The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda - 12/08/2003 WOODBURN CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DECEMBER 8, 2003 - 7:00 P.M. 1. CALL TO ORDER AND FLAG SALUTE 2. ROLL CALL 3. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND APPOINTMENTS Announcements: A. Holiday Closures: Christmas: City Hall and the Library will close at noon on December 24, 2003 and will reopen for regular business hours on December 26, 2003. The Library will open two hours early at 8:00 a.m. on December 24. The Aquatic Center will be open on December 24 until 4 p.m. and will be closed on December 25. New Years: City Hall, the Library, and the Aquatic Center will be closed on January 1, 2003. B. Dance, Dance, Dance will perform their winter recital on December 13 at 1 :00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. at Woodburn High. School. C. The Mayor's Holiday Concert featuring local musicians will continue on December 10 at 7:00 p.m. at Woodburn High School. D. Volunteers are needed to help with the Love Santa program. Sorting and wrapping will be on December 17 and 18 from 1 :00 to . 8:00 p.m. at the Woodburn Armory. Distribution will be on December 19 from 2:00 to 4:00 p.m., also at the Armory. E. Mrs. Claus will visit the Woodburn Public Library on December 20 at 1 :30 p.m. . Mrs. Claus will entertain the audience with stories, sing-a-Iongs, comedy magic and her special friend, Snoops the live bunny. UHabra inrerpreres ~isponibles para aquellas personas que no bablan Il1fJles, previo acuer~o. Comuniquese al (503) 980-2.485-.. December 8, 2003 Council Agenda Page i F. There will be a holiday open house at the Woodburn Historical Museum on December 19, from 2:00 - 6:00 p.m. Museum Hosts will be on hand to conduct tours. "Vintage movies" will be shown at the Bungalow Theater throughout the afternoon. Refreshments will be served. Santa will be there to greet children of all ages. This free community event is open to the public. G. There will be a Public Hearing on January 12, 2004 for Annexation 02-01 (Industrial Welding Supply). Appointments: None. 4. PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS Proclamations: None. Presentations: A. Tim Eddy, of Hennebery Eddy Architects, will present the conceptual designs for remodeling and expanding the Woodburn Public Library 5. COMMlnEE REPORTS A. Chamber of Commerce B. Woodburn Downtown Association 6. COMMUNICATIONS None. 7. BUSINESS FROM THE PUBLIC (This allows the public to introduce items for Council consideration not already scheduled on the agenda.) 8. CONSENT AGENDA -Items listed on the consent agenda are considered routine and may be enacted by one motion. Any item may be removed for discussion at the request of a Council member. A. Woodburn City Council minutes for the November 17 work session; 1 November 24 regular meeting; and the November 25, 2003 special meeting Recommended Action: Approve the Woodburn City Council minutes. December a, 2003 Council Agenda Page ii B. Woodburn Planning Commission minutes of November 13, 2003. 20 Recommended Action: Accept the Woodburn Planning Commission minutes. C. Recreation Division Participation Report Recommended Action: Receive the report. 26 D. Building Activity for November 2003 Recommended Action: Receive the report. 30 E. Planning Tracking Sheet dated December 2, 2003 Recommended Action: Receive the report. 31 9. TABLED BUSINESS None. 10. GENERAL BUSINESS A. Council Bill No. 2488 - Resolution calling for a public hearing on 34 the annexation of certain property located on the east side of Highway 99E and north side of Aztec Drive and addressed as 600 North Pacific Highway Recommended Action: Adopt the resolution. B. Council Bill No. 2489 - Resolution Initiating the annual review of the 37 Woodburn Development Ordinance Recommended Action: Adopt the resolution. C. Council Bill No. 2490 - Resolution Initiating consideration of 48 proposed amendments to the Woodburn Sign Ordinance Recommended Action: Adopt the resolution. D. Council Bill No. 2491 - Resolution establishing the compensation 50 schedule for certain hourly and seasonal employees Recommended Action: Adopt the resolution. E. Vacancies and Term Expiration - City Boards, Commissions and. 55 Committees Recommended Action: Announce existing vacancies and upcoming term expirations for positions on City boards, commissions and committees; and solicit applications from individuals interested in serving. December 8, 2003 Council Agenda Page iii F. Liquor License Application - Greater Privilege 57 Recommended Action: Approve a Full On-Premise Commercial Sales License for Denny's at Woodburn, 2919 Newberg Hwy. G. Cancellation of December 22, 2003 Meeting 59 Recommended Action: Cancel the December 22, 2003 City Council meeting. H. No Parking Restrictions on Amity Court 60 Recommended Action: No parking be approved along both sides of Amity Court to provide better accessibility for emergency vehicles and increased safety. I. Sale of Rotating Biological Contactors 63 Recommended Action: Approve the sale of two rotating biological contactors shafts without cover to the City of Wapato for $100.00. 11. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. East Hardcastle Street Final Assessment Public Hearing 65 Recommended Action: Receive public comment, complete public hearing, and instruct staff to prepare an ordinance for Council action establishing the final assessment amounts, as presented. 12. PUBLIC COMMENT 13. NEW BUSINESS 14. PLANNING COMMISSION OR ADMINISTRATIVE LAND USE ACTIONS - These are Planning Commission or Administrative Land Use actions that may be called up by the City Council. A. Planning Commission's approval of Variance 03-23 (1050 Boones 77 Ferry Road) 15. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 16. MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS December 8, 2003 Council Agenda Pageiv 17. EXECUTIVE SESSION A. To consult with counsel concerning the legal rights and duties of a public body with regard to current litigation or litigation likely to be filed pursuant to ORS 192.660 (1) (h). B. To consider records that are exempt by law from public inspection pursuant to ORS 192.660 (1) (f). 18. ADJOURNMENT December 8, 2003 Council Agenda Page v SA COUNCIL WORK SESSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 17, 2003 TAPE READING Tape I - Side A .ill. DATE. COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CITY OF WOODBURN, COUNTY OF MARION, STATE OF OREGON, NOVEMBER 24,2003 CONVENED. Mayor Figley convened the work session at 7:00 p.m. for the purpose of meeting with the Planning Commission to hear a presentation on the Periodic Review Amendment Package. ROLL CALL. Mayor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Figley Bjelland Cox McCallum Nichols Sifuentez Veliz Present Present Present Present Present Present Present Planning Commission Members Present: Claudio Lima, Royce Young, Patty Grigorieff, Rob Mill Staff Present: City Administrator Brown, City Attorney Shields, Community Development Director Mulder, Asst. City Attorney Won, Senior Planner Zwerdling, Associate Planner Rodriguez, Public Works Manager Rohman, City Recorder Tennant Consultant: Greg Winterowd, Jesse Winterowd, WinterBrook Planning Also present: Larry Ksionzyk, Mid- Willamette Valley Field Representative for LCDC; Les Sasaki, Marion County Planner 5.7 WOODBURN 2004 PERIODIC REVIEW AMENDMENT PACKAGE. Greg Winterowd stated that the City has conducted several studies over the last two years data of which is being used to develop amendments for the City to consider as part of the 2004 Periodic Review. He has been working closely with City staff and Marion County regarding a new population projection and a new employment projection both of which have a ripple effect to the City. The Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) justification report involves data from the Buildable Lands Inventory, Land Needs Analysis, Housing Needs Analysis, Transportation Alternatives, and Natural Resources report. In regards to UGB expansion, the areas to expand to are located to the south and west of the existing boundary for industrial sites and to the north around the golf course for residential areas. Consideration is also being given to form a new Nodal Development south ofWal-Mart and the existing city limits. He stated that those are the two biggest changes other than transportation. The City is working with Marion County and the State with WinterBrook Page I - Council Work Session Minutes, November 17, 2003 1 COUNCIL WORK SESSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 17, 2003 TAPE READING as an intermediary, in an effort to come up with a plan that will work with the state-wide planning goals, the existing Marion County framework plan, and meet the City's local needs. Proposed amendments are being made to the Comprehensive plan to separate background documents from policy so that a comprehensive plan amendment is not required if a change is made to a background study such as the Buildable Lands Inventory. These proposed amendments then affect the Woodburn Development Ordinance and a package of amendments to this plan. The package before the Council and Planning Commission also includes a revised Comprehensive Plan Map and a zoning map is currently being worked on that will implement the amendments. The current Urban Growth Boundary is about 25 years old and it needs updating to accommodate projected population and employment growth within the City. He stated that past growth trends do not adequately address future economic opportunities, housing needs or applicable statewide planning goals. Key objectives include (1) implementation of Economic Opportunities Analysis, (2) provide choice of suitable industrial sites to attract certain types of industries, (3) provide buildable land for housing, parks, and schools, (4) increase land use efficiency within UGB, (5) complete the periodic review process which began about 7 years ago, (6) coordinate with the Marion County Framework Plan, (7) provide adequate transportation connections not only east/west connection but interchange improvement, (8) minimize impacts on agricultural land, and (9) protect stream corridors and wetlands. He reviewed the UGB amendment process which includes the basic steps of identifying population and employment projections, buildable lands inventory, land needs analysis, intensify land use within the existing UGB, and alternative analysis which is to bring land in under ORS 197.298 priorities. He stated that those priorities say that the first areas to be added would be the exception areas of a rural residential land in which a house or small business could be located that abuts the current UGB boundary, then lower class agricultural soil (Class ill-IV) areas can be considered, and prime agricultural soil (Class I-II) land is to be avoided if possible. Population projection for the City over the next 20 years indicates a 74% growth and employment projection indicates an 81 % growth. The population projection has been coordinated with the staff of Marion County and LCDC, and, as part of this process, the City will be asking the Marion County Commissioners to adopt the populatiollprojectionof34,919 for year 2020 as the coordinated popuiation projection. He suggested that the plan year be changed to 2023, 2024, or 2025 since this process will still take some time to complete. In regards to employment, the Council has expressed a desire to recruit businesses that will provide employment to the residents of Woodburn rather than the residents having to go elsewhere for employment. The Buildable Lands Inventory did impose some restrictions on development and he referred to a map that displayed the locations of buildable land by category. He reviewed the method used to determine 20-year land needs for the City which included taking into consideration the Economic Opportunities Analysis, Housing Needs Analysis, and the Page 2 - Council Work Session Minutes, November 17,2003 2 COUNCIL WORK SESSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 17, 2003 TAPE READING School and Park Analysis. The City's industrial land supply within the existing UGB is 126 buildable acres with an average lot size of3.5 acres. The residential land supply is 470 buildable acres of which 375 acres is low density residential and 79 acres in medium density residential. Based on lot size between 1988-2002, the average lot size is 7,000 square feet or 6.83 dwelling units per acre. He reviewed Goal 9 provision regarding need to provide adequate supply of suitable sites and the acreage and site requirements for industrial, commercial, and residential acreage to meet the need within the current UGB. Since there is a deficit within the existing UGB, this information will be used within the UGB expansion justification report. In regards to the large stores that are currently vacant, these parcels have already been developed and are part of the existing inventory even though they are currently not occupied by a business. He explained the concept of a nodal residential plan designation which is an area with a commercial center surrounded by a higher density residential area with design standards to make up the density and provide affordable housing opportunities. Side B Mr. Winterowd stated that the park and school needs are, for the most part, in the residential areas but are not met in commercial areas. Therefore, the amount of residential land needs to be increased to meet the parks, schools, and open space needs. 2.4 Under state law, local government must use land more efficiently within the UGB before they can expand their UGB. The plan before the City would be to allow 1) as much as 10.5 dwelling units per net acre, 2) a residential mix of 65% single family and 35% multi- family, 3) new overlay zones by increasing densities in nodal development, 4) increasing density in exception areas adjacent to the existing UGB, 5) master planning requirement in southwest industrial reserve area and nodal areas to maintain large parcel sizes, 6) housing over retail businesses in the downtown and nodal development areas, 7) minimum density standards be set at 80%, and 8) planning for development of infill, partially vacant, and potential redevelopment land. It was noted that growth efficiency measures to be implemented will still require the expansion of the UGB by approximately 1,000 gross acres or 30% increase. Mr. Winterowd provided more in depth information on proposed nodal development policies that are incorporated into this package. He expressed his opinion that the southwest industrial reserve is the key to implementing Woodburn's economic strategy since it has good access to 1-5, Butteville Road and Parr Road. To make transportation work to this area, the long range plan needs to include a connection from Butteville to Highway 99E utilizing area south of the current city limits. He also reviewed policies that for this area which would include reserving land for targeted industries, maintaining large lot sizes, prohibit commercial rezoning, provide direct access to 1-5, and require master planning. He provided information on the factors that need to be considered when deciding where to grow in the outlying areas. Eight study areas were decided upon and, after applying the factors, proposed areas of expansion developed. He outlined those areas on the map and briefly reviewed the Page 3 - Council Work Session Minutes, November 17, 2003 3 COUNCIL WORK SESSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 17, 2003 TAPE READING reasons as to why those parcels could be in the proposed area of expansion. In regards to lot size, the proposed maximum allowable density is 6,000 sq. feet, however, a developer would need to stay within that density level overall so it would be possible to have some lots larger in size and others smaller so long as the average is met. He also provided a chart on projected timelines to complete the review and adoption process. Public hearings would be held before the Planning Commission and Council during the spring of 2004 with reviews by other governmental agencies to be completed by the fall of 2004. Tape 2 Side A Mayor Figley expressed a concern on (1) how certain housing types can be detrimental to a community as it relates to the number of persons per household and not just units per acre. Mr. Winterowd stated that concerns surface on the quality of life with small house and small lot sizes with multiple family. The amendments before the Council and Commission are a compromise that many would like to see in a community versus the mandate from the State that land be used efficiency and affordable housing be available. He does not feel that row houses will be built within the next 10 years and design standards, for instance, would dictate as to where a garage is located in a row house design. The population per household size is projected between 2.7 and 3.1 since factors such as better education and more money will result in a lower household size over the next 20 years. Commissioner Lima expressed his concern that the trend will continue to increase versus decrease since it takes many years to change the cultural factors that affect the household SIze. Following some discussion on this issue, Mr. Winterowd urged the Council and Commissioners to consider a set of numbers that they feel comfortable with so that the household size directly relates to land consumption areas and the types of house being. demanded. Commissioner Young questioned how close the Cit)' is tQJhe d~Il~ity target of8.3 to 8.5 homes per acre. Mr. Winterowd stated that the actual density is 6.83 whereas the proposed plan would increase the density by 25%. In the buildable lands inventory, a parcel by parcel analysis was completed and that did include a developer's ability to partition land for flag lots in order to make use of all available land and remnant pieces of land were taken out of the calculations. It was noted that 6.83 density was calculated from the period of 1988-2002 and, for the period of 1998-2002, the overall density was 7.1. Discussion was also held on design standards and the impact smaller lot sizes may have on the housing quality and affordability. Page 4 - Council Work Session Minutes, November 17, 2003 4 COUNCIL WORK SESSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 17, 2003 TAPE READING Councilor Veliz commented on how the interchange improvement is a high priority but it is still unknown as to its status and the proposed plan calls for the building of the east- west connection which is even more unknown than the interchange improvement. Mr. Winterowd stated that once the UGB expansion is granted and the Transportation System Plan is updated, the goal would be to make the connection over the next 20 years as development on the southerly portion ofthe UGB occurs. Side B 4.0 Mayor Figley stated that the work on this issue will continue and public hearings will give the citizens an opportunity to comment on the proposed amendments. The work session ended at 9:20 p.m.. APPROVED KATHRYN FIGLEY, MAYOR ATTEST Mary Tennant, Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 5 - Council Work Session Minutes, November 17, 2003 5 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 24, 2003 TAPE READING 0001 DATE. COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CITY OF WOODBURN, COUNTY OF MARION, STATE OF OREGON, NOVEMBER 24,2003 CONVENED. The meeting convened at 7:00 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, Police Chief Russell, Public Works Director Tiwari, Finance Director Gillespie, Parks & Recreation Director Westrick, Library Director Sprauer, Public Works Manager Rohman, Management Analyst Smith, City Recorder Tennant 0059 ANNOUNCEMENTS. A) Office Closures: fu observance of Thanksgiving, City Hall will be closed on November 27 and 28, 2003. The Library and Aquatic Center will be closed on November 27,2003. It was noted that the Aquatic Center will have open swim each afternoon during Thanksgiving week except for Thursday, November 27th. B) Holiday Tree Lighting Ceremony will be held on December 6, 2003 beginning at 6;30 p.m. at the Settlemier House, followed by a posada to the comer of First and Hayes Street for the City tree lighting ceremony at Warzynski Plaza. Following this program, Lupita's Restaurant will host a tree lighting party. Cl Mayor's Holiday Concert featuring local musicians will be held at Woodburn Higtr~------ School on December 8 and 10,2003 beginning at 7:00 p.m. each evening. D) Public Hearing will be held on December 8, 2003, 7:00 p.m., regarding the tinallocal improvement district final assessment for East Hardcastle (continued from November 10, 2003). E) Conceptual Designs for remodeling and expansion of the Woodburn Public Library will be presented to the Council on December 8, 2003 by Tim Eddy of Hennebery Eddy Architects. F) Dance, Dance, Dance will perfonn their winter recital on December 13, 2003, at Woodburn High School. Perfonnances will be held at 1:00 pm and 3:00 pm. Page 1 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 24,2003 6 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 24, 2003 TAPE READING 0232 PRESENTATION: SOLV COMMUNITY GROUP AWARD TO THE LIVABILITY TASK FORCE. Jason McCain, representing SOLV (Stop Oregon Litter & Vandalism), presented the Livability Task Force with the 2003 SOLV Citizenship Award. SOLV recently held their 2003 banquet and a video presentation on the City's city-wide cleanup program was shown at the banquet and re-played at the Council meeting. Mr. McCain stated that the annual banquet is an opportunity for SOL V to showcase community groups, individuals, schools, and businesses who show exemplary efforts to beautify and improve livability within our communities. He reviewed the selection process by which an independent committee reviews all of the applications received to determine which program in each group are to be recognized for their efforts. Award winners are those who volunteer or provide personal or professional resources that contribute to the livability oftheir community in combination with assisting challenged Oregon communities towards environmental and economical health through volunteerism and effectively involving Oregon youth. This year's winners were as follows: 1) illdividual Award winner - Scott Field from Sprague; 2) School Award winner - Brian Reynolds, an educator from Tillamook; 3) Business Award winner - Nonn Thompson; and 4) Community Group Award winner - Woodburn Livability Task Force. Reasons for the selection of the Task Force as the 2003 award winner include 1) semi- annual cleanup projects which builds collaboration by pulling together the business community, schools, service organizations, government officials and employees, and the general public; 2) flower basket program; and 3) public infonnation about solid waste and on-going dissemination of infonnation to keep people actively involved in finding solutions to the problem. He reiterated that the combination of these efforts is critical in building a better and healthier community. Members of the Task Force present to accept the award were Co-chair Pete McCallum, Jane Christoff, Betty Guzman, Mike Bergeron, Phyllis McKean, and Lisa Ellsworth. Pete McCallum stated that co-chairs Nancy Kirksey and JoAnn Bjelland were unable to attend this Council meeting. On behalf of the TasJ~ Force and till: CityJ-he-1hanked all of . --~--ffie community volunteers and the City for their support, and to SOL V for awarding the Task Force with this award. 1156 CHAMBER OF COMMERCE REPORT. Patrick Vance, representing the Chamber Board, provided the Council with updated monthly statistics on the number of visitors, telephone contacts, informational packets and web hits since the first of the year along with annual statistics since calendar year 2000. He stated that the Chamber had found that their web counter was incorrectly counting the number of web hits and, after a change was made to correct this problem, the web site hits greatly increased which is why the last two months on the statistics show a Page 2 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 24,2003 7 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 24,2003 TAPE READING substantially higher number of web hits. Overall, the number of contacts in all of the areas listed are increasing each year. Crystal Apple awards were recently presented to educators and staff members from the Woodburn School District, St. Luke's School, and the Lourdes School at McClaren. There were 54 nominees of which 12 individuals were selected to receive the awards. This event is self-funded by specific sponsors and by the cost of the dinner. It continues to grow each year and it is self-sustaining. This year's sponsors were West Coast Bank, Cascade Park Retirement Community, Chemeketa Community College, PGE, US Bank, Whittenberg Inn, Abby's Pizza, American Family illsurance, the DeHart Agency, Miles Chevrolet, Miles Chrylser Dodge & Jeep, North Willamette Valley Mortgage, Renaissance Homes, Silverton Hospital, Wells Fargo Bank, Willamette Education Service District, Woodburn High School Bulldog Foundation, and the Woodburn School District. Upcoming Chamber events include: 1) Greeter's Program on December 5,2003 at Silver Creek Assisted Living, December 12th at Colonial Gardens, and December 19th at West Coast Bank; 2) Business After Hours will be an open house at the Chamber Visitor's Center on December 11 th from 4:30 pm until 7:00 pm and the public is invited to attend; and 3) Chamber Forum lunch will be held on December 17th at the Settlemier House and advanced reservations are required. 1476 WOODBURN DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION REPORT. Bruce Thomas, WDA President, congratulated the Livability Task Force on receiving the SOL V award. He stated that his organization is partnering with Woodburn Recreation & Parks, French Prairie Historical Society, and French Prairie Kiwanis to celebrate the Christmas Season on December 6,2003. This event will begin at 6:30 pm at the Settlemier House where caroling and a tree lighting ceremony will be held, followed by a posada to Warzynski Plaza downtown where another tree lighting ceremony will be held. Participants are invited to Lupita's Restaurant for entertainment and refreshments ... _._ _ _ ~___~llovyin~ the c~re~o.l!!.es. Lastly, WDA has been_ working on the lights along Front Street and, on the southeast comer of Young Street and Front Street, the lights have been strung differently. WDA is looking for input from the public to determine if all of the trees should have a similar lighting pattern. 1612 COMMUNICATIONS. Mayor Figley stated that she had received a letter from MW ACT (Mid- Willamette Area Commission on Transportation) infonning the City that nominations will be accepted for the position currently being held by the Mayor ofMt. Angel since the term expiration date for that position is December 31, 2003. Councilors interested in either applying for Page 3 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 24, 2003 8 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 24, 2003 TAPE READING that position or to serve as a alternate are encouraged to submit their name to MW ACT for consideration. Councilor Bjelland stated that the Mayor ofMt. Angel is willing to continue in the position and she has a very strong interest in the North Marion County area and in the particular transportation projects Woodburn is interested in having funded by ODOT. 1765 CONSENT AGENDA. A) approve Council meeting minutes of November 10,2003; B) accept the Planning Commission minutes of October 23, 2003; C) accept the Library Board minutes of November 12,2003; D) accept the Recreation and Park Board draft minutes of November 18,2003; E) approve the claims for October 2003; F) accept the annual System Development Charge report for 2002-03; and G) accept the Leaf Program update report. NICHOLS/SIFUENTEZ.... adopt the consent agenda as presented. The motion passed unanimously. 1824 COUNCIL BILL 2483 - RESOLUTION INITIATING CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE WOODBURN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AND MAP. WOODBURN DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE AND WOODBURN ZONING MAP RESULTING FROM COMPLETION OF PERIODIC REVIEW TASKS 1.2.4.S.6.7.AND 8. Councilor Sifuentez introduced Council Bill 2483. Recorder Tennant read the bill by title only since there were no objections from the Council. Mayor Figley stated that this bill authorizes the staff and Planning Commission to move ahead with the process to update the City's Comprehensive Plan and related ordinances. On roll call vote for final passage, the bill passed unanimously. Mayor Figley declared Council Bill 2483 duly passed. 1985 COUNCIL BILL 2484 - RESOLUTION ADJUSTING WATER RATES AND- REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 1646. Council Bill 2484 was introduced by Councilor Sifuentez. The bill was read by title only since there were no objections from the Council. Councilor Cox stated that this bill would provide for a reduction of a proposed increase that was previously adopted by the Council to fund the water treatment facility project and this bill will provide for rate increases to take place over a longer period of time. On roll call vote for fmal passage, the bill passed unanimously. Mayor Figley declared Council Bill 2484 duly passed. Page 4 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 24, 2003 9 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 24, 2003 TAPE READING 2092 COUNCIL BILL 2485 - RESOLUTION ENTERING INTO A INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH CHEMEKET A COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE CHEMEKETA COOPERATIVE REGIONAL LIBRARY SERVICE. Council Bill 2485 was introduced by Councilor Sifuentez. Recorder Tennant read the bill by title only since there were no objections from the Council. On roll call vote for final passage, the bill passed unanimously. Mayor Figley declared Council Bill 2485 duly passed. 2170 COUNCIL BILL 2486 - ORDINANCE APPROVING ZONING ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION CASE NO. 03-03 AFFECTING PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1300 ASTOR COURT. Councilor Sifuentez introduced Council Bill 2486. The two readings of the bill were read by title only since there were no objections from the Council. Councilor McCallum stated that several concerns were expressed regarding setbacks, heights, and property line issues and he questioned how this type of project would be monitored by City staff to see that it meets the rules and regulations. Administrator Brown stated that the fence will require a pennit and inspections will take place. Regarding the measurement of right-of-way, the City does not measure the distance as part of the inspection. If there is a need for the City to use the right-of-way, a complete survey of the line will be taken at that time and, if the fence is in the right-of- way, the property owner will be responsible for all costs to replace the fence. Councilor Cox stated that he would not be voting on this issue and questioned City Attorney Shields if the ordinance would pass at this meeting ifhe abstained from voting and all other members of the Council voted in favor of the bill. . City Attorney advised Councilor Cox to make a declaration like he had done at the previous meeting and not vote at all on this issue. A unanimous vote from the remaining Council members would then pass the bill at this meeting. Councilor Cox stated that he is disqualifying himself from voting on this issue. Brief discussion was held regarding the setback distance and staff's inspection of the location as part of the application and permit process. On roll call vote, the bill passed 5-0 with Councilor Cox not taking part in the vote. Mayor Figley declared Council Bill 2486 duly passed with the emergency clause. 2562 COUNCIL BILL 2487 - ORDINANCE APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION NO. 03-12. PHASING PLAN APPLICATION NO. 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 1-5. Council Bill 2487 was introduced by Councilor Sifuentez. Recorder Tennant read the Page 5 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 24, 2003 10 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 24, 2003 TAPE READING two readings of the bill by title only since there were no objections from the Council. Councilor Bjelland stated that a portion of the land to be developed under this application is critical to the future of Woodburn and crucial to the development of the 1-5 interchange. He felt that any action that is taken in respect to this application is going to have a potentially serious impact on the interchange. For that reason, he would be voting no on this particular Council Bill. Following the last meeting, he has been wrestling with the role of the Planning Commission versus the Council and, in his opinion, the Planning Commission has the obligation to follow the rules pertaining to development and land use issues whereas the Council has a higher obligation in that they need to take into account the public good. Councils from other communities have denied proposals that their Planning Commissions had passed, for example a denial of a Wal-mart development because they did not want to see a big box coming into their community even though Wal-mart may have met all of the criteria for developing the parcel and meeting the zoning and other issues particular to that development, since those Councils felt that the development was not in the best interest of their community. h1 this case, he feels that this decision goes far beyond the example cited since this particular project has the capability of influencing the traffic patterns and the improvement of the 1-5 interchange which is an extremely crucial element in Woodburn's future and that of north Marion County. As a member ofMW ACT, he recognized very strongly the importance ofthe need for improving the 1-5 interchange. He referred to a letter submitted by the applicant which stated that "... the best solution, and one which the applicant supports, is for the Oregon Department of Transportation to make the long awaited improvements to the Woodburn interchange..". He stated that everyone recognizes the need for the improvement, however, approving this particular project in its present fonnat does not aid in achieving that improvement. If the applicant were to submit a revised site plan that showed improvements on the parcel portions that would not be impacted by the improvement to the interchange he would have no objection to the site plan. Since this particular site plan and proposal places buildings in the path of where the necessary right- of-way needs to be acquired to improve the interchange, he finds that he cannot support this development application as being one that is in the best interest of the community. Councilor McCallum stated that he had been inclined to vote no on the application until there was a last minute arrangement that appeared to give some time for a property appraisal and hopefully negotiate for the purchase of right-of-way. He continues to be concerned about this issue since it appears that the efforts to improve the interchange may be endangered by the approval of the application. There is the possibility that the price of the property will increase substantially and ODOT may change its mind on the funding of the project. He reiterated that the City needs to move ahead with the 1-5 interchange improvement and, after a more careful review, the Council may be endangering the interchange project by approving this application. Page 6 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 24, 2003 11 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 24, 2003 TAPE READING Councilor Cox agreed with statements made by Councilor Bjelland, however, as a lawyer, he has always been told to follow the rule oflaw. Using that kind oflogic, he could see no basis for denying the application. He is still undecided as to whether or not the rule of law should be followed versus public interest. Councilor Sifuentez felt that this will be a very hard decision to make since the citizens deserve to have the interchange improved. Councilor Cox also expressed his view that the agreement made by the applicant to postpone the application for building permits for a few months is probably not that critical since he would be surprised if they were to come in for permits much before that time due to the need to finalize plans and get their financing into place. He also had a strong suspicion that the mere adoption ofthis ordinance raises the value of the property whether they ever apply for a building permit or not. He appreciated the offer that they made but did not feel that it would make much difference in the outcome of this project. Councilor Nichols felt that the political aspect be dropped and a statement be made concerning the value an interchange improvement would have on our community. For that reason, he would be voting no because he is more concerned about the future of Woodburn. Councilor Veliz reiterated his feelings that if the applicant has followed all of the rules, then barriers should not be erected. He is in favor ofthe interchange improvements but the applicant has followed the rules and his application should be approved. 3640 Councilor Bjelland stated that several comments had been made about following the rules and, in his opinion, it is the Planning Commission's responsibility to see if the rules are being followed. He also felt that it was the Council's responsibility to go beyond whether it follows the rules by taking into consideration other factors that would be in the best interest of the City. On almost all other projects, he believed that he had gone by the rules because usually a project is in the best interest of the City. However, in this case, he felt that the public good is more important than just following the rules. Mayor Figley reminded the Council that this decision is subject to the 120-day rule and, as a precaution, she has noticed a special City Council meeting for tomorrow in the event there is not a unanimous approval of this Council Bill. In the event she were to vote on this bill, she would be voting in favor of the bill because the Council is dealing with a site plan that is zoned outright for the proposed use and the applicant was willing to backoff on concerns that were most critical. She expressed her concerns that if the bill is defeated, the Council will need to come back with an ordinance with findings of denial, which will not be that easy to prepare, and the issue of appeal to LUBA. For the record, she would vote in support of the ordinance for a tie because she did not want to cost the taxpayers ofthe City money, time, and expense associated with an appeal that she does not feel that the City would prevail. Page 7 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 24, 2003 12 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 24, 2003 TAPE READING Councilor McCallum stated that one of the concepts that is important is the rule of law. He questioned if the City is breaking any law if a negative position is adopted by the Council. Attorney Shields stated that, as the City Attorney, he would argue in favor of the decision. In this case, the difficulty is that there are planning standards and criteria under the current code that apply and it appears, based on the planning staff report, the Planning Commission decision, and the testimony in the record, that the standards and criteria have been met. If the bill is defeated, another ordinance would need to be drafted to deny the application based on the Council's reasons for the denial. An appeal of the decision would be to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA). h1 most cases, LUBA does not award the cost of attorney fees, but in this case, that may be an issue to be argued. Councilor Cox stated that he was not aware of LUBA having the ability to award attorney fees against the City. Attorney Shields stated that there are two statutes (197.835 (10)(a), and 197.830 (15)(b)) that give LUBA the authority to award the attorney fees. Councilor Bjelland stated that he is aware of several instances where cities have taken similar type of actions and he questioned if Attorney Shields was aware of any court cases on issues of this type and the outcome of those cases. Attorney Shields stated that the City has a zoning code and certain standards and criteria that need to be applied. If a decision to deny is based on specific criteria, then the case is a lot stronger to defend. Mike Robinson, attorney for the applicant, requested an opportunity to make a procedural point. Attorney Shields informed the Mayor that it was at her discretion if she allowed him to speak since he was making a procedural point and not offering evidence. Mike Robinson stated that the record is closed, but if the Council chose to act to deny, there is nothing in the public hearing evidentiary record relating to MW ACT, safety, or access to other roads. To the extent that Councilor Bjelland's comments might be construed as evidence, he asked that they be stricken from the record since the record is not open and he is not aware of anything in the record on these specific issues. Councilor Cox stated that there is concern about liabilitY for attorney fees but that should not be the focus. h1 his judgment, the only thing that he can think of that would give the City a basis for making a decision that is other than purely subjective idea that it is not the best interest of the City, would be that it is implicit in the Woodburn Development Ordinance provisions that traffic impact studies must be provided, that the Council must have the right to act on those traffic studies, and have the right to rely on the impact of the traffic as part of the City's approval criteria. Councilor Bjelland stated that he still felt that there was sufficient testimony in the record so that staff could prepare an adequate ordinance to deny the application. Page 8 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 24, 2003 13 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 24, 2003 TAPE READING 5425 Attorney Shields reiterated that he wanted to alert the Council as to what the parameters are and he will follow through with whatever he can to do to justify the Council's decision. Councilor McCallum stated that he is dedicated to Woodburn and the livability issues, however, he also felt that he needed to look at the rule of law when making a decision. On roll call vote, Councilors McCallum, Sifuentez, and Veliz voted aye; Councilors Bjelland, Cox, and Nichols voted nay. Mayor Figley voted aye to break the tie. . A special meeting will be held on November 25, 2003, 6:30 p.m., City Hall Council Chambers, for a final vote on this Council Bill. 5685 ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE WOODBURN DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE. Councilor Cox suggested that the City consider having a concurrency provisions within the development ordinance which would give the City the right to deny an application if the long range plans are not yet fulfilled as long as there is some reasonable expectation that they will be fulfilled. Another concern involves big box stores and the length of time it may take to get another business into those stores since the holders of those properties may hold off on leasing those properties to a competitor. As a condition of approval, he felt that the City could require that the developer enter into a covenant that the property owner would have to agree to sell it to anybody once the building has been vacated whether or not the business buying the property is a competitor. After reviewing the starr s list, he felt that they were all worthy of review but he was unsure if he was in agreement on all of the issues at this time. Councilor Bjelland stated that the fence issue was identified on the list for review. Administrator Brown stated that the Focus Group will be reinstated to assist in the review process. Councilor Cox stated that he would be willing to be the Council representative on the Focus Group. Mayor Figley stated that she would contact the Planning Commission Chair to see which member of the Commission would be willing to serve on the Focus Group. BJELLAND/SIFUENTEZ.... instruct staff to prepare a resolution to direct staff to draft revisions to the Woodburn Development Ordinance. to address the issues outlined in Exhibit "A" to the agenda item and those additional items that were brought up by Councilor Cox. The motion passed unanimously. 6465 DISCUSSION ON ALIGNMENT OF BOONES FERRY ROAD AT HIGHWAY 214. Public Works Director Tiwari provided background information on this project which is on the City's Capital Improvement Project list and eligible for approximately $200,000 in federal and state highway funds. The Boones Ferry Road I Settlemier Avenue I Highway 214 intersection is not part of a local improvement district and funding for this project involves a number of sources including traffic impact fees, system development charges, Page 9 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 24, 2003 14 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 24, 2003 TAPE READING and state / federal highway funds. Two options were provided for Council consideration one of which would widen the roadway equally on both sides (Option A) and the other option would widen the street on the west side (Option B). He stated that both options will include the removal of some trees to the north and south ofthe intersection. The capacity of the roadways will increase once the intersection is improved and the traffic signal timing will be different thereby improving the capacity of the entire intersection. There will be some right-of-way acquired but the amount to be purchased is dependent upon the option selected. He stated that the State is looking for a decision by the City so that they can move forward with a traffic signal configuration. The School District is concerned about their parking area since they do not want to lose parking spaces. Staff is working with the School District to help them configure the parking lot to retain the number of spaces. h1 regards to the house along Settlemier near the Grange Hall entrance, the City will need to purchase the house and will then sell back a portion of the land not needed for the right-of-way to the Grange. He reviewed other land to be acquired on the north side of the intersection in order to provide sufficient right-of-way for this project. Staff suggested that Option B be considered since long range future development in this area will not require the replacement of sidewalks and curbs abutting the school property whereas by widening the road equally on both sides will require the removal of the sidewalks and curbs on both sides ofBoones Ferry Rd. He reiterated that either option will work and the State Dept. Of Transportation has indicated that they-will work with the City on this improvement. Councilor Bjelland questioned the number of lanes that would be going north and south. Director Tiwari stated that there will be three lanes going to the south on the north side of the intersection and one lane will go north with a refuge lane into the school. The area will have a bikelane and the sidewalk on the west side will be 6 feet in width. The same lane configuration will be on the south side of the intersection and the project will end at Harrison Street Councilor Cox questioned how far over is Option B shifted from Option A.. Director Tiwari stated that there will be about 14 feet difference between Option A and Option B. Discussion was held on the nwnber of traffic lanes proposed and how stacking ofvehic1es will help to eliminate the backup of traffic on Settlemier and Boones Ferry Road. In regards to Church Street, there will be a barrier between lanes so that motorists will need to go to Harrison Street to turn east. Councilor McCallum stated that the School District currently utilizes parking on the east side of Boones Ferry Rd since there is insufficient parking spaces available in the m.ain parking lot. However, he did feel that employees could park in the parking lot behind the school thereby opening up some spaces in the front of the building. 2003 COX/MCCALLUM... approve the westerly alignment as recommended by staff. The motion passed unanimously. Page 10 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 24, 2003 15 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 24, 2003 TAPE READING 2110 PLANNING COMMISSION OR ADMINISTRATIVE LAND USE ACTIONS: A) Planning Commission's approval of Design Review 03-17 and Variance 03-25: Expansion of the Salud Medical Facility 1175 Mt. Hood Avenue. No action was taken by the Council on this issue. 2157 MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS. Councilor McCallum thanked City Administrator Brown for making the nomination of the Task Force to SOLV, and for all the work done by Matt Smith and Kezia MacAlistaire in assisting the Task Force over the years. Councilor McCallum stated that the Fire District is aiming for an April 15, 2004 completion date and, with the construction going on at the main station, the fire department personnel are using the James Street station for their living quarters. The Fire Department also received a new ladder truck which replaces a ladder truck which is now about 27 years old. The new ladder will go up about 100 feet which is about 25 feet higher than the old ladder truck. Councilor Bjelland stated that a large tree branch crossing Cleveland Street near Settlemier Avenue looks like it is close to breaking off and he asked staff to look into this situation as soon as possible. Councilor Nichols invited the public to attend the Music Holiday concerts and attendees are asked to bring a can of food which will be donated to the food bank. 2488 ADJOURNMENT. NICHOLSIMCCALLUM....meeting be adjourned. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 9: 10 p.m.. APPROVED KATHRYN FIGLEY, MAYOR ATTEST Mary Tennant, Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 11 - Council Meeting Minutes, November 24, 2003 16 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-ehance of passing up an opportwlit)' to ~d timdy 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 1 - Special Council Meeting Minutes, November 25, 2003 17 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 ofthe 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 tenns 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 of the 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 nccdcd for the right of way to remain undeveloped, and the rule oflav/. 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 pennits 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 ofthis 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 18 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 controversia11and 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. 2517 ADJOURNMENT. MCCALLUMlNICHOLS... the meeting be adjourned. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 7:11 p.m.. APPROVED KATHRYN FIGLEY, MAYOR ATTEST Mary Tennant, Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 3 - Special Council Meeting Minutes, November 25,2003 19 8B WOODBURN PLANNING COMMISSION November 13, 2003 CONVENED The Planning Commission met In a regular session at 7:00 p.m. In City Hall Council Chambers with Chairperson Lima presiding. \ . , ROLL CALL Chairperson Vice Chairperson Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner LJl)"la Young Vancil Grlgor~ Mill '.;. Bandelow Lonergan p P A P A P P Staff Present: r Jim Mulder, Community Development Director Naomi Zwerdllng, Senior Planner MINUTES A. Woodburn Plannlna Commission Minutes of October 23. 2003. Commissioner Bandelow requested a change ~ made to her statement found on page 8 to read "...she recalled it the same way Commissioner Mill did... " Commissioner Bandelow made a motion to accept the minutes with the noted correction. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Griaorieff, which unanimously carried. BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE None COMMUNICATIONS A. City Council Minutes of October 13. 2003. B. Joint Cltv Councll/Plannlna Commission work session on November 17. 2003 reaardlna Periodic Review. Staff provided the Commission with copies of the agenda for the November 1J'm meeting along with a memo from Staff. Also provided was an attachment from the Planning Consultant that summarizes what will be reviewed at the meeting as well as a layout ofthe tentative hearing schedule. Staff stated it is anticipated this will come before the Commission the first two meetings in January 2004 and to Council in February 2004. He indicated the Commission would be expected to make some sort of recommendation by the first meeting in February. Staff noted all affected property owners will be notified (Measure 56 Notice), which in this case, would be everyone within the current UGB as well as those that may be affected by potential UGB expansion. He also stated both Planning Commission and City Council hearing dates will be included in the notice as the intent is to send the notices out only once. - Commissioner Bandelow aak8cl Staff whether there is a specific schedule for the first Commissiun meeting in December because it almost seemed like there was something tentative in addition to regular business for that night? Staff replied it was first thought the first hearing would take place then but that has been pushed off. At this point, there will be two final orders and two public hearings coming up on December 4th and one hearing going to the December 11 th meeting. PUBLIC HEARING A. Annexation 02-01. Zone Chanae 02-02. Annexation and Zone Chanae from County Planning Commission Meeting - November 13, 2003 Page 1 of 6 20 Commercial to Commercial General lCG} at 800 N. Pacific Hwv.. RSS Architects. aDDllcant. EX-PARTE CONTACTS None Staff read the applicable ORS Statement and provided a presentation as reflected in the Staff Report. Approval of the applications was recommended by Staff based on the applicable review criteria, the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. Commissioner Lonerean requested clarification as to what the difference would be if the application had come to Staff on July 2nd instead of June 29'h? Staff responded the zoning criteria, as well as the Comprehensive Plan Map criteria, contained in the new development code would have been different. Commissioner Lonerean asked whether the statement made by the applicant indicating sidewalks are not needed at this time because no development is needed, applied to Highway 99E or to Aztec Way? Staff answered the Public Works Department indicated to her there would be no conditions of approval at this time since the applicant is only undergoing the Annexation and Zone Change. However, it would be conditioned in the future once it is annexed into the City and undergoes some sort of design review. Staff reported there is no sidewalk on Highway 99E nor on the subject site Aztec Drive. TESTIMONY BY THE APPLICANT Martin Matiskainen. RSS Architecture. PC. 2225 Country Club Rd.. Woodburn. OR 97071 commented the Staff Report adequately presented the relevant information for annexing the property into the City and he certainly supported that recommendation. Chairoerson Lima inquired if the applicant had any ideas of what could be constructed in the undeveloped area? Martin Matiskalnen responded he did not know at this point. He stated It would naturally not be for residential use since it is zoned Commercial General but it would be something more along the lines of an income producing, job generating facility. TESTIMONY BY PROPONENTS None TESTIMONY BY OPPONENTS None DISCUSSION Chairoerson Lima closed the public hearing and opened for discussion among the Commissioners. Commissioner Lonerean remarked this type of business has been around a long time and has been an asset to the City and he strongly favored the project. Vice Chairoerson Youne commented the passage of this Annexation into the City limits of Woodburn would provide water/sewer, storm water services to the current business that has been there for over 19 years and has been a contributor to our community. He stated this would give us one more piece of property on Highway 99 and he certainly favored the project. Commissioner Lonerean moved to accept Annexation 02-01 , Zone Change 02-02 and requested Staff return with facts and findings. Commissioner Bandelow seconded the motion. Motion unanimously carried. Planning Commission Meeting - November 13, 2003 Page 2 of 6 21 B. Variance 03-23. Variance to allow additional slanaae at 693 Glatt Circle. Ramsav Slans. aDPllcant. EX-PARTE CONTACTS Chairoerson Lima, Vice Chairoerson Youna, Commissioner Loneraan and Commissioner Bandelow reported they were familiar with the site. Staff read the applicable ORS Statement and a presentation, as reflected in the Staff Report, was provided. Staff recommended approval of Variance 03-23 with the condition of approval that the directional sign be limited to 12 square feet. TESTIMONY BY THE APPLICANT Robert Enale. Webstar III. LLC. 610 Glatt Circle. Woodburn. OR 97071 reported although he was representing Silverton Hospital tonight, he is a member of the hospital governing board as well as a member of Webstar III, LLC. He referred to the issue addressed by Staff regarding the size of the sign. Mr. Engle reported the Tukwila Center for Health and Medicine is a 22,000 sq. ft. medical building which opened September 2001. He further stated when the building was constructed and occupied, Simon Funeral Center, now owned by Cornwell, was an enclave and not part of the city limits at the time. Mr. Engle mentioned when the hearing for that development appeared before both the Planning Commission and City Council they were told at that time that it would be nice if the City could have placed a condition of approval that a back entrance right-of- way be developed because it Is very difficult to get out on Highway 214 out of Glatt Circle. He further reported Silverton Hospital entered into negotiations with Cornwell for a 28 foot right-of-way easement in the back for egress and ingress out on to Boones Ferry Road. Mr. Engle commented he understood Staff's position in dealing with an existing sign code that is not a good code for commercial businesses or for public protection and hoped the revised code will be better and that it will be business friendly. He indicated the size of sign they are looking for is like the sign Legacy Clinic installed on S. Boones Ferry Road. Mr. Engle asked why shouldn't Tukwila Center have the same benefits that Legacy system does? Furthermore, he pointed out you will not be able to read the services listed on the sign that need to be publicized to the publiC if the sign is compacted in half. It was Mr. Engle's feeling the size of the sign is established to be important on an economic basis and they are in competition with Legacy systems in this community. The Tukwila Center facility is so unique in that the Boones Ferry Road entrance is as much a front entrance as the entrance off Glatt Circle because people can not get in and out on the other side and it is highly used. In closing, Mr. Engle asked why shouldn't it be a 24 sq. ft. sign? He clarified there is no public around their facility that needs protection from a larger lighted sign nor anybody that will be detrimentally affected by a larger sign. In closing, Mr. Engle stated it is very important to them that the sign be 24 sq. ft. and asked the Commission to consider their Variance and felt the request is justified because of the unique circumstances. Commissioner Loneraan inquired what are the normal operating hours of the center? Robert Enale replied the specialists are in during basic daytime center hours. However, the weight loss clinic, physical therapy and primarily the conference room are open before daylight in the morning during the winter and into the evening until 8:00-9:00 pm. Vice Chairoerson Youna asked if there are any other signs that tell about the center at the other entrance area? u Robert Enale referred to the Staff Repon ana referred to photos of the entrance sign located in front of the water feature. He explained they did not have all the specialists in the center at the time the sign was installed and they feel the need to tell people what kind of services are provided in the center. Additionally, he stated they are in an advertising competition with the Legacy system at this time. Although that facility is not very big and does not have many doctors, Legacy is a good facility that wants market share within this community. Chairoerson Lima commented Mr. Engle made some good points, particularly in that the current sign ordinance is not really what the city deserves. However, he believed the competition is not the size of the sign Planning Commission Meeting - November 13, 2003 Page 3 of 6 22 but the service and quality provided at the clinic and indicated he had difficulty following Mr. Engle's reasoning for the Variance. Chairperson lima further noted they are trying to limit, to a certain degree, clutter of signage and it was his perception they are allowing too many Variances go through and agreed with Staff's recommendation. Robert Enale understood Chairperson lima's remarks and he agreed in that the services provided by the Tukwila Center are as good as services that you can get anywhere. Nevertheless, they have quite a budget spent on advertising in the Woodburn Independent every week just to advertise the types of services available and the signage is simply an extension, from their point of view, of their rather large advertising budget. He explained it is important that people know where you are and what your services are. He also indicated It is their belief that although that is not as important as quality of service provided, it is very important to the success of the hospital. TESTIMONY BY PROPONENTS None TESTIMONY BY OPPONENTS None DISCUSSION The hearing was closed by Chairoerson lima and Commission discussion was opened. Commissioner Bandelow said everyone is aware the Tukwila Center is a terrific and community friendly facility. Nonetheless, the Legacy sign on Boones Ferry is their main sign and it is their main entrance. She thought although an illuminated second sign is important, Staff is correct in stating the sign needs to be limited to a 12 sq. ft. sign as outlined in the ordinance. Commissioner Bandelow mentioned although the proposed sign is nice, it is rather large for that area. Furthermore, we want signs to do their jobs for the community but we also are trying to eliminate clutter and keep everything as attractive as possible. She favored the Variance with Staff's recommendations that the sign be limited to 12 sq. ft. Commissioner Loneraan agreed with Commissioner Bandelow and added he is very pleased the Tukwila Center Is in Woodburn and it has been very community friendly. He pointed out it was very smart of them to obtain back access and he thought Woodburn, overall, should be very thankful as it is certainly relieving a lot of traffic congestion on the intersection. Commissioner Lonergan further mentioned he was not sold on the economic need and felt the center will be successful on its own merit without the need of a sign and thought a directional sign is what is needed. It was his opinion that the Legacy sign is somewhat unattractive and commented if he had a say on that he would have done something to limit the sign. In closing, Commissioner Lonergan stated he would vote in favor of Staff's recommendation. Commissioner Griaorieff concurred with her fellow Commissioners. Vice Chairoerson Youne made it clear the reason there is a sign Variance is because it is an additional sign and would require a Variance even if it were 5 sq. ft. Staff clarified the additional sign, in this case, is being allowed as a directional sign and is why Staff recommended the 12 sq. ft. limitation. He inted out one of the roblems with dir ... ommercla enera zone is it allows 12 sq. ft. but it does not specify a maximum height. Staff recommended the Commission establish a maximum height. Otherwise, the applicant could do the proposed sign but just reduce the copy down to 12 sq. ft. He stated it might be appropriate to allow the applicant respond regarding height since the issue has just been raised. Robert Enele replied he does not know what height to establish and requested he would like their sign person give them a recommendation. Commissioner Bandelow inquired whether the height problem would be taken care of if this were s~cified Planning Commission Meeting - November 13, 2003 Page 4 of 6 23 as a monument sign and not a pole sign? Staff responded the code does not have a maximum height on a monument sign either and noted the definition of a sign area is not entirely clear. He recommended a maximum height be established just to make it clear to the applicant and to Staff. It was suggested by Staff it be no more than 5 ft. from ground to top so that the top of the sign is no more than 5 ft. Commissioner Loneraan moved to accept Variance 03-23 with the modification of Condition of Approval Item #2 to add . ...and maximum height of the sign to be 5 ft. for a 12 sq. ft. sign" and instructed Staff return with facts and findings. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Bandelow. Motion unanimously carried. ITEMS FOR ACTION A. Final Order for Deslan Review 03-17 and Variance 03-25. DroDOsed 7.514 sa. ft. addition to Salud Medical Center at 1175 Mt. Hood Ave.. Matthew SDlcer. Clark/Klos Architect. Commissioner Loneraan reported although he was not present for this hearing, he did review the minutes and the Staff Report and felt comfortable casting a vote. Commissioner Youna moved to accept the Final Order as presented by Staff. Commissioner Bandelow seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. B. Cancel Plannlna Commission meetlna of November 27. 2003 and schedule sDeClal meetlna for December 4. 2003. Commissioner Loneraan moved to cancel the meeting of November 27, 2003 and to schedule a special meeting for December 4, 2003. Vice Chairoerson Youna seconded the motion. Motion unanimously carried. DISCUSSION ITEMS Staff announced the Sign Focus Group has finished their review of the draft Sign Ordinance. He stated he was quite impressed with how well the group worked together and really came to a consensus. Additionally, Staff reported a resolution to initiate Planning Commission public hearing for that ordinance will go before City Council possibly the first meeting in December and probably will come before the Commission in February. He explained both January Planning Commission meetings will be dealing with Periodic Review related public hearings. Staff pointed out the Commission will be reviewing code amendments the first three months of 2004. Commissioner Loneraan asked Staff if the December 4lh meeting will be the only one for that month? Staff clarified there are two publiC hearings scheduled for December 4lh and the final orders for those hearings will be brought back before the Commission December 11lh. In addition, there is a hearing scheduled for December 11lh however, the final order for that hearing will have to wait until January 2004. REPORTS A. Bulldlna Activity for October 2003 B. Plannlna Prolect Tracklna Sheet {revised 11-3-(3) Commissioner Bandelow mentioned the City Council called up the approval for the property on Stacey Allison Way. She indicated according to the Council minutes, the reason given was the amount of traffic that would be generated In that area. She commented It was her understanding that the traffic Impact COUld not be considered since a traffic study was not required of the applicant and all of the criteria had been met. Staff informed the Commission the City Council held their hearing this past Monday and the City Council agonized over that exact issue. He indicated the Council finally ended up unanimously approving the project. However, there were several councilors that would have liked to have been able to deny It if they had some basis to do so. Planning Commission Meeting - November 13, 2003 Page 5 of 6 24 BUSINESS FROM THE COMMISSION Commissioner Loneraan announced he has a business meeting at 6:00 pm November 17'h and hopes to attend the work session but will arrive a little late. Staff pointed out the work session will start at 7:00 pm in the City Council Chambers and it is planned to go for about 1 % hr. However, it may stretch out for as long as needed as there will be a lot of material for review. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Loneraan moved to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Bandelow seconded the motion. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:15 pm. APPROVED i:J. ~ '/./03 DATE () ,-rrefSaVl ATTEST Jim Mulder, Community Development Director City of Woodburn. Oregon Date Planning Commission Meeting - November 13. 2003 Page 6 of 6 25 ~ WOO:QBlL~N IIt,orl'(Jrtlt~d JlUi9 8e A~'~ . . December 3, 2003 TO: FROM: Mayor and City Council through City Administrator D. Randall Westrick, Recreation and Parks Director IJ;../ SUBJECT: Recreation Division Participation Report RECOMMENDATION: Receive the report. BACKGROUND: The City Council has expressed concerns that recent fee increases for recreation could have a negative impact on program participation. Attached for the Council's information is data for After School Club that compares 2002-03 participation to 2003-04. DISCUSSION: Future reports will include revenue amounts as well as seasonal programs the Department produces such as youth sports programs, summer day camp and adult enrichment. These reports will be included monthly in the City Council's packet. Also attached is the monthly report for the Aquatic Center. FINANCIAL IMPACT: These reports will help to make decisions regarding program and the impact that fees have on participation. Attachment Agenda Item Review: City Administrator City Attorney Nit Finance 26 Woodburn Recreation & Parks Recreation Division Program Part icipation & Revenue Cci>mparisons Feb 04 Feb 03 1202 66.8 Jan 04 Jan 03 1063 71.1 Dee 03 Dee 02 1091 77.9 Nov 03 1033 79.5 Nov 02 1074 76.7 Oct 03 1756 83.6 Oct 02 1702 81.1 Sept. 03 1356 67.8 After School Club Sept. 02 1496 74.8 Washington Daily Visits Daily Avg. Year 02/03 Year 03/04 11,812 4145 73.4 76.8 June 04 June 03 432 61.7 May 04 May 03 1388 73.1 Apr04 Apr03 1537 73.2 Mar 04 Mar 03 827 69.1 Daily Visits Daily Avg. Feb 04 Feb 03 1498 83.2 Jan 04 Jan 03 1262 84.1 Dee 03 Dee 02 1229 87.8 Nov 03 1337 102.9 Nov 02 1389 99.2 Oct 03 2128 101.3 Oct 02 2035 96.9 Sept. 03 1900 95 Sept. 02 1813 90.7 Lincoln Daily Visits Daily Avg. June 04 IYear 02/03 Year 03/041 14,017 5365 87.1 102.9 June 03 524 74.9 May 04 May 03 1523 80.2 Apr04 Apr03 1730 82.4 Mar 04 Mar 03 1014 84.5 Daily Visits Daily Avg t-) ~ :1 nter FY '2002-03 v.s. FY '2003-04 - JulY 2002 JulY 2003 Aua 2002 Aua 2003 sept 2002 Sept 2003 Oct 2002 Oct 2003 Nov 2002 Nov 2003 Dee 2002 Dee 2003 $0.00 $0. $7.00 $355.00 $483.00 $279.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $9 581.00 $9 214. $7 082.02 $6.516.25 $3 580.23 $4 207.20 $2676.75 $3 458.63 $1 951.00 $3 606.65 $3147.55 $1 860.00 $2,340. $1,076.75 $747.50 $1 275.50 $934.00 $1 106.35 $410.00 $608.10 $582.50 $2 322.50 $6.497.87 $9,006. $5,707.63 $6,008.15 $1620.25 $3109.17 $430.00 $4 954.03 $904.25 $1 092.75 $0.00 $90.00 $525. $157.50 $320.00 $1.676.00 $0.00 $0.00 $629.50 $595.00 $1204.80 $1,595.50 $657.50 $670. $452.80 $519.30 $315.30 $384.80 $596.66 $254.05 $392.85 $370.25 $266.15 $3,824.70 $4,004.1 $2,812.04 $2,839.27 $1,514.n $1,318.75 $932.97 $1,172.54 $758.49 $1,087.36 $1,267.05 $22,511.07 $25,780.2: $17,295.54 $17,305.47 $10,485.05 $10,212.92 $5,742.73 $10,878.75 $5,207.69 $7,944.11 $6,598.75 $0.00 9192 82S 6747 S838 4304 4187 2926 3998 3323 4421 4071 3,249.15 9.93 -2S2.13 S,136.02 2,736.42 -8,S98.7S 14.43 (, 0.06% -2.41% 89.44% S2.SS% -100.00% Jan 2003 Jan 2004 Feb 2003 Feb 2004 Mar 2003 Mar 2004 ADriI 2003 April 2004 MaY 2003 MaY 2004 Jun 2003 June 2004 $0.00 $31.50 $187.50 $1 412.10 $310.00 $0.00 $6.108.95 $4,571.41 $6 585.85 $5 872.85 $7412.76 $8 636.06 $19.208.85 $2,385.35 $1 570.00 $3 800.00 $682.80 $1 4S8.6S $1 .200.65 $2 881.87 $3 871.50 $5 814.74 $4 749.37 $10 443.2S $588.80 $1,263.00 $324.50 $1 780.00 $1 111.00 $19S.00 $479.40 $376.38 $385.15 $574.80 $386.55 $SS8.10 $1,853.35 $2,418.09 $2,576.05 $2,392.09 $2,099.47 $2,902.7S $29,438.20 $0.01 $13,907.60 $0.00 $15,500.55 $0.00 $21,646.38 $0.00 $16,751.75 $0.00 $24,193.81 $0.00 671S S8SS S799 6612 S899 14239 -29,438: -13,907.60 -15,500.55 -21,646.38 -16,751.75 -24,193.81 -100.00 \I -100.00% -100.00% -100.00% -100.00C!b -100.00% : by account Year To Date Summary 2002- 2003 2003- 2004 DIfferenCe Irotal Reveuue1001-1003 $61,222.08 Revenue Budget Estimates $2,431.10 $634.()( ($1,797.10 Irotal Reveuue1003-1004 $72,101.48 ZOO3-1004 $19S,OOO.00 $67,208.43 $27,003.41 ~ DoI1aB to date $72,101.48 $37,354.85 $5,014.01 DUl'ereDCe $10,879.40 % Collected year to date 36.98% $44,101.58 $24,170.1 Percent CIuuuIe 17.77% $9,374.30 $2,679.1 .20 $5,441.24 $2,178.7 ($3,262.54) Year To Date Attendance $25,349.82 $10422.01 fS14,lf"'f.fOI r- -I $81,222.08 $72,101.41 $10,871.40 0031004 16697 $181,218.12 ($118,117.84) Woodburn Revenue C Special Events Admissions Membershipll Lessons Rentals Resale Conce88iOll8 TOTAL Attendance $ Di1fenmce % Difference Special Events AdmisaiOll8 Membershipll Lessons Rentals Resale Coace8siOllS TOTAL AUendanl:e $ Difference % Difference Year to date Donations AdmissiOll8 Membenhipll Lessons Rentals Resale Coace8sions Year to date tota1 mootb tota1 12 to) 00 Department Totals Summary Description Jul 03 AUl,Ist 03 Se tember 03 Oct~ber.Q3 November 03 March 04 rUM Totals 6497 1570 4555 438 629 1037 318 876 29 8D CITY OF WOODBURN Community Development MEMORANDUM 270 Montgomery Street Woodburn, Oregon 97071 (503) 982-5250 Date: December 2,2003 To: Jim Mulder, Community Development Director From: Building Division Subject: Building Activity for November 2003 2001 2002 2003 Dollar Dollar Dollar No. Amount No. Amount No. Amount New Residence Value 9 $1,110,589 4 $429,308 13 $1,659,904 Multi Family 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Assisted Living Facilities 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Residential Adds & Alts 4 $110,000 3 $23,400 0 $0 Industrial 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 Commercial Value 4 $873,788 5 $73,399 4 $54,001 Signs, Fences, Driveways 3 $5,000 4 $8,307 1 $750 Manufactured Homes 1 $15,000 0 $0 1 $3,374 TOTALS 21 $2,114,377 16 $534,413 19 $1,718,029 Fiscal Year (July 1- $25,759,727 $8,206,679 $16,152,550 June 30) to Date 1:\Community Development\Bldg\Building ActivitylBldgAct-2003\Bldg Activity Memoslactivity - NOVEMBER 2003.wpd 30 PLANNING PROJECT TRACKING SHEET."-IMcI: 1202003 M.iI NclIlc. FInIIl PC M.iI NoIIce PYajecl DatI DMmed 1 o.o.y FlIdIIIee NoIIce III !'oM SlfRpl PC 0nIw FInIIl NclIlc. III !'oM SlfRpl CC Old. CC Old. AnDIc8nt ReceIwd ~ Il8IIl PIlInner ~ - for PC - "'-lY DUll HNrtna DUll 0nIw far CC - - DUll ....... DUll -... AnI.x buill.- AmI p8Ik 1r*I\he 11-01, CorpandIlImiIa 101141!1l1 UGB WriIy Uen of \he CRy. O8IOl/llll HlA JIm coni. aft" 11-01. ZC EsllIbIIeh \he IL QIencI8r 11-01 _ on \he pIOpeIty. __zc '......... ANX Inlm CcuIIr 02001 ZC -- ca.m.doIlD CO 0lI/28/02 - HlA I'mnI lIlII22I03 081211113 101Z41l13 101Z41l13 11I03I03 11lO8III3 11/13103 D/11IlII DIZMIl .utDI!II lWlII/!I! lI1l!IIl!I! lI.1t:li/lI! c:an.- 02.02 _ 8011 N. "-<lIe 01/21103 Hwy. SIgn 0._ 0lI/23ID2 ~ :=: 01_ VAR R8JoOolIII far -. 18011 ... 08l23I02 .......... I'mnI HlA 12I20I02 12/20/02 HlA 12/31102 01102/03 - 02_ lI9Wo Inc. Hood A.... 12111llo'02 011 - 1Ill-, CU-. Conauc:l19,500 ZA owz. - VAR -... '" Heed SI8r1bldg 04118103 .......... I'mnI Il1011, -- -' 540 N. 05111103 VAR ~A.... . 1So11, VARISo17 VAR RlImuy V8fiIInce to 8Iow .........- ---.. . 0MIlII03 - a 111114 I'mnI 10115103 101111113 10124103 HlA llJ113/\13 111llM13 11/13103 !JM!Il - SIgna 693 GIIIlI Cln:Ie c:an.- 1C1f14103 RSS 8,810 "'..... .......... DR 03-11 - bldg. . 1955 S. 08121103 VIcIDr Inc. IllnII Eye A.... - PAR SUbdIvIde ana lot '......... os.a. - Ir*I two Iula -' 0l/I22I03 1CllD7103 0: ~4IlI4 VIcIDr 10/28103 11I08I03 11/14103 HlA 111241Q3 11121103 !JM!Il D/11IlII VAR - llll5 .-.- ~ os.u A.... 1_ :: Conauc:l........ DR owo. & ......1*ldnII eor,... 0: ~ VAR LOS Chn:II lot .. a.lIng 0III2IIIII3 1012&'03 I'mnI 1000lO3 11/13103 11/14103 HlA 11124103 11121103 !JM!Il D/11IlII OWl c:hun:h . 1000 CounIIy Club Rd. DR 03.z1. _ ~2.2IlO II '''-''- ___GloII 101111113 VIcIDr VAR - CIrde. 111131113 03-27 PAGE 1 / Q) t!J PLANNING PROJECT TRACKING SHEET MIll NoIIce FnI PC MIll NoIIce pyq.ct DalI llIemecI >>o.y F.... NoIIce III Poll SlfRpt PC Onler FnI NoIIce III Po.! SlfRpt CC On!. CC On! ADaIIcMl ReceMId 0IIlI PlImer IWwnIIa -... for PC ~ PItxIerIY Due - Due Onler for CC - PnlDerIv Due ,- Due I AdaaIIo DR 0W2, ~ 2,3lI5 of ..-...- VM RSS _ II 57lI GIIII 10117103 lCl120103 MI4I04 VIclDr 11/10103 1112l1103 11/21103 NlA 12/01103 DMU BL11Ill1 - ~ lIS-2lI Cln:Ie. 11_ PM Ben _...Iat 0M4 ~ InIo 3 ........ II 11107103 NIIoml 1505W.~Sl CU 0M3, ~__oI DR 0W4, ClIyol -- 10l28I03 .-..- NIIoml VM - ~1I_P8rr 11_ OWO Rd. ~ CU~. ~__oI DR OWl, ClIyol -- 10l28I03 ..-...- NIIoml VM - ~ 1110114 11_ lIWII c:cu.y CUI Rd. CU~. ~__oI DR lIWS, ClIyol -- 10l28I03 ..-...- NIIoml VM - ~II 2225 11_ 11341 -w., ZA 0M4 ClIyol Fence......- II 10l28I03 Inc:ompIele NIIoml - 202Y_ Sl 11_ VM --.- I~ M s.IIIy ~1Ign1l 11/20/03 VIclDr a.u BION. ~Dr. 11_ ~ PAGE 2 LONG RANGE PROJECTS MIll NIlb FlnII PC MIll NcIIIclI Pn:IjKt 0..- [)MrMd t>>Day F.... NolIce 10 PIllIt SlfRpl PC 0nIw FlnII NolIce 10 PIllIt SlfRpl CC Old. CC Old. - R..-..s DlIlII "*"* IWemIIa -... for PC - - Due --... Due 0nIw for CC - - Due --... Due &-..Inn - u...__ - __by_on JaIvl/JIm ......... 311_ """,,"_1'IIIlI*oIId lD__ ... 0nI. -- JIm - ...,.otodlD" .....- by mid _. '':'''" ~DrIIII ......-. ....- --- -.... ,... ......... - .,...... --- JIm ..- '-'1lII """,-In ~ 04. I'eItodIc __ p.,lolIc .. -......-. ...... __on JIm 11117111SlD_ ar.nt _1IlII_lD - 1:'oConlmunty ~C8MLog PAGE 3 W W ~. W~N I.,.".,.,.J 188' ~~OA . . December 8,2003 TO: FROM: Mayor and City Council through City Administrator Jim Mulder. Director ot Community Development r Resolution Calling for Public Hearing to Consider Annexation of Indushial Welding Supply, Inc. Properly Located at 600 North Pacific Highway SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution calling for a public hearing on January 12, 2004 to consider annexation of property located at 600 North Pacific Highway. BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission recommended that the City Council. approve Annexation 02-01 and Zone Change 02~2 to annex 1.15 acres of land located at 600 North Pacific Highway into the City of Woodburn and change the zoning of the property from Marion County CR (Commercial Retail) to City of Woodburn CG (Commercial General) at their meeting of November 13, 2003. DISCUSSION: State law requires a city council to set a public hearing to consider an annexation proposal. A resolution setting the date for public hearing before the City Council on January 12, 2004 is attached. FINANCIAL IMPACT: - There is no financial impact associated with the recommended action. Agenda Item Review: City Administrat City Attorney N(J 34 COUNCIL BILL NO. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF HIGHWAY 99E AND NORTH SIDE OF AZTEC DRIVE, AND ADDRESSED AS 600 NORTH PACIFIC mGHWAY. THE CITY OF WOODBURN RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Pursuant to ORS 222.120, 7:00 p.m. on January 12,2004 is declared to be the time set for public hearing before the Woodburn City Council on whether the City of Woodburn shall annex that property described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Section 2. Pursuant to ORS 222.120, no election is required on this issue. Section 3. Notice of said hearing shall be published once each week for two successive weeks prior to the day of the hearing, in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, and notices of the hearing shall be posted in four public places in the City for like period. Approved as to Forrn:77. ~ ~ /2 - If - lo 0 :5 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 Page 1 - COUNCIL BILL NO. RESOLUTION NO. 35 EXHIBIT "A" /. Beginning 6.147 chaine ~orth S7- East and 2~..13.~ '.cha1.ns ~orth 32- 21" East from the Southwest corner of the :Dona~ion Land c~aim ol E_.C. .Coo~ey . and wife, s'ame being cl~J.rn Number .42' i.n Township 5 sout7n., 'Range' 1 W!i~t of the W.i:ll.arnette Meridian 1.n HariC?n Count;y, Oregon (sai;.d' point of' beg.1.n~d.ng be1.ng the .po'int .of interBec~ion of the. South l1.ne of: a: tract of l&nd aee~ed to S. Hortsch and A. Hortsc::h by deed recorded :1.n Volume 214, page. 532,...,Qeed..Records for Kar.lon county, Or8gol1., w1:t:h the EAst l1.ne of the PAc~f"ic Highway as. relocat:.ecl by deed re'corded Febi::uary 2S, 1~i33', i.n Vol.ume 215, page. 2:42, D.eed Records to' the State of Oregon); and ~rom thence. ru'n.ning South .8Ef- ..3:2' ~ East. 9.. 465. ~ha~n. &iOn9 the Soqth boundary o~. sa.ld'~ract to a'poiz:lt 9.?25 ch4-i.ns~~art~ 8S.' 32' We'at:. t"rom an. .i..ron' pLpe at t~e SC?uthea.st. eorne~ o( sa1;d .t:a:"act.-of.'-1anc1;. .thenc.~.,No,:'th. 1- 3.'. West '2.00 cha.ln_j.thence North.8S. 32' Wes~~'par.~1.1'wXth' ~he'Sou~h bound,ary o"t said. trac~" of land, 'S .153 cha~n.e to'. th~ Bast ~boundary li:ne of the P&cl~~c H~9hway; then~e.Sou~~~~ly.along sa~d.Eaet '~1ne '2~3~3 ~haln8 ~o the" place of'~eg1nn1ng, ~h.Karion Qounty, oregon. SP.'Z AND EX~PT.. . E. lnn1ng at:.. the: S~lltb!'t~s,t c;:or.ner of a trac~ :of .lal)d ~nv.y.~' to W111:Lam Henry Read and w~fe, by deed rec~rdQd November 12,.1959 ~n~o1uma ~28, p~~e'451, Deed Records for Kar1.on'.County,Oregon; ~hence':Nortn 1- 34'" West' .2.00 chai.ne (132.00 f.eat.) to the' Northeas~ corner o~ ..saiCi."aeact".T"raci;' t.henc...~orth SS. 32-.' w.st: aJ:png :~h. North l.i.:ne'. of aai.d R~.d .t;ract:."2'O'O~ ()... .1!eeit;. thence' SCJ.uth 1.. 34' East 2.00 chains (~a2.D~ fee~) to: the'so~th~~in.:ot~_&1d.Read Tractl t.hence Soutth 8S- .32 " ~a.4;:. 200. O' teet to '~he.. pla~e of' b.9.1nn~ng~ . ,LSO SAVE AND EXCEP~ that porti~n convey~d to tbe.C1.~y,o~ Woodburn,'a o(unic1.pal corporation' l;iy 1nstrument' recorded July .6, 19S4 in .Reel. 349,. PAge 1289 I Microf1.1~ Records., Marion' county, or~9on ~ ~eal Property Ta.x Account- No: : 42929-00Q iit:us Addr.ees as :di.~cl.08ed by' KAr1.onCou~ty Tax .Roll: ., " .6oq ~.. i>>ac1f1..c Hwy .Woodburn, OR 97071 36 "~_...,.,",_".. .....~_,,,....,_,,,.._.,,,,._~.__.,.~.,_,..~_"",.,.,~,....,....,,~~.,_."ft_,.~...',.,_~._..,..,__._.,,_~..,.'_""_ ....,~- ".h ...~.'..'.""~ '. . ~ WOODBURN t.'.f,,,Qud "'9 ~~OB . . December 8, 2003 TO: Mayor and City Council through City Administrator FROM: Jim Mulder. Director of Communify Development ~ SUBJECT: Resolution to Direct Staff to Draft Revisions to the Woodburn Development Ordinance (WOO) to address the Issues Outlined In Exhibit II A. " RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution to direct staff to draH revisions to the Woodburn Development Ordinance (WOO) to address the issues outlined in Exhibit "A." BACKGROUND: The WOO was adopted by the City Council in July 2002. Section 1.101.08 of the Woodburn Development Ordinance states that the Community Development Director shall report potential modifications of the WOO (due to new state and/or federal laws and rules, case law precedents, scrivener errors, and interpretations) to the City Council at the first meeting in the month of November so that the City Council may consider initiating appropriate measures to modify the WOO. The Annual Review of the Woodburn Development Ordinance (WOO) is a Type V Legislative Decision. A resolution is required for the City Council to initiate the Annual Review of the WDO. DISCUSSION: The WOO has not been amended since its original adoption. The City Council reviewed a list of proposed policy, clarifications and text changes generated by staff at the November 24, 2003 City Council Meeting. The City Council directed staff to add concurrency and not allowing businesses to exclude competitors from leasing or buying their big box stores to the list of issues outlined in Exhibit "A." Agenda Item Review: City Attorney ItJ Finane 37 ~__,~. _........ _,.. ,_",_,~"_~,~,._",~__._,,,,~,_,,*<,_',,",-,~. ..__________""'._~,..,"<__._,"0_;"".'._~~~"_ Mayor and City Council December 8, 2003 Page 2 . . FINANCIAL IMP ACT: There is no direct financial impact associated with the recommended action because no outside resources will be utilized. However, a significant amount of time will be required from existing staff to complete this project. 38 COUNCIL BILL NO. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION TO INITIATE THE ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE WOODBURN DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE. WHEREAS, city staff of the City of Woodburn has prepared an outline of the issues to be addressed in the update of the Woodburn Development Ordinance (WOO) in Exhibit "A" at the direction of the Woodburn City Council; and WHEREAS, city staff of the City of Woodburn is directed by the City Council to prepare draft revisions of the WDO to address the issues outlined in Exhibit "A"; and WHEREAS, Section 4.101.17 of the Woodburn Development Ordinance requires the City Council to initiate the legislative amendment process by resolution; NOW THEREFORE: THE CITY OF WOODBURN RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Pursuant to Woodburn Development Ordinance Section 4.101.17, the annual review of the Woodburn Development Ordinance is initiated and staff is directed to prepare draft revisions to the WOO to address the issues outlined in Exhibit "A." APprovedastoForm?7(Y(J-A.6 It. - q - ZOO:J 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 Page 1 - COUNCIL BILL NO. RESOLUTION NO. 39 !. iii . Y"~.": This provision is fairty common in SectIon zoning ordinances but may create aI . Home owners in the CG zone have Section 1.104.04, not been able to reftnMCe their homes because the WOO apeclfies that non-conforming single fanily dwelling. cannot be rebuilt In the CG zone. 3. Amend SectIon Amend the code 80 that a change Section 1.104.05, Page 1.1-24 or expansion of an existing use triggers the wan and refuse facilities uirementa In the code. 4. Amend lot coverage in the Retirement Community Single Family Residential Allow the RIS zone to have the Section 2.103.07.G, Page 2.1-20 (RIS) Zone to allow a maxirYl.lm of 40" for loll containing a primary building with same lot coverage standard 88 the an average height of 14 feet or 1e88, and a rnexirYl.lm of 35% for Iota with a Single Family Re8IdentIaI (RS) rima buildi with an ht of more than 14 feel zone. 5. AHow for exceptions to the front yard setback for smell structures (i... - Mayor Figley propOI.. that ttia trelllees, arbors oIa8 and archwa . 188U8 be addreeeed. 6. Update Manufactured Dwelling Park standards to make them consistent with Ensure that changes in state law SectIon 2.203.15, Pages 2.2-16 to 22 state law. regarding Manufac::tLnd Dwelling Parka are accurately reftecf8d In the WOO. 7. Table 2.1.7 requires a ninirYl.lm 24 foot, 30 foot and 36 foot interior yard A lingle family dwelling CUfTW1tIy Table 2.1.7, Page 2.1-26 setbacks for lingle and two fanily dw8IIing.. This 8houId be revised to apply RS has to meet the same 88Iback standards to these U888. requirements as a rYI.Iltif8mjly building in the Medium Density Residential (RM) zone. Staff are reconmenclii that the AM zone Exhibit -A- Pages 1.1-23&24 WOO UPDATE l ., _.,. i ~ Section 1.101.06regMJing imProper Permits being vOid should be deIet8d. 2. Allow non-conforming single family dwellings in the Commercial General (CG) zone to be rebuilt If destroyed. 1.104.05 to include waUl and refuse facilities. ~ o PAGE 1 woo UPDATE WOO UPDATE be revised 80 th8t the lingle family dwelUng 88tb8ck atand8l'd81n the RS zone apply to single f8nily dwelll In the RM zone. 8. Move the provision In the conwnerci8l zones that the maximum yard abutting a Staff would like more tIexIbIUty In Section 2.105.05.C.1.a.2, Page 2.1-35 & street shall be 150 feet to the architectural guidelines section of the WOO where applying the 150 foot ITI8Ximum Section 2.1 06.05.C.1.a.2, Page 2.1-45 this provision would be a .should.. yard eetbeck b8Md on the Iize and shape of a commerci8Ilot and the existing buildings on a commerci8I site. 9. Clarify what the finance and lnaurance use nan because It is not cIe8r. Also, Check cashing 8I'lCI pawnshops Section 2.107.01.E.1, Page 2.1-51 all zones prohibit check cashing, pawnshops, etc. except in the CG zone where It were outright pemitted In the CG is a conditional use. W. this Intended? zone In the WlO. Check cashing and pawnshops al8 conditional uses In the CG zone In the WOO. W. this provision supposed to be changed with the 8doption of the WOO? 10. Prohibit bans and taverns in the DOC district. The Woodburn Zoning Ordinance Section 2.107 .01.L.3, Page 2.1-53 prohibited bans and taverns In the DOC district. Bans and taverns are allowed in the DOC district per the WOO. W. this provision supposed to be changed with the 'on of the WOO? 11. Revise fence height on a corner and through lot (side and rear yard abutting Add..... the .... of reducing the Section 2.201.03.8. Page 2.2-2 a street). Amend the fence and freestanding walls section of the code to clarify setb8ck of a fence on the side and that the setback of fence8 and walls applies only to front yards adjacent to a rear of a lot th8t abuts a street if the street and not a lot line ad nt to a street. vision clearance atandards are mat. 12. Remove the requil8m8nt th8t property line adjustments be subject to the .In two appellate court decisions It Section 3.104.01, Pages 3.1-17 & 18 access . uirement and link the access section to the street section of the was found th8t the nexus did not oIlo ... PAGE 2 woo UPDATE WDO UPDATE woo. exist between a straet improvement and a property line adjustmant. There is not a link In the 8CC888 section to the street eec:tion of the WOO. 13. Change the Exception and Variance Type III appIic8tion for the dedication d A building pennit for a lingle f8mi1y Section 3.104.01, Pages 3.1-17 right of way and street improvementa to a Type. II application if it i8 processed dwelling, adninlatratlve delign concurrently with a Type I or II application. review request and a partition request are UBmpIee of Type I and II applications. The8a types of appUcati0n8 currently trigger the public hearing proceu through an exception or variance application if the dedication of the full right of way and street Improvements cannot be met. S1IIff Is proposing that exception and wrianc8 reqU88tB be proceIIed through the adnini8tratNe decision making proceu if the8e appIIcaIiona are pl'OC8lled concurrently with a Type I or Type II application because the application fee and time required to proc888 the exception or variance request is reduced If It Is an adnini8tratNe 14. Reduce the 24 foot by-passlane width for a drtve-through. A 24 foot wide drlve-through and Section 3.104.02, Page 3.1-18 by-pass lane i. wider than what 18 necessary. It II cltllcuIt for en applicant to meet the 24 foot wide driv. handb I8ne ~ to.) PAGE 3 woo UPDATE WOO UPDATE video rental busill8l8 oper&te8 more like a retail use than an oIIioe use. Code needa 10 be revised to reflect this. 19. Parking section needs to state what happens when a use doesn't fit in a Need direction In the code SectIon 3.105, Pages 3.1-2710 36 c rd thil 20. Change the 00II1Nld p8IkIng 8tBII width from 9 feet to 7.5 feet to match the The c:on'1)8Ct parking stIIll width Table 3.1.4, Page 3.1-36 7.5 curb length for the 90 degree". need, to be changed to accurately reflect a compact parking stall width. 21. Add parking lot landscaping standard for the PISP zone. Addreea the iaaue of requiring Section 3.108.03.C.1, Page 3.1-39 parking lot IIIndacaping for uses in the PISP zone _II required In the c:onmercIal and Induatrtal zones. 22. Revise Conservation of SIgnificant Tree eection of the WOO in regard to tree Add.... the ..... of how to Section 3.108.04, Page 3.1-40 mitigation fund and how to amend conditions of approval 10 11M a significant amend conditions d approveI to tree. save a significant tree and creating a tree mitigation fund or give the replacement tr8eI to the City to Iant. 23. Refine Architectural Standards. SectIon 3.107.03 (F) should be modified 10 Addreea the Iaaue of removing non- Section 3.107, Pages 3.1~ to 66 read: -At Ieaat 15 percent of the fac;8de wallsurfBce, excluding roof1s and the livable IpaC88 In lingle f8mi1y triangular waD al'88 under a gable roof, and the garage f8c;ade of a dwelling unit dwellings from the window facj a front lot line shall be windows.. calculation uirement. 24. Add under the buft'8r wall requirement th8t a maonry wall should be Currently, the WOO does not h8ve SectIon 3.108.01.B.5, Page 3.1-87 constructed on lingle family aubdMalona where lots have frontage on a non-IocaI a provision that would allow Itaf'f to street. require a masonry wall on a aubcliviaion where Iota haw on a non-IocaI street. 25. Consider reviai Section 4.102 in our Have a11taf'f Section 4.102, P 4.1-24 ~ ~ PAGE 5 woo UPDATE WOO UPDATE Section 5.102.02A 1&2, Page 5.1-18 after receiving input from staff. It is unclear if an expansion over 1,000 square feet would trigger an administrative deeign review request because they ere adding leu thIIn 10% of groee ftoor area d the existing building. Council dlrecllon to clarify. .nee with this section. 26. Clarify Section 5.102.02A 1&2 regarding the trigger for an administrative design review request. Section 5.102.05, Page 5.1-21 Section 2.1 02.oe.C.b.1, Page 2.1-9 (RS Zone), Section 2.103.oe.C.1.b.1, Page 2.1-17 (RIS Zone), Section 2.104.08.C.1.b.1, Page 2.1-25 (RM Zone), Section 2.105.05.C.1.b.1, Page 2.1-35, (CO Zone), Section 2.108.05.C.1.b.1, Page 2.1-45 (CG Zone), Section 2.109.08.C.1.b.1, Page 2.1.e2 (IP Zone), Section 2.110.08.C.1.b.1, Page 2.1-70 (ILZone), & Section 2.111.05.C.1.b.1, Page 2.1-77 CPISP zone) Should IlonIge and diaplay be more clearly addressed in the allow8d use sections of zones? AdcII'8I8 the i.... of whether . parking setback is needed from a wall. Substitution 27. Get policy direction on how ReaidentIaI Architectural Standard should be inIBrpreted. 28. Clarify how storage and display 81'8 addl'88l8d. Revise code to BIlow parking in a required eetback adjacent to a wal 29. ~ ~ Should parking be aIIcNI8d on the rear of a through lot? Currently no parking is BlIow8d in the 20 foot eetback on the rear of. through lot adjacent to a street. Should a property owner be allowed to have more useable space on the rear of through lot 30. AdcII'8I8 aetbacks and partdng on a WOO UPDATE PAGE 6 WOO UPDATE ath hlot? 31. Clarify the certiftcation pI'OC88I r81ated to review of plats & covenants for Need to darify what is being Section 5.101.04.0.2, Pages 5.1-4 & 5, Manufactured Dwelling Park Final Plan Approval, Partition Final Plan Approval. certified by various ofIiciaIl. Section 5.101.05.0, Pages 5.1-6 to 8, Planned Unit Development Final Plan Approval, Property Une Section 5.101.08.0, Pages 5.1-9 to 11. AdjuatmentlConeolidation eX Lots and Subdivision Final Plat Approval. Section 5.101.07.0.1. Page 5.1-12. Section 5.101.09.0 e 5.1-14 32. Add Portable Toilet provision to the WDO. Need to add a provision In the WOO to regulatB portable IDiIets since portable toileta are no longer regulated by the City's Nuia8nce Ordinance. 33. Grading Pemit Address grading pemit in the WOO to atre criteria. 34. Concurrency Address transportation II\1)8CI8 of d ment. 35. If a big box store II vacated, then it would not be allowed to exclude Address the i-.. of businesses competitor8 88 8 condition of approval. not allowing COf11)8titor8 to buy or Ie88e their . box 8tore8. in the Health Care and lots. · ~ en PAGE 7 woo UPDATE WOO UPDATE 7. It would be beneficial to show 8 curvilinear lot and how it would be determined to be an interior or comer Figure 6.2, Page 6.102-2 lot 8. Stall depth (F) is not shown in Figure 6.10. Correct mistakes in the diagram. Figure 6.10, Page 6.102-10 101.09A3, Pages 4.1-13 PAGE 8 1. In arel to the definition of Mobile Food Servicee, 2.Add .atI8ched" lifter "Figure 6.6 and Section 3.104 3. Delete "banks. after .use. 4. Replace '71381. with '71384. 5. .Definitions. should not be repeated twice. 6. Delete .commerclal. after "from. and before .or" 7. Replace .abutting atreet(s). with .connecting street(s). after .and. and before 8. Insert "that" between -lots. Met .... 8. RepIace.Exist" with -Exit" 10. Change T to "6. 11. DeIete.Partition and Subdivision Standards (See Figure 6.11 ). 12. Insert -be. after .may" and before "flexible. 13. Exception to Street RIght otWay and IqH'O'I8I'n8Irt Requil'W1'l8l'1ts is a Type III decision and not a Type I decision. 14. Residential Archit8cturaI Standards Substitution is a Type II and not a Type I decision. 15. Delete ..Ibmenr after .nanatMt. and before .staf8rnenr 16. .5.102.103. should be -5.102, 5.103 and 5.104. 17. Insert "Initial evidentiary" after .alr and before "public hearings. and after "Type III. and before .hearing.. Replace .City" with .Director" after "the. and before .shaII.. Insert "Initial evidentiary" aftBr "the. and before .hearing.. 18. Delete "to. and .a- after .before. and before .public hearing. - Insert .an initial evidentiary" aftBr "before- and before ie hearil ." Delete .Convn.In' nt" after "the. and before .Director". .are. '" 0\ woo UPDATE WOO UPDATE PAGE 9 .101.09.8, 4.1-14 .101.12, Page 4.1-19 19. Delete -a- before -I jc- and after -of.- Insert -an Inltlal evidential after -of' and before -I Dc hearing- 20. Insert -or revifNI' after -air and before -.rings.- Delete -r in "parities- after -other" and before -sh8Il.- Insert an -s- at the end of -call- after Council and before -a.-Add a period at the end of the second to the last sentence after -1II1ow" and before -nHt. - DeIet8 -persona- after -record- and before -al icabIe-. 21. Delete -nor after -has- .nd before "been- 22. Remove .01 at the end of SecIIon 3.107.01 23. Insert -nor after -are- and before '1rnit8cr 24. Insert -a- before -special- .nd lifter -be- 25. Remove -.- before "formal- and after -.- 1:\Communlty Development\Plannlng\WDO Upda.\WDO Updat84.doc 12I03I03 woo UPDATE ~ ~ ~~~. vv.~N Incer,ernl,d IS89 ~~oc . . December 8, 2003 TO: Mayor and City Council through City Administrator FROM: Jim Mulder, Director of Community Development f/iY1 SUBJECT: Resolution Initiating Consideration of Amendmen~ to the Woodburn Sign Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: Approve the attached resolution initiating consideration of legislative amendments to the Woodburn Sign Ordinance. BACKGROUND: On November 12, 2003, the focus group appointed by the Mayor to review a draft new sign ordinance completed its review. The "Focus Group" draft (see attachment) is now ready to be submitted to the Planning Commission for review at a public hearing scheduled for January 15, 2004. The Woodburn Development Ordinance requires that the City Council initiate a legislative land use amendment by resolution. DISCUSSION: Staff has prepared the attached resolution to initiate proposed amendments to the Woodburn Sign Ordinance. The resolution also refers the proposed amendments to the Planning Commission for recommendation to the City Council. FINANCIAL IMP ACT: There is no direct financial impact associated with the recommended action because no outside resources will be utilized. However, a significant amount of time will be required from existing staff to complete this project. Attachments: . Resolution Initiating Proposed Amendments . Focus Group Draft Sign Ordinance (Provided to City Council only, but available upon request) Agenda Item Review: City Administrator City Attorney Finane 48 COUNCIL BILL NO. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION INITIATING CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE WOODBURN SIGN ORDINANCE. WHEREAS, city staff of the City of Woodburn has prepared amendments to the Woodburn Sign Ordinance at the direction of the Woodburn City Council; and WHEREAS, a focus group appointed by the Mayor of the City of Woodburn has completed its review of the draft sign ordinance amendments; and WHEREAS, Section 4.101.17 of the Woodburn Development Ordinance requires the City Council to initiate a legislative amendment by resolution; NOW THEREFORE: THE CITY OF WOODBURN RESOL YES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Pursuant to Woodburn Development Ordinance Section 4.101.17, consideration of legislative amendments to the Woodburn Sign Ordinance is initiated and referred to the Planning Commission for recommendation to the City Council. Approved as to Form: 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 Page 1 - COUNCIL BILL NO. RESOLUTION NO. 49 ,:."- '> ,\ /.' '~-il. o&-:~.....' . ~. '. .. "M' .' ,- .~.~. WQ.Q.:Q~QBN III'-"""I~,(l,(d 1~".V9 IOD ~~ . . December 3, 2003 TO: Mayor and City Council through City Administrator Mary Tennant, City Recorder ~ SUBJECT: Minimum Wage Increase FROM: RECOMMENDATION: Council adopt the accompanying Council Bill which provides for an increase in the hourly rate to meet minimum wage law requirements plus grade/step adjustments for related positions to maintain equity compensation between classifications. BACKGROUND: Under the current State minimum wage law, the Bureau of Labor & Industries Commissioner calculates the Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) in September with hourly rate increases, if any, to be implemented on January 1 sf of the following year. As a result of the Commissioner's 2003 calculation, the minimum wage will increase from $6.90 per hour to $7.05 per hour based on an inflation rate of 2.2% effective January 1, 2004. DISCUSSION: The City has an hourly rate schedule for Park and Recreation employees (Exhibit A) with the first grade level beginning with the minimum wage hourly rate and 5% adjustments between steps. Under the City's Personnel Policy manual, part- time employees are eligible for merit increases following the completion of 1040 hours within each step. The majority of our part-time employees work less than 20 hours per week therefore it takes them one year or longer before they are eligible for a merit increase. This schedule also provides for 5% increases between grade levels to compensate employees who have greater responsibilities and/or lead worker responsibilities over other employees. On October 13, 2003, the City Council adopted Resolution 1737 increasing the hourly rates for Part-time and Limited Term positions, excluding recreation Agenda Item Review: City Administrator City Attorney ~ 50 n .__.-,...." ..._._...,~.,..."....~.--.._.,...",.,....,,,,_,.,"__ . _._,_~._~_^"_",....c~_.__.K"~=__'.~___''''''_'__'' Mayor and City Council December 3, 2003 Page 2 . . employees, except for the positions of Library Page, Clerical Aide, and Park Maintenance Aide (Exhibit B). These part-time positions remained at the minimum wage level since they are considered entry level positions. The proposed Council Bill will increase the hourly rate for these positions in order to meet minimum wage law requirements, however, all other positions on this schedule will remain at the same rate of pay that was adopted under Resolution 1737. FINANCIAL IMP ACT: The total estimated financial impact for fiscal year 2003-04 is $3,330 ($3,078 in wages and $252 in benefits) whereas annually, based on current year budget projections of part-time hours, the financial impact is estimated at $6,450 for wages and $540 for required benefits. 51 COUNCIL BILL NO. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE COMPENSATION SCHEDULE FOR CERT AIN HOURLY AND SEASONAL EMPLOYEES. WHEREAS, the City Council is obligated per Section 11 of the Woodburn City Charter to establish compensation for each City officer and employee; and WHEREAS, a state-wide ballot measure was adopted by the voters at the November 5, 2002 general election which increased the minimum wage paid to employees effective January 1 of each year; and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes the need to adopt a hourly rate schedule to maintain compliance with State law and maintain proper equity compensation between classifications; now, therefore, THE CITY OF WOODBURN RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The hourly rate schedule for Park & Recreation Program part-time / seasonal employees (Exhibit A), and the hourly rate schedule for Part-Time and Limited Term / Temporary employees (Exhibit B) is hereby adopted effective January 1, 2004, a copy of the exhibits are attached for reference. Approved as to Fonn?l.rrva- ~ /2.- :s - '2 0 0 S City Attorney Date APPROVED Passed by the Council Submitted to the Mayor Approved by the Mayor Filed in the office of the Recorder ATTEST Mary Tennant, Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 1 - COUNCIL BILL NO. RESOLUTION NO. 52 Exhibit "A" PARK & RECREATION PROGRAM PART-TIME / SEASONAL EMPLOYEES Effective January 1, 2004 CLASSIFICATION STEP A STEP B STEP C STEP D STEP E PS-l Cashier 7.05 7.40 7.77 8.16 8.57 Lifeguard Recreation Aide Office Assistant Water Safety Instructor Aide PS-2 Head Lifeguard 7.40 7.77 8.16 8.57 9.00 Recreation Leader Fitness Instructor PS-3 Aquatics Center Clerk 7.77 Water Safety Instructor Recreation Assistant 8.16 8.57 9.00 9.45 PS-4 Recreation Program Mgr. 8.16 8.57 9.00 9.45 9.92 PS-5 8.57 Special Recreation Pgnn Mgr 9.00 9.45 9.92 10.42 PS-6 9.00 Special Projects Manager Aquatics Prgm Mgr Lifeguard Supervisor 9.45 9.92 10.42 10.94 53 Exhibit "8" HOURLY RATES FOR PART.TIME AND LIMITED TERM I TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2004 RANGE STEP A STEP 8 STEP C STEP D STEP E PT - 1.0 LIBRARY PAGE 7.05 7.40 7.77 8.16 8.57 CLERICAL AIDE PARK MAINT. AIDE PT - 4.0 PARK MAINT. WORKER 7.66 8.04 8.44 8.87 9.31 PT - 7.0 CLERK I 9.28 9.74 10.23 10.74 11.27 PT - 7.5 CUSTODIAN 9.51 9.98 10.48 11.01 11.56 PT - 8.0 LIBRARY ASSISTANT 9.74 10.23 10.74 11.27 11.83 PT - 8.5 CLERK II 9.98 10.48 11.01 11.56 12.14 PT - 9.0 10.23 10.74 11.27 11.83 12.42 PT - 9.5 MUNICIPAL COURT CLERK 10.48 11.01 11.56 12.14 12.75 PT-10.0 RSVP ASSISTANT 10.74 11.27 11.83 12.42 13.04 PT - 10.5 CLERK III 11.01 11.56 12.14 12.75 13.39 PT -11.0 BUS DRIVER 11.27 11.83 12.42 13.04 13.69 PT - 11.5 11.56 12.14 12.75 13.39 14.06 PT - 12.0 ADMN. SECRETARY 11.83 12.42 13.04 13.69 14.37 PT-12.5 12.14 12.75 13.39 14.06 14.76 PT - 13.0 EVIDENCE TECH. 12.42 13.04 13.69 14.37 15.09 WWTP LAB HELPER PT-13.5 LIBRARIAN 12.75 13.39 14.06 14.76 15.50 PLANNING TECH. PT - 14.0 UTILITY WKR I 13.04 13.69 14.37 15.09 15.84 PERMIT SPECIALIST PT - 14.5 13.39 14.06 14.76 15.50 16.28 PT-15.0 ENGINEERING TECH II 13.69 14.37 15.09 15.84 16.63 DRAFTSMAN PT-15.5 WWTP OPERA TOR I 14.06 14.76 15.50 16.28 17.09 CODE ENFRC OFFICER 54 ~ WQQDBURN J"(O'I'~'r~teJ .,889 lOE ~~ . . December 8, 2003 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: John C. Brown, City Administrator SUBJECT: Vacancies and Term Expiration- City Boards, Commissions and Committees RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the Mayor and City Council: 1. Announce existing vacancies and upcoming term expirations for positions on City boards, commissions and committees; and 2. Solicit applications from individuals interested in serving. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: Vacancies and terms set to expire exist on the following City boards, commissions and committees: Budget CommiHee Position IV (Stanley Milne) to expire on December 31 , 2003 Position V (Flurry Stone) to expire on December 31,2003 Planning Commission Position 2 (Robert Mill) to expire December 31 , 2003 Position 3 (David Vancil) to expire December 31,2003 Position 5 (Frank Lonergan) to expire December 31, 2003 Recreation and Park Board Position III (Philip Lagao) to expire December 31,2003 Position IV (Rosetta Wangerin) to expire December 31 , 2003 Position V (Ann Meyer) to expire December 31 , 2003 Library Board Position IV (Colleen Vancil) to expire December 31,2003 Agenda Item Review: City Administrata~ City Attorney _ Financ~ 55 Honorable Mayor and City Council December 8, 2003 Page 2 . . Pursuant to current policy, applications for these positions, and letters from incumbents interested in continuing to serve will be solicited. Appoints shall be made by the Mayor, with the concurrence of the Council, at the first meeting in January 2004. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact associated with the recommended action. JCB 56 ~~ ~ W~N '."'f.'4"J /~8' ~~OF . . December 2, 2003 TO: Mayor and City Council through City Administrator FROM: Scott D. Russell, Chief of Pollee ~ SUBJECT: Uquor Ucense Application - Greater Privilege RECO~MENDAnQN: The Woodburn City Council approve a Full on Premise Commercial Sales License for Denny's at Woodburn, 2919 Newberg Hwy, Woodburn, OR BACKGROUND: Applicant: Denny's at Woodburn, LLC 2919 Newberg Hwy. Woodburn, OR. 97071 Owners: Kathleen Freeburg, Owner IManager Steven Freeburg, Manager Jason Freeburg, Manager License Type: Full On-Premise - Allows for the sale of Distilled Spirits, Wine, Malt Beverages, and elder, by the Individual drink for consumption at the business. On November 13, 2003, the Woodburn Pollee Department received an application for a liquor license 'from applicant Denny's at Woodburn LLC. The application Is for a greater privilege "Full On-PremlseN license for Denny's at Woodburn LLC, located at 2919 Newberg Hwy., Woodburn. The applicants currently hold a Limited On-Premise OLCC license for this location. The OLCC reported no liquor violations at this establishment In the past 12 months. Agenda Item Review: City Administrat City Attorney Finane. 57 Mayor and City Council December 2, 2003 Page 2 . . The Woodburn Pollee Department responded to 23 calls for service at the establishment In the last twelve months, none of which were for liquor law violations. The restaurant will operate 24 hours a day, 7 days per week. but the lounge area will operate only between the hours of 11:00 AM and 11:00 PM dally. The only entertainment will be recorded music. All employees will be trained and certified through OlCC for serving alcohol. The pollee department has received no communication from the public or surrounding businesses In support of or against the application. DISCUSSIQti: The pollee department has completed a limited background Investigation on the applicant business and found nothing of a questionable nature. An In- depth Investigation was completed on owner/managers and no offenses that would preclude a license being Issued or Items of a questionable nature were located. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None 58 " ___..^"'. _~'.,...<o-. ',', .,___ _ ~."N..=___".~.,.,"'..--'-"......._........ ~ WOODBURN '.(.rp.rAt.d 1889 lOG ~~ . . December 8, 2003 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: John C. Brown, City Administrator SUBJECT: Cancellation of December 22,2003 Meeting RECOMMENDAtiON: It is recommended the City Council cancel its December 22, 2003 meeting. BACKGROUND: , Pursuant to City Charter, the City Council is required to meet regularly, at least once a month. The Council usually meets twice monthly to conduct City business. ThJ Council occasionally holds additional meetings due to pressing business, or c6ncels a meeting due to holiday schedules or lack of business. . , DISCUSSION: The Council has routinely canceled its second meeting in December because of that meeting's proximity to the Christmas Holiday, and because far fewer business transactions are typically necessary during the latter half of December. Accordingly, it is recommended your Council cancel the December 22, 2003 meeting. ' FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact associated with the recommended action. Agenda Item Review: City Administrator City Attorney Finane " 59 ~ WOODBURN IncDrporated f889 lOR Il~ Jiem . . December 3, 2003 TO: Mayor and City Council through City Administrator FROM: ~ulie Moore, C. E Tech III through Public Works Directof~ SUBJECT: No Parking restrlcllons on Amity Court RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that no parking be approved along both sides of Amity Court, as shown on the following map, to provide better accessibility for emergency vehicles and increased safety. BACKGROUND: Meadowpark Homeowner's Association has requested no parking along both sides of the entrance to Amity Court. They stated that it is difficult to enter/exit this area if any vehicles are parked in this area and that an emergency vehicle would not be able to get to these homes in an emergency. Amity Court is a small court, which serves as access to six homes. There is a narrow section of roadway, which runs about 100 feet north of Hermanson Street. This section has a right-of-way width of 20.5 ft and a paved width of 20.5'. The court widens out substantially from there. Traffic design manuals suggest that streets with paved widths not over 20 feet should have parking restrictions on both sides and widths not over 30 feet should have parking restrictions on one side of the street. DISCUSSION: With the width of Amity Court just 20 feet wide, it would increase safety and accessibility for emergency vehicles if the parking is restricted on both sides of this entrance, as shown on the following map. This would still allow parking along the curb around the main part of the court. A copy of this report has been provided to the Police Department and the Fire District. Therefore, it is recommended that no parking restrictions be approved for both sides of the street at the entrance of Amity Court. FINANCIAL IMP ACT: There is no significant impact other than the cost of the signs and it's installation, which is estimated at $250.00. Agenda Item Review: City Administrat City Attorney Finan 60 Mayor and City Council December 3, 2003 Page 2 . ~ ~ h Ii U . Map of Amitv Court ~, ~~ /! I~ / l 1/ ,.~, ."- ii' :/ 3.J / .../ "',{J I ~, /~~, :/ :/ 6 ............. / 7 .-.--/ ~~ ;r 8 ----~--1 --__"'..5lIo " -....c...::_____ " --.. -1 I . 9 L'! . ~ ..... :co....,~.a,,~ .~... ~ - . -- i; ..~ f 8/ ~ PROPOSED NO PARKING /4 .os . 61 -----. RECEIVED OCT 3 0 Z003 PUBLIC WOFlKS To: From: Date: Re: Public Works Dept. Meadow Park Homeowners Assoc. October 26, 2003 "NO PARKING" sign on Amity Court Every evening cars are parked on both sides of the entrance to Amity Ct. It makes it nearly impossible for homeowners to enter/exit and a fire truck would not be able to get to the homes in an emergency. Can a "NO PARKING" sign be placed on one side of the street (or both) near the entrance/exit? Attached is a map of the problem area. Thank You Please respond to: Joseph lacobucci 949 Deer Run Lane Woodburn, OR. 97071 (503) 981-6594 62 ~~.. W~N 1.:O',O'dt,i f~89 101 ~~ . . December 3, 2003 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Mayor and City Council through City Administrato~ a---- Randy Rohman, Public Works Program Manager 7' Sale of Rotating Biological Contactors RECOMMENDATION: Approve the sale of two rotating biological contactors shafts without cover to the City of Wapato for $100.00. BACKGROUND: The city has surplus rotating biological contactors at the wastewater treatment plant that are not used as part of the upgraded plant. These units are approximately 25 years old and have no real market value. The city, as part of the wastewater treatment plant upgrade, determined that there was no market for the contactors and they were left at the plant and not removed due to demolition costs. The City of Wapato, Washington uses rotating biological contactors at their treatment plant and need to replace a broken contactor (see attached letter). The have requested to purchase two rotating biological contactors shafts and one set of covers to for $100.00. DISCUSSION: The city has found no disposal outlet for the contactors and at this time has no plans for demolition of the existing contactor facility. Staff concurs with the sale of the contactors but the covers should be retained and not sold. The loss of the cover results in an open contactOf' pit which causes safety concerns. The City of Wapato has been advised that recommendation should be to retain the cover and they did not object since their primary need is for the contactor shafts. The City of Wapato can use the plant's contactors and this is probably the best use for these surplus items. The City of Wapato would be responsible for all costs associated with removal of the contactors. The contactors will be sold in "as is" condition as the City of Wapato acknowledged in their letter. Staff recommends the sale of only the two rotating biological contactors shafts (retaining requested cover) to the City of Wapato. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no significant financial impact associated with the recommended action. Funds from the sale will be considered miscellaneous revenue in the Wastewater Fund. Agenda Item Review: CiIy Admlnlstral....-...)C~ City Allomey{l/Ah Finanee/Jm 63 205 E. Third Street Wapato. W A 98951 City of APATO Office 509-877-2334 Fax.509-877-3979 November 18, 2003 Mayor Kathryn Figley 270 Montgomery Street Woodburn, OR 97071 Subj: Wastewater Treatment Plant RBC Units Honorable Mayor: The City Of Wapato needs to replace a broken rotating biological contactor (RBC) shaft at our wastewater treatment plant. We understand from your wastewater treatment plant superintendent, Frank Sinclair, that the City of Woodburn has surplus RBC shafts that need to be removed from your wastewater treatment plant. It would appear that the Cities of Woodburn and Wapato should be able to mutually benefit each other. The City of Wapato would like to purchase two of your retired RBC shafts with air headers and one set of covers for a total purchase price of$100.00. It is understood that the equipment would be purchased as is. The City of Wapato would be responsible for removing the purchased equipment from your wastewater treatment plant. Please advise at your earliest convenience as to whether this agreement would be acceptable. Thank you in advance for your consideration of this request. Sinu;~~ Mayor Don Stel1wagen RM/RR Cc: Frank Sinclair. WWTI' Superintendent "'larshall Munson. Acting l'uhlic Works Dircctor C"J)oculllcnts and Scttings,Rosic.RI....1SEy.I\1y J)oculllcnts'Rosic'I'uhlic Works Sc\\cr Rile Ictlculoc 64 ~~.. ~ WOQJ2BURN Incorporated i889 ~~lA . . December 4, 2003 SUBJECT: Mayor and City Council through City Administrator G. S. (Frank) Tiwari Public Works Direclo~ ~ Additional Information Needed for East Hardcastle Street Final Assessment Public Hearing TO: FROM: RECOMMENDATION: Upon completion of the public hearing, instruct staff to prepare an ordinance for council action establishing the final assessment amounts, as presented. BACKGROUND and DISCUSSION: In the public hearing of November 10, 2003, certain issues were raised that could only be resolved by having a meeting between the concerned property owners and the Public Works staff. Therefore, the City Council decided to leave the public hearing open so that additional information may be provided. Public Works staff has met with the property owners and the issues have been resolved as outlined below: A. CREDIT FOR EXISTING SIDEWALK The property owners, Mr. and Mrs. Yeager, had an existing sidewalk on their property and contributed toward its replacement through assessment. They are being provided with a check in the amount of $303.11 as compensation in full for their share of contribution for the said sidewalk. B. POST BOX INSTALLATION There are three planned actions, agreed upon between the property owner and city staff, as outlined below: 1) The property owners of Kennedy Court, Mr. and Mrs. Yeager, will coordinate with post office representative and agree on the locations of the mailbox installations. 2) The property owner will recondition or purchase new, updated mailboxes and inform the city that mailboxes are ready for installation. 3) City will install the boxes at no cost to the property owner. Agenda Item Review: City Administrator City Attorney 65 Mayor and City Council December 4, 2003 Page 2 . . C. STRIP OF LAND BElWEEN SIDEWALK AND CURB It has been agreed that the strip of land between the sidewalk and the curb will be allowed to be landscaped or filled with the concrete, brick or asphalt at the choosing of the adjoining property owner who is responsible for its maintenance. Property owners will receive appropriate Public Works approval prior to construction in public rights-of-way. D. DRIVEWAY SLOPE MODIFICATION AND COMPLETION OF STONE INSTALLATION It has been agreed that the city will modify the driveway slope as requested by Mr. Wyatt, the property owner at 1920 Hardcastle Avenue, in the spring of 2004. This will shift the starting line of city-constructed driveway by about three feet to the south of current location. Also, to a distance of approximately six feet, the concrete stones will be extended to complete the intended installation. FINANCIAL IMPACT: All modifications will cost the city less than $2,000.00. This amount will be paid from the CIP funds remaining in the approved budget due to the lower cost of the project. This entire payment from CIP funds allows the city not to increase the assessment amount, even though it will be less than one percent, as shown in the letters sent to the property owners by the City Recorder. Attachments: Staff Memo and Report from November 10,2003 Council Meeting H:\MyFiles1\Councilltems\E Hardcastle Final Assessment Hearing 66 ~ W~N I.,.".,.t,~ 166' . ~dWw . November 6, 2003 TO: Mayor and City Council through City Administrator FROM: Public Works Director SUBJECT: pubnc Hearing on East Hardcastle Avenue UD Final Assessmenll RECOMM~NDAnON: Upon completion of the public hearing, Instruct staff to prepare an ordinance for council action establishing the final assessment amounts, as presented. BACKGROUND: The City Council initiated the Local Improvement District (LID) process for East Hardcastle Avenue street improvements, approved the engineering report, held a public hearing and adopted Ordinance no. 2316, that established the legal foundation for the LID assessments. This ordinance established the Local Improvement District Boundary, established the method of assessment, directed for the contract award and provided for the payment of costs though assessment of properties In the Local Improvement District. A public hearing Is required of council to complete the LID process as a last action prior to the approval of final assessment ordinance. DI~CU$SIO~: The street Improvements have been Installed In accordance with the approved engineering report, East Hardcastle was widened to 44 feet in width providing two travel lanes, one turn lane and a blkelane In each direction. The Improvement is complete with curbs, drainage improvements, installation of the sidewalk on the north side thereby, providing sidewalks on both sides, ADA ramps at aI/Intersections and street lighting. The final known costs are approximately 17% below the estimated project cost of the adopted assessment ordinance. The final assessments have been established using the methodology and unit distribution as outlined In the adopted LID ordinance 2316. Project costs not assessed against benefiting properties Include the capacity cost portion of East Hardcastle, the extension Agenda Item Review: City Administrator: City Attorney Finane 67 Mayor and City Council November 6, 2003 Page 2 . . the existing water system, the extension of existing sanitary sewer main and the alterations required on the existing south side sidewalk to meet ADA requirements at new driveway locations. Proper notice has been published in local newspaper and mailed to the each individual property owner and the LID process in accordance with ordinance 2105 has been followed. The final assessment cost amounts are approximately 17% below the estimated assessment amounts previously adopted. A payment plan for the assessment amount is also being offered to each property, an example of which is included as attachment 3. Therefore, it is recommended that the city council direct staff prepare an ordinance for council action establishing the final assessment amounts as presented on Attachment "2" The council options are to 1) Direct Staff to prepare for council action the final assessment ordinance based on the assessments as presented, or 2) Direct staff to modify the assessment amounts based on the public testimony, or 3) Postpone the decision Attachments 1 . Out line of LI D process 2. Proposed final assessment amounts 3. Payment Plan FINANCIAL IMPACT: Funding of the unpaid assessments will be provided by a loan from the Traffic Impact Fee Fund. The terms of the loan are described in the separate staff report on this evening's agenda. 68 ._-....__.........^"_~.~.o_........_._.___........"....~~"'-,___'._~>>.,.._ ~.>_...-...,~"____.._.~.~"~_,.,_~.a-""..~''-''''__ .. ATTACHMENT 1 PROCESS FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (LID) 1. PROJECT INITIATION: Project is initiated by petition or by action of the City Council 2. RESOLUITION AUTHORIZING AN ENGINEERING REPORT: City Council, by approval of a resolution, directs staff to prepare an engineers report for the improvement 3. ENGlNEERING REPORT APPROVAL: Engineers report contains, project need, method of assessment, cost estimate based on preliminary engineering, Local Improvement District (LID) boundary. The City Council may at this stage direct staff to prepare a "Resolution of Intent to Improve". 4. RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO IMPROVE: LID boundary and assessments are defined for public process. Public hearing date set with council approval of resolution. 5. ADVERTISEMENT OF PUBLIC HEARING: The City Recorder gives notice meeting legal requirements of advertising for public hearing. 6. PUBLIC HEARING: City Council holds a public hearing on the project and receives input from the affected property owners. If, at the time of hearing, written remonstrances are received from the owners of a majority of land within the LID, consideration of the LID must be suspended for six months. 7. CITY COUNCIL DECISION: a. Direct staff to prepare an assessment ordinance b. Direct staff make modifications to the LID c. Abandon or postponement of the LID 8. ADOPTION OF THE ASSESSEMENT ORDINANCE: Funding defined. 9. COMPLETION OF FINAL ENGINEERING: Final engineering plans, specifications and contract documents are completed. 10. ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS AND BID AWARD: The project is advertised and bids are received. The City Council reviews staff recommendation and awards the contract for construction to the lowest responsible bidder. (Note: City may receive bids earlier but contract award can not take place until assessment ordinance has been adopted) II. CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES: Construction takes place under the supervision of the City Engineer. ( Note: This is the time when the public sees project action) 12. FINAL ASSESSMENT ORDINANCE: Upon completion of the improvements the final assessment process is followed lhe process n~q~i(~sJl.notherpI.lRlic b~~rjng an<! explanation of payment plan time lines. .... Wt' An'.1 ".'1'(' 69 ATTACHMENT 2 Eat Banklltlc Lm - ...- ..... _L ~- 1l'I...1 .Amt IIIIit 00000oo 1740 HARDCASTLE A V MCKENNEY,TERRY A&. $2,S82.55 $-183.31 0'1 WOBCD06200 GLORIA 0 $3,075.ee 0000000138' OREENVlEW DR AGUlLAR,CONRAOO &. $244.03 $51.82 0'1 W08DAO'3oo EGINIO $295.85 0'1 W08DAO'400 00000oo 1383 OREENVIEW DR RADY,ANDREW A TRUSTEE $250.62 $206.56 $44.06 0'1 W08DAOSSoo ooooooooooo CITY OF WOODBURN $3.15 $2.81 $0.54 os 1 W08DAOS600 ooooooooooo CITY OF WOODBURN $3.03 $2.52 $0.51 OS1W08DAOS7oo 00000oo 137S GREENVlEW DR DILSAVER)lLLE $261.85 $215.88 $45.99 os 1 W08DAOSSOO 0000000136S GREENVlEW DR MooRE.JULlA 0 $270.96 $223.40 $47.56 os 1 W08DAOS900 00000oo 13S9 OREENVlEW DR MOLODIH,MARK.-ET AL $259.44 $213.88 $45.58 00000oo 134S GREENVIEW DR MONTOY A,ALV ARO &. $212.74 $45.36 os 1 W08DA06OOO MARTHA $258.10 00000oo1323 GREENVlEW DR GARDlNER,ROBERT J &. $425.49 $90.70 OSIW08DA06100 BRENDA J $516.19 00000oo1297 GREENVlEW DR MORA VIOV.NAST ASIA ET $425.49 $90.70 os 1 W08DA062oo AI., %MURA VIOU. Bill. $516.19 00000oo 1281 GREENVlEW DR CHEREMNOV.SERGEY &. $425.49 $90.70 os 1 W08DA063oo MARIA $516.19 . VnoALI os 1 W08DA06400 00000oo1420 GREENVlEW DR &. KURlLOV.ALEXANDR G &; $264.46 $218.02 $46.44 ,n,. "1o.T A U os 1 W08DA06Soo 00000oo 1464 GREENVlEW DR SCHINDLER,DENA M $258.10 $212.74 $45.36 0000000 1486 GREENVlEW DR KEYMOLEN.FRANCISCA &; $214.88 $45.74 os 1 W08DA06600 SHEYLA $260.40 os 1 W08DA067oo 00000oo 1498 GREENVlEW DR PlTI'H.SANDRA R $270.93 $223.38 $47.55 os 1 W08DCOO3oo 00000oo1220 PACIFIC HY BIGEJ,JACK R &; DEANNA $3,300.63 $2,141.09 $1,159.54 os 1 W080c00900 00000oo 175' HAROCASTLE A V JAEGER,HENRY C $2,413.31 $2,288.29 $127.02 OS 1 W08OCO 1200 oo1251-12S7 KENNEDY ST JAEGER,HENRY C &; JOY L $2,854.97 $2,353.30 $501.67 os 1 W08OCO 1300 001231-1237 KENNEDY ST JAEGER,HENRY C &; JOY L $2,854.97 $2,353.30 $501.67 OS 1 W08OCO 1400 001191-1197 KENNEDY ST JAEGER,HENRY C &; JOY L $2,854.97 $2,353.30 $501.67 . os 1 W08DCO 1 SOO 001171-1177 KENNEDY ST JAEGER,HENRY C &. JOY L $2,854.97 $2,353.30 $501 .fJl OSlW08DC016oo oo1151-11S7 KENNEDY ST JAEGER,HENRY C &; JOY L $2,832.65 $2,334.81 $497.84 os 1 W08OCO 1700 ooooooooooo JAEGER,HENRY C $1,828.17 $1,342.93 $285.24 ~ o 051WOBDCOIBoo 000000000oo KENNEDY 81 JAEGER-HENRY C" JOY L $0.00 $0.00 $0,00 051WOBDCOI900 001148.1154 KENNEDY 8T JAEGER-HENRY C " JOY L $1,833.Be $1,513.34 $320.52 051 WOBDC02000 001168-1174 KENNEDY 8T JAEGER-HENRY C "JOY L $2,875.50 $2,370.31 $505.19 OSIW08DC02100 001188-1194 KENNEDY ST JAEGER,HENRY C " JOY L $2,875.50 $2,370.31 $505.19 os 1 W08DC022oo 001228-1234 KENNEDY ST JAEGER.HENRY C &. JOY L $2,875.50 $2,370.31 $505.19 OSIW08DC02300 001248-12S4 KENNEDY ST JAEGER,HENRY C &. JOY L $2,837.11 $2,338.50 $498.61 os 1 W08DC02400 00000oo1268 KENNEDY ST JAEGER,HENRY C &. JOY L $1,761.93 $1,453.75 $308.18 os 1 W08DC02S00 OOOOOOOOOOO CITY OF WOODBURN $1,037.07 $854.87 $182.20 os 1 W08DC02600 00000oo 118S GREENVIEW DR BONALES,MARIA MEZA, &. $1,030.93 $849.78 $181.15 TAU..., 00000oo1175 GREENVIEW DR CHAPElLE,FRANK. A&; $924.85 $196.69 os 1 W08DC02700 welLE METAL $1,121.54 0000000116S GREENVIEW DR SCYMANKY,JOSEPH R &. $1,310.58 $279.16 os 1 W08DC02800 JENNIFER E $1,589.74 OS 1 WOSDC02900 0000000 1155 GREENVIEW DR THOMPSON,JOSEPH E ET AL $1,521.75 $1,254.25 $267.50 OSIW08DC03000 00000oo 114S GREENVIEW DR HAND,PHILIP J &; KATHLEEN $1,254.25 $267.50 M $1,521.75 OSIW08DC03100 00000oo 113S GREENVIEW DR LEOS,JOSE ISIDRO &. $1,254.25 $267.50 ROSALINDA $1,521.75 0000000112S GREENVIEW DR DISHON, TOMMY R &. LINDA $1,321.97 $281.51 os 1 W08DC032oo L $1,603.48 OS I W08DC03300 00000oo 111 S GREENVIEW DR REYES,GABRIEL A&. $1,308.48 $278.73 AMPEUAM $1,587.21 OS 1 W08DC03400 00000oo 182S HARDCASTLE A V ALCAZAR,ANACLETO &; $2,181.11 $108.48 MARIA $2,289.59 OS 1 W08DC03S00 0000000110S GREENVIEW DR 10NKO,PA VEL &. KORNELA $2,015.89 $1,661.48 $354.41 os I W08DC03600 00000oo 1100 GREENVIEW DR SHUBIN,GEORGE JR &; $1,707.68 $363.98 TANYAN $2,071.64 OS I W08DC03700 0000000 111 0 GREENVIEW DR JAQUEZ,FAU8TO &. JUANA, &; $1,247.54 $266.11 v ARGAS, FIDEL $1,513.65 OS 1 W08DC03800 00000001120 GREENVIEW DR POWERS,WARREN L &; $1,248.30 $266.27 KATHY L $1,514.57 OSIW08DC03900 00000001130 GREENVIEW DR COOPER,DOUOLAS L &; $1,247.98 $266.20 EIlZABETH M $1,514.18 OSIW08DC04OOO 00000oo 1140 GREENVIEW DR MCPHERSON,DENIS C $1,513.49 $1,247.42 $266.07 OSIW08DC04100 00000oo II SO GREENVIEW DR JAMISON,DARLENE J $1,027.30 $848.77 $180.53 os I W08DC04200 00000001160 GREENVIEW DR ELLAMAE, ROSALES,DA VID $1,030.80 $849.50 $181.10 ~ Tn.. ~ ... $17e.3C5 $362.015 $370.39 $355.14 $355.85 $361.86 $446.65 $360.96 $362.53 $361.65 $423.71 $530.78 $685.71 $686.19 $408.42 $630.18 $504.45 $496.55 $496.55 se28.00 $1,888.42 $1,OO2.&e $2,060.48 $1,738.82 $1,884.95 $1,688.39 $1,897.44 $2,357.09 $1,943.07 $1,700.71 $1,793.08 $2,248.27 $2,513.56 $3,512.08 $3,514.41 $2,172.39 $2,993.83 $2,388.75 $2,328.58 $2,328.58 $2,382.44 $0.00 $2,109.01 $2,020.09 $2,024.24 $2,059.30 $2,803.74 $2,304.03 $2,063.24 $2,174.73 $2,669.98 $3,044.34 $4,197.79 $4,200.60 $2,580.81 $3,624.01 $2,871.20 $2,825.13 $2,825.13 $2,890.14 5UIIUI'I ~'I>.T, C/O LOUIS LEROY SU'M'ON 'DA'T'DTAlIt"'U KILMURRAY.MICHAEL " PAMELA KOROBEINIKOV,IV AN " EUOENIA MORALES,SAL V AOOR D" AMBROCIAC OONZALEZ,BENJAMIN A DAGGETT,JAMES L" CAROL L ASCENCIO,ROSA M-ET AL V ALENZUELA,JOSE" LEOBARDA OREENVIEW DR 00000oo 1170 00000oo 1145 RlOS,ISREAL BENJAMIN \,;UK I elS,JUA'-c!U1l'l &It VERONICA. " n.TDnl4.T A lI.TTnll.TTn \.mll.TT\{\~ CONTRERAS,GULLERMO & MARlA S SAMOILOV,MIKE ORCHARD LN ORCHARD LN ORCHARD LN ORCHARD LN ORCHARD LN HARDCASTLEAV HAROCASTLE A V HARDCASTLE A V HARDCASTLE A V HARDCASTLE A V $507.70 $0.00 $579.03 $526.14 $559.07 $26.34 $2,727.08 $2,471.55 $2,830.83 $127.23 $0.00 $3,306.11 $2,997.69 $3,189.70 $153.57 DUNN ST 001050-1054 DUNN ST 001070-1074 DUNN ST 001060-1064 DUNN ST ooooooooooo 00 1040-1 044 JAEOER,HENRY C & JOY L MONT AL YO,ERNESTO & ROSA M VAN CLEVE,ROBERT ET AL, 78% INT QUAliTY PillS INTERIORS INC SAMARIN,MICHAEL & TANIA B SAMARIN,MICHAEL & TANIA B SAMARIN,MICHAEL & TANIA B SAMARIN,MICHAEL & T ANIE B SAMARIN,MICHAEL & TANIA B i SAMARIN,MICHAEL & TANIA B SAMARIN,MICHAEL & TANIA B SAMARIN,MICHAEL & TANIA B SAMARIN,MICHAEL & TANIA B DUNN ST DUNN ST HAROCASTLE A V HARDCASTLE A V HARDCASTLE A V DUNN ST 00000001135 00000oo 112S 00000oo 111 S 00000oo 110S 00000oo 1840 00000oo1836 00000oo1838 00000oo1832 00000oo1834 00000000000 00000oo1830 00000oo1820 00000oo 1810 OOOOOOOOOOO 001034-1035 ooooooooooo 001080-1084 001041-1045 051 W08DC04300 051W08DC04400 051 W08DC04500 OS 1 W08DC04600 OS 1 W08DC04700 OSIW08DC04800 OS1W08DCOSSOO OS 1 W08DCOS700 051W08DCOS800 OS 1 W08DCOS80 1 OS 1 W08DC05802 OS1W08DCOS803 ~ OSIW08DCOS900 t-) OS 1 W08DC06000 OSI W08DC06100 051W08DC06101 OSIW08DC06300 OS 1 W08DC06400 OS 1 W08DC06500 OS 1 W08DC06600 OS1W08DC067oo OSIW08DC06800 OS 1 W08DC06900 051 W08DC07000 OS 1 W08DC071oo $513.&4 $S01.81 $498.55 $504.45 $459.27 $354.02 $354.02 $354.02 $354.02 $354.02 $354.02 $356.34 $357.53 $357.53 $389.14 $362.80 $361.04 $356.39 $361.04 $362.80 $392.64 $397.92 $432.98 $0.00 $91.74 $2,412.85 $2,354.03 $2,328.58 $2,388.75 $2,418.08 $1,859.57 $1,859.57 $1,859.57 $1,859.57 $1,859.57 $1,859.57 $1,870.81 $1,878.53 $1,878.53 $1,829.21 $1,701.98 $1,893.50 $1,871.02 $1,893.50 $1,701.98 $1,846.18 $2,121.82 $2,291.06 $0.00 $2.826.48 $2,855.84 $2,825.13 $2,871.20 $2,8n.35 $2,013.59 $2,013.59 $2,013.59 $2,013.59 $2,013.59 $2,013.59 $2,027.15 $2,034.06 $2,034.06 $2,218.35 $2,064.78 SAMARIN,MICHAEL" TANIA B SAMARIN,MICHAEL" TANIA B SAMARIN,MICHAEL" TANIA B SAMARIN,MICHAEL" TANIA B HAOENAUER.DONAlD L" AGNES AF ANASIEV, VLADIMIR &; NATAUA llAN\;nu.,K\>>ALlU clt SANCHEZ,IOSE &; ~,Hk.~clt LOPEZ,FLAVIO &; ZURITA, ,",'UD" A ~Tnt"\ SORIANO,ARON P" NORA " D' SARA" ISMAEL C &; ISABEL , DA VIDSON,LEROY WINDSOR-SMITII LOPEZ,ANTIMO &; MARIBEL HERRERA,HERMELINDO ET AL )~KU4Jr.llUi) r. clt HERNANDEZ- DUNN8T DUNN ST DUNN 8T DUNN ST HAROCASTLE A V ORCHARD LN ORCHARD LN ORCHARD LN ORCHARD LN ORCHARD LN ORCHARD LN ORCHARD LN CENTENNIAL DR CENTENNIAL DR CENTENNIAL DR $2,054.54 $2,027.41 MENDOZA,CHARLENE A WlNDSOR-SMITII WlNDSOR-SMITII $430.53 $2,054.54 $2,064.78 $2,238.82 $2,519.54 $2,724.04 $0.00 $522.27 BOUCHAIN,10ROE LUIS SMITH,1UNE E CHERNISHOFF,ANATOLIE M HAOENAUER.KARBN &; DONAlD L &; AONES OLOMBOSKE,DEANNE P HARPER,SUSAN MARIE EATON,ROSEMARY HAROCASTLE A V HAROCASTLE A V CENTENNIAL DR CENTENNIAL DR ORCHARD LN ORCHARD LN ORCHARD LN ORCHARD LN OREENVIEW CT 001051-1055 001061.1065 001071.1075 001081-1085 00000oo 191 0 00000oo 1064 00000oo1052 00000001048 00000oo1036 00000oo1024 00000oo1012 00000oo1015 00000oo1886 00000oo1874 00000oo1861 00000oo 1873 00000oo1885 00000oo 1047 00000oo1051 00000001063 00000oo1075 00000oo 1890 00000oo 1880 OOOOOOOOOOO 00000oo1430 051 W08DC07200 051 W08DC07300 051 W08DC07400 051W08DC07500 051W08DC07600 051 W08DC077oo 051 W08DC07800 051 W08DC07900 051W08DCOSOOO 051W08DC081oo 051 W08DC08200 051 W08DC08300 ... 051 W08DC08400 (,) 051W08DC08500 051W08DC08600 051 W08DC08700 051W08DC08800 051W08DC08900 051 W08DC09OOO OSIW08DC09100 051W08DC09200 051W08DC09300 051 W08DC09400 051 W08DC0940 1 051 W08DDOO7oo 0'1 W08DDOO800 00000001447 OREENVlEW CT HOWEU..,UNDA H $S09.80 $420.20 $88.80 0'1 W08DDOO900 0000000 14'9 OREENVIEW CT SUPINO,EDW ARD J & MARY $420.20 $88.80 v $S09.80 OS1W08DD01000 00000001467 OREENVlEW CT RAYON,ROY E $S09.80 $420.20 $89.80 OSIW08DOOll00 00000oo 1479 GREENVlEW CT GUBKIN,ANDREY & OLGA $509.13 $419.64 $89.49 OS1W08DD012oo 00000oo 1487 GREENVIEW CT BROWN,EWART F & UNDA G $503.44 $414.92 $88.52 os 1 W08DDO 1300 00000oo1493 GREENVlEW CT SCHMIDT,GREGORY L & $428.31 $90.87 SHARON P $517.18 OS 1 W08DDO 1400 00000oo1496 GREEN VIEW CT RICHARDSON,FAY K ~.26 $449.57 $96.69 OS 1 W08DDO 1 SOO 00000001490 GREENVIEW CT CABAlLERO,AMADOR M & $427.83 $91.18 JOUNE L $519.01 OSlW08DD016oo 00000001478 GREENVIEW CT SANCHEZ,ROSEMARIE & $419.42 $89.44 JESUS $508.86 OS1W08DD017oo 00000oo 1466 GREENVIEW CT SANCHEZ,JESUS E & $420.20 $89.80 ROSEMARIE B $S09.80 OSlW08DD018oo 00000001454 GREENVIEW DR RABlMOV,SUKHROB U & $420.20 $89.80 MAVJUDA R $509.80 OS 1W08DDO 1900 00000oo 1442 GREENVIEW DR DE DIOS,GENARO & $420.20 $89.80 SANJUANIT A $509.80 OSlW08DD02000 00000001282 GREENVIEW DR F ARRELL,NANCY J $522.27 $430.53 $91.74 OS 1 W08DD021 00 00000oo1258 GREENVIEW DR WY ATI,WILUAM E & SUSAN $425.49 $90.70 L $516.19 OS 1 W08DD02200 00000oo 1240 GREENVIEW DR STIGNEI,FEODOR $516.19 $425.49 $90.70 os 1 W08DD023oo OOOOOOOOOOO PUBLIC PARK $1 ,323.45 $1,095.73 $227.72 os 1 W08DD024OO 00000oo 1263 GREENVIEW DR REYES,MARCIAL & $425.49 $90.70 CORTFZ,MARIA $516.19 OS 1 W08DD02SOO OOOOOOOO000 CHA VEZ,FRANK C & MARIA $425.49 $90.70 C $516.19 OS 1 W08DD02600 0000000 1217 GREENVIEW DR RIVERA,ANTONIO & $425.49 $90.70 RIVERA,CEllA FLORES $516.19 SALDANA,JOSE J 00000001199 GREENVIEW DR HERNANDFZ & OS 1 W08D002700 MEZA,GREOORIO CORTFZ & COR'l'FZ,JOSE A $516.19 $425.49 $90.70 os 1 W08DD02800 00000001189 GREENVIEW DR MELLON,FRED WILLIAM & $421.52 $89.88 lANTHA $511.40 OS 1 W08DC02900 00000oo 1180 GREENVIEW DR SUNDHOLM,NORMAN W $1,053.76 $888.70 $185.06 OS 1 W08DD03000 0000000 11SS ORCHARD LN FEDERAL HOME LOAN $1,855.41 $353.16 MORTGAGE CORP $2,008.57 OSlW08DD03100 00000001165 ORCHARD LN SUITER,FRANK A & KAREN J $2,067.03 $1,703.84 $363.19 ~ oIlio 0'1 W08DD032oo 00000001175 ORCHARD LN RlVER.A,JOSE $2,088.81 $1.722.10 $381.11 OOOOOOOOOOO R.IVER.RA,JOSE . $82.37 $18.12 0'1 W08DD033oo lUVER.A.RAUL $111.48 00000001160 ORCHARD LN MlTSUK,ALEXEY. $1,882.88 $418.78 os 1 W08DD03400 NADEZHDA $2,379.44 00000oo 1140 ORCHARD LN CmBANK NA, C/O CHASE $1,738.63 $369.97 os 1 W08DD03Soo MANHATI AN MORT CORP $2,106.60 OS 1 W08DD03600 00000oo1130 ORCHARD LN MINGEAR,CUNT A&; COlU $2,029.71 $1,672.93 $356.78 os 1 W08DD037oo 00000oo1120 ORCHARD LN GEORGIEFF,ALEX. ANNA $2,063.14 $1,700.62 $362.52 00000oo 1110 ORCHARD LN BEST,CHRIS C &; KAnn..EEN $1,704.78 $363.38 os 1 W08DD03800 1M $2,068.16 0000000 11 00 ORCHARD LN UllOA MEZA, YIMMI S &; $1,885.59 $355.27 OS 1 W08DD03900 LAURA R $2,020.86 OS 1 W08DD04000 00000oo 1941 HARDCASTLE A V BROWN,SANDRA F $2,307.38 $1,945.83 $381.53 00000oo 1943 HARDCASTLE A V UVlNGSTON,GARY L &; $1,906.09 $353.30 OSIW08DD04100 CAROLYNE $2,259.39 os 1 W08DD04200 0000000 1945 HARDCASTLE A V SANDOV AI., VICTORIA $2,315.90 $1,952.91 $362.99 r~l OSIW08DD04300.. 0000000000o CHRISTIAN, MOLOKAN $6,880.49 $5,a4.38 $1 ,396.11 OS 1 W08DD04600 00000oo 1920 HARDCASTLE A V WY ATI,WIWAM E &; SUSAN $2,230.45 $420.44 L $2,650.89 OS 1 W08DD04700 OOOOOOOO 163 HERITAGE A V ElDREDOE,VESSIE T &; RUIll $1,977.78 $419.86 F $2,397.86 OS 1 W08DD04800 OOOOOOOO 197 HERITAGE A V DAVIS,EDWIN WIWS ET AI.. $2,275.58 $1,876.63 $398.95 os 1 W08DD04900 0000000022S HERITAGE A V SIMPSON,ELEANOR $2,257.10 $1,861.32 $395.78 os 1 W08DDOSOOO OOOOOOOO239 HERITAGE AV MOREJON,GREG &; TANIA R $2,415.43 $1,992.50 $422.93 OS lW08DDOS 100 000000002S3 HERITAGE A V llSOFF,SOLOMEY A $2,295.13 $1,892.83 $402.30 os 1 W08DDOS200 OOOOOOOO240 HERITAGE A V AlLISON)AMES L &; CAROLE $2,281.15 $482.67 1 $2,763.82 os 1 W08DDOS300 OOOOOOOO226 HERITAGE A V TAYLOR,EUZA8ETII A $2,429.40 $2,004.07 $425.33 os 1 W08DDOS400 OOOOOOOO198 HERlT AGE A V PEARCE-GARRY A&; $2,000.64 $424.61 FRANCES 10YCE $2,425.25 os 1 W08DDOSSOO OOOOOOOO 160 HERITAGE A V FISCHER,DA VlD G &; MARY $2,030.41 $430.78 mAN $2,461.19 os 1 W08DDOS600 00000oo1930 HARDCASTLE A V KlRSCH,1AMES P &; REBECCA $2,368.16 $448.94 1 $2,817.10 TOTAL $258,547.69 $213,672.00 $44,875.69 .. Ci~ portion of the assessment atnOWlt on this tax lot is $549.04, approximately 1 acre of the subject site is being utilized as Public Park and a Public Detention Facility. ...:.J en ATTACHMENT 3 EAST HARDCASTLE A VENUE TYWCAL ANNUAL PAYMENT PLAN 10 YEAR TERM (Based on Assessment Amount) ASSESSMENT INTEREST TOTAL YEARLY PAYMENT AMOUNT RATE 5500.00 5.44% $ 66.14 51000.00 5.44% $ 132.29 $1500.00 5.44% $ 198.43 52000.00 5.44% $26457 __ 52500.00 5.44% $ 330.72 53000.00 5.44% 5 396.86 53500.00 5.44% $ 463.00 $4000.00 5.44% S 529.14 $4500.00 5.44% $ 595.29 55000.00 5.44% $ 661.43 76 (\ ^ ~...~... . ~'.tv.:. .... '. . "'''-''~'.., . . . , . -..--,.-.-- WOQ.DBURN III''''rC,a1tJ 1889 14A ~~ . . December 8, 2003 TO: Mayor and City Council through City Administrator .I FROM: Jim Mulder, Director of Community Development <1t1 SUBJECT: Planning Commission's Approval of Variance 03-z3. RECOMMENDATION: No action is recommended. This item is placed before the City Council for information purposes in compliance with the Woodburn Development Ordinance. The City Council may call up this item for review if it desires. BACKGROUND: On December 4, 2003 the Planning Commission adopted a final order approving a variance request to allow for a 12 square foot illuminated directional sign to be placed in a 28 foot access easement on the south side of the property located at 1050 Boones Ferry Road. The subject property is located at 1050 Boones Ferry Road (T5S-1W-18AC, Tax lot #1200). A funeral chapel is located on the subject site. Webstar III leases the southerly 28 feet of the subject site from the Cornwell Family Limited Partnership. An existing driveway 290 feet in length and landscaping are located in the leased area. The driveway provides a secondary access to the Tukwila Center for Health and Medicine from N. Boones Ferry Road. The applicant is proposing to erect a 24 square foot illuminated directional sign in the leased area to direct customers from N. Boones Ferry Road to the Tukwila Center for Health and Medicine. The subject property is zoned Commercial Office (CO) and designated Commercial on the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan Map. The properties to the east and south are also zoned CO and designated Commercial on the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan Map. Commercial uses are located on these properties. The property to the west (across N. Boones Ferry Road) is zoned Public and Semi-Public (P /SP), designated Open Space and Parks on the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan, and is the location of a school. No wetlands are located on the subject site and it is located outside of the 500 year floodplain. Agenda Item Review: City Administrato City Attorney f/,(,':i Finane 77 Mayor and City Council December 8, 2003 Page 2 . . Section 11 (B) of the Woodburn Sign Ordinance (WSO) does not allow a directional sign in the CO zone. The applicant has submitted a variance request to allow for a 24 square foot illuminated directional sign to be placed in a 28 foot access easement on the south side of the property located at 1050 Boones Ferry Road. Applicant: Webstar III, LLC 610 Glatt Circle Woodburn, Oregon 97071 Silverton Hospital 342 Fairview Silverton, Oregon 97381 Property Owner: Cornwell Family Limited Partnership 988 West Hayes Street Woodburn, OR 97071 DISCUSSION: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact associated with the recommended action. 78 3.110 Sub-Sections: 3.110.01 3.110.02 3.110.03 3.110.04 3.110.05 3.110.06 3.110.07 3.110.08 3.110.09 3.110.10 3.110.11 3.110.12 3.110.13 3.110.14 3.110.15 3.110.16 3.110.17 3.110.18 3.110.19 3.110.20 3.110.21 3.110.01 I 'I Woodburn Sign Ordinance (WSO) Purpose Applicability Definitions Sign Permits Required Sign Permit Approval Process Expiration of Approval Inspections General Requirements Design Guidelines for Type II Sign Applications Sign Maintenance Exemptions Prohibited signs Temporary Sign Permit Permitted Signs-Residential and Public/Semi-Public Land Use Districts (RS, RIS, RM, and P/SP) Permitted Signs-Commercial Office District (CO) Permitted Signs-Commercial General District (CG) Permitted Signs-Downtown Development and Conservation (DDC) Permitted Signs-Industrial Districts (IP and IL) Variances Nonconforming Signs Enforcement Purpose These regulations balance the need to protect the public safety and welfare, the need for a well maintained and attractive community, and the need for adequate identification, communication and advertising. The regulations for signs have the following specific objectives: A. To ensure that signs are designed, constructed, installed and maintained according to minimum standards to safeguard life, health, property and public welfare; B. To allow and promote positive conditions for sign communication while at the same time avoiding nuisances to nearby properties; C. To reflect and support the desired character and development patterns of the various zones, overlay zones, and plan districts and promote an attractive environment; Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WOO] Page 3.1-74 November 12,2003 D. To allow for adequate and effective signs in commercial and industrial zones while preventing signs from dominating the appearance of the area; E. To improve pedestrian and traffic safety; and F. To ensure that the constitutionally guaranteed right of free speech is protected. The regulations allow for a variety of sign types and sizes for a site. The provisions do not ensure or provide for every property or business owner's desired level of visibility for the signs. The sign standards are intended to allow signs to have adequate visibility from streets and rights-of-way that abut a site, but not necessarily to streets and rights-of-way farther away. 3.110.02 Applicability Section 3.110 states the standards for the number, size, placement, and physical characteristics of signs. This section applies to signs in all zoning districts within the City of Woodburn. Other regulations in the City Code may also apply to signs. No sign shall be placed or constructed on any property within the City of Woodburn that is not in compliance with Section 3.110 or other applicable provisions of the WDO. Proposals for signs where the code is silent, or where the rules of Section 3.110 do not provide a basis for concluding that the sign is allowed, are prohibited. 3.110.03 Definitions Words used in Section 3.110 shall have their normal dictionary meaning unless they are listed in Section 3.110.03 below or in Section 1.102. Words listed in Section 3.110.03 have the specific meaning stated or referenced, unless the context clearly indicates another meaning. Area of sign.: Sign area is measured by drawing no more than four straight lines around and enclosing each cabinet or sign display surface; these shall be summed and then totaled to determine total area. No more than three cabinets or sign display surfaces or any combination thereof may be used to calculate the total sign area on any freestanding sign or for each tenant's signage on a building wall. The measurable area shall not include embellishments such as pole covers, decorative roofing, foundation or supports provided there is no written advertising copy, symbols or logos on such embellishments. The area of a sign shall include any symbol, material, lighting, or color forming an integral part of the background of Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WOO] Page 3.1-75 November 12,2003 .<,........".........-.._-._"......._~--~ / the display or used to differentiate the sign from the backdrop or structure against which it is placed. Sign area includes only one side of a multi-sided sign, regardless ofthe presence of sign copy on both or all sides. Where a sign is of a three dimensional, round or irregular solid shape, the largest cross section shall be used in a flat projection for the purpose of determining sign area. The areas of all signs in existence at the time of enactment of this ordinance, whether conforming or nonconforming, shall be counted in determining pennitted sign area. Awning: A shelter projecting from, and supported by, the exterior wall of a building on a supporting framework. The awning may be constructed of rigid or non rigid materials. Bench: A seat located upon or adjacent to public property for the use of a combination of passersby or persons awaiting transportation. Boundaries of the Site: The area inside the legal lot lines of a site and does not include any property in the public right of way. Building Code: The most current edition of the Oregon State Structural Specialty Code. Building Frontage: Building elevations which front on a public street, alley or parking lot. Building frontage shall be measured as the length of a straight line extending horizontally between the exterior building walls of a single tenant building or the midpoint of the separation walls between individual tenant spaces in a complex. Canopy: A pennanent unenclosed roof structure for the purpose of providing shelter to patrons in automobiles. Complex: Any group oftwo or more buildings, or individual businesses within a single building provided at least two of the businesses have separate exterior entrances, on a site that is planned and developed to function as a unit and which has common on-site parking, circulation and access. A complex may consist of multiple lots or parcels which mayor may not be under common ownership. Director: Woodburn Director of Community Development or hislher designated representative. Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WDO] Page 3.1-76 November 12,2003 Display Surface: The area made available by the sign structure for the purpose of displaying a message. The display surface includes the area of the message and the background. Eave: The overhanging lower edge of a roof. Glare: Illumination of a sign that either directly, or indirectly from reflection, causes illumination on other properties or right of way in excess of a measurement of 0.5 foot candles of light measured at the property line. Height: Height is measured from the lowest point ofthe grade below the sign (excluding artificial berm) to the topmost point of the sign. MarQuee: A permanent roofed structure attached to and supported by a building, and projecting out from a building wall, or over public access, but not including a canopy or awning. Premises: The land and buildings contained within the boundaries of a single tenant site or complex. Property Owner or Lessee: An individual, corporation, partnership, or other legal entity shown on county records as the owner or contract purchaser ofthe property, or is named as the lessee in a lease agreement regarding the property. Sign: Materials placed or constructed, or light projected, that conveys a message or image or is used to inform or attract the attention of the public. Some examples of 'signs' are materials or lights meeting the definition of the preceding sentence and which are commonly referred to as signs, placards, A-boards, posters, billboards, murals, diagrams, banners, flags, or projected slides, images or holograms. The scope ofthe term 'sign' does not depend on the content of the message or image conveyed. Specific definitions for signs regulated in Section 3.110 include the following: A-Frame Sign: A double faced portable sign constructed with an A-shaped frame, composed of two sign boards attached at the top and separate at the bottom, not permanently attached to the ground, but secured to the ground or sufficiently weighted to prevent the sign from being blown from its location or easily moved. Awning Sign: A sign attached to or incorporated into an awning or an awning that is internally illuminated. Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WOO] Page 3.1-77 November 12, 2003 Balloon: An inflatable device less than 36 inches in diameter and anchored by some means to a structure or the ground. Banner Sign: A sign made of fabric or other non-rigid material with no enclosing framework. Bench Sign: A sign on an outdoor bench. Blimp: An inflatable device 36 inches or greater in diameter and anchored by some means to a structure or the ground. Changing Image Sign: Any sign, display, device, or portions thereof which is designed to have the capability of movement or give the semblance of movement of the whole or any part of the sign or that displays any artificial light which is not maintained stationary or constant in intensity and color at all times when such signs are in use or through some other automated method, results in movement, the appearance of movement or change of sign image or text. Such signs include but are not limited to electronic signs including LED, LCD, video or other automatic changeable display, rotating and revolving signs, readerboard signs, flashing signs, and wind driven signs including flags, pennants, and streamers. Directory: A sign located in a complex which lists tenants and corresponding addresses located within the complex. Externallv Illuminated Sign: A sign where the light source is separate from the sign and is directed so as to shine on the exterior of the sign. Flag: A sign made of fabric or other similar non-rigid material supported or anchored along only one edge or supported or anchored at only two comers. Flashing Sign: A sign incorporating intermittent electrical impulses to a source of illumination or revolving in a manner which creates the illusion of flashing or which changes colors or intensity of illumination at intervals of more than once in any 60 second period. Freestanding Sign: A sign wholly supported by a sign structure in the ground (e.g., monument signs, pole signs). Historical Marker: A plaque or sign erected and maintained on property, a building, or structure by an organization that is Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WDO) Page 3.1-78 November 12, 2003 recognized for routinely identifying sites, buildings, or structures of historical value. illternallv Illuminated Sign: A sign where the light source is contained within the sign and is directed so as to shine on the interior of the sign. Lawn Sign: A temporary freestanding sign made of lightweight materials such as cardboard or vinyl that is supported by a frame, pole, or other support structure placed directly in the ground without foundation or other anchor. Menu Board: A sign placed adjacent to a designated drive-thru lane of a drive-thru service establishment. Monument Sign: A low profile freestanding sign that is placed on a solid base that extends a minimum of one-foot above the ground and extends at least 75 percent ofthe length and width of the sign. The above-ground portion of the base is considered part of the total allowable height of a monument sign. Off-Premises Si~: A sign designed, intended or used to advertise, inform or attract the attention of the public as to: a. Goods, products or services which are not sold, manufactured or distributed on or from the premises on which the sign is located; b. Facilities not located on the premises on which the sign is located; or c. Activities not conducted on the premises on which the sign is located. Pennant: A lightweight plastic, fabric, or other material, whether or not containing a message of any kind, suspended from a rope, wire, or string, usually in series, designed to move in the wind. Pennanent Sign: Any sign other than a temporary sign. Pole Sign: A freestanding sign which exceeds eight feet in height. Portable Sign: A sign that is not affixed to a structure or the ground in a pennanent manner and that may be moved easily from place to place. Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WOO] Page 3.1-79 November 12,2003 Proiecting Sign: A sign, other than a wall sign, that projects from, and is supported by a roof or wall of a building or structure and is generally at right angles to the building. Readerboard Si~. Electronic Changeable Copy: A pennanent sign on which copy can be changed electronically by using patterns of lights that may be changed at intervals not exceeding one change in copy or display, or intensity or color oflighting in any 60 second period. Readerboard Sign. Mechanical Changeable Copy: A permanent sign on which copy can be changed manually in the field. Roof sign: Any sign erected upon or extending above or over the eave or roof of any building or structure. A sign erected upon a roofwhich does not vary more than 20 degrees from vertical shall be regulated as a wall sign. Subdivision Sign: A sign located on land in a recorded subdivision containing 10 lots or more. Suspended Si~: A sign suspended from the underside of a canopy, awning, arcade, marquee, or other roofed open structure and oriented to pedestrian traffic. Temporary Sign: A sign that is not permanently affixed or attached to a building, structure, or the ground. Temporary signs include, but are not limited to, A-frames, banners, flags, pennants, balloons, blimps, streamers, lawn signs, and portable signs. Unsafe sign: A sign constituting a hazard to safety or public welfare by reason of inadequate maintenance, dilapidation, obsolescence, disaster, damage, abandonment or inability to meet lateral and/or vertical loads as detennined by the City of W oodbum Building Official. Wall Sign: Any sign attached to or erected against the wall of a building or structure or attached to or erected against a roof which does not vary more than 20 degrees from vertical, with the exposed face of the sign in a plane parallel to the plane of the wall or roof and which does not project more than 18 inches from the wall or roof. Window Sign: A sign which is placed inside a building (such as placement on a windowsill) within six inches of a window or attached to the inside of a window. Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WOO] Page 3.1-80 November 12, 2003 Sign Maintenance: Normal care needed to keep a sign functional such as painting, cleaning, oiling, and changing light bulbs. Does not include an alteration to the sign. Sign Repair: Fixing or replacement of broken or worn parts. Replacement includes comparable materials only. Repairs may be made with the sign in position or with the sign removed. Sign Structure: The structure, supports, uprights, braces, framework and display surfaces of a sign. Single Tenant Site: A development that is not a complex. Street Frontage: The portion of a site that abuts a public street. Structural Alteration: Modification of a sign or sign structure that affects size, shape, height, or sign location; changes in structural materials; or replacement of electrical components with other than comparable materials. The replacement of wood parts with metal parts, the replacement of incandescent bulbs with light emitting diodes (LED), or the addition of electronic elements to an non-electrified sign are examples of structural alterations. Structural alteration does not include ordinary maintenance or repair, repainting an existing sign surface, including changes of message or image, exchanging painted and pasted or glued materials on painted wall signs, or exchanging display panels of a sign through release and closing of clips or other brackets. Vision Clearance Area: See Section 3.103.10. 3.11 0.04 Sign Permit Required A. A sign permit is required to erect, replace, construct, relocate, or alter a sign, unless such sign or action is exempt under Section 3.110.11. A sign permit shall be issued by the Director ifthe applicant files an application, filing fee, and plans which demonstrate full compliance with all provisions of Section 3.110 and other applicable city regulations. B. Sign maintenance, sign repair and changing of a sign display surface is allowed without obtaining a sign permit so long as structural alterations are not made and the sign display surface is not increased in size. C. A building pennit shall be obtained for any signs where the sign installation is regulated under the Building Code. Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WDO] Page 3.1-81 November 12.2003 -~,,",,---,,,,,,,,,,,,,--~-~-,_.'---"~---'---'~'" D. An electrical permit shall be obtained for all illuminated signs, subject to the provisions of the State Electrical Code. E. The Director may require application for sign permits for any existing signage on the premises if no existing permits previously had been approved. 3.110.05 Sign Permit Approval Process A. Initiation of an Application. An application for a sign permit may only be initiated by the property owner or lessee with the authorization of the property owner. B. Application Form. An application for a sign permit shall be made on forms as prescribed by the Director. Such an application shall be filed with the Planning Department. The application shall be accompanied by any fees as specified by City Council resolution. A sign permit application shall include the following information: 1. Sign location 2. Business name and business owner's name, address and phone number 3. Property owner's name, address, and phone number 4. Sign company name, address, and phone number 5. Contact person and phone number 6. Type of sign 7. Illustration of the proposed sign(s), existing signs and location including the following items: a. Site plan and/or building elevation plans drawn to scale and dimensioned showing: 1) 2) 3) Existing structures Driveways Streets and right of ways Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WDO] Page 3.1-82 November 12,2003 4) Existing signs 5) Proposed sign 6) Existing property lines b. Proposed sign drawn to scale and dimensioned, showing (as applicable): 1) Total height from the ground 2) Width 3) Depth 4) Area of sign in square feet 5) Size and style ofletters 6) Colors 7) Type of illumination 8) Materials 9) Drawing of the sign on the building elevation with dimensions of the building wall 8. Signatures of the property owner or lessee. If a lessee signs, property owner authorization shall be provided. C. Process. 1. Permits for new signs or modification of existing signs shall be processed as follows: Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WDO] a. Signs subject to a sign permit, except signs listed under Section 3.110.05.C.1.b below, shall be processed, using the procedures, standards, and application requirements, provided in Section 3.110. b. Pole signs and the placement of neon tubing on the exterior of a building shall be processed as a Type II land use application, using the application requirements of Section 5.102.02, except additional exhibits required under Section 5.102.02.B are limited to sign information required under Section 3.110.05.B, and using the standards and design guidelines of Section 3.110 as approval criteria. A Type II sign application may be processed concurrently with a separate Type II or III development application. Page 3.1-83 November 12, 2003 2. After a sign application is received and deemed complete by the Director, the Director shall provide the applicant with a written decision granting or denying the application for a sign permit. For non-compliant applications, the decision shall explain the reasons why the application was denied. A decision to deny shall be mailed to the address on the application by regular mail. 3. The Director's decision under Section 3.110.05.C.1.a is final for purposes of appeal on the date that it is mailed or otherwise provided to the applicant, whichever occurs first. The Director's decision is not appealable locally, and is the final decision of the City. 4. A decision under Section 3.110.05.C.1.b may be appealed following the appeal procedure for a Type II application. 3.110.06 Expiration of Approval Sign permit approval shall expire 180 days from the date of approval if a building permit is not issued, if required, or substantial construction of the sign has not commenced if a building permit is not required. Signs that require the issuance of a building permit shall be constructed within the time period established by the building permit. Expiration of a Type II sign application approval shall comply with Section 4.102.03. 3.110.07 Inspections A. Construction Inspection. General requirements for the inspection of signs during and following construction shall be as follows: 1. All construction work for which a permit is required shall be subject to an inspection by the Building Official in accordance with the Building Code and Section 3.110: a. A survey of the lot or parcel or proposed location for sign erection may be required by the Building Official to verify compliance of the structure with approved plans. b. Neither the Building Official nor the City of Woodburn shall be liable for expense or other obligations entailed in the removal or replacement of any material required to allow inspection. Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WOO] Page 3.1-84 November 12, 2003 2. It shall be the duty of the person doing the work authorized by a permit to notify the Building Official that such work is ready for inspection. The Building Official may require that every request for inspection be filed at least one working day before such inspection is desired. 3. The applicant shall request a final inspection when all work is completed. This inspection shall cover all items required by the Building Official under State law or City ordinances such as the locations, landscaping if required, and general compliance with the approved plans and requirements of Section 3.110. B. Director's illspection. The Director is authorized and directed to enforce all of the provisions of Section 3.110. 1. All signs for which permits are required shall be inspected by the Director. 2. Upon presentation of proper credentials, the Director may enter at reasonable times any building, structure, or premises in the City to perform any duty imposed upon the position by Section 3.110. 3.110.08 General Requirements A. Landscaping: Permanent freestanding signs shall be located in a planted landscaped area which is of a size equal to at least twice the sign area. The landscaped area shall be improved and maintained subject to the landscaping standards of Section 3.106. B. Location: No portion of a freestanding sign shall be located less than five feet from any boundary property line. 3.110.09 Design Guidelines for Type II Sign Applications The following design guidelines shall be applicable to Type II sign applications: A. Each sign should be designed to be consistent with the architectural style of the main building or buildings upon the site. Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WOO] Page 3.1-85 November 12,2003 B. Signs located upon a site with only one main building should be designed to incorporate at least one of the predominately visual elements of the building, such as type of construction materials or color. Each sign located upon a site with more than one building, such as a complex or other nonresidential development, should be designed to incorporate at least one predominate visual design element common to all such buildings or a majority of the buildings. C. Multiple signs located within a single development, or complex should have a common design established through the use of similar sign colors and materials, sign supports, method of illumination, sign cabinet or other configuration of sign area, shape of sign and components, and letter style and size. D. Sign colors and materials should be consistent with the color scheme and materials used in the development. The use of fluorescent colors or similar highly reflective materials should be discouraged. E. Supporting elements of pole signs should be covered consistent with subsection (D) above. The total width of pole covers should be at least 30 percent of the sign display width. F. Freestanding signs should appear to be a single unit and should not have separate or detached cabinets or readerboards that are not architecturally integrated into the primary sign display area. 3.110.10 Sign Maintenance. Signs and sign structures together with their supports, braces, guys, anchors and electrical components must be maintained in a proper state of repair. The Director may order the removal of any sign or sign structure that is not maintained in accordance with Section 3.110 or the Building Code. Signs and sign structures that are dangerous must be taken down and removed or made safe as the Director deems necessary. 3.110.11 Exemptions. The following are exempt from application, permit and fee requirements of Section 3.110, but are subject to other applicable portions of Section 3.110 and the City Code and may require building and electrical permits: A. Window signs provided such signs shall not obscure more than 50 percent of the total window area of a building face. Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WOO] Page 3.1-86 November 12,2003 B. Flags provided that not more than two flags shall be permitted on a lot or parcel in any zone. The area of an individual flag shall not exceed 40 square feet. Flag mounts or poles shall not exceed 40 feet in height. C. Temporary freestanding signs in non-residential zones provided that not more than two such signs shall be permitted on a single tenant site or complex. The total area of such signs on a single tenant site or complex shall not exceed 24 square feet and the height shall not exceed eight feet. Such signs shall not be placed in the public right of way or a vision clearance area. D. Wall signs on residential dwellings provided that not more than two such signs are permitted on a dwelling unit and the total area of all such signs shall not exceed three square feet. E. Additional Permanent Wall and Freestanding Signs. h1 addition to the wall and freestanding signs permitted under Sections 3.110.14 through 3.110.18, the following additional permanent wall and freestanding signs are permitted for all uses, except single and two family dwellings. The area of each such freestanding sign shall not exceed three square feet and a height of five feet. The area of each such wall sign shall not exceed three square feet. Not more than three such freestanding signs shall be pennitted on a lot or parcel and not more than two such wall signs shall be placed on a building with a single tenant or on an individual tenant space in a multiple tenant building. A freestanding sign shall not be located within a required front yard setback or setback abutting a street. F. Menu boards in conjunction with a drive-thru service establishment. Not more than two menu boards shall be permitted for a drive-thru service establishment. Menu boards shall be located adjacent to the driveway leading to a drive through window and shall not exceed seven feet in height and eight feet in width. G. Lawn signs and A-frame signs in residential zones provided that not more than two such signs are located on a lot or parcel and the total area for all such signs does not exceed eight square feet. Such signs shall not exceed six feet in height and shall not be placed in the public right of way or vision clearance areas. H. Signs which are inside a building, except window signs, or signs which do not have a primary purpose of being legible from a public street or another property. Such signs include scoreboard signs, signs on the inside of ball field fences, signs within a Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WOO] Page 3.1-87 November 12,2003 stadium, and signs located within the site of a special event such as a festival or carnival. I. Signs required by federal, state, or city law on private property if the sign is no more than 32 square feet in area. Such signs include building addresses, handicap parking signs, designation of fire lanes, public hearing notices, and building inspection notices. J. Signs owned and maintained by federal or state agencies or the City of Woodburn. K. Signs lawfully erected in the public right of way in accordance with applicable state and local laws and regulations, including public utility signs, traffic signs and traffic control devices. L. Decorations and lights relating directly to federal, state, or city recognized events or holidays, provided that such decorations and lights shall be placed not more than 45 days before the holiday or event to which they pertain and shall be removed within 15 days of the passing ofthe holiday or event to which they pertain. M. Signs on phone booths and product dispensers, such as beverage, recycling, newspaper, gasoline, and propane machines provided the total area of signage on an individual unit does not exceed three square feet. N. Directories for non-residential complexes with two or more buildings and multiple family residential complexes with four or more buildings. Directories shall be limited to a maximum of one per street access and shall be located a minimum of 50 feet from a street right of way. Each directory shall be limited to a maximum area of 24 square feet. Freestanding directories shall be limited to a maximum height of eight feet. O. Bench signs provided the total area of such signs on a bench does not exceed one square foot. 3.110.12 Prohibited signs The following signs and advertising devices are prohibited: A. Any sign constructed, erected, replaced, relocated, altered, repaired, or maintained in a manner not in compliance with Section 3.110. Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WOO] Page 3.1-88 November 12, 2003 B. A temporary sign not otherwise allowed under Section 3.110.13 or exempt under Section 3.110.11. C. Off premises sign. D. A sign located on the roof of any building or structure. E. A sign located in the vision clearance area established by Section 3.103.10. F. A sign located in the special setback area established by Section 3.103.05. G. A sign in public right of ways except awning, projecting, wall, and suspended signs projecting over a public right of way in conformity with Section 3.110, or unless specifically exempt under Section 3.110.11. H. Internally illuminated awning sign. 1. A changing image sign not otherwise allowed under Sections 3.110.13 through 3.110.18 or exempt under Section 3.110.11. J. A permanent sign located on an undeveloped lot or parcel, except subdivision signs. K. A beacon light, search light, strobe light or a sign containing such lights. L. Neon tubing on the exterior of a building unless approved as part of a Type II sign application. M. A sign that imitates or resembles official traffic lights, signs or signals or a sign that interferes with the effectiveness of any official traffic light, sign or signal. N. An illuminated sign that produces glare. Glare may not directly, or indirectly from reflection, cause illumination on other properties or right of way in excess of a measurement of 0.5 foot candles of light measured at the property line. o. A sign required to have been issued a sign permit, but for which no sign permit has been issued. P. A sign with visible incandescent bulbs or fluorescent tubes or a sign with a visible direct source of illumination, except neon, and Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WOO] Page 3.1-89 November 12,2003 not otherwise allowed under Section 3.110.13 or exempt under Section 3.11 0.11. Q. A sign which is unsafe or constitutes a public nuisance. R. A sign which incorporates flames or emits sounds or odors. S. A sign supported in whole or in part by cables or guy wires or that has cables or guy wires extending to or from it. 3.110.14 Temporary Sign Permit A. Certain temporary signs that are not otherwise exempt under Section 3.11 0.11 may be approved for a limited period oftime as a means of drawing attention to special events such as grand openings, carnivals, charitable events, seasonable openings, special promotions, etc. Approval of a Temporary Sign Pennit application shall be required prior to placement of such signs. B. Process. 1. Temporary Sign Permits shall be processed using the procedures, criteria, and application requirements of Section 3.110.14. 2. After a Temporary Sign Permit application is received and deemed complete by the Director, the Director shall provide the applicant with a written decision granting or denying the application for a Temporary Sign Permit. For non-compliant applications, the decision shall explain the reasons why the application was denied. A decision to deny shall be mailed to the address on the application by regular mail. 3. The Director's decision under Section 3.110.14 is final for purposes of appeal on the date that it is mailed or otherwise provided to the applicant, whichever occurs first. The Director's decision is not appealable locally, and is the final decision ofthe City. C. Application Requirements. An application for a Temporary Sign Permit shall be made on forms as prescribed by the Director. Such an application shall be filed with the Planning Department. The application shall be accompanied by any fees as specified by City Council resolution. The following infonnation is required for submittal of a Temporary Sign Permit application: Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WOO] Page 3.1-90 November 12,2003 A completed Temporary Sign Permit application form. The application fonn shall include the following: 1. Address oflocation where sign(s) is to be placed 2. Business name~ property owner or tenant name, mailing address, and phone number 3. Contact person and phone number 4. Type of signs and total area of signs in square feet 5. Signatures of the applicant and property' owner or tenant 6. Identification ofthe location where sign(s) is to be placed as a single tenant site, an individual tenant in a complex, a complex with less than 20 tenants, or a complex with 20 or more tenants D. Criteria. The Director shall approve an application for a Temporary Sign Permit only if it complies with the following approval criteria: 1. The following types of temporary signs are permitted with a Temporary Sign Pennit: A-frames, banners, flags, pennarits, balloons, strings of lights, streamers, blimps, and lawn signs. Portable signs are specifically not permitted. 2. A Temporary Sign Permit shall not be granted for single and two family residential uses or for an individual tenant in a multiple family residential complex. 3. An owner or tenant of an individual property, a tenant in a complex, and the owner of a complex may obtain temporary sign permits. In a complex, a tenant shall be limited to placing only banners and flags on the exterior walls and windows of its tenant space. 4. Temporary sign permits shall be limited to a specified number of 15-day periods per calendar year. Said periods may run consecutively~ however, unused days from one period shall not be added to another period. The number of temporary sign permits allowed shall be as follows: Final Focus Group Draft Page 3.1-91 Woodburn Development Ordinance [WDO] November 12,2003 a. A single tenant site or an individual tenant in a complex shall be pennitted a maximum of four temporary sign permits per calendar year. b. A complex consisting ofless than 20 tenant spaces shall be permitted a maximum of four temporary sign permits per calendar year, in addition to temporary sign permits allowed for individual tenants. c. A complex consisting of 20 or more tenant spaces shall be permitted a maximum of six temporary sign permits per calendar year, in addition to temporary sign permits allowed for individual tenants. 5. No temporary sign shall extend into or over public right of way or vision clearance areas, as governed by Section 3.103.10. 6. No temporary sign shall obstruct on-site pedestrian or vehicular access or circulation. 7. The total area of all temporary signs permitted by a temporary sign permit shall not exceed 100 square feet for an individual tenant in a complex, 200 square feet for a single tenant site or a complex with less than 20 tenant spaces, or 400 square feet for a complex consisting of 20 or more tenant spaces. 3.110.14 Permitted Signs-Residential and Public/Semi-Public Land Use Districts (RS, RIS, RM, and P/SP) Signs in the RS, RIS, RM and P/SP Districts shall be subject to the following provisions and all other applicable provisions of Section 3.110 and the WDO. A. Subdivision and Manufactured Home Park Signs. Signs located within a subdivision containing 10 lots or more or a manufactured home park containing 10 lease spaces or more shall be permitted subject to the following limitations: 1. Type. Monument signs and signs attached to a freestanding wall are pennitted. 2. Area of signs. Each sign shall not exceed 20 square feet in area. Final Focus Group Draft Page 3.1-92 Woodburn Development Ordinance [WOO] November 12,2003 3. Height of sign. a. Monument sign shall not exceed a height of five feet. b. Sign on freestanding wall shall not project above wall. 4. Number of signs. One sign is permitted on each side of each public street entry into the development. 5. Illumination. Only externally illuminated signs are permitted and such signs shall not cause glare. B. Multiple Family Dwelling Signs. Signs associated with multiple family developments containing four or more attached dwelling units shall be pennitted subject to the following limitations: 1. Type of sign. Monument and wall signs are permitted. 2. Area of sign. a. Wall sign shall not exceed 20 square feet in area. b. Monument sign shall not exceed 20 square feet in area. 3. Height of sign. Monument sign shall not exceed a height of five feet. 4. Number of signs. Not more than one monument sign and one wall sign shall be permitted 5. Illumination. Only externally illuminated signs are permitted and such signs shall not cause glare. C. Non-Residential Use Signs. Signs for non-residential uses shall be permitted subject to the following limitations: 1. Developed site containing less than three acres: a. Type of Sign. Monument, wall, and mechanical changeable copy readerboard signs are permitted. b. Area of sign. Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WOO] Page 3.1-93 November 12,2003 I). Wall sign shall not exceed 20 square feet in area. 2). Monument sign shall not exceed 20 square feet in area including any readerboard sign. 3). Readerboard sign shall not exceed 12 square feet in area. c. Height of Sign. Monument sign shall not exceed five feet in height. d. Number of Signs. One monument sign and one wall sign shall be permitted. Readerboard sign may only comprise part of a monument sign and shall be included in the area calculation for a monument SIgn. e. Illumination. Only externally illuminated signs are permitted and such signs shall not cause glare. 2. Developed site containing three or more acres: Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WOO] a. Type of Sign. Monument, wall and mechanical changeable copy readerboard signs are permitted. b. Area of sign. 1). Wall sign shall not exceed 32 square feet in area. 2). Monument sign not exceed 32 square feet in area including any readerboard sign. 3). Readerboard sign shall not exceed 18 square feet in area. c. Height of Sign. Monument sign shall not exceed six feet in height. d. Number of Signs. One monument sign is permitted per public street frontage provided the total number of monument signs shall not exceed two signs. One wall sign is permitted on each building wall that fronts on a public street provided the total number Page 3.1-94 November 12,2003 of wall signs shall not exceed two signs. Readerboard signs may only comprise part of a monument sign and shall be included in the area calculation for a monument sign. e. Illumination. Only externally illuminated signs are permitted and such signs shall not cause glare. 3.110.15 Permitted Signs-Commercial Office District (CO) Signs in the CO District shall be subject to the following provisions and all other applicable provisions of Section 3.110 and the WDO. A. Developed site or complex containing less than three acres. 1. Type of signs. Monument and wall sign(s) are allowed. 2. Area of signs. a. Wall sign. No more than four percent of any building wall shall be covered by wall signs. b. Monument sign. Monument sign shall not exceed 20 square feet in area. 3. Height of monument sign. Monument sign shall not exceed a height of five feet. 4. Number of signs. a. Wall sign. Maximum of one sign per tenant. One additional sign is permitted to identify each building or complex. b. Monument sign. Maximum of one sign per street frontage not to exceed a total of two signs. 5. Illumination. Externally or internally illuminated signs are permitted and such signs shall not cause glare. B. Developed site or complex containing three acres or more: 1. Type of signs. Monument and wall sign(s) are allowed. 2. Area of signs. Final Focus Group Draft Page 3.1-95 Woodburn Development Ordinance [WOO] November 12, 2003 a. Wall sign. No more than four percent of any building wall shall be covered by wall signs. b. Monument sign. Monument sign shall not exceed 32 square feet in area. 3. Height of monument sign. Monument sign shall not exceed a height of six feet. 4. Number of signs. a. Wall sign. Maximum of one sign per tenant. One additional sign is permitted to identify each building or complex. b. Monument sign. Maximum of one sign per street frontage not to exceed a total of two signs. 5. Illumination. Externally or internally illuminated signs are permitted and such signs shall not cause glare. 3.110.16 Permitted Signs-Commercial General District (CG) Signs in the CG District shall be subject to the following provisions and all other applicable provisions of Section 3.110 and the WDO. A. Pole Signs. 1. Single Tenant Site. a. A pole sign is permitted on a street frontage that exceeds 100 lineal feet not to exceed one pole sign on a single tenant site. A pole sign shall be permitted instead of a monument sign. b. A pole sign on a street with less than 300 lineal feet of frontage shall not exceed 12 feet in height and 32 square feet in area. c. A pole sign on a street with 300 lineal feet or more but less than 600 lineal feet of frontage shall not exceed 15 feet in height and 50 square feet in area. d. A pole sign on a street with 600 lineal feet or more of frontage shall not exceed 20 feet in height and 100 square feet in area. Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WOO] Page 3.1-96 November 12.2003 2. Complex. a. A pole sign is permitted on a street frontage that exceeds 100 lineal feet not to exceed one pole sign for a complex. b. A pole sign on a street with less than 300 lineal feet of frontage shall not exceed 15 feet in height and 50 square feet in area. c. A pole sign on a street with 300 lineal feet or more but less than 600 lineal feet of frontage shall not exceed 18 feet in height and 75 square feet in area. d. A pole sign on a street with 600 lineal feet or more of frontage shall not exceed 20 feet in height and 100 square feet in area. B. Monument Signs. 1. One primary monument sign is permitted on a single tenant site or complex. If a pole sign is placed on a single tenant site or complex, a primary monument sign is not permitted. 2. In a complex, secondary monument signs are permitted at a ratio of one monument sign for each 300 lineal feet of street frontage on the same street not to exceed two secondary monument signs on a single street frontage and not to exceed a total of four secondary monument signs on a complex. 3. Monument signs on a street frontage with less than 300 lineal feet of frontage shall not exceed six feet in height and 32 square feet in area. 4. Monument signs on a street frontage with 300 lineal feet or more of frontage shall not exceed eight feet in height and 50 square feet in area. C. Wall Signs. 1. Wall signs are permitted on a primary building frontage. Such signs shall not cover more than six percent of the building wall on a single tenant building or each tenant's leased wall on a multiple tenant building and shall not Final Focus Group Draft Page 3.1-97 Woodburn Development Ordinance [WDO] November 12,2003 exceed a maximum area of200 square feet. However, a minimum sign area of20 square feet shall be permitted for each single tenant building or tenant in a multiple tenant building. Only one building wall shall be designated as the primary building frontage. 2. Wall signs are permitted on secondary building frontages. Such signs shall not cover more than three percent of the building wall on a single tenant building or each tenant's leased wall on a multiple tenant building and shall not exceed a maximum area of 100 square feet. However, a minimum sign area of 16 square feet is allowed for each single tenant building or tenant in a multiple tenant building. 3. Wall signs are permitted on canopies. Such signs shall be limited to no more than two sides of the canopy and shall not cover more than 15 percent of a canopy face or 50 square feet, whichever is less. D. Readerboards. Mechanical and electronic changeable copy readerboards are permitted. Readerboards are permitted on pole and monument signs only. Readerboards shall be integrated into the overall sign to appear as a single unit and shall not comprise more than 50 percent of the total sign display surface. E. Awning and Marquee Signs. Signs on awnings and marquees are permitted as wall signs, except that internally illuminated awning signs are prohibited. Signs on awnings and marquees shall not extend above or below the awning or marquee. F. Projecting Signs. One projecting sign is permitted on a single tenant site or complex. However, no projecting sign shall be permitted on a single tenant site or complex where there is a pole or monument sign. Projecting signs shall not exceed an area of 24 square feet and shall be located a minimum of eight feet above the ground. Such signs shall not project more than six feet from a building wall. G. Suspended Signs. Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WOO] Page 3.1-98 November 12,2003 One suspended sign is permitted for each entrance to a building or tenant space. Such sign shall not exceed an area of six square feet and shall be located a minimum of eight feet above the ground. Such sign shall not project past the outer edge of the roof structure. H. General Standards. 1. Pole and monument signs within the same complex shall be located a minimum of 100 feet apart. 2. Pole signs shall be subject to approval of a Type II application pursuant to Section 3.110.05.C.1.b. 3. Illumination: Externally or internally illuminated signs are permitted and such signs shall not cause glare. 3.110.17 Permitted Signs--Downtown Development and Conservation District (DOC) Signs in the DDC District shall be subject to the following provisions and all other applicable provisions of Section 3.110 and the WDO. A. Monument Signs. 1. A monument sign is permitted on a single tenant site or complex. 2. A monument sign shall not exceed five feet in height and 20 square feet in area. B. Wall Signs. 1. Wall signs are permitted on a primary building frontage. Such signs shall not cover more than four percent of the building wall on a single tenant building or each tenant's leased wall on a multiple tenant building and shall not exceed a maximum area of 50 square feet. However, a minimum sign area of 16 square feet shall be permitted for each single tenant building or tenant in a multiple tenant building. Only one building wall shall be designated as the primary building frontage. 2. Wall signs are permitted on secondary building frontages. Such signs shall not cover more than two percent of the building wall on a single tenant building or each tenant's leased wall on a multiple tenant building and shall not Final Focus Group Draft Page 3.1-99 Woodburn Development Ordinance [WDO] November 12,2003 exceed a maximum area of 30 square feet. However, a minimum sign area of 12 square feet is allowed for each single tenant building or tenant in a multiple tenant building. C. Readerboards. Mechanical and electronic changeable copy readerboards are permitted. Readerboards are permitted on monument signs only. Readerboards shall be integrated into the overall sign to appear as a single unit and shall not comprise more than 50 percent ofthe total sign display surface. D. Awning and Marquee Signs. Signs on awnings and marquees are permitted as wall signs, except that internally illuminated awning signs are prohibited. Signs on awnings and marquees shall not extend above or below the awning or marquee. E. Projecting Signs. One projecting sign is permitted on a single tenant site or complex for each street or alley frontage. However, no projecting sign shall be permitted on a single tenant site or complex where there is a monument sign on the same street frontage. Projecting signs shall not exceed an area of 12 square feet and shall be located a minimum of eight feet above the ground. Such signs shall not proj ect more than four feet from a building wall. F. Suspended Signs. One suspended sign is permitted for each entrance to a building or tenant space. Such sign shall not exceed an area of six square feet and shall be located a minimum of eight feet above the ground. Such sign shall not project past the outer edge of the roof structure. G. General Standards. 1. Projecting signs shall be subject to approval of a Type II application pursuant to Section 3.110.0S.C.1.b. 2. Illumination: Externally or internally illuminated signs are permitted and such signs shall not cause glare. 3.110.18 Permitted Signs-Industrial Districts (IP and IL) Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WDO] Page 3.1-100 November 12, 2003 Signs in the IP and IL Districts shall be subject to the following provisions and all other applicable provisions of Section 3.110 and the WDO. A. Monument Signs. 1. One monument sign is permitted on a single tenant site or complex. 2. In a complex, one additional monument sign is permitted if the complex has at least two street frontages that each exceed 300 lineal feet. 3. Monument signs on a street frontage with less than 300 lineal feet of frontage shall not exceed six feet in height and 32 square feet in area. 4. Monument signs on a street frontage with 300 lineal feet or more of frontage shall not exceed eight feet in height and 50 square feet in area. B. Wall Signs. 1. Wall signs are permitted on a primary building frontage. Such signs shall not cover more than four percent of the building wall on a single tenant building or each tenant's leased wall on a multiple tenant building and shall not exceed a maximum area of 150 square feet. However, a minimum sign area of 16 square feet shall be permitted for each single tenant building or tenant in a multiple tenant building. Only one building wall shall be designated as the primary building frontage. 2. Wall signs are permitted on secondary building frontages. Such signs shall not cover more than two percent of the building wall on a single tenant building or each tenant's leased wall on a multiple tenant building and shall not exceed a maximum area of75 square feet. However, a minimum sign area of 12 square feet is allowed for each single tenant building or tenant in a multiple tenant building. C. Readerboards. Mechanical and electronic changeable copy readerboards are permitted. Readerboards are permitted on monument signs only. Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WOO] Page 3.1-101 November 12,2003 Readerboards shall be integrated into the overall sign to appear as a single unit and shall not comprise more than 50 percent of the total sign display surface. D. Awning and Marquee Signs. Signs on awnings and marquees are permitted as wall signs, except that internally illuminated awning signs are prohibited. Signs on awnings and marquees shall not extend above or below the awning or marquee. E. Projecting Signs. One projecting sign is permitted on a single tenant site or complex. However, no projecting sign shall be permitted on a single tenant site or complex where there is a monument sign. Projecting signs shall not exceed an area of 20 square feet and shall be located a minimum of eight feet above the ground. Such signs shall not project more than four feet from a building wall. F. Suspended Signs. One suspended sign is permitted for each entrance to a building or tenant space. Such sign shall not exceed an area of six square feet and shall be located a minimum of eight feet above the ground. Such sign shall not proj ect past the outer edge of the roof structure. G. General Standards. 1. Monument signs within the same complex shall be located a minimum of 100 feet apart. 2. Illumination. Externally or internally illuminated signs are permitted and such signs shall not cause glare. 3.110.19 Variances A variance may be granted from any regulation of Section 3.110 in accordance with the provisions of Section 5.103.11. 3.110.20 Nonconforming Signs A. Nonconforming signs are those signs lawfully established prior to the adoption of Section 3.110 or subsequent amendment thereto or signs lawfully established on property annexed to the City, which do not conform to the requirements of Section 3.110. Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WOO] Page 3.1-102 November 12,2003 Nonconforming permanent signs may remain provided they comply with the provisions of Section 3.110.20. However, nonconforming temporary signs shall comply with the provisions of Section 3.110. B. Nonconforming permanent signs shall comply with the provisions of Section 3.110 when one or more of the following occurs: 1. A nonconforming sign is expanded, relocated, replaced or structurally altered. 2. The use of the premises upon which the sign is located terminates for a continuous period of 180 days or more. In a complex, if an individual tenant space is vacant for a continuous period of 180 days or more, only signs attached to such tenant space shall be required to comply with the provisions of Section 3.110. 3. The use of the premises upon which the sign is located changes. In a complex, ifthe use of an individual tenant space changes, only signs attached to such tenant space shall be required to comply with the provisions of Section 3.110. 4. A Type II Design Review or Type III Conditional Use or Design Review land use application is approved for the premises upon which the sign is located. In a complex, if an individual tenant space is the subject of a Type II Design Review or Type III Conditional Use or Design Review land use application, only signs attached to such tenant space shall be required to comply with the provisions of Section 3.110. 5. A nonconforming sign is damaged, destroyed, or deteriorated by any means where the cost of repairs exceeds 50 percent of its current replacement cost as determined by the Building Official. 6. A sign permit for a conforming sign(s) is issued for the premises upon which a nonconforming sign is located. In such case, all nonconforming signs on the same premises, except signs attached to individual tenant spaces in a complex, shall comply with Section 3.110 prior to installation ofthe new sign(s). In a complex, if a sign permit for a conforming sign(s) is issued for an individual tenant space upon which a nonconforming sign is attached, Final Focus Group Draft Page 3.1-103 Woodburn Development Ordinance [WDO] November 12, 2003 only signs attached to such tenant space shall be required to comply with the provisions of Section 3.110. C. A nonconforming sign or sign structure may be removed for no more than 60 days to perform sign maintenance or sign repair. A nonconforming sign or sign structure removed for more than 60 days shall comply with the provisions of Section 3.110. 3.110.21 Enforcement. See Section 4.102.11. Final Focus Group Draft Woodburn Development Ordinance [WOO] Page 3.1-104 November 12, 2003