Loading...
Minutes - 11/25/2003 Spec Mtg SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 25, 2003 TAPE READING 0001 DATE. COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CITY OF WOODBURN, COUNTY OF MARION, STATE OF OREGON, NOVEMBER 25, 2003 CONVENED. The special meeting convened at 6:30 p.m. with Mayor Figley presiding. 0008 ROLL CALL. Mayor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Figley Bjelland Cox McCallum Nichols Sifuentez Veliz Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Staff Present: City Administrator Brown, City Attorney Shields, City Recorder Tennant 0058 COUNCIL BILL 2487 - AN ORDINANCE APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION CASE NO. 03-12. PHASING PLAN APPLICATION CASE 03-02. AND VARIANCE APPLICATION CASE 03-21. AFFECTING PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF STACEY ALLISON WAY ACROSS FROM W AL-MART. WEST OF LAWSON AVENUE. AND EAST OF INTERSTATE 5. Since this bill was originally introduced at the regular meeting of November 24, 2003 but failed to received a unanimous vote at that meeting, Mayor Figley called for the second reading of the bill by title only since there were no objections from the Council. Councilor Bjelland expressed his opinion that it is in the public's best interest to deny this application and, even though he realizes that the Council has concerns about the potential litigation expenses in defending the City's action, the cost to support this position may be small in comparison to the chance of passing up an opportunity to get timely improvements at the 1-5 interchange. He referred to a different Council action taken the night before which was made in the public's interest that will cost the City an additional $50,000 to save four trees at the Highway 214/Settlemier Ave/Boones Ferry Rd intersection and urged the Council to invest some monies to support a position that is also in the best interest of the City. In looking at how it may be presented, he felt that simply stating findings of fact to deny with the reason for denial being that acceptance of this application is clearly detrimental to the public interest of the citizens of Woodburn. The issue is then does the City have the right to make a land use decision when the reason for its decision is to protect the public's interest. He feels that the City and the Council should have the right to make that type of decision. The interchange improvement will Page I - Special Council Meeting Minutes, November 25, 2003 ---,,,- .......-- .-,,-<,..- ..;-,.,~.~.,"',~._,._~"'-,..---~._~--,~---~---~---~'~..~-'--.~-_.... SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 25, 2003 TAPE READING have a significant impact on the willingness of companies to locate in Woodburn, on the ability of people to attack annexation requests, expansion of urban growth boundary, and the addition of new industries into the City. He reiterated that it is in the public's best interest to deny the application, potentially invest some taxpayer dollars to litigate this issue, and, even if the City were to lose the case, maybe condemnation proceedings will have commenced regarding acquisition of the right-of-way on the undeveloped land. 0666 Councilor Nichols agreed with Councilor Bjelland that the application as it is presented is detrimental to the citizens. Councilor Cox stated that he would continue to vote no on this issue, however, he feels that the findings need to be more than just saying that it is not in the public's interest. The code issues need to be addressed and LUBA will interpret the law. His lifetime occupation has trained him to focus on the laws and the only way he can justify his no vote on is the interpretation that since the City's code allows the City to require a traffic analysis then it carries an implied right to include the traffic analysis as one of the factors in their decision to deny the application. The second step of that analysis is to not accept the traffic engineer's report by believing that it is not accurate in terms of its alleged minimal impact therefore there is an adverse impact on traffic. There is a chance that LUBA would reverse the City's decision if a denial was adopted by the Council and LUBA could impose attorney fees against the City on the appeal. He is not too concern about the attorney fee issue since the exposure could be about $30,000-$50,000 which is a risk he is willing to take since the Council is making their decision in good faith. Councilor Sifuentez questioned the result of the traffic analysis. Councilor Cox stated that his understanding ofthe report is that the City Public Works Department has no problem with the methods or data used or conclusions reached by the traffic engineer in the traffic report. The traffic report stated that the impact at various intersections that would be affected by this development would not be sufficient to put it below the acceptable service levels. Councilor Sifuentez stated that she has also been tom between the knowledge that the interchange needs to be improved and it would be in the public's best interest for the land needed for the right of way to remain undeveloped, and the rule oflaw. Councilor McCallum stated that he is also struggling with the issue of following the law versus knowing what the traffic problems are at the interchange. The applicant has followed the rules to submit his application and he feels that the applicant has at least made an effort to delay obtaining permits for a few months. Councilor Bjelland stated that his vote after the hearing was in favor of moving to the next phase of the process and he had never intended on voting in favor of this proposition. He also felt that there was clear evidence in the record that increasing the cost of this development endangers the potential for improving the interchange. Councilor Veliz stated that he feels comfortable with his vote in favor of the application. His perception is that of looking after the citizens of our community and the applicant has Page 2 - Special Council Meeting Minutes, November 25, 2003 SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 25, 2003 TAPE READING put forth an effort to delay some of what they were going to do and he sees that as a means of working with the City. He reiterated that his feelings that rules should not be changed in the middle of the process and if the criteria is met then it should be approved. 1761 Mayor Figley stated that, in the event she is asked to vote, she would be voting in favor of the application. She felt that the City did not have a solid legal case that would uphold a denial. Additionally, she has been involved in a number of controversial land use decisions of varying degrees and she agreed that the rules should not be changed during the process. She was not pleased with the potential financial consequences to the taxpayer. She did not feel that the approval would prevent the interchange from building built unless persons with other agendas decide that it will not be constructed. 2002 Councilor Nichols stated that the applicant, through his attorney, has admitted that the interchange needs improvement and he feels that LUBA will look favorably on the City's findings since the Council is responsible to the citizens. Councilor Bjelland stated that there are instances in which cities have taken somewhat similar actions. In this case, the Council may be breaking new ground and he is not afraid to invest taxpayer dollars in legal fees to see if the City would prevail in a denial and create a situation that is in the public's best interest. Mayor Figley called for a roll call vote on this bill. Councilors Sifuentez, Veliz, and McCallum voted aye, Councilors Bjelland, Cox, and Nichols voted nay. Mayor Figley voted aye to break the tie (4-3) and pass the bill. Mayor Figley declared Council Bill 2487 duly passed with the emergency clause. 2419 Councilor McCallum thanked the Councilors and the Mayor for discussing this issue in length before this difficult decision was made. Mayor Figley thanked the Councilors for their love for our community, their thoughtfulness, and intelligence in dealing with a matter that no one found easy to deal with. The special meeting that she had taken the precaution to notice earlier today will be cancelled since a decision was made at this meeting. APPROVED 2517 ADJOURNMENT. MCCALLUM/NICHOLS... the meeting be ad'ou unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 7:11 p.m.. ATTEST Mary T e t, Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 3 - Special Council Meeting Minutes, November 25,2003