Transportation Engineering & Planning, Inc., dated September 19, 2002. The traffic impact analysis indicates that the proposed change in land use designation on the subject property from single family to multiple family residential will result in a slight increase in delays drivers will experience at the studied intersections if the proposed 20 apartments are constructed instead of four additional single family homes. This traffic impact analysis was reviewed by the Woodburn Public Works Program Manager. In a memo dated December 10, 2002 he concludes that the analysis is an accurate analysis of the project's potential traffic impacts and the difference in impacts from the two potential uses is minimal with no impact on the 20-year projected level of service. Based on this information, the applicant has provided substantial evidence that a change in the Comprehensive Plan Map designation from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential would not adversely affect planned facilities of the Transportation System Plan (TSP). VI. CONCLUSION: CPA 01-03. ZC 01-07 Findings 16 7'/ Based on the findings of fact contained herein, all relevant approval criteria relating to approval of the Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential and the Zone Change from RS to RM on the subject property have not been satisfied. CPA 01-03, ZC 01-07 Findings 17 78 10C CITY OF WOODBURN Community Development MEMORANDUM 270 Montgomery Street Woodbum, Oregon 97071 (503) 982-5246 Date: To: F rom: Subject: January 27, 2003 Honorable Mayor and City Council through City Administrator i!.'t Jim Mulder, Director of Community Development,~CY',j7 Ordinance Approving Residential Architectural Substitution 02-02 (Comstock) Standard Recommendation: Approve the attached ordinance approving Residential Architectural Standard Substitution 02-02. Background: The City Council, at its January 13, 2003 meeting, directed staff to prepare an ordinance to approve the above referenced application. That ordinance is attached. 79 COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE APPROVING RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURAL STANDARD SUBSTITUTION APPLICATION CASE NO. 02-02 AFFECTING PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1084 COMSTOCK WAY; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, the applicant, Don Comstock, submitted Residential Architectural Standard Substitution Application Case No. 02-02 to allow two alternate architectural elements to substitute for not meeting one residential architectural standard on property located at 1084 Comstock Way in the Meadowwood subdivision; and WHEREAS, the Woodburn Community Development Director previously approved said application; and WHEREAS, the Woodburn City Council called this approval up for its review; and WHEREAS, the Woodburn City Council has conducted a public hearing and reviewed the record in Residential Architectural Standard Substitution Application Case No. 02-02; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF WOODBURN ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That based upon the findings and conclusions contained in Exhibit "A" which is affixed hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, Residential Architectural Standard Substitution Application Case No. 02-02 is approved. Section 2. That the land use application approved by Section I herein is subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit "B", which is affixed hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, which the Council finds reasonable. Section 3. This ordinance being necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety, an emergency is declared to exist and this ordinance shall take effect immediately upon passage by the Council and approval by the Mayor. Approved as to form:<~ ,~'~ ~ City Attorney Date Page 1 - COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. 8O Passed by the Council Submitted to the Mayor Approved by the Mayor Filed in the Office of the Recorder Approved: Kathryn Figley, Mayor ATTEST: Mary Tennant City Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 2 - COUNCIL BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. $! II. III. IV. EXHIBIT "A" FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURAL STANDARD SUBSTITUTION 02-02 APPLICATION INFORMATION: Applicant & Property Owner: Don Comstock 12020 SW 118th Street Tigard, OR 97223 NATURE OF APPLICATION: The applicant requests approval to allow two alternate architectural elements to substitute for not meeting one residential architectural standard. The affected standard requires 25 year architectural style roofing. The two alternate architectural elements that the applicant proposes to substitute for not meeting the residential architectural standard that requires 25 year architectural style roofing are described as follows: A minimum 4:12 roof pitch of a home is required in Section 3.107.03.B.1.a. of the WDO. The applicant is proposing to exceed this standard by providing a roof pitch of 8:12. A minimum porch area of 48 square feet is required in Section 3.107.03.E.2.a. The applicant is proposing a 95 square foot porch which exceeds this standard. RELEVANT FACTS: The subject site is located at 1084 Comstock Way in the Meadowwood Subdivision, further identified on Marion County Assessor maps as Township 5 South, Range 1 West, Section 18CA, Tax Lot 15100, lot 47. The subject property is zoned Single-Family Residential (RS). Existing single family dwellings are located to the north, south, west and east (across Comstock Way) of the subject site. Site-built homes are subject to the design standards in Section 3.107.03 of the WDO. If these design standards are not met, then the applicant is required to apply for and receive approval for a residential architectural standard substitution. RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA: A. WOODBURN DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE 1. Section 3.107.03 Design Standards for New Single Family and Duplex Dwellings Sited on Individual Lots 2. Section 5.102.05 Residential Architectural Standard Substitution PASS 02-02, 1084 Comstock Way Page I 83 FINDINGS: A. WOODBURN DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE 1. Section 3.107.03 Design Standards for New Single Family and Duplex Dwellings Sited on Individual Lots. B. Roof Standards. 1. Site Built Dwelling The roofing material for a site built dwelling shall be either composition shingles; clay or concrete tile; metal; or cedar shingles or shakes. Composition shingles shall be architectural style with a certified performance of at least 25 years. FINDING: The applicant is proposing to place 3-tab composition shingles on the roof of the home. This does not meet the standard for an architectural style roof with a certified performance of at least 25 years. Meadowwood Subdivision has been almost completely built out. All of the single family residences built in this subdivision do not have architectural roofs with a certified performance of at least 25 years. The applicant's proposal to not have an architectural roof with a certified performance of at least 25 years is consistent with the construction of all of the other residences in the Meadowwood Subdivision. The applicant is proposing to exceed two other residential architectural standards to substitute for not meeting the 25 year architectural roof. A minimum 4:12 roof pitch of a home is required in Section 3.107.03.B.1.a. of the WDO. The applicant is proposing to exceed this standard by providing a roof pitch of 8:12. A minimum porch area of 48 square feet is required in Section 3.107.03.E.2.a. The applicant is proposing a 95 square foot porch which exceeds this standard. 2. Section 5.102.05 Residential Architectural Standard Substitution Purpose. The purpose is to allow limited substitution of comparable or improved residential architectural standards to reflect circumstances that comply with the approval criteria following an administrative procedure. A maximum of three substitutions may be considered for each residential building covered by an application for substitute standards. Architectural standards set by statute (ORS 197.307 and 197.314) relating to siding and roofs on manufactured homes are non-variable, and cannot be modified by a substitution. RASS 02-02, 1084 Comstock Way Page 2 83 FINDING: The applicant is proposing one substitution for the residential building on the subject site. The applicant has met this approval criterion. Application Requirements. An application shall include a completed City application form, filing fee, deeds, notification area map and labels, written narrative statement regarding compliance with criteria, location map and the following additional exhibit: A complete building permit application, including architectural drawings elevations for facades subject to architectural review standards. Either a written description or a illustration of each architectural standards proposed for substitution. FINDING: The applicant has provided all of the above described required information. This approval criterion has been met. Criteria. The suitability of the substitute architectural standards shall be based on consideration of how each substitute standard: 1. Incorporates design elements and materials that reflect a custom design; FINDING: The subject property is located in the Meadowwood Subdivision, the majority of which has already been developed with single-family homes. The home proposed on the subject lot is a custom home because it has been designed outside of standard models that have been used in the subdivision. The majority of the homes in the subdivision are manufactured homes, and the proposed home on the subject lot does not resemble a manufactured home. The proposed larger roof pitch and porch reflect a custom home since the home is unique in design as compared to the homes in the surrounding area. The above criterion has been met. Reflects the character of the existing housing within the subject subdivision and/or surrounding area within 250 feet of the subject property; FINDING: As mentioned, the majority of the homes in the subdivision am single-family manufactured homes. However, them am a few stick-built homes in the subdivision that are similar in character to the proposed home because many am two-story homes with lap siding RASS 02-02, 1084 Comstock Way Page 3 84. VI. and 3-tab shingle roofing. Additionally, the manufactured homes in the surrounding area within 250 feet also have 3-tab single roofing. This approval criterion has been met. 3. Incorporates materials, that in substance and visual appeal, are of equal or greater quality; FINDING: The applicant is proposing to provide a greater roof pitch and larger porch than what is required by the architectural design standards in the WDO. These design details will improve the quality of the proposed home and increase the visual appeal of the home itself and the surrounding homes in the neighborhood. The proposed 3-tab roofing is of equal quality in substance and visual appeal as compared to the existing homes in the area. This approval criterion has been met. 4. Assures that needed housing is not discouraged through unreasonable cost, pursuant to ORS 197.307. FINDING: The standards which the applicant proposes to substitute will reduce the cost of constructing the home since 3-tab composition single roofing is less costly than 25 year architectural style. This approval criterion has been met. CONCLUSION: Based on the findings contained herein, all relevant approval criteria relating to approval of the Residential Architectural Standard Substitution have been satisfied. RASS 02-02, 1084 Comstock Way Page 4 8B ~ 'IT EXHIBIT "B" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RESIDENTIAL ARCHITECTURAL STANDARD SUBSTITUTION 02-02 1. The proposed architectural standard substitutions shall be in substantial conformance with the submitted plans as provided in Exhibit "B" (Located in the Planning Department file and date stamped 11-13-02). PASS 02-02, 1084 Comstock Way Page 1 86 City of Woodburn Police Department STAFF REPORT 1OD 270 Montgomery Street Woodburn, Oregon 97071 Date: From: To: Thru: RE: (503) 982-2345 January 21, 2003 _/ Scott Russell, Chief of Police~. Mayor and City Council John Brown, City Administrato~~'~ New ORS 190 Agreement with City of Silverton for a Police Records Management System to provide additional services Recommendation: Pass the resolution entering into a new ORS 190 agreement with the City of Silverton to provide additional police records management system services. The Woodbum Police Department is in the process of installing a new police records management system (RMS) which will replace the RAIN records management system. The new RIMS is a multi-user system, which allows simultaneous access by more than one agency. The Woodbum Police Department has offered this new RMS to other police agencies in Marion County. The sharing of our RMS provide the following benefits: City of Woodburn can recoup a portion of the cost of the new system Quality RMS to other cities at a reduced cost Improve police operations through the sharing of records and information Currently, Hubbard, Silverton, and recently Mt Angel Police Departments have agreed to participate in the consolidation ora records management system. The City of Silverton Police Department now wishes to utilize additional services from the RMS to include Mobile Computer Terminals to the system. These mobile terminals will allow Silverton officers to communicate with other officers on the network and allow records checks in their vehicles. This is the next step towards a completely integrated solution for Silverton, and follows the steps that Woodbum is already taking. The additional charges to Silverton are due to the use of software licenses already purchased by the city of Woodburn, staff support, and charges for Standard Software Maintenance agreements. 87 COUNCIL BILL NO. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A MOBILE DATA SYSTEM AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF WOODBURN AND THE CITY OF SILVERTON. WHEREAS, it is mutually beneficial for public agencies to supplement, coordinate, and support one another; and WHEREAS, the community welfare is best preserved through such supplemental support; and WHEREAS, Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 190, authorizes intergovernmental agreements for cooperation services; and WHEREAS, the City of Woodburn currently has an Agreement with the City of Silverton to provide a Police Records Management System (RMS); and WHEREAS, the City of Woodburn has the capability to also provide to the City of Silverton a Mobile Data System; and WHEREAS, the City of Silverton wants to enter into an Agreement with the City of Woodburn to provide said system; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF WOODBURN RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Mayor is authorized to sign the Mobile Data System Agreement between the City of Woodbum and the City of Silverton, a copy of which is affixed hereto as Attachment "A" and, by this reference, incorporated herein. Approved as to form:~)/~'~ ~ /~ 2 q - 2 o O.~' City Attorney Date Approved: Kathryn Figley, Mayor Passed by the Council Submitted to the Mayor Approved by the Mayor Filed in the Office of the Recorder ATTEST: Mary Tennant City Recorder City of Woodbum, Oregon Page 1 - Council Bill No. Resolution No. 88 Attachment A Pa.qe 1 of 4 Agreement Mobile Data System This Agreement is made to engage the services of City of Woodburn to provide a Mobile Data System to the City of Silverton; and is made under the authority and in consideration of the provisions of ORS Chapter 190. In consideration of mutual benefits and obligations herein set forth, the parties agree as follows: 1. Scope of Services City of Woodburn shall maintain a Mobile Data System for the City of Silverton. The system shall provide a user generated law enforcement records data base and provide Silverton Police Department message switching to the Oregon Law Enforcement Data System (LEDS). City of Silverton shall provide and maintain desk top computers, printers, controllers, mobile data computers, all required desktop and mobile software, all telecommunication lines and related equipment, and any other equipment for access to the Mobile Data System. All ownership rights to said equipment shall remain with the City of Silverton. The following standard data processing services shall be provided by the City of Woodbum: Full time (24 hour, 7 days a week) operation and support for AS400 computer and software, and maintenance of backup and archival data storage media according to Woodbum Police Department standard procedures, and access of Mobile Data System and LEDS message switching facilities; all of which is subject to reasonable downtime for routine maintenance, support, and emergency repairs. ii. Current manuals and other necessary documentation, protocols, and procedures will be provided. 111. City of Woodbum upon request, but no more than once a month, meet with City of Silverton and participate in a records management user group. iv. Ownership of all records information entered into the Mobile Data System by Silverton Police Department shall remain with Silverton Police Department. Page 1 of 4 - Mobile Data System Agreement 89 Attachment A Pa.qe 2 of 4 o e Fees and Charges Fees and charges for the police Mobile Data System shall be based on a per capita pricing model. Fees and charges are reflected in Addendum "A" of this Agreement Bo The City of Silverton will be offered new records management modules as they become available and agreed to be purchased by the City of Woodbum. Fees and charges for the new modules will be based on the current users per capita pricing model. Unless otherwise agreed upon, new modules shall be paid within 45 days after delivery of the software. Co If the parties do not agree as to the need for a new records management module(s) the City of Silverton may elect to purchase the new records management module(s) for it's own use as long as the module(s) has no detrimental effect on the operation of the overall Mobile Data System. The City of Woodbum shall have no responsibility or obligation with respect to the purchase of this module(s). Fees and charges for future years shall be based on actual cost using the per capita pricing model. Billing and Payment mo The annual charges and fees shall be due and payable from the City of Silverton to the City of Woodburn in equal quarterly installments commencing January 1, 2003. Fees and charges for new records management modules shall be due within 30 days after installation is completed. Security Ao City of Woodburn shall provide adequate system and data security for police Mobile Data System in accordance with the requirements of the Oregon Law Enforcement Data System (LEDS) and the U.S. Department of Justice National Crime Information Center (NCIC). City of Woodbum shall have no responsibility or obligation with respect to access to the Silverton Mobile Data System through individual members of Silverton Police except to allow access to the Mobile Data System only upon use of passwords and procedures adopted in accordance with provisions of 4.1. Co City of Woodburn shall have no responsibility or obligation to verify the identity or authority of any person using the Silverton Mobile Data System Page 2 of 4 - Mobile Data System Agreement 9O Altachment A Page 3 of 4 who has used appropriate passwords and procedures to gain access to the system. Silverton Police Department shall be exclusively responsible for the protection and security of terminal equipment located in their facility or vehicles. o Limitations of Liability City of Woodbum assumes no liability for the accuracy of any data entered by Silverton Police Department in the Mobile Data System, nor any errors in data transmission. City of Woodburn represents and warrants only that it will use its best efforts to maintain an accurate database of information as entered, modified, or deleted by data entry users. City of Silverton agrees, to the extent it may under the Constitution and laws of Oregon, to indemnify, defend, and save harmless the City of Woodburn, its officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim or demand arising out of or in connection with any act, error or omission of any person for those acts such user may be responsible under ORS 30.265, or out of connection with such user's use of the Mobile Data System and caused by any condition or circumstance for which liability is expressly disclaimed or limited by City of Woodburn under any provision of this Agreement, to the extent of such disclaimer or limitation. City of Woodbum agrees, to the extent it may under the Constitution and laws of Oregon, to indemnify, defend, and save City of Silverton harmless from any and all claims arising out of the acts, errors or omissions of City of Woodbum or those for whose acts may be held liable under ORS 30.265, save and except any claim for which City of Woodbum has expressly disclaimed or limited its liability hereunder, to the extent of such disclaimer or limitation; and further provided that with respect to any single claim or occurrence, City of Woodbum liability arising out of contribution or indemnity shall not exceed the limits provided by ORS 30.270, if applicable to the asserted claim. 6. Terms and Termination This Agreement shall be effective upon execution hereof on behalf of both parties, and shall continue until terminated as provided herein. This Agreement may be terminated by City of Silverton upon written notice given not later than March 1 of each year. Page 3 of 4 - Mobile Data System Agreement 91 Attachment A Page 4 of 4 Notwithstanding the giving of notice of termination as provided herein, City of Silverton shall remain obligated with respect to any unfulfilled financial obligation which accrued hereunder prior to the effective date of such termination. 7. Communication and Notice Ao Any notice in writing required to be given hereunder shall be sufficient if sent by regular mail or personally delivered to the Chief of Police, City of Woodbum; and to the Chief of Police, City of Silverton. Bo Each party shall designate, and may change from time to time, a representative for communication, negotiations, and general liaison with the other concerning the content, future, and administration of this Agreement. No such designated representative shall be held an agent or attorney-in-fact having authority to bind either party. 8. Attorney Fees mo In the event it is necessary for either party to bring an action in the courts of the State of Oregon to enforce any rights under this Agreement, the non-prevailing party shall pay to the prevailing party its reasonable attorney fees at trial or on appeal in a sum determined by the court. 9. Amendments mo This Agreement represents the complete and integrated agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and may be amended only by written amendment executed by both parties. As such, this Agreement cancels and supersedes all prior written and oral agreements, representations, negotiations, and communications between the parties and their representatives with respect to the subject matter hereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have caused the Agreement to be executed on behalf by their duly authorized representatives as of the dates set forth below. CITY OF WOODBURN CITY OF SILVERTON By: Kathryn Figley, Mayor Date: By: Title: Date: Page 4 of 4 - Mobile Data System Agreement 92 Mobile Data System Agreement Addendum A: Pricing Per Unit one time Mobile Software Access Charge: $1100.00 ea. Six (6) Units one time fee total: $6600.00 2002 Mobile Data User Fee (pro-rated) $ N/C* 2003 Mobile Data User Fee (Based on six units) Includes SSMA for Mobile Messaging Software on the RS6000 Message Switch, Equipment Maintenance, and Backup Tapes $1008.00 * No additional SSMA fees will be required during operation of the system during FY 2002-2003. Additional SSMA and maintenance fees will be required for FY 2003-2004 operations to provide for upgrades required to allow Silverton PD Mobile Data access. City of Woodburn Police Department STAFF REPORT IOE 270 Montgomery Street Woodburn, Oregon 97071 (503)982-2345 Date: From: January21,2003 Scott Russell, ChiefofPolice/ To.' Mayor and City Council John Brown, City AdministratorFlor/ RE: ORS 190 Agreement with City of Mt. Angel for a Police Records Management System Recommendation: Pass the resolution and enter into an ORS 190 agreement with the City of Mt. Angel to provide a police records management system. The Woodbum Police Department is in the process of installing a new police records management system (RMS), which will replace the RAIN records management system. The new RMS is a multi-user system, which allows simultaneous access by more than one agency. The Woodbum Police Department has offered this new RMS to other police agencies in Marion County. The sharing of our RMS provide the following benefits: City of Woodbum can recoup a portion of the cost of the new system Quality RMS to other cities at a reduced cost Improve police operations through the sharing of records and information Currently, Hubbard and Silverton Police Departments have agreed to participate in the consolidation of a records management system, Mt. Angel Police Department now wishes to join in the system. The installation of the new Records Management System is progressing as scheduled. 94. COUNCIL BILL NO. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A POLICE RECORDS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF WOODBURN AND THE CITY OF MT. ANGEL. WHEREAS, it is mutually beneficial for public agencies to supplement, coordinate, and support one another; and WHEREAS, the community welfare is best preserved through such supplemental support; and WHEREAS, Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 190, authorizes intergovernmental agreements for cooperation services; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF WOODBURN RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Mayor is authorized to sign the Police Records Management System Agreement between the City of Woodburn and the City of Mt. Angel, a copy of which is affixed hereto as Attachment "A" and, by this reference, incorporated herein. Approved as to form:/~/~-~ ~ I- '~ 3"- Z o 0 ~, City Attorney Date Approved: Kathryn Figley, Mayor Passed by the Council Submitted to the Mayor Approved by the Mayor Filed in the Office of the Recorder ATTEST: Mary Tennant City Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 1 - Council Bill No. Resolution No. O15 Attachment A Pa.qe I of 5 Agreement Police Records Management System This Agreement is made to engage the services of City of Woodburn to provide a Police Records Management System (RMS) to the City of Mt. Angel; and is made under the authority and in consideration of the provisions of ORS Chapter 190. In consideration of mutual benefits and obligations herein set forth, the parties agree as follows: 1. Scope of Services City of Woodburn shall maintain a police records management system (RMS) for the City of Mt. Angel. The system shall provide a user generated law enforcement records data base and provide Mt. Angel Police Department message switching to the Oregon Law Enforcement Data System (LEDS). City of Mt. Angel shall provide and maintain desk top computers, printers, controllers, mobile data computers, all required desktop and mobile software, all telecommunication lines and related equipment, and any other equipment for access to the RMS. All ownership rights to said equipment shall remain with the City of Mt. Angel. The following standard data processing services shall be provided by the City of Woodbum: Full time (24 hour, 7 days a week) operation and support for AS400 computer and software, and maintenance of backup and archival data storage media according to Woodburn Police Department standard procedures, and access of RMS and LEDS message switching facilities; all of which is subject to reasonable downtime for routine maintenance, support, and emergency repairs. ii. Record information entered into the RMS shall be retained on line for a minimum of five years unless altered or deleted by Mt. Angel Police Department or ordered to be altered, sealed, or deleted by a court of competent jurisdiction. iii. Current manuals and other necessary documentation, protocols, and procedures will be provided. iv. City of Woodburn upon request, but no more than once a month, meet with City of Mt. Angel and participate in a records management user group. Page 1 of 5 - Police RMS Agreement 96 Attachment A Page 2 of 5 Ownership of all records information entered into the RMS by Mt. Angel Police Department shall remain with Mt. Angel Police Department. Once a year, and/or at the termination of this Agreement, all of the City of Mt. Angel's records entered into the RMS shall be saved to a tape cartridge and provided by the City of Woodbum to the Mt. Angel Police Department at no cost. Fees and Charges Fees and charges for the police RMS shall be based on a per capita pricing model. Fees and charges are reflected in Addendum "A" of this Agreement When a new user is added to the police RMS, fees and charges shall be recalculated using the per capita pricing model. The recalculated fees and charges shall go into effect within 30 days of completed installation. Co The City of Mt. Angel will be offered new records management modules as they become available and agreed to be purchased by the City of Woodburn. Fees and charges for the new modules will be based on the current users per capita pricing model. Unless otherwise agreed upon, new modules shall be paid within 45 days after delivery of the software. If the parties do not agree as to the need for a new records management module(s) the City of Mt. Angel may elect to purchase the new records management module(s) for it's own use as long as the module(s) has no detrimental effect on the operation of the overall RMS. The City of Woodbum shall have no responsibility or obligation with respect to the purchase of this module(s). Fees and charges for future years shall be based on actual cost using the per capita pricing model. Billing and Payment The annual charges and fees shall be due and payable from the City of Mt. Angel to the City of Woodburn in equal quarterly installments commencing January 1, 2003. Fees and charges for new records management modules shall be due within 30 days after installation is completed. Security mo City of Woodbum shall provide adequate system and data security for police RMS in accordance with the requirements of the Oregon Law Page 2 of 5 - Police RMS Agreement 97 Attachment A Pa.qe 3 of 5 Enforcement Data System (LEDS) and the U.S. Department of Justice National Crime Information Center (NCIC). Bo City of Woodburn shall have no responsibility or obligation with respect to access to the Mt. Angel RMS through individual members of Mt. Angel Police except to allow access to the RMS only upon use of passwords and procedures adopted in accordance with provisions of 4A. C° City of Woodbum shall have no responsibility or obligation to verify the identity or authority of any person using the Mt. Angel RMS who has used appropriate passwords and procedures to gain access to the system. D° Mt. Angel Police Department shall be exclusively responsible for the protection and security of terminal equipment located in their facility. Limitations of Liability Ao City of Woodburn assumes no liability for the accuracy of any data entered by Mt. Angel Police Department in the RMS, nor any errors in data transmission. City of Woodburn represents and warrants only that it will use its best efforts to maintain an accurate database of information as entered, modified, or deleted by data entry users. Bo City of Mt. Angel agrees, to the extent it may under the Constitution and laws of Oregon, to indenmify, defend, and save harmless the City of Woodbum, its officers, employees, and agents from and against any claim or demand arising out of or in connection with any act, error or omission of any person for those acts such user may be responsible under ORS 30.265, or out of connection with such user's use of the RMS and caused by any condition or circumstance for which liability is expressly disclaimed or limited by City of Woodburn under any provision of this Agreement, to the extent of such disclaimer or limitation. Co City of Woodburn agrees, to the extent it may under the Constitution and laws of Oregon, to indemnify, defend, and save City of Mt. Angel harmless from any and all claims arising out of the acts, errors or omissions of City of Woodburn or those for whose acts may be held liable under ORS 30.265, save and except any claim for which City of Woodbum has expressly disclaimed or limited its liability hereunder, to the extent of such disclaimer or limitation; and further provided that with respect to any single claim or occurrence, City of Woodbum liability arising out of contribution or indemnity shall not exceed the limits provided by ORS 30.270, if applicable to the asserted claim. Page 3 of 5 - Police RMS Agreement 98 Attachment A Pa.qe 4 of 5 w e o e Terms and Termination This Agreement shall be effective upon execution hereof on behalf of both parties, and shall continue until terminated as provided herein. Bo This Agreement may be terminated by City of Mt. Angel upon written notice given not later than March 1 of each year. Notwithstanding the giving of notice of termination as provided herein, City of Mt. Angel shall remain obligated with respect to any unfulfilled financial obligation which accrued hereunder prior to the effective date of such termination. Communication and Notice Ao Any notice in writing required to be given hereunder shall be sufficient if sent by regular mail or personally delivered to the Chief of Police, City of Woodbum; and to the Chief of Police, City of Mt. Angel. Each party shall designate, and may change from time to time, a representative for communication, negotiations, and general liaison with the other concerning the content, future, and administration of this Agreement. No such designated representative shall be held an agent or attorney-in-fact having authority to bind either party. Attorney Fees mo In the event it is necessary for either party to bring an action in the courts of the State of Oregon to enforce any rights under this Agreement, the non-prevailing party shall pay to the prevailing party its reasonable attorney fees at trial or on appeal in a sum determined by the court. Amendments Ao This Agreement represents the complete and integrated agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and may be amended only by written amendment executed by both parties. As such, this Agreement cancels and supersedes all prior written and oral agreements, representations, negotiations, and communications between the parties and their representatives with respect to the subject matter hereof. Page 4 of 5 - Police RMS Agreement 99 Affachment A PaRe 5 of 5 IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have caused the Agreement to be executed on behalf by their duly authorized representatives as of the dates set forth below. CITY OF WOODBURN CITY OF MT. ANGEL By: Kathryn Figley, Mayor Date: By: Title: Date: Page 5 of 5 - Police RMS Agreement 100 Cost ProJection - Por~ce Records Management & Mobile and Field Reporting System 3~e Records Management System Total 5-Year Cost Total Cost 'oodbum Cost Alone abbard Cost ON+H) Iverton Cost ON+H+S) t Angel Cost (W+H+S+MtA) Population/Thousands Per Capita Cost Total 5-Year Cost 20.1 $11,318 $227,495 ?_483 $10,074 $25,013 7.414 $7,584 $56,227 3.121 $6,869 $21,439 $227,495 $227,495 Annual Cost $45,499 $5,003 $11.245 $4,288 ost to Hubbard - Records Management System Only' ; o~ly partner '~h Siiverto~ parlJcipafing -~ ,~l',,erton & Mt Angel ParticipaUng 22.583 $10,074 $25,013 29.997 $7~584 $18,831 33.118 $6,869 $17,056 $5,003 $3,766.. $3,411 .ost to Silverton - Records Management System Only adhered with Woodbum & Hubbard ~'~h Siiverton & Mt Angel Participating 29.997 $7,584 $56,2~ 33.118 $6,869 $5o,928 $11~45 $10,186 :ost to Mt Angel - Records Management b~rstem Only · artnefed with Woodbum. Hubbard & ,~lvedo~ 33.1t8 $6.869 $21,439 101 10F January 27, 2002 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Honorable Mayor and City Council John C. Brown, City Administrator~ Challenging 2003 PERS Rate Orders Recommendation: It is recommended the City Council: 1. adopt the attached resolution authorizing the City Of Woodburn to participate in the League of Oregon Cities 2003 PERS Rate Challenge; and 2. authorize the City Recorder as the City's contact person for information regarding the City's participation as a PERS employer. Background: On January 13, 2003, you received a letter sent by City staff to the PERS board requesting they use a different method of calculating PERS employer rates than the method recommended by their actuarial. The method requested by the City, which was generally consistent with that proposed by the League of Oregon Cities, would result in rate increases on the order of half as much as those recommended to the board by its actuarial. Neither our request, nor the League's was reflected in the PERS Board's January 14, 2003 decision. Discussion: The League of Oregon Cities proposes to challenge the 2003 PERS rate increase, if the increases adopted are inconsistent with Judge Lipscomb's recent opinion, as indicated in the attached letter from the League. The City is asked to voluntarily participate in the challenge, and to provide a $150 payment associated with the costs of such a challenge. As the City stands to benefit greatly from this small investment, your approval of the recommended actions is recommended. Financial Impact: An alternate method of calculation could allow Woodburn to avoid as much as $175,000 in PERS rate increases in FY 2003-04. JCB 102 January8, 2003 TO: FROM: Re: PERS-Covercd City Employers Rob Drake, LOC President; Mayor, Bcavedon Challcnging 2003 PERS Rate Orders On January 14, the PERS Board (PERB) is expected to adopt employer rates effective July 1, 2003 based on the most recent actuarial valuation report they have received. You have likely seen an estimate of those new rates for your city. PERB is choosing to adopt these new rates using current practices, conlxary to the October 7, 2002 opinion of Marion County Judge Paul Lipscomb in response to a lawsuit filed by a number of public employers. Lipscomb's opinion declared that PERB violated its statutory duties in administering the Public Employees Retirement Fund in several ways: By improperly calculating employer obligations for payment of benefits to retirees with investment in variable accounts; By distributing earnings to employee accounts without maintaining proper reserves; and By using outdated mortality tables which prescribe higher monthly retirement payments than are actually justified. PERB was ordered to recalculate the employer contribution rates for 1998 and 2000, yet those rates have not been recalculated, and the issues identified by the judge were not corrected before calculation of the 2003 employer rates. Therefore, the 2003 employer rate orders are inaccurate and likely inflated. As a public employer, your city will have 60 days from the date of the rate adoption to file a formal appeal. The League of Oregon Cities believes it is time. for cities, along with other public employers, to take additional steps to end the policies of PERB which have benefited members at the expense of the financial health of the retirement system. In order to facilitate the appeal process and to keep legal fees to a minimum for LOC members, the League has retained the services of attorneys John W Osbum and Peter W. Mersereau of the Portland finn Mersereau & Shannon, LLP. We have asked the firm to file appeals of the 2003 employer rate (Over, please) Working together for lit, able Orego, com,nu,ilf[~' ~,, ~ ~ orders for any LOC member cities who elect to participate. This same firm has also been retained by the Oregon School Boards Association and the Special Districts Association of Oregon to file similar appeals on behalf of their members. The League has negotiated a single fiat-fee rate of $150 for any of our members who choose to file an appeal. The fee covers the following services: · Filing a timely notice of appeal in Marion County Circuit Court; · Prosecution ofthe appeal to judgment in circuit court; and · In the event of legislative action materially affecting the litigation, consultation with the League and individual participants regarding any subsequent legal action. Your participation in this effort is strictly voluntary but is strongly encouraged in order to show broad multi-employer objection to the current practices of the PERB, and to establish a legal trail for your city in opposition to the rate order. Please note the $150 fee is for legal work on this appeal only and would be in addition to any voluntary contribution you may make to the League in response to our earlier request for actuarial and legal evaluation of legislative proposals. To participate in the appeal, your city must: · Adopt the enclosed resolution; · Complete the enclosed letter of engagement and return it to the League office along with a copy of your city's rate increase notice; and · Enclose a check for $150 made out to Mersereau and Shannon, LLP. The League will collect and forward all materials to the firm and keep participating cities up to date on the progress of the litigation. You are encouraged to respond quickly to this opportunity. The cost is low for the legal appeal and the potential payoffin the form of reduced rates could be significant. Please do not hesitate to call the League office if you have questions regarding this project or other PERS-related efforts. Rob Drake, LOC President Mayor, Beaverton Ken Strobeck LOC Executive Director 104 COUNCIL BILL NO. 2421 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CITY OF WOODBURN TO PARTICIPATE IN THE LEAGUE OF OREGON CITIES 2003 PERS RATE CHALLENGE. WHEREAS, eight public employers brought suit against the Oregon Public Employee Retirement System in Marion County Circuit Court; and WHEREAS, those employers claimed they were being overcharged in the calculation of employer contribution rates; and WHEREAS, Judge Paul Lipscomb had returned the case to the Oregon Public Employee Retirement System Board with instructions to update employee mortality tables, issue new employer rate orders for t998 and 2000 and make a new earnings allocation order for the 1999 investment year; and WHEREAS, the Oregon Public Employee Retirement System Board has yet to comply with these instructions; and WHEREAS, the Oregon Public Employee Retirement System Board expected to adopt proposed employer rate increases; and WHEREAS, the proposed employer rate increases would be less if the Board had complied with Judge Lipscomb's instructions, NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY OF WOODBURN RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Woodburn authorizes the League of Oregon Cities to coordinate the filing of an appeal on the City's behalf, through outside counsel, from the rate increase received from PERS. Approved as to form: ~/~'~ ~ /'- 2 ~- Zoa-,T' City Attorney Date Page 1 - COUNCIL BILL NO. RESOLUTION NO. 105 APPROVED: Kathryn Figley, Mayor Passed by the Council Submitted to the Mayor Approved by the Mayor Filed in the Office of the Recorder ATTEST: Mary Tennant City Recorder City of WoOdburn, Oregon Page 2 - COUNCIL BILL NO. RESOLUTION NO. 106 (City Letterhead) (Date) John W. Osburn, of Counsel Peter W. Mersereaui Mersereau & ShannOn, LLP 1600 Benj. Franklin Plaza One SW Columbia Portland, Oregon 97258 Subject: Representation of City in Appeal from PERS Order Gentlemen: This will confirm your availability and willingness to provide legal services to (name of "City") in filing an appeal to the Circuit Court of the State of Oregon for Marion County from the decision of the Oregon Public Employees Retirement Board dated January 14, 2002, and prosecuting that appeal to conclusion in the circuit court That order is expected to increase the contribution rate for PERS employers effective July 1, 2003. The Oregon Administrative Procedures Act provides that an appeal from such an order must be filed Within 60 days of the order from which the appeal is taken. On October 7, 2002, in the case of the City of Eugene v. PERB, which is referred to as PERS I, Marion County Circuit Judge Lipscomb ruled that PERB violated its statutory duties in administering the Public Employees Retirement Fund by improperly calculating employer obligations for payment of benefits to retirees with investment in variable accounts who choose the money match option, by distributing earnings to employee accounts without maintaining proper reserves, and by using outdated mortality tables which prescribe higher monthly retirement payments than are actuarily justified. PERB's proposed employer rates for 2003 do not reflect corrective calculation in accordance with Judge Lipscomb's order. In order to maintain the benefit to employers from Judge Lipscomb's order, and to avoid the loss of that benefit in the 2003 rate calculation, we authorize you to file an appeal of behalf of the City. A copy of the notice from PERS as to the proposed employer contribution rate is attached to this letter. The City has designated as the City's contact person for information regarding the City's participation as a PERS employer. We enclose the City's check in the amount of $150 which you agree to accept in full payment for your services in the circuit court. 107 In accepting this engagement, you certify that you know of no conflicts of interest on the part of either John W. Osbum or Mersereau & Shannon LLP, and agree that you will not acquire any such conflicts related to the subject of this litigation. The City acknowledges that you have been engaged represent the participating members of the Oregon School Boards Association, and the Special Districts Association of Oregon and the Association of Oregon Counties. The City does not consider thc represcntation of similarly situated employers to constitute a conflict of interest. If the temps of this arrangement are satisfactory, would you plcasc so indicatc by endorsement beloW and return a copy to the City. The City of By Title: The terms of this engagement are accepted and agreed to. Dated: John W. Osbum, on behalf of John W. Osburn, PC and Mersereau & Shannon, LLP 108 10G Staff Rpp__ort Woodburn Recreation and Parks Department Date: To: From: January 23, 2003 Mayor and City Council via John Brown, City Administra. t~r"(~"~"t'~' ' D. Randall Westrick, Recreation and Parks Director ~ Intergovemrnental Cooperation Agreement- City of Woodbum & Woodbum School District RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the City Administrator to sign the Intergovernmental Agreement with the Woodbum School District. BACKGROUND: The City and School Distdct have a long history of shadng facilities. These facilities include gyms and classroom space for sports programs and after school activities as well as Aquatic Center and athletic fields for sports programs. For the past several years, this relationship has been guided by informal agreements. The attached Agreement formalizes this relationship and generally reflects recent City and School Distdct interaction to share facilities. This Agreement was developed through a cooperative effort of City and School Distdct staff. Last fall, the School Board adopted the Agreement as presented to the City Council. DISCUSSION: The Agreement recognizes that the school grounds are included in the Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Plan as neighborhood parks and the School Distdct agrees to keep them open to the public for recreation use while school is not in session. Additionally, the Agreement recognizes that recreation programs and the School District's academic program are related and that each can support the other's mission. The Agreement sets for a general understanding of how each agency should interact with the other and reasonable expectations for how a guest agency should expect to find a facility and retum the facility to the host agency. 109 Position Allocations - Part-time Teen Scene Staff 2 · FINANCIAL IMPACT: The Intergovernmental Cooperation between the City and School District. City financial resourceS. Attachment Agreement will formalize past operating practices Therefore, it obligates the expenditure of no additional 110 INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT WOODBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT AND CITY OF WOODBURN This agreement is entered into as of the__ day of ., 2003, by and between and among the Woodbum School District (District) and the City of Woodbum (City). WHEREAS, the District and the City have a long tradition of sharing facilities for recreation programs and academic and athletic programs; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City and School district to work together in the joint use of school and recreation and Park facilities; and WHEREAS, this joint use provides taxpayers better utilization of school buildings, athletic facilities, aquatic facilities and parks and recreation areas. This cooperation avoids duplication of these facilities, thereby saving tax monies; and WHEREAS, the City has recently updated the Parks and Recreation Comprehensive Plan to include School District grounds within the City inventory of neighborhood park facilities; and WHEREAS, the funds for the cost of such uses, facilities and services are included within each agencies' budgets; and WHEREAS, this agreement is o fa type and for a purpose authorized by Chapter 190, Oregon Revised Statutes and is not otherwise prohibited by law; THEREFORE, in consideration of the above premises, the District and City agree to cooperate with each other as follows: The City of Woodbum has included school grounds within the inventory of neighborhood park resources. To serve neighborhood public recreation use, the School District will keep grounds open until sunset during hours school is not in session. The Woodbum School District considers all Recreation and Parks programs operated on campus as an integral part of its co-curricular and extended day learning program. WSD and Recreation and Parks will collaborate in the development and management of the programs to insure that all activities support the mission of both the Woodburn School District and the City of Woodbum. 3. Woodbum School District and facilities and grounds are tobacco-free facilities. All registration materials and information regarding WSD and Recreation and Parks programs and activities will be available in English and Spanish. Facility use requests will be exchanged by the 1st of May each year. Both agencies will conduct a follow up meeting bythe 15t~ of May, to workout facility schedules, dates and times. A follow up meeting will be held by December 15th. At these meeting the agencies will discuss specific details or special needs for the upcoming schedule and resolve anticipated and past problems. All other use 111 I · INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT Pa~;e 2 , o o 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. requests will be made in writing through each agency's regular facility use procedures. Each agency will confirm final approved schedules within 10 days of the request. Once arrangements for facilities are made, either through the above-referenced meetings or through the facility use application process, neither agency will cancel the other's facility use less than two weeks in advance unless a suitable alternative site or facility is made available for that event as scheduled. No cancellations will be made less than 48 hours before an event. Both agencies will provide an adequate number of competent and qualified personnel to supervise activities taking place in the other agency's facilities. Each agency will comply with and enforce the other agency's rules and regulations while using the other agency's facilities. Each agency will advise the other of potential policy changes that affect this document and allow the other 30 days to cornlnent. Should said policy changes render all or portions of this document ineffective, either agency may request renegotiation or termination of the Agreement according to the provisions of Section 15 and 20 herein. Before any scheduled use, each agency will provide the other agency with premises and facilities in neat order, properly ventilated with the HVAC systems operating. The agency organizing an activity is responsible for rearranging furniture or make other minor alterations. Each agency should take reasonable care to leave the other's facility in the condition in which it was found. Each agency will keep the other agency's premises and facilities in neat order, will promptly remove all trash and will report any problems or damage to equipment or facilities. Each agency should take reasonable care to leave the other's facility in the condition in which it was found. Should either agency find that the other has not left a facility in the condition in which it was found, the host agency must contact the guest agency and request resolution of the matter. If the guest agency cannot resolve the condition, the host agency may bill the other agency for expenses necessary to restore the facility to acceptable conditions. Billing will include a description of the deficiency and a cost accounting for the expense to correct the situation. Each agency will reimburse the other for personnel expenses over and above those normally scheduled to work when additional personnel are necessary to accommodate the other agency's facility use. The host agency will determine whether staffshould be assigned. The cost for necessary personnel will be calculated and quoted when the use request is submitted and approved. The host agency will advise the other agency of necessary anticipated costs when facility use confirmed following the May exchange of schedules. For athletic fields, each agency will be responsible for final preparation and field marking for the agency's respective events. Each agency should take reasonable care to leave the other's facility in the condition in which it was found. 112 INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT Page 3 15. No alteration, modification or addition to the other agency's facilities is to be made by either party without separate written approval. 16. The City Administrator and Superintendent of Schools each will appoint an agency contact person to represent each agehcy in the administration of this agreement. However, the agencies are encouraged to handle day-to-day details regarding facility between building and facility managers and program coordinators for each agency. This includes last-minute detail changes, emergencies and weather problems such as baseball rain outs. 17. Both agencies agree that any dispute or difference involving facilities that arise between the School District and the City will be resolved by the City Administrator and Superintendent. 18. The relationship created by this agreement will be perpetual until terminated by one or both parties. The agreement may be terminated at any time when either agency issues a notice requesting separation no less than 90 days before the intended separation. 19. Each agency will provide the other agency with a certificate of insurance naming the other agency as additional insured showing that the activities of the other agency are covered under a comprehensive liability policy with minimum limits of $5,000,000. 20. To the extent it is lawfully permitted under the Constitution and laws of Oregon, each agency agrees to indemnify, defend and save harmless the other agency from any actions arising from its acts, and errors of the agency, its officers, agents or employees. 21. Neither agency will sell or assign its rights under this agreement or allow other parties to receive the benefits of this cooperative agreement by inclusion to avoid fees. 22. This agreement will be binding upon the agencies signing and their respective successors. 23. Any alterations to this agreement must be agreed in writing and approved by the City Administrator and Superintendent of Schools. IN WITNESS THEREOF, the following have signed on behalf of their respective agencies. CITY OF WOODBURN WOODBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT Date Date 113 1OH MEMO To: For Council ~,ction, through the City Administrator From: Randy Scotti Senior Engineering Technician, through the Public Works Director ~ SuDject: Acceptance Of'Public Rights o£Way, Arney Lane Date: January 22, 2003 RECOMMENDATIOi~I: It is being recommended the City Council accept the attached Public Rights of Way for the future extension of Arney Lanei as descdbed on Attachment "A" BACKGROUND: The Public Rights of Way is being conveyed by Craig Realty Group-Woodbum, LLC in accordance with requirements as set forth by the Agreement Accepting Proposed Amended Conditions entered into ~Yith the City of Woodbum dated January 28, 2002. In accordance with a segment of the Amended Condition of Approval 23, Paragraph A, prior to building permits being issued for Phase II, the rights of way is being dedicated along the northerly boundary, to the western bounds of the subject property. Included as attachment "A" is the properly signed Rights of Way Dedication Included as Attachment "B" is a map showing the boundary of the Rights of Way Dedication 114 ATTACHMENT "A" WARRANTY DEED CRAIG REALTY GROUP-WOODBURN, LLC, an Oregon limited liability cotnpany, hereinafter called Grantor, conveys and wa~ants to CITY OF WOODBUILN, a Municipal corporation, Organized and existing under and I~y virtue of the laws of the State of Oregon, hereinafter called Grantee, all that real property situaSed in Marion County, State of Oregon, described as follows: See Exhibit "A" and "B" attached and covenants that Grantor is the oWner of the above-described property free of all encumbrances except those of record, and will wairrant and defend the same against all persons who may lawfully claim the stone. I The true and actual conside[ation for this transfer is no money, but for other valuable consideration, "This instrument will not allow use of the I¥operty described in this instrument in violation of applicable land use laws and regulations. Befor~ signing or acceptMg this instrument, the person acquiring lee title to the property should check with the appropriate City or County planning department to veri~, approved uses and to determine rely limits on lawsuits against farming or forest practices as del'reed in ORS :30.930." Dated this / ,--/4n~ day of i "7~O'~t/-a-'7 ,2003. CRAIG REALTY GROUP - WOODBURN L.L.C. - an Oregon limited liability company by: ~. ~'~m be r /~te~en L. Crmg - STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss COUNTY OF ORANOE ) On this i 7 day of (~& ~ ,2003, before me a Notary Public in m~d for thc County and Stat~ pcr~onaily appeared SteYen L. Craig, known to me to be the same person whose name is subscribed to the within inatmment and acknowledged that he voluntarily executed the same for the purpose therein contained. IN WITNI~SS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand and official seal. NOTARY PUBI~IC ]~I~ CALIFORNIA My Commission Expires:/~/',t/x_c~/~ ~-:c:~ 00{9 I WARRANTY DEED - Page I Accepted by: CITY OF WOOBURN City Council on day of ,2003 By: Mary Tennent, City Recorder City of Woodbum, Oregon Date: .,2003 ATTACHMENT "A" Exhibit "A" A parcel of land situated in the North half of Section 12, Township 5 South, Range 2 West of tile Willamette Meridian in Marion County, Oregon being described as lbllows: Beginning at a point on the South line of the William Darst Donation Land Claim No. 60 marking the Northeast comer of,th,a,t,[t, ract of land described in Reel 1276, Page 547, Deed Records which point bears North 89'06 00 ~West 778.67 feet frown the re-entrant corner being the most easterly Southeast corner of said Da~st Claim; thence South 89'06'00' East]along file South line of said Darst Claim, a distance of 546.97 feet; thence southeasterly along tlie arc of a 107.00 foot radius curve to tile right (the chot'd of which bears South 35'52'37" East 3~4.38 feet) a distance of 34.53 feet; thence southeasterly along th~ arc of a 37.00 foot radius curve to Ibc Icfl (the chord of which bears South 42'53'56" East 20.73 fe~et) a distance of 21.01 fcet; thence SouCl~ 54'59'0Y' We.~t 100.75 feet; thence northwesterly along tl~e arc ora 37.00 foot radius curve to the Icfl (tile chord of which bears North 23'15'37" West 67.52 feet) a distance of 85.04 feet; thence North 89'06'00" We:~t 188.59 feet; thence southweste, rly along ~he arc of a 645.00 foot radius curve to the lell (the chord of which bears South 84'52 18" West ~35.48 feet) a distance of 135.73 feet; thence southweste, r?, along ~h_e arc of a 715.00 foot radius curve to the right (tile chord of which bears South 84'52 18' West !150.18 feet) a distance of 150.46 feel; thence North 89'06'00" We~st 342.71 feet; thence North 00'54'00" Eas[ 3.79 feet; thence North 87'11 '27" We~t 172.92 feet to a point on tile westerly line of said tract of land described in Reel 1276, Pag,e, 5,,4,7, lpeed Records; thence North 14'43 30 East along said westerly line, a distance of 62.25 feet to the Northwest comer thereof; thence South 89'06'00" Ea~t along the North line of said tract, a distance of 500.67 feet to the point of begi~ming and contalni/~g 63,726 square feet of land, more or less. 116 ATTACHMENT "B" II I ~r 117 MEMO To: For Council Action, through the City Administrator~ From: Subject: Date: Randy Scotti Senior Engineering Technician, through the Public Works Director Acceptance Of Utility Easement, Harvard Meadows Apartments January 23, 2003 101 RECOMMENDATION: It is being recommendedi that the City Council accept the attached Water Line Easement as described on Attachment "A". BACKGROUND: The water line easement IS being conveyed by KWDS LLC. in conjunction with the Harvard Meadows apartment complex. The water line easement is for a city maintained water main traversing through the site providing both fire protection and domestic use. Included as attachment "A" is the properly signed Water Easement Included as Attachment "B" is a map showing the boundary of the Water Easement 118 UTILITY EASEMENT for WATERMAIN ! KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that k" ~%/t,.~.~ L..L. C-- , for the consideration of One Dollar ($1.00) and other valuable considerations to them paid, the receipt whereof hereby is acknowledged, hereby do forever grant unto the CITY OF WOODBURN, a Municipal Corporation of Marion County, Oregon referred to herein as the CITY, a pe~nanent easement over and along the full width and length of the premises described as follows, to wit: A tract of land situate in Parcel il, Partition Plat 2002-19, located in the Southwest quarter of Section 12 and the iNorthwest quarter of Section 13, Township 5 South, Range 2 West of the Willamette M~ridian, City of Woodburn, County of Marion, Oregon, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Initial Point fox Partition Plat 2002-19, ~ 5/8-inch iron rod with yellow plastic cap stamped "WILHEL~ ENG. OR LS 2413"; thence South 89°12'43'' East, a distance of 6.55 feet; thence North 0°!47'17" East, a distance of 18.80 feet to the of the tract herein described; thence South 00~47'17" West, a Point of Beginning distance of 15.61 feet; thence South 741a45'47''~ West, a distance of 19.68 feet; thence South 26°04'07" West, a distance of 2.64 feet: thence South 00°47'17" West, a distance of 301.04 feet; thence North 89°28'17" iWest, a distance of 115.38 feet; thence South 00°31'43.' West, a distance of 6.15 feet;I thence North 89°28'13" West, a distance of 24.20 feet; thence South 00°15'54" West, a distance of 13.13 feet; thence North ~9°28'17" West, a distance of 0.00 feet;I thence North 89°28'17'' West, a distance of [0.00 feet; thence North 00°15'54" Eas~, a distance of 19.28 feet; thence North 89°28'17" West, a distance of 122.95 fe~t; thence South 00°31'43" West, a distance of 32.03 feet; thence North 89°28'17" West, a distance of 15.00 feet; thence North 00"31'43" East, a distance of 32.03 fee~; thence North 89"28'17" West a distance of 4.94 feet; thence North 00"47'17" East,i a distance of 7.53 feet; thence North 00°47'17' East a distance of 386.94 fe~t; thence North 69"05'59" East a distance of 16.14 feet; thence South 00"47'17" West, a distance of 57.61 feet; thence South 89"12'43" East a distance of 33.55 fee~; thence South 00"47'17# West a distance of 20.00 feet; thence North 89"12'43" West, a distance of 33.55 feet; thence South 00"47'17" West, a distance of 42.13 fee~; thence South 89"12'43" East a distance of 21.59 feet; thence South 00"47'17" West, a distance of 10.00 feet; thence North 89°12'43~ West a distance of 21.59 fee~; thence South 00"47'17" West a distance of 255.63 feet; thence South 89"28'17" EaSt, a distance of 89.74 feet; thence North 00°31'43" East a distance of 10.97 fee~; thence South 89"28'17" East a distance of 15.00 feet; thence South 00~31'43# West, a distance of 10.97 feet; thence South 89"28'17" East a distance of 157.76 feet; thence North 00"47'17" East a distance of 299.48 feet; ~hence North 74"45'47" EaSt, a distance of 10.66 feet; thence North 00'14'45" West a distance of 20.77 fee~; thence North 89"45'15" East a distance of 15.00 feet; thence South 00°14'45" East, a distance of 16.75 feet; thence North 74"45'47" East, a distance of 10.28 fee~ to the Point of Beginning. Containing 0.39 Acres, more or less. with the right, privilege and authority, to said City, to construct, maintain, replace, reconstruct, remove, and add to, utility pipeline or pipelines, with all appurtenances incident thereto or necessary therewith, in, under and across the said premises, and to cut and remove from said EASEMENT any trees and other obstructions which may endanger the safety or interfere with the use of said pipelines, or appurtenances attached or connected therewith; and the dght of ingress and egress to and over said above described premises at any and all times for the purpose of doing anything necessary or useful or convenient for the enjoyment of the easement hereby granted. THE CITY SHALL, upon each and every occasion that such utility facility is constructed, maintained, replaced, reconstructed or removed, or added to, restore the premises of the Grantors, and any improvement disturbed by the City, to as good condition as they were in prior to any such installation or work, but if not practicable, then pay to Grantors reasonable compensation. THE GRANTORS, heirs and assigns, reserve the right to use the premises for walkways, driveways, planting, and related purposes, and all utility facilities shall be at a depth consistent with these purposes. EXCEPTION: No structure shall be placed within the easement, or within 45° projection upward from the bottom of the pipe. (,, ///'~ Accepted by the Woodburn City Council ~x~,/y. on ,200__ Mary Tennant, City Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon STATE OF OREGON ) )SS COUNTY OF C..c-A(.tc~%~.'~"' ) 119 ATTACHMENT "A" On this the ~)~__--L~ day oF-,.~'~,J R-¢,.-~ 200_.~. before me a Nota~ Public in and for the Coun~ and State pemonally apiarY. known to me to be the same pemon whose na~e is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged that they voluntarily execut~ the same for the pu~se therein contained. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my haed and official seal. ~~ Be ore m : -- (~ B~;~ N~k~ WBL~-~EGON ~ BLIC 'FOR OR EGQN // My Commiss~n E~ires: After Recording Return To: City of Woodbum 270 Montgomery St Wooclburn, OR 97o7~ 120 WATER MAIN EASE ATTACHMENT "B" ssg'~o',]-~ ~s.oo' ~_ ......... ~~_ ....... ~... ~ ' I,~~A~P~~MENT CO.~/IP~E](~ ,' Cz<] S89'12' 43'E 6.55' R=20.00' A- i00 °.14' 42' L=35. it CH LEN-30.77' CH RRG-s4g *~0' 04-E C2 23.2' 121 lOJ Staff R _ort Woodburn Recreation a~d Parks Department Date: To: From: January 23, 2003 i Mayor and City Council via John Brown, City Administrato D. Randall Westrick, Recreation and Parks Director Position Allocations - Part-time Teen Scene Staff RECOMMENDATIONi: Allocate two part-tim~ Program Manager and six part-time Recreation leader positions funded through the W0odbum Together OJJDP Drug Free Communities grant. BACKGROUND: At the November 12, 2002 meeting, the City Council authorized a full-time project appointment for a Teen Scene Coordinator. The Recreation and Parks Department has completed that recruitment. The Coordinator will begin work the week of January 27, 2003. Also funded as a part of the OJJDP grant are part-time support staff. This portion of the staff includes a Program Manager and three Recreation Leaders for each of the two centers. These positions will p~'ovide on-site daily supervision of the centers and other activities Teen Scene organizes. All middle school center staff will be required to be over 18 years of age and all high school center staff will be required to be over 20 years of age. The recruitment for these positions will also require education beyond high school and experience in working with youth. DISCUSSION: At the December 9, 2003 meeting, the City Council appointed a seven member Youth Advisory Council. Since then, the Council has met four times and accomplished a significant amount of work. With Recreation and Parks Department staff assistance, they have established a Mission Statement, center rules of conduct and have organized teen work parties to clean and fix up both centers. The Council is planning to tour successful teen centers in surrounding communities to gain new ideas for programs. The High School Teen Center at Legion Park is scheduled to open on Tuesday, February 18, 2003. WRPD staff and the Teen Council are planning a dbbon cutting ceremony and grand opening for that day. The Middle School Center at Settlemier Park will open March 3, 2003. 122 I Position Allocations - Part-time Teen Scene Staff FINANCIAL IMPACT: Because funding for tt~ese positions is dependent upon a grant, the allocations are in place only if grant funds ar0 available. The positions are at-will and will be discontinued if grant funding dries up. 123 CITY OF WOODBURN Community Development MEMORANDUM 14A 270 Montgomery Street Woodburn, Oregon 97071 (503) 982-5246 Date: To: From: Subject: January 27, 2003 Honorable Mayor and City Council through City Administrato Jim Mulder, Director of Community Development, ~~] Planning Commission's Action on Subdivision 02-06 & Variance 02-07. On January 23, 2003, the Planning Commission adopted a final order denying a subdivision application to subdivide the subject property (2.01 acres) into 7 lots and a variance application tO allow for no street improvements on Ogle Street. The property is located north of Luba Street, south of Bradley Street, west of Pana Street and east of Ogle Street. This decision is final unless appealed or the City Council calls this decision up for review. APPLICANT: W.F. Ringnalda 1844 - 77th Avenue SE Salem, OR 97301-9008 PROPERTY OWNERi Nazari Cam 12471 Ingallis Ln. NE Woodburn, OR 97071 NATURE OF APPLICATION: The applicant requested the subdivision of the subject property (2.01 acres) into 7 lots and a variance to allow for no street improvements on Ogle Street. RELEVANT FACTS: The subject property is located north of Luba Street, south of Bradley Street, west of Pana Street and east of Ogle Street. It can be identified specifically on Marion County Assessor Map T5S, 1W, Section 18CA, Tax Lot #7000. The subject property is zoned Single Family Residential (RS) and designated on the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan as Residential less than 12 units per acre. A single family home is currently being built on the subject site on the proposed lot #1. The surrounding properties are also zoned RS and designated on the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan as Residential less than 12 units per acre. Single family homes are developed on the Properties surrounding the subject site. The subject site is flat and is located outside of the 500-year floodplain. No wetlands are located on the site; 124, Luba Street, which has been constructed to City standards, dead ends at the south east corner of the subject site. Ogle Street, a gravel unimproved street, is located on the west side of the subject street. Ogle Street is a substandard City street. 2 125 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 Oi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 O, 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o o ~ o o o ~ ~ o o ~ o ~' o ~ 0~0~~~~~ 0 0 0 r'~ 0 0 0 Age by Income Distribution of Households in Woodburn in 1999 Total Households 4~40 1,859 HHr under 25 years HHr 25 to 34 years HHr 35 to 44 years HHr 45 to 54 years HHr 55 to 64 years HHr 65 to 74 years HHr 75 and older White JHispanic White IHispanic White IHispanic White IHispani,' White IHispanic White IHispan,¢ Whita IHispanic White ]Hispanic White IHispanic White JHispanlc White IHispanic White IHispanic White Hispanic' White IHispan,c Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Total in Age Range 114 228 2.7% 12.3% 333 677 7.9% 36.4% 527 457 12.4% 24.6% 480 308 11.3% 16.6% 510 137 1`[4% 7.4% 782 22 18.4% 1.2% 1,394 30 32.9% 1.6% Less than $10;000 9 7 7.9% 3.1% 12 64 3.6% 9.5% 0 7 0.0% 1.5% 23 20 4.8% 6.5% 43 5 7.0% 3.6% 90 6 11.5% 27.3% 221 8 15.9% 26.7% $1{];1300 tn $14;999 0 19 0.0% 8.3% 22 30 6:6% 4.4~o 33 33 ~ 7.2%0 ~ 22 TI ' ,[6% 3.6% ~ z[6 27 7.5% 19.7% 46 0 5.9% 0.0% 203 7 14.6% 23.3% $15;000 to $19;999 19 48 16.7% 21.1% 16 38 4.8% 5.6% 23 39 4.4% 8.5% 6 19 1.3% 6.2% 7 4 1.1% 2.9% 130 0 16.6% 0.0% 137 0 9.8% 0.0% $20;000 to $24;999 0 20 0.0% 8.8% 0 43 0.0% 6.4% 26 48 4.9% 10,5% 25 1 5.2% 0.3% 57 12 9.3% 8.8% 56 0 7.2% 0.0% 174 8 12.5% 26.7% $25;000 to $29;999 20 23 17.5% 10.1% 16 84 4.8% 12.4% 26 79 4.9% 17.3% 22 12 4.6% 3.9% 90 0 14.8% 0.0% 91 0 11.6% 0,0% 107 0 7.7% 0.0% $30;000to$34;999 9 18 7.9% 7.9% 21 88 6.3% 13.0% 72 31 13.7% 6.8% 54 70 11.3% 22.7% 33 19 5.4% 13.9% 54 0 6,9% 0.0% 171 7 12.3% 23.3% ~35;000 to $39;999 18 24 15.8% 10.5% 7 72 2.1% 10.6% 52 23 9.9% 5.0% 34 29 7.1% 9.4% 52 13 8.5% 9.5% 48 0 6.1% 0.0% 66 0 4.7% 0.0% $40;000 to $44;999 16 21 14.0% 9.2% 8 63 2.4% 9.3% 66 59 12.5% 12.9% 28 14 5.8% 4.5% 46 0 7.5% 0.0% 41 0 5.2% 0.0% 57 0 4.8% 0.0% $45;000 to $49;999 11 11 9.6% 4.8% 72 30 21.6% 4.4% 8 27 1,5% 5.9% 35 4 7.3% 1.3% 26 0 4.3% 0.0% 35 0 4.5% 0.0% 47 0 3.4% 0.0% $50;000 to $59;999 4 10 3.5% 4.4% 62 61 18,6% 9.0% 61 38 11.6% 8.3% 35 53 7.3% 17,2% 77 0 12.6% 0,0% 88 0 11.3% 0.0% 73 0 5.2% 0,0% $60;000 to $74;999 0 11 0.0% 4.8% 43 74 12.9% 10.9% 52 56 9.9% 12.3% 64 41 17.5% 13.3% 29 17 4.8% 12.4% 72 6 9.2% 27,3% 66 0 4.7% 0.0% $75;000 to $99;999 8 16 7.0% 7.0% 44 20 13.2% 3.0% 59 7 11.2% 1.5% 65 22 13.5% 7.1% 63 8 10.3% 5.8% 8 0 1.0% 0.0% 45 0 3.2% 0.0% $100;000 to $124;999 0 0 0,0% 0.0% 10 6 3.0% 0.9% 49 10 9.3% 2.2% 32 12 6.7% 3.9% 15 32 2.5% 23.4% 7 0 0.9% 0.0% 7 0 0.5% 0.0% $125;000 to $149;999 0 0 0.0% 0.0% 0 4 0.0% 0.6% 0 0 0.0% 0.0% 7 0 1.5% 0.0% 10 0 1.6% 0.0% 8 0 1.0% 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0.0% $150;000 to $199;999 0 0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0.0% 8 0 1.7% 0,0% 10 0 1.6% 0.0% 8 0 1.0% 0.0% 10 0 0.7% 0.0% $200;000 or more 0 0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0 0.0% 0.0% 0 0 0,0% 0,0% 0 0 0.0% 0.0% 6 0 1.0% 0.0% 0 10 0.0% 45.5% 0 0 0.0% 0.0% Source: U.S. Census Bureau Census 2000 Summary File 3 (SF 3) - Sample Data o o 0 o o 0 o o o 0,3 o o