Loading...
Agenda - 09/28/1992 1. CAll TO ORDER AND FLAG SALUTE 2. ROLL CALL 3. MINUTES A. B. City Council minutes of September 14, 1992. Planning Commission minutes of September 10, 1992. 3A 3B 4. APPOINTMENTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS ANNOUNCEMENTS PROCLAMATIONS A. Proclamation: Disability Employment Awareness Month - October. 4A 5. COMMITTEE REPORTS A. Chamber of Commerce B. Woodburn Comeback Campaign 6. COMMUNICATIONS A. Written - 7. BUSINESS FROM THE PUBLIC (This allows public to introduce items for Council consideration not already scheduled on the agenda.) 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Annexation and zone map amendment: 48 acres located on the south side of Parr Rd. between Brandywine Subdivision and Centennial Park. 8A B. Annexation and comprehensive plan map change: 173:!: acres located adjacent to Interstate 5 and south of Hwy 214, bordered by Evergreen Road and W. Hayes Street. (Application, staff report, and traffic impact study were provided earlier). 8B Page 1 - Woodburn City Council Agenda - September 28, 1992. 1 {9. 1 TABLED BUSINESS 10. GENERAL BUSINESS A. Council Bill No. 1421 - Final draft of the sign ordinance. B. Council Bill No. 1422 - Resolution setting a public hearing on the franchise renewal of Northland Cable Television, Inc. C. Council Bill No. 1423 - Resolution calling for a public hearing on the annexation of property located west of 1-5 and north of Hwy. 214. D. Temporary extension of liquor license and closure: private party at laLinda's on Thursday, October 1, 1992. E. Bid award for backhoe: Street Department. 11. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS 12. PUBLIC COMMENT 13. NEW BUSINESS 14. SITE PLAN ACTIONS A. Carl's Jr. Restaurant. 15. STAFF REPORTS A. Renewal of DUll traffic safety grant. B. Water Curtailment Plan approval. C. Transportation Task Force report. 16. MAYOR AND COUNCil REPORTS 17. ADJOURNMENT Page 2 - Woodburn City 'Council Agenda, September 28, 1992. lr 10A 10B 10C 100 10E 14A 15A 15B 15C 3A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES, September 14, 1992 TAPE READING 0001 DATE. COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CITY OF WOODBURN, COUNTY OF MARION, STATE OF OREGON, SEPTEMBER 14, 1992. 0003 CONVENED. The CounciLmet in regular session at 7:00 p.m. with Mayor Kyser presiding. 0012 ROLL CALL. Mayor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Councilor Kyser Figley Galvin Hagenauer Jennings Sifuentez Steen Present Present Present Present Absent Present Absent Staff Present: City Administrator Childs, City Attorney Shields, Public Works Director Tiwari, Community Development Director Goeckritz, Police Chief Wright, Park Director Holly, Finance Director Gritta, Library Director Sprauer, Public Works Manager Rohman, City Recorder Tennant 0019 MINUTES. FIGLEY/GALVIN... regular and executive session Council minutes of August 24, 1992 and the special Council meeting minutes of August 27, 1992 be approved; and the Library Board minutes of August 26, 1992 and Planning Commission minutes of August 27, 1992 be accepted. The motion passed unanimously. 0036 PROCLAMATION - ALCOHOL AND DRUG TREATMENT WORKS MONTH. Mayor Kyser proclaimed the month of September 1992 as Alcohol and Drug Treatment Works month in recognition of the effectiveness of alcohol and drug treatment programs. 0050 CHAMBER OF COMMERCE REPORT. Greg lundeen, representing the Chamber Board, stated that the Western Days Auction was a success and the Chamber cleared in excess of $5,000 from the event. On September 16th, the luncheon forum will be held at the Elks lodge with guest speaker Patrick Vance to discuss the American with Disabilities Act. Page 1 - Council Meeting Minutes, September 14, 1992 - 1 3A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 14, 1992 TAPE READING 0073 COMEBACK CAMPAIGN REPORT. On behalf of the Committee, Councilor Figley expressed her appreciation to the individuals who helped pick-up litter in the downtown area on August 27th. 0098 PUBLIC HEARING - TRAFFIC FLOW AND PARKING ACTIONS - AREA EAST OF 1-5 AND SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 214. Mayor Kyser declared the public hearing open at 7:04 p.m.. Public Works Director Tiwari reviewed the staff report on traffic flow in the area of Evergreen Road, Lawson Avenue, Country Club Road, Oregon Way, Stacy Allison Way, and Highway 214. The staff recommended that "no parking" signs be installed on the following streets: Stacy Allison Way, Lawson Ave., near the intersection of Stacy Allsion & Evergreen, and close to the Highway 214 intersection on Evergreen Road. Director Tiwari stated that he had been working with McDonald's owner, Mindy Smith, to place directional signs on her property to route motorists back to 1-5 using the Evergreen Road access from the back portion of her property. He also recommended that the existing turn lanes on Lawson Avenue onto Hwy. 214 be modified to only one turn lane which would eventually be a right turn only once the Evergreen Road intersection is constructed as a four-way intersection. 0370 Mindy Smith, owner of McDonalds, stated that she has proposed the utilization of the back portion of her property as an exit onto Evergreen Road and directional signs would be installed to route her customers onto Evergreen Road for easy return to the freeway. Since there was no further testimony on the traffic flow issue, the hearing was declared closed at 7: 18 p.m.. Councilor Figley questioned if additional signage would be installed to direct truck traffic away from the residential areas. Director Tiwari stated that he had spoken with Wal-Mart officials regarding signs off of Highway 214 at Lawson and/or Evergreen Road. He stated that most of the signs and striping will be accomplished within the next month, however, he requested some flexibility in the implementation of the right turn only proposal until the Evergreen Road four-way intersection is constructed. FIGLEy/SIFUENTEZ.... recommendation of the staff regarding traffic flow and traffic patterns be accepted and the staff be authorized to act on them over the next five months. The motion passed unanimously. 0594 PUBLIC HEARING - SIGN ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS. Mayor Kyser declared the public hearing open at 7:22 p.m.. Community Development Director Goeckritz stated that the Planning Commission had recently reviewed the sign ordinance and has recommended Page 2 - Council Meeting Minutes, September 14, 1992 lr 3A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 14, 1992 TAPE READING the repeal of the original ordinance and its amendments to be replaced by a new sign ordinance. No one in the audience spoke either for or against the proposed sign ordinance. Brief discussion was held regarding the posting of promotional flyers/garage sale signs on utility poles. Director Goeckritz stated that the poles are private property and its the utility company's responsibility to notify individuals that the poles are not to be used for advertising. If the City receives a complaint, Code enforcement notifies the utility company to request removal of the signs. Mayor Kyser suggested that the Comeback Campaign Committee make a project of removing some of posters. The public hearing was declared closed at 7:26 p.m.. HAGENAUER/SIFUENTEZ.... approve the draft ordinance as recommended by the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. 0787 COUNCIL BILL 1417 - ORDINANCE EXTENDING THE NORTHLAND CABLE TV FRANCHISE FOR A 30 DAY PERIOD. Council Bill 1417 was introduced by Hagenauer. The two readings of the bill were read by title only since there were no objections from the Council. Administrator Childs stated that a draft ordinance has been distributed subject to final review by the parties involved. It is anticipated that the draft ordinance will be before the Council for their review at the next regular meeting and a public hearing will be held on October 12th. On roll call vote for final passage, Council Bill 141 7 passed unanimously. Mayor Kyser declared the bill duly passed with the emergency clause. 0864 COUNCIL BILL 1418 - RESOLUTION CALLING FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON ANNEXATION OF PROPERTY - 174 ACRES EAST OF 1-5 AND SOUTH OF WEST HAYES STREET. Councilor Hagenauer introduced Council Bill 1418. The bill was read by title only since there were no objections from the Council. On roll call vote, the bill passed unanimously. Mayor Kyser declared Council Bill 1418 duly passed. The public hearing will be held on September 28, 1992. 0896 COUNCIL BILL 1419 - RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON ANNEXATION OF PROPERTY - 43 ACRES SOUTH OF PARR ROAD. Council Bill 1419 was introduced by Hagenauer. Recorder Tennant read the bill by title only since there were no objections from the Council. On roll call vote for final passage, Council Bill 1419 passed unanimously. Mayor Kyser declared the bill duly passed. The public hearing on the proposed annexation will be held on September 28, 1992. Page 3 - Council Meeting Minutes, September 14, 1992 lr 3A COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 14, 1992 TAPE READING 0925 COUNCIL BILL 1420 - RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INTERDEPARTMENTAL BORROWING OF FUNDS. Councilor Hagenauer introduced Council Bill 1420. The bill was read by title only since there were no objections from the Council. On roll call vote for final passage, the bill passed unanimously. Mayor Kyser declared Council Bill 1420 duly passed. 0960 CLAIMS FOR THE MONTH OF AUGUST 1992. SIFUENTEZ/GALVIN.... approve voucher checks #15664 - 15945 for the month of August 1992. The motion passed unanimously. 0989 SITE PLAN ACTIONS. At their August 27, 1992 meeting, the Planning Commission approved the following site plans with conditions for approval: 1) Klaw Addition (4 lot commercial subdivision abutting Stacy Allison Way and Lawson Avenue); and 2) Miller Farm Subdivision Planned Unit Subdivision (formerly known as Hazelnut PUDlo 1036 Councilor Sifuentez questioned if the City could encourage new businesses to hire local residents for employment positions whenever possible. Director Goeckritz stated that the City can suggest such a practice, however, it cannot be made as a condition of site approval. He stated that letters can be sent to the businesses suggesting recruitment of local applications. Councilor Sifuentez also stated that the Community Fair sponsored by Salud on September 13th was well-received by the public. She also thanked the Police Department staff for their attendance at the program. 1128 Councilor Figley also expressed her appreciation to the staff for providing information on truck traffic regulations within the City. 11 60 ADJOURNMENT. The meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m.. APPROVED FRED W. KYSER, MAYOR ATTEST Mary Tennant, Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 4 - Council Meeting Minutes, September 14, 1992 lr 38 MINUTES WOODBURN PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 10, 1992 1) ROLL CALL: Chairman Vice Chairman Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Mr. Johnson Mr. Bauer Mrs. Warzynski Mrs. Henkes Mrs. Bjelland Mr. Pugh Mrs. Grijalva Mr. Stoval Present Present Present Present Absent A"esert (2) 1\111) Present Present Staff Present: Steve Goeckritz, Community Development Director Barbara Sochacka, City Planner 2) MINUTES: The Planning Commission minutes of August 27, 1992 were accepted as written. 3) BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE: None 4) PUBLIC HEARING: Chappell Development/Factory Outlet Shopping Center, Annexation 92-01, Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment 92-01, Zone Map Amendment 92-02 and Site Plan Review Staff read the statement necessary to open the public hearing. Staff stated that the applicant request was to build a regional factory outlet center. It would be located on a 28 acre site on the northwest side of Interstate 5. It will have approximately 50 tenants. The shop size will vary from 2000 sq. ft to 10,000 sq. ft. There will also be a food court. The design theme will relate to the historical, agricultural, industrial architecture of the Mid-Willamette Valley. Such as saw mills, factories, grain elevators, etc. The applicant will need three different pcm910.92 sglbw 1 - lr 38 approvals from the Commission, Annexation, Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment. and a Zone Map Amendment. He stated that the applicant is willing to meet all the on-site conditions of approval necessary and all the off-site conditions necessary to gain approval for this proposal. Staff stated that the newspaper made incorrect statements as to where traffic would be directed. Staff has never recommended that traffic be directed down Willow Ave. In the long term traffic solution the signal at Arney Rd. will be moved to Woodland Ave. and the light will be needed due to the buildout of the industrial area. so it will be necessary to connect Arney Rd. to Woodland Avenue and its 214 intersection. Staff stated that there would be lighting on the east side of the overpass at the on/off ramps of the interstate. There was some discussion between Commissioner Grijalva and staff concerning the housing need in Woodburn. Staff stated that in the staff report that had been touched on. He stated that a better location for housing than by the freeway could be found. These buildings would make a good noise barrier from the interstate. Steve Russell. 3500 First Interstate Tower, Portland, 97201. attorney for the applicant. He stated that at no time have they suggested that traffic be sent into the residential area of Willow or Woodland. Bob Chappell. 1316 Mitchell Lane, Portland, applicant, stated that Chappell owned their own buildings, they lease and manage the complexes. He stated that references on Chappell would be furnished is requested. He stated that Woodburn would be a strategic location for the outlet mall. He stated that the average shopper stays 4 hours at one of these malls. So that is why the food service facilities. He stated that a third generation mall actually has a factory facility on site. He stated that Bugle Boy is interested in the site, Book Warehouse, artist. Janesco. etc. He introduced some of the staff that would be there to answer questions. Craig Carlson, architect. stated that staff had read the written description of the outlet center. He stated that they felt that the theme would fit into area. He discussed the design of the buildings. He stated that the site was pedestrian friendly with the covered walkways, complete walkways through the area. This was to encourage people to park and walk around the site. Chairman Johnson asked if trucks would be delivering in the back only. Mr. Carlson stated that most deliveries would be in the back area and employee parking would also be provided in the back. pcm910.92 sg/bw 2 - 38 Hal Keever, Planner/Engineer, W&H Pacific, 8405 SW Nimbus, Beaverton, 97005, stated that some the transportation issues needed to be covered. He stated that a traffic analysis was done with the City and ODOT. He discussed the realignment of Arney Road being safer. He talked about the turn lanes at Arney Rd. at Hwy 214, the water line extension, sanitary sewer extension, pedestrian and bike access into the facility. He stated that special parking for the RV travelers from 1-5 will be provided. He discussed the temporary signal at Arney and Hwy 214, the signal at the east on/off ramps of 1-5. Chairman Johnson asked what the speed limit would be changed to on Arney Rd. when the mall was complete. Mr. Keever stated that the maximum would be 35 mph. Commissioner Warzynski asked what the footage is from the signal at the west side of the overpass to Arney Rd. Mr. Keever answered that it was 700 feet. Chairman Johnson asked if the bike paths would be on both sides, or along one side of the motel. Mr. Keever stated that it is very restricted on the one corner due to the BPA towers on the one corner. It may have to be one way bike paths on each side of the street. They had hoped to combine the bike paths into a 10 foot bike path along their facility. Commissioner Grijalva asked what the overall traffic would be generated by the businesses. Mr. Keever stated that it had been stated that 6,000 to 7,000 daily trips, but Mr. Stein would be more detailed about that. Howard Stein, Kiddleman and Associates, 610 SW Alder, Suite 700, Portland, 97205, stated that to determine the traffic generation they counted the Troutdale Mall traffic. They took the count on a weekday and a Saturday. What they found that the higher trip generation day was Saturday during peek hours. It was 1200 vehicles went through the peek hours on that particular Saturday. This mall will be just a slightly larger mall than the one in Troutdale. Commissioner Pugh asked what type of planning had been done for the stacking up of vehicles on Arney Rd. wishing to turn left to go back to the Interstate. pcm910.92 sg/bw 3 ... 38 Mr. Stein stated that the three signals, one at Arney Rd., one on the west side of the overpass and the signal on the east side of the overpass would all be qued together as to let traffic flow at a reasonable rate. Commissioner Bauer made a comment about the queing of the signal in the chart that truck and larger vehicles would be not make this queing correct. Mr. Stein answered that the queing calculations are based upon p.m. peek hours. He doubted very much if any deliveries or service vehicles going into the facility during this time. It has not been a major concern during that period. Most deliveries are made before the stores open at 10:00 am. Chairman Johnson asked if in their traffic study did they take into the consideration the Wal-Mart traffic. Mr. Stein stated yes, a year ago he did the Wal-Mart traffic study. Steve Russell, attorney, stated that no major development could occur these days without a traffic study. He stated that the traffic impact study shows that once this development is on line including the Wal-Mart project, all or all but one of the effected intersections will work as well or better as it does now. The reason is that the applicant is willing to make expensive off site improvements to help facilitate better traffic flow. He stated that they had taken into consideration the Wal-Mart project and the 1993 traffic impact on the 1-5 interchange area. Chairman Johnson asked if the entire project would be built all at once or phased in. Mr. Russell answered that the original plan had been to phase in the project, but the response from tenants was so good that there is no reason to phase it. Commissioner Grijalva asked if they had a time line from the start to completion of the project. Mr. Russell answered 200 days approximately. What they hoped to do is to have it finished by Memorial Day next year and help celebrate the 150 year anniversary of the Oregon Trail with the Oregon Tourist Bureau at the site. Commissioner Bauer asked what the capital investment would be. Mr. Chappell answered it is estimated to be 15 million dollars. pcm910.92 sg/bw 4 lr 38 Chairman Johnson for anyone in the audience who wished to speak for the project. Maryane Imblum, property owner at the corner of Myrtle and Woodland Street. She stated that she was not against the project but she was concerned about the traffic increase that would be created in the area. She was also concerned about who would be responsible for the security at the mall, would it be private security or the Woodburn Police Department and if any of the restaurants would include a tavern, etc. How late would the restaurants be open? Would the City bus be included as part of transportation to that problem? She wanted to know how the loitering problem would be handled. She stated that when HWI and K-Mart went in, they were told that it would provide jobs for local residents, a very small percentage of the employees are residents of Woodburn. She was concerned about the disabled access to the mall, elderly and wheelchair maneuverability on the sidewalks, floors, etc. She also asked about the sidewalk cover. Mark Dufall, 16505 Arney Rd, stated that basically they wanted to be good neighbors and hoped the outlet mall wanted to be a good neighbor too. He was concerned about the zoning. He was concerned about Arney Road becoming Arney Alley. He was concerned about what would be behind the buildings which is would be what he would be viewing from his property. He stated that he made a visit to the Troutdale facility and what he saw behind the buildings was what he was concerned about the loading docks, and the trash bins. He was willing to give the project a chance and looking forward to a first class facility. Scott Erickson, Redi-Mix concrete facility, located next to the proposed site to develop. He urged support of this project (1) Arney Road needs the improvements, (2) Woodburn has a limited amount of freeway visibility, to put housing next to the freeway would be short sited. Housing does not depend on freeway siting. Commercial development does. These buildings would put a noise buffer between the Willowbrook Estates area and the freeway noise. Leggs Frawley, 1243 Woodland, stated that the proposal he had heard about this evening was a much better proposal than the one he had heard through the rumor mill and from the newspaper. He was concerned about the traffic, security and tourist. Brenda London, 3393 McNaught St., stated that she was in favor of the proposal. She stated that if you look at the concerns for sewage and water, if houses were built in this area, much more water would be used than in a commercial development. She was concerned about the on/Off ramps to the freeway. She has seen three trucks dump their loads on the southbound ramp due to the tight turn. She asked if the width of the ramp would be changed or find a way to make pcm910.92 sg/bw 5 - lI' 38 it easier for trucks to make the turn so they do not lose their loads and tie up traffic in that area. Jim Owens, 1350 Willow, stated that he had questions about a street on the map that seemed to go through Willowbrook. He did not want to have delivery and garbage trucks going through Willowbrook to the rear of the mall. Harold Krugan, 3144 Jory Street, stated he was for this proposal with reservations. He stated that he moved here from Troutdale due to the traffic the mall there created. He talked about keeping the traffic in the commercial area, not in the residential area. He stated there had already been enough debate on the streets around Wal-Mart. He stated that he was for this development but it needed to be put in a different area. He stated that homes were needed. Bill Powers, 3322 Jory Street, stated he was for the proposal, but he was concerned about Hwy 214 being the only freeway access 15 to 20 years from now or only 99E being the only two ways into Woodburn. He felt that a new freeway access was needed. Barry Sullivan, Manager and owner of Texaco, 100 Arney Rd., stated he was really happy to see this project but he is in the middle of the whole traffic jam. He stated there seemed to quite a bit of confusion about the queing of the lights in the area. "Dale Baker, business owner and developer, 2074 Newberg Hwy. stated he was in favor of the proposal. He encouraged the connection of Arney Road go through to Woodland. Chairman Johnson asked if there was anyone else who wished to speak for the project. There were none. He asked if there was anyone who wished to speak against the proposal. Tom Wagner, 849 Woodland, stated that he worked for a freight company. He stated that freight is not shipped UPS. He stated that he and his wife were at the Troutdale mall on Friday at 1 :00 pm and three 30 ft. trailers were delivering freight at that time of day. He read a verbatim letter he had written. He commented on the water and sewer system. Jim Clark, 1468 Woodland Ave. stated that across from his house is a 60 wide piece of property that he was told would be an improved street when the residential area which is now being turned into a commercial area was developed. He was told it was residential, that is what he expected to go in there when he bought his property. He was upset about the proposal. He made comments about weird people driving down Woodland now looking into his windows, he had pcm910.92 sg/bw 6 1I' 38 no privacy now and he did not want this property developed into anything other than residential. He stated that he heard staff stated that people enjoy having their property value increase. He stated he did not like having his property value increase it means more taxes. Larry Smith, 1870 Woodland Avenue, asked where the road was to be placed. He stated that he supported the proposal if they put in a buffer of. some source so as their present environment doesn't change. Gordan Hanna, PO Box 966, Salem, 97308, he stated he was there representing the Roth Brothers Construction Profit Sharing Trust, which owns property next door. He stated that this proposal does not show the need at this time for additional commercial zoned land. He stated that there was quite a bit of undeveloped, commercial zoned property on the southeast quadrant of the 1-5 interchange. He stated that the applicant has not stated why it is not feasible to put it somewhere else that is already designated a commercial zoned piece of property. His client had some traffic concerns also. He stated at sometime in the future when his client wished to develop his property, his project would also have an impact on the traffic at that time. He was uncertain about the queing of the signal lights as to how they would all work so as not to create more problems. Commissioner Pugh asked about the property of Mr. Hanna's client. He asked if it was being damaged by the proposed project. Mr. Hanna answered no, but his client's property is zoned interchange development property for the sole purpose of attracting people off the freeway. At the time of his client's investment they made the economic assumption that the need for this property would be there in the future, but if the zones were changed so that developers could buy cheaper land and convert this land to commercial later. He felt that this is what these other people were complaining about. Barbara Bell, 349 Acacia, stated that she is not really against the development, she actually thought it is a good plan. She did have some concerns about Hwy 214. She stated that Hwy 214 is a IIZ001l no matter what direction you go on it. She had concerns about the rest of Arney Rd. to where it connects with Crosby Rd. She was concerned about the sewer capacity. She was also concerned about the l'temporaryll light at Arney Rd. Paul Starn, 3094 Camas, had concerns about the road in Willowbrook, he felt that trucks could not make turning maneuvers with the large island divider in the middle of Woodland Ave. He felt that another off ramp should be built and roads improved to the north. pcm910.92 sg/bw 7 lr 38 Sandy Buckley, 599 Willow, she had concerns about the mall, she is for the mall, but she is not sure as to where the location is. She has concerns about the road that is to come down Woodland and Willow. She felt that the State of Oregon should build another on/off ramp to the north to accommodate the property on the east side of the freeway. Barbara Bell, 349 Acacia, asked if the road went in to bring traffic down Woodland, could not sidewalks be built so that the children who walk down to the park could do so safely. Staff asked for a five minutes break. Chairman Johnson declared a five minute break. Hal Keever stated that the issue of security would probably be handled by the facility. He did not know if the details had been worked out yet. As for the issue of the tavern or bar, it is not conducive to the type of clientele and shoppers they wished to see there. Someone brought up the fact of the amount ot elderly that live in Woodburn and the idea of facilitating lift sidewalks and surfaces is something they would surely consider. The plans call for a 10 foot overhang over the sidewalks. There will be a good covered area from the heat and the rain. The concerns about the traffic and trash bins on the north sections, and talk of a connection from the northern access road of the development to Woodland Ave. It is not their intention or is it the intention of the City to connect to Woodland. The stub road on the proposed plan is to function as an access to two properties that located on the corners areas and to access some loading and unloading traffic behind the buildings. The stub street ends almost 1f2 mile away from Woodland Street. The 60 foot right-ot-way is not dedicated, to his knowledge, as a road connection. He thought this was a water, sewer connection easement. He stated that three times the local newspaper has done an injustice by mis-printing information. He stated he spoke to the reporter from the paper and the reporter apologized. He stated that he clarified every thing to the reporter three weeks ago, yet again the newspaper printed more mis-information. He felt that the newspaper owed the community an apology. He stated that the applicant would be more than happy to make a condition to this approval that a connection to Woodland not be made, but this is up to the City. He addressed the temporary light, as being moved if and when the connection to Woodland was made. He stated that the proposal was located 1/3 mile away from the residential area. Mr. Russell stated that they are not interested in having traffic flow down Woodland or Willow. The other item he wished to address was that they did look at and examine the other existing commercial zoned properties in the area to see if they would work. He stated that they would not be going through all the necessary changes if any of the other properties in the area would suit the needs of the pcm910.92 sglbw 8 ... 38 development. The configuration of the other properties will not accommodate this proposal. Chairman Johnson had some concerns about the traffic. in the area. Staff stated that at this time they were looking at something to mitigate the traffic impact from this proposal. The long term planning and the State has agreed with us that sometime in the future a signal is needed at Woodland Avenue. The State will make the decision as to when the signal is necessary. Frank Tiwari, Public Works Director, City of Woodburn, stated that the traffic issue in Woodburn really needs to be thought through. He stated that he would be glad to answer any questions relating to water and wastewater issues if needed. Chairman Johnson asked at what point another sewage plant would be needed for the west side. Mr. Tiwari stated that the EPA and DEQ loading to the Pudding River rules have been changed. He stated that there is a time frame when an new wastewater treatment facility is going to be built and the size of the plant, cost, etc. need to be dealt with. Staff asked Mr. Tiwari to clarify that at this time a facility of this size could be adequately accommodated by our current wastewater treatment facility. Mr. Tiwari answered that yes, the new pump station that was built with grant money, can handle West Woodburn. Staff commented that the developer will be required to pay substantial connection fees to that facility. Commissioner Warzynski stated that she felt the factory outlet mall would be good for Woodburn, jobs for young people, she stated she did feel that a wall was needed to the west side of the mall or trees to act as a buffer for the residents of West Woodburn. Commissioner Grijalva stated that all of the questions and concerns brought up by the citizens were covered in the 52 conditions listed in the staff report. She stated that she felt comfortable that all the conditions have been taken into consideration. pcm910.92sg/bw 9 - l 38 Commissioner Pugh stated that he was uncomfortable with the non-connection of Arney to Woodland. He stated that he was supportive of the proposal. Commissioner Stoval stated that it seemed to him that the property between Woodland and the development was still open to residential development and this would increase the traffic by nature of the development. Commissioner Bauer asked if there was any way to take that first curve on Arney and going directly to Woodland. Staff answered yes, anything could be engineered, but traffic safety is the main concern. He stated that the State Highway Division has not let them know exactly what alternatives they will accept. Chairman Johnson closed the public hearing. Commissioner Warzynski made the motion that Annexation 92-01 , Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment 92-01, Zone Map Amendment 92-02 and Site Plan Review with all conditions in the staff report and the condition received by the DLCD be approved. Commissioner Pugh amended the motion to also include the condition that the northern stub not be developed but only to the end of the property. Commissioner Henkes seconded the motion. A roll call vote was taken: Johnson No Warzynski Yes Pugh Yes Stoval No Bauer Henkes Grijalva No Yes Yes The motion passed as presented. Chairman Johnson told the audience that it would go to the City Council on October 12, 1992 for their review and final decision. pcm910.92 sglbw 10 I 38 5) REPORTS: A. Site Plan Review 92-11 - Carl's Jr. Restaurant, 1-5 Interchange Area Staff recommended approval with the conditions listed in the staff report. The Commission acknowledged staff recommendation. S. Building Activity for' August, 1992 C. Code Enforcement Activity for August, 1992 6) ELECTION OF NEW VICE CHAIRMAN: Chairman Johnson nominated Commissioner Warzynski to Vice Chairman. Commissioner Pugh seconded the nomination. A vote was taken, Commissioner Warzynski is now Vice Chairman. 7) BUSINESS FROM THE COMMISSION: None 8) ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business the Planning Commission meeting adjourned. pcm910.92 sglbw 11 IT" WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS, WHEREAS. NOW, THEREFORE, 4A CITY OF WOODBURN 270 Montgomery Street Woodburn, Oregon 97071 982-5222 . . PROCLAMA TION The President of the United States of America, George Bush, during the signing of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, declared, -The shameful wall of exclusion for people with disabilities is finally tumbling down-; and People with disabilities can now aspire to live a life of quality with tolerance and freedom from barriers of discrimination; and Public and private employers are encouraged to hire and promote qualified people with disabilities, and We acknowledge Woodburn employers and others who recognize the abilities of our workers and not their disabilities. I, Richard Jennings, President of the City Council of the City of Woodburn, Oregon, hereby proclaim October 1992 as DISABILITY EMPLOYMENT AWARENESS MONTH in Woodburn and encourage all citizens to join in this observance. Dated this day of September, 1992. Richard Jennings, Council President City of Woodburn, Oregon lr 8A MEMO TO: City Council through City Administrator FROM: Community Development Director SUBJECT: Capital Development Annexation and Comprehensive Plan Map Request DATE: September 24, 1992 At its hearing of September 10, 1992 the Woodburn Planning Commission reviewed the Capital Development proposed to annex approximately 174 acres to the City of Woodburn with concurrent redistribution of Commercial, High Density Residential and Low Density Residential descriptions on the Comprehensive Plan Map. The commission recommends the Woodburn City Council approve, with conditions, applicant's request. The city council may take one of the follow.ing actions: 1. Approve the request as recommended by the Woodburn Planning Commission. 2. Modify the approval with additional conditions. 3. Deny the request with findings. This proposal, which will be heard September 28, 1992, consists of three parts. The blue folder contains the transportation analysis of potential traffic impacts. The hardbound white folder consists of the applicant's request and findings and the pink sheets in front of the applicant's report contains the city staff report. SG:lg CAPDEV.CC 11 88 MEMO TO: City Council through city Administrator FROM: Planning Commission SUBJECT: Woodburn School District Annexation and Zone Map Amendment DATE: September 18. 1992 At their hearing of September 10. 1992 the Planning Commission reviewed the Woodburn School Districts proposal to annex a 48 acre parcel to the City of Woodburn. The Commission also reviewed and approved the School District's request for conditional use approval to place a school on this specific site. The Commission recommends the City Council approve the applicant's request for annex and zone map amendments. The City Council may take one of the following actions: 1. Approve the request as recommended by the Commission. 2. Modify the approval with additional conditions. 3. Deny the request with findings. 11" .-. 88 STAFF REPORT ANNEXATION 92-03 INTRODUCTION The Woodburn School District is interested in purchasing approximately 48 acres for needed additional school facilities. The District has concluded that a facility should be sited in the south central portion of Woodburn to better serve this area of our community. A conceptual site plan is attached as exhibit IIBII. 1. Location: The 48 acre site is located on the south side of Parr Road between the Brandywine Subdivision on the east and Centennial Park on the west. See Exhibit IIAII. 2. Property Owners: Louis & Elsie Berning, 285 Canyon Mesa Dr., Sedona, AZ 86335 3. Existing Conditions of the Area Land Area: Acres - 48 acres General description of the area: 1. Slopes: - 0 to 3% 2. Vegetation: - farm crops 3. Drainage: - attached engineer's letter Exhibit lIell 4. Flood Area - property is not in flood area 5. Sewage disposal: - see map on Exhibit IIN' 6. Utilities (gas, elect, tete) - see map on Exhibit 'WI Existinq Land Use: 1. Number of single family units: ~ 2. Number of multiple family units: ~ 3. Commercial ~ Industrial ~ Public Uses ~ 4. Open Space ~ acres. 4. Wetland Determination: The City of Woodburn contacted the Division of State Lands (DSL) who are responsible for reviewing developments that may affect wetlands. DSL's response was that none of the property meets the wetland criteria. See Exhibit 11011. 1I' ~.. I .~ 88 . 5. Public Facilities: Mitchell, Nelson, Welborn, Reimann Associates, Inc. have addressed, on a preliminary level, the opportunity to secure water and sewer service. Also preliminary observations have been investigated as to how to handle storm water run off. See Exhibit UE". As for street improvements and more detailed analysis of public facilities those would be addressed at such time as the Planning Commission reviews the School Districts site plan. 6. Applicable Criteria: A. Woodburn Comprehensive Plan a) Chapter IV Existing Lands: 1) It was in 1973-74 the City began working on the establishment an Urban Growth Boundary. This boundary was established in 1980. The applicants property lies within that Urban Growth Boundary. b) Chapter V Open Space, Scenic and Historic Areas and Natural Resources. Lands needed for open space are certainly accommodated with this proposal. A substantial amount of the property will be utilized for outdoor recreation and other activities. In regards to protection of wetlands none have been identified on this site by DSL. c) Chapter IX Goals and Policies Policy A-1 page 42 identifies the fact that liThe neighborhood should provide a focus and identity within the community and should have a community facility to allow for interaction within the neighborhood.1I There area no parcels 48 acres in size within the City Limits that can accommodate a school site therefore land within the UGB was assessed for development. Policy D-1 page 46 state that there should be a five year supply of vacant land within the city. Policy H page 49 identifies the fact that public services must be available to all areas of the city in the way of water, sewer and streets. Those services are available to the site. Policy 1-1-2 page 51 requires a transportation system to interconnect residential areas with school and parks. This proposal will at the time of site plan review will require an ~1 "'"' ~ 88 analysis of various modes of transportation i.e. street improvements, sidewalks, bike lanes and pedestrian trails. Policy J-1 page 55 states that growth should be orderly and accompanied by necessary public services. Of course providing adequate school facilities is one of those primary public services. d) Chapter X The Land Use Plan Policy E page 73 states that II In addition to the four major types of land uses, lands for public use are shown. These are lands which are used or intended for governmental units including lands which are currently owned by the City or School District. Future acquisition sites are not indicated, however, as this may tend to affect the price the public will have to pay. As the location of these sites depends a great deal on price and availability, the City and School District will have to make the decisions at the time the acquisition is needed as to the best 10cation.1I e) Chapter XII Implementation of the Plan Growth management pages 83-86 identifies the fact that providing adequate public facilities such as schools is an integral part of good growth management policy. f) Urban Growth Policy - City of Woodburn/Marion County The proposal has been submitted to Marion County for review. 7. Findings: 1. The proposed site lies within the City's Urban Growth Boundary 2. The Comprehensive Plan Map designates this property for single family residential use. 3. Schools are permitted as a Conditional Use in single family residential designated areas. 4. The property has no identified wetlands. 5. Public services in the way of water and sewer are available. 6. The property is not subject to flooding. 7. The request will fulfill a future public need. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Annexation request. CONDITION OF APPROVAL: A notarized letter requesting Annexation from the property owners. lI' ..... . "'-,.,,'. ~, l ~ t:1 e~.t1.:t\ ON 6tH 161T tao,.: I MiTY MAp or C-i+.t Il /( A . ..~:~:.. .' ., .' ..... . ., .. .,'- ....~.< ::~. t'_:, ". ~.... . ., '.:. _~ . .~.. \:~~'.~ ,I . .' .:" -,". ":. /., .', ' Ojt"f , ., J L E)(\-\\'6\\ 1\ ,~\ l ~, .~" eXH{0fT ((Bit ) A R R R 0 AD'.' .... (-::.~co/ N W -tE 5 -, - ~ \0 ~ CD ..r - . ~- i~ -,. .~ . ~. ~~ . . ~ -0 N . \.() ..,.. W lfl OJ g :z: f-.\ J; e~". f, r;'\... .. , \ ... . 'I .. , ~v\~ (1F;~D5 ) . .. . , . . ,0 I , ...,\~ ~ \) Q-'\. . ~~ ~ . . .. ...- p~A~ F"j/;1-DS 88 '."': C -- - .4 .- :.., LI . - I : ': <1'''' en o o V'l \Q OJ M CO " ,0 ,~ ~v <( Q:-. ~ 0-<<;'~ ~ 8 0 "" -- ()0 o EX \-\ \ Bf'\ ~ / / t.-...._~;.._..... 'v;~. ,'" J':r."~': . . , \ '" " I. >.,.........,. ""r' .... . -- . .~. \"... J..' , .'t-''/ .'"'" ., "( "'.. .. .-. ..~,," ',:. :-....-... ; 't::":, .- _ .... ,,-..:..('.... ..:.t\':....:~~..:'(~)'.c . , . . . ... -. EXH/g/T leet! ~ B-3, F-2500-01 FUJITANI HILTS & ASSOCIATES, INC. ,88. /FHA! GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS July 2, 1992 Ms. Marci Christian Woodburn School District No. 103 ' 965 N Boones Ferry Road Woodburn, Oregon 97071-9674 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION PARR STREET SCHOOL SITE Dear Ms. Christian: In response to your request and authorization on July 2, we have completed a preliminary geotechnical evaluation of the above property. The purpose of this evaluation was to de- termine if existing soil conditions, as they relate to foundations and earthwork, would negatively impact your Boards intention to purchase this property for eventual school con- struction. Our study was based upon a site visit by our Geologist, Kim Elliott, on July 1, our general knowledge of the area, and a review of available file information on a nearby project. The work did not include an environmental assessment of the site to determine the possible presence of hazardous materials. This report was prepared for your use in determining the feasibility of purchasing the sub- ject property. It is not intended as a design document or to be used in place of a compre- hensive geotechnical investigation for project design. We would appreciate the opportunity to prepare a proposal for a site-specific geotechnical investigation if you proceed with the purchase of the property and project development. SITE CHARACTERISTICS The site is located on the south side of Parr Street immediately west of Elana Way. From the City map you have provided, it appears to consist of about 55 acres with 1,400 feet fronting Parr Street. The site is currently a relatively level, open, cultivated field. The site and surrounding undeveloped areas have been farmlands dating back to at least 1936. There are currently no buildings on the site. The school site is located within the Willamette basin that was formed by the folding and faulting of Columbia River Basalt flows and older marine sedimentary rocks. The basin 2255 S.W Canyon Rd. . Portland, OR 97201 . 503/223,6147 . FAX 503/223,6140 \=;l,'~, "R \\ ( .-" - ., ) 88 Ms. Marci Christian July 2, 1992 Page 2 F-2500-01 has been partially filled with consolidated and semi-consolidated non-marine sedimentary deposits. The most recent of these deposits are the Willamette Silts which were deposited by water back-flooded from the Columbia and Willamette Rivers during catastrophic flooding some 12,000 to 19,000 years ago. The Willamette silts underlie the current ground surface, and consist generally of interlay- ered fine sandy silts, clayey silts, silty tine sands and occasionally silty clays. Beneath the site, these soils probably extend several tens of feet below the ground surface. Regional groundwater is usually relatively deep and occurs within the underlying sands and gravels of the Troutdale Formation. However, local and seasonal groundwater can be perched within the more permeable zones of the Willamette Silts, and during the wet season water levels can rise temporarily to, or close to the ground surface. GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS The site, in our opinion, will prove acceptable for conventional continuous and individual spread footing foundations for typical school construction. Allowable bearing in the Willamette silts generally varies from 1,500 to 3,000 pounds per square foot depending on site-specific conditions. Parameters for foundation design should be determined on the basis of explorations during the design phase. Site preparation usually entails stripping the of the upper 12 to 18 inches from beneath building and pavement areas to remove the topsoil and root zone. The underlying undis- turbed soils, after proof rolling, will provide and acceptable subgrade for pavement, floor slab, and structural fill construction, in our opinion. The on-site soils can be used for fill, but they are sensitive to placement moisture content and workability is poor, so their use as fill is sometimes limited landscaping and yard areas where compaction is not critical. The practicability of using on-site soils for structural fill will depend upon support requirements and anticipated moisture conditions at the time of construction. Drainage within the Willamette silts is typically poor. Because of this and high seasonal groundwater, the site will not prove acceptable for water discharge through conventional drywells, in our opinion. Surface runoff should be channeled in surface ditches or shallow retention basins, or collected and discharged into storm sewers if available. Special drain- age provisions may also prove necessary beneath gymnasium floor slabs and other areas that may be particularly sensitive to subgrade moisture. Drainage will also require special attention with respect to running tracks and athletic playfields. F)(\~ \ R\T C - lI' :~\ Ms. Mard Christian July 2, 1992 Page 3 CONCLUSIONS . 88. F-2500-01 Based upon our study and evaluation of the proposed site, and assuming development for typical school facilities, it is our opinion that there are no unusual geotechnical site charac- teristics that would preclude purchase of the property. We trust that this information will satisfy your present needs. Sincerely, FUJIT ANI HILTS & ASSOCIATES by f2~1nt(.;&- Senior Vice President F25000lA.DOR [f(~\b\\ C (). .. (1 DIVISION OF STATELAhLlS ' Environmental Plann~n9 and Permits 775 Summer Street NE Salem, OR 97310 503/378-3805 88 WETLAND DETERMINATION REPORT At the request of the landowner or agent, Division staff have conducted an offsite or onsite wetland determination on the property described below. COUNTY \'\(\."\0", CITY \\.)cJ<'""'\.\:>\"" v'. LOCATION :" (~\.~ ,-~ \' . -' \1 -<-, \ ,,' p~,\..- ('-\., 'T\o~v,,,, u.)e-.. ^ . T ~: ~- R ~ S \ \7-. ,TAX. LOT(S) \ ~()n --) OWNER/AGENT: ,\,,", ,}.'iC.:. (\..." -:-,\ '0-..' l \()(~C)\:; v..~ \~ <'''\''l"''-\\..... :.\.,..)., \03 ADDRESS: C;v~ LL vC,-,v-.<'- 'Cc.~.r_\i,\.. '.lIn(',}..\..n'N" 9.-](~7i DATE OF ONSITE INVESTIGATION:":' -:""...\'_~ 7<\. V\ (;j .,), . ,,' tl i \ There are no jurisdictional wetlands or waterways on the property. Therefore, no removal-fill permit is required. Notes: [) There are wetlands and/or waterways on the property. Those areas are subject to the State Removal-Fill Law. A permit is required for 50 cubic yards or more of fill, removal, or alteration of substrate. Notes: o A wetland delineation will be wetland/non-wetland boundary. obtained from the Division. Notes: needed to locate and stake the A list of consultants can be o A removal-fill permit will be required for o No removal-fill permit will be required for because/if o A permit may be required by the Army Corps of Engineers (326-6995) Comments: ~'J \ _ . ." ,.;~ \r . \,._"'. ",~. '\'Jt"J,...,-\.......:}.,\.............<:rt "\:1"} 7- _ \(:J::.;'..-~f\...~.~.o/\'~~~\:- \. i(.....\..i. -\\.........:_.1~~\C~>_ ........ \ I /.'i (' :_", :.\ ....'_. ..~,.:\:- \1'- '- {""l -?\. ,,-,,_--,.:~\"..........\ Lv -, \\-";;"\{ ," <^ a \ Determination by: .-:::SZ\'d'i.;- ">\',:\I).N'\ Da te : 9; - l\; ,. c'\ d-..., Response Copy To: ~ Owner/Applicant 0 ~ C~~ & lDcc~\oIA(Y"\ o Q,~ (~\a,^lAA- [) DSL file copy [) Reading file copy Enclosures: Planning Department , Corps of Engineers 'If" .12 10: 34 000~~WOODBURN SCHOOL DIST 103 TEL ~~981-9555-13 P. 88 MITellnl. NEI.SON WEI.BORN REIM^NN Phll'J'Nl.JlSlIlI' f/.ANN/!/1.t EN(ilNEt:II$ LANDSCAfE IIkCHI'tEt:Tt August 7, 1992 Marci Christian Woodburn School District 965 N. Boones Ferry Road Woodburn, Oregon 97071 RE: Proposed School Site oft Parr Street in Southwest Woodburn Existing Utilities Analysis Dear Marci: This letter is in response to a request made to me by Steve Olson, Dull Olson Weekes Architects, through you with regard to reviewing the availability of storm sewer facilities to serve a proposed school site located on approximately 48 acres south of Parr Street. We have also briefly reviewed the availability of sanitary sewer and water service to the site. The following summarizes our findings: STORM DRAINAGE From topographic information obtained from the City of Woodburn, the site is divided approximately in half by two drainage basin..li. One flowing to Parr Street and one flowing to the railroad tracks in the Southeast corner of the site. Dean Morrison, A'isistant City Engineer provided as-built information showing an existing 18 inch culvert that crosses Parr Street and an existing 24 inch system t6:the north running through Elana Way. The City feels that this system is currently at capacity. The City's Storm Drainage Master Plan, dated 1978, identifies replacing the exiting 18 inch cross culvert under Parr Street with a 24 inch cross culvert to handle a design flow of 45 cubic feet per second (CFS). No other immediate down stream improvements were identified. Dean mentioned that detention of storm water run-off would be a condition of approval, as would he for any other site in the City. Based on the above preliminary information obtained, detention facilities (ie. ponds with orifices, or oversized pipe) will be required and can be utilized to eliminate the impact to the downstream system, therefore not requiring large expenditures for off-site storm drain system improvements by the School District. 71 s,w. OAK STkllsT POR1'LANP, OR.Il<HlN 91l(l~ TEl. ~O)122'.OR22 PA~ )Q)12H.R.\5.j 'In S.W. VIIIlNS STIUll'r, SHITE lei PORTLAND, OIUIGON 972H TEL ~(I)I(.l..noo FAX '0.\1621. )760 ~avj<..: L""<llr",,. AN/;II.,/II", Ci~il Ellti"..r;wl, L"",/ Uu "",/ O.";'."'''l''I''/ /""nil/g. 0"'''''';',,,1 S'''';r(l Pt';Ill'iPAh: 1'b."'41 NI/i... Anlll).IJI' N'/un, IIJ./.A; {1"rrt. Wt/bn.. I'E; J,.",h". Rtl"l".', 1'F. M....., I~~.p", .~ "..... \=" ')( \J \ Q C\ \= .:! 10:35 0- TEL..~3-981-9555-13 0~ WOODBURI--l SCHOOL 0 I :::;T 1 .J ., ~ 88 Marci Chri.~(ian Letter Augu<st 7, 1992 Page 2 These on-site detention facilities can be designed into the overaJl site plan for the school and play fields. In addition, the proposed site has two separate storm drainage discharge points which help reduce the overall size of the detention facility (ie two smaller facilities). SANITARY SEWER As-built information from the City shows an existing sanitary sewer manhole at the intersection of Parr Street and Elana Way. This sewer is approximately 6.5' deep. Because of the size of the site and the length of the extension of the sanitary sewer service to the site (approximately 1,400'), the sewer service invert elevation would dictate fini'ih floor elevations for the School. Rough calculations show that to maintain a minimum of 3 feet of cover on the sanitary sewer service, the building finish floor elevation would have to be 1 to 2 feet above the existing ground. This would potentially trigger the requirement of imported fiJI to properly grade the site. However, with proper design of site grades, an on- site balance in cut and fill earthwork volumes could be obtained without the added expense of imported fill material. Based on the above preliminary information, we feel that this site can be served with gravity sanitary sewer from the existing system in Parr Street with proper site planning of finish floor elevations and site grades. It may be necessary to purs~e imported fill if the site cannot be balanced with cut and fill volumes.. , . WATER A<;-built information from the City shows an existing 12 water line stubbed out at the end of the subdivision on Parr Street. A<;suming that the proposed school will be fully sprinkled, the required fire flow for tl:1e school would be approximately 1,500 gallons per minute at 20 pounds per square foot residual pressure. This is also assuming the largest area not separated by fire walls being approximately 55,000 square feet with type V-N construction. In discussions with City Water officials, the existing 12 inch waterline has the capacity to handle the above identified flow. Based on the above preliminary information, we feel that the existing water system adjacent to the site has the capacity to serve the proposed school. MNWR \=)( \-\ \ K \\ t: 1 ::12 10:35 - TEL 5~,..981-9555-13 000p..." WOODBURH SCHOOL D 1ST 10,j "\ l f 88 Marci Christiao Letter August 7, 1992 Page 3 In summary, we believe that this site can be feasibly served by with storm drainage, sanitary sewer, and water systems that currently exist adjacent to the site, as long as proper up~front site planning is performed and the above mentioned measures are pursued in more detail at the appropriate time. Please let me or Steve Olson know if you have any questions or need any further information. Thank-you Marci. Sincerely, MITCHELL NELSON WELBORN REIMANN ASSOCIATES, INC. . Jon P. Reimann, P.E. Partner Attachments c: Steve Olson, Dull Olson Weekes Architects E.i\ \-\\ \j \\ L MNWR .- " l '1 88 STAFF REPORT ZONE MAP AMENDMENT 92-03 REVIEW, REVISION, AND UPDATE The planning process is continuous. There is no plan which can foresee all of the problems which the future will bring. In most cases decisions the Planning Commission and Council review will be petitioned by private citizens to change the' Land Use Plan designation of a particular parcel of property. This is a quasi-judicial activity and should follow the procedures set out for quasi-judicial rulings. However, the Planning Commission should insure that whatever changes it makes in the Land Use Plan, they are consistent with other goals and policies established in this Plan. These changes, in general, should be justified by a solid body of evidence presented by the petitioner showing the following: 1. Compliance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; 2. Compliance with the various elements of the Comprehensive Plan; 3. Compliance with state-wide goals and guidelines; 4. That there is a public need for the change; 5. That this land best suits that public need; and 6. That the land cannot be suitably used as it is presently designated. Staff Response 1. The annexation staff report identifies several goals, policies and statements incorporated in the City's Comprehensive Plan that support the applicant's request. 2. The Comprehensive Plan Map identifies that upon annexation the property shall be designated as a RS (Residential Single Family) District. This is the designation requested by the applicant. 3. The School District has identified that a need for this size parcel exists to provide additional facilities for Woodburn's growing student population. 4. This site location will best serve the South Central area of our city. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of this request to designate the property as RS (Single Family Residential) 11" . . ~ ;} "1 88 APPL~C(\N,I~ ~\r\\tL1JV\tZJ.J\ ZONE CHANGE STATEMENT OF INTENT This zone change is a requirement of an annexation petition. The school district is in the process of purchasing this site if it can be annexed to the city. They plan to build school facilities to meet the present needs of the Woodburn community. Proper zoning for this would be Single Family Residential District. with a conditional use for a school facility. 1. This request is in conformance with the comprehensive plan. in that the plan allows for such changes to meet the public needs. with a conditional use. 2. Public need for these facilities has been demonstrated in studies of the current overcrowding at the schools. Current trends also indicate that student population will continue to grow. (See attached demographics.) 3. In surveying the community this site has come up as one of the best to meet this need. It is not the only site available. but it is the most favorable. given cost of land, off-site improvements, availability of city services and utilities. Tnis site is surrounded by other designated residential lands and the city anticipates future development in this area. 4. There is no other site zoned for Single Family Residential District that would meet the need for size and logistical requirements. Other sites may be available, but would also require this annexation process and conditional use. The opportunity is available to purchase this site. The school district has looked throughout the city and urban growth boundary for possible sites and this one meets the requirements as well as any others. 5. Petitioner cannot use the current zone change policy allows public use. land as currently zoned. The annexation for schools and f ~: 88 STAFF REPORT CONDITIONAL USE NO. 92-02 A Con'ditional Use is an activity which is basically similar to other uses permitted in the district but due to some of the characteristics of the Conditional Use, which are not entirely compatible with the district, such use could not otherwise be permitted in the district. A public hearing and review of the proposed Conditional Use by the Planning Commission will insure that the use will be in consonance with the purpose and intent of the district. Findings of the Planning Commission, Before granting a Conditional Use, the Planning Commission shall determine: a) That it has the power to grant the Conditional Use; b) That such Conditional Use, as described by the applicant, will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of the district; c) That any condition imposed is necessary for the public health, safety or welfare, or to protect the health or safety of persons working or residing in the area, or for the protection of property improvements in the neighborhood. Staff Response: The City of Woodburn is realizing unprecedented growth. This in turn has resulted in a growing need to provide adequate education facilities to meet this demand. With proper design impacts on adjoining neighborhoods can be minimized. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the applicant's request. T DIRECTOR Robert J, Hansen, P,E., P,L.S. ADMINISTRATION & ENGINEERING (503) 588-5036 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT (503) 588-5108 COUNTY SURVEYOR'S OffiCE (503) 588-5155 ROAD MAINTENANCE (503) 588-5304 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Randall Franke Gary Heer Mary Pear mine ADMINSTRATlVE OFFICER Ken Roudybush &\ Printed on Recycled Paper ~ Reduce. Reuse . Recycle. RKover ,-- 1 ~, '-~ 88 Marion County OREGON DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS September 10, 1992 Mr. Goeckritz city of Woodburn 270 Montgomery Street Woodburn, Oregon 97071 RE: Woodburn School District Annexation along Parr Road Dear Mr. Goeckritz: The Marion County Department of Public Works has no objection to this annexation as long as Parr Road is annexed along the parcefs frontage and the city assumes responsibility for maintenance. If the city does not assume responsibility for maintenance of Parr Road in this area, an access permit from our department will be required for the school. Development of this site coupled with development of the Woodburn crossing will greatly increase traffic on Parr Road. Accordingly, the access permit will require improvements to Parr Road as deemed necessary by the Marion County Department of Public Works. sincerely, Dan c. Keeley, P.E. civil Engineer DCK:dsp c: Board of Commissioners 0910parrrdltr.dck Administration / Engineering / Surveyor's / Emergency Management 220 High Street NE Salem . Oregon 97301-3670 Road Maintenance . 5155 Silverton Road NE . Salem, Oregon 97305-3899 10A MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council through City Administrator FROM: Community Development Director SUBJECT: Final Draft of Sign Ordinance DATE: September 18, 1992 At the September 14 meeting, Council directed staff to prepare an ordinance for final adoption at the next meeting. The only changes made by staff from the "draft" copy are the correction of typographical errors in Sections 10(F)(3)(b) and 11 (C)(5). Section 10(F)(3)(b) Number: Only one per public street frontage. An unlimited number of additional laws signs may be erected during the period preceding 60 days prior and extending no more than 12 days after a general, primary or special election. Section 11 (C)(5) Free standing signs are limited to a maximum height of 35 square feet. 1T 10A COUNCil Bill NO. 1421 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO SIGNS, PRESCRIBING PENALTIES, REPEALING ORDINANCE 1827, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. The City of Woodburn ordains as follows: SECTION 1. PURPOSE AND INTENT. The purpose and intent of this ordinance is to promote the efficient transfer of information; to balance the desire of individuals to identify their businesses and convey their messages against the desire of the public to be protected against sign clutter and the unrestricted proliferation of signs; to preserve the right of free speech exercised through signs; and to protect the public health, safety and welfare. SECTION 2. APPLICABILITY. This ordinance applies to signs within the City limits and all the planning districts of the City of Woodburn. The regulations are not intended, and shall not be interpreted, to restrict the content of signs and shall be so interpreted. Other regulations of the City may also apply to signs. SECTION 3. EXEMPT SIGNS. The following signs are exempt from the regulations of this ordinance, but may be subject to other regulations of the City. (A) Signs authorized and installed by public utilities, such as electricity, natural gas, telephone and cable television, which are directly related to plant and materials in the public right-of-way and easements, and which aid public safety, identify the location of underground or above ground facilities, or assist the public utility in the maintenance of its facilities. Signs erected for office uses, storage yards and other primary activities of the agency or company are not exempt. (B) Signs erected by the City of Woodburn. (C) Signs and traffic control devices erected by the State of Oregon or Marion County in the public right-of-way for traffic control, traffic safety or public works construction purposes. (D) Signs inside a building, except window signs. (E) Signs affixed to vehicles where the communicative purpose is incidental to the use as a vehicle. PAGE 1 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 1421 ORDINANCE NO. 10A (F) Street addresses. (G) "Neighborhood Watch" and "Block Home" signs. (H) City-awarded plaques related to historic resources. SECTION 4. DEFINITIONS. As used in this ordinance, unless the context otherwise requires: (A) Construct. Means to build, erect, attach, hang, place, suspend, paint, affix, or otherwise bring into being. (B) Integrated Business Center. A group of two or more businesses which are planned and designed as a center, whether or not the businesses, buildings or land are under common ownership. (C) Maintain. Means to permit a sign, sign structure of part thereof to continue or to repair or refurbish a sign, sign structure or part thereof. (D) Non-Structural Trim. Means the molding, battens, caps, nailing strips and latticing letters and walkaways which are attached to a sign structure. (E) Painted Wall Decorations. Displays painted directly on a wall, designed and intended as a decorative or ornamental feature. Decorations may also include lighting. (F) Painted Wall Highlights. Means painted area which highlights a building's architectural or structural features. (G) Person. A natural person, his heirs, executors, administrators, or assigns and also included a firm, partnership or corporation, its or their successors or assigns, or the agent of any of the aforesaid,and any political subdivision, agency, board or bureau of the State. (H) Premises. One or more lots on which are constructed or on which are to be constructed a building or a group of buildings designed as a unit. (I) Ridge Line. The top edge of a roof or building parapet, whichever is higher, excluding any cupolas, chimneys or other minor projections. (J) Sign. An identification, description, illustration, symbol, letter, number, logo, fluorescent tube or row of tubes, incandescent bulb or string of bulbs, or graphic information or device, but not an architectural feature of a building, PAGE 2 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 1421 ORDINANCE NO. 10A including the structural supports, which is affixed directly or indirectly, or temporarily or permanently, upon a building, vehicle, structure or land. Signs identify or direct attention to a product, place, activity, person, institution, business, use, idea, belief, candidate or political issue. Murals and painted highlights are not signs. "Sign" incudes, but is not limited to: (1) A-Frame (also known as an A-Board or Sandwich Board) Sign. A double-faced portable sign constructed with an A-shaped frame, composed of two sign boards attached at the top and separated at the bottom, and not supported by a structure in the ground. (2) Awning Sign. A sign incorporated into or attached to an awning. (3) Building Directory Sign. A sign giving the name and room number of location of the occupants of a building, limited to an attached wall sign. (4) Combination Sign. A sign incorporation any combination of the features of a free standing, projecting or roof sign. (5) Directional Sign. A permanent on-premises sign which is designed and erected solely for the purpose of traffic or pedestrian direction and placed on the property to which the pubic is directed. (6) Electric Sign. A sign utilizing electrical wiring. (7) Flashing Sign. Means a sign or sign structure which is illuminated by an intermittent or sequential flashing light source whose interval is one second or less in duration, or which is in movement without actual physical movement or the illusion of a flashing or intermittent light or light source. (8) Free Standing Sign. A sign supported by one or more uprights or braces in the ground and detached from any building or structure. (9) Illuminated Sign. All or any portion of a sign that is illuminated by lamps, bulbs, tubes or other light source contained in or upon the sign. (10) lawn Sign. A temporary, free standing or A-frame sign. (11) Non-Conforming Sign. A sign or sign structure that would not be allowed under the sign regulations presently applicable to the site. PAGE 3 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 1421 ORDINANCE NO. lOA. (12) Off-Premises Sign. A sign advertising goods, products, businesses or services which are not sold, manufactured or distributed on or from the premises of facilities on which the sign is located. (13) Projecting Sign. A sign attached to a building other than a wall sign in which the sign face is not parallel to the wall. (14) Roof Sign. A sign erected on or attached to a roof. (15) Under the Canopy Sign. A sign which hangs underneath a building canopy, awning or other projecting feature an perpendicular to the building wall face. (16) Wall Sign. Any sign attached to, painted on, or erected against the wall of a building or structure with the exposed face of the sign in a plane parallel to the plane of the wall. (K) Sign Structure. Means the supports, braces and framework and foundations of the sign. (L) Street Frontage. A lot line fronting on a street or highway. SECTION 5. ADMINISTRATION. (A) Sign Permit Reauired. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2) below, no person shall erect, construct, modify, relocate, use or replace a sign, change a sign face, or alter a sign or sign structure unless a sign permit and any required building permit and/or electrical permit have been issued. (2) The following signs are not required to obtain a sign permit: (a) exempt signs in accordance with Section 3 above, (b) lawn signs, (e) temporary window signs and displays that do not meet the definition of a sign, for example, murals. Notwithstanding that these signs need not obtain a sign permit, they shall comply with applicable regulations in this ordinance. PAGE 4 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 1421 ORDINANCE NO. 10A (3) A separate sign permit application shall be submitted for each sign erected, constructed, modified, relocated, replaced, face changed or structurally altered and for sign repair that includes these activities. Sign maintenance requires no permit. All proposed work on a sign shall be shown in the sign permit application. (B) Aoolication for Permit. Application for a sign permit shall be provided by the Building Official and shall contain or have attached the following information: (1) Name, address, and telephone number of the applicant. (2) A Site Plan which shows the site address, location of building, structure or lotto which or upon which the sign or other advertising structure is to be attached or erected. (3) A sketch showing the method of sign attachment, construction, materials, sign height and area dimensions design, stress of roof or cantilever type sign, sign footing and such other information as may be necessary so that the Building Official may determine the compliance of the sign with this ordinance. (4) Name of person, firm corporation or association directing the construction. (C) Sign Permit Fees. Fees for sign permit applications, extensions of sign permit approvals, sign variances, sign ordinance interpretations and other application actions set forth in this ordinance shall be established by the Woodburn City Council. SECTION 6. SIGN MEASUREMENT. (A) Sign Area. (1) Sign area is measured within lines drawn around and enclosing the perimeter of each cabinet, sign face or module; these shall be summed and then totaled to determine total area. The perimeter of measurable area shall not include embellishments such as pole covers, decorative roofing, foundations or supports provided there is no written advertising copy, symbols or logos on such embellishments. PAGE 5 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 1421 ORDINANCE NO. - 11' JOA (2) Sign area includes only one side of a multi-sided sign. regardless of the 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. (3) The areas of all signs in existence at the time of enactment of this ordinance. whether conforming or non-conforming, shall be counted in determining permitted sign area. (4) If the sign is composed of individual letters or symbols using the wall as the background with or without added decoration. the total sign area shall be calculated by measuring the area within the perimeter of all symbols and letters or other decoration including logos. Inclusion of a logo or other symbol in a sign area calculation shall be determined as follows: If the distance between the logo or symbol and the remainder of the sign is greater than one-half the width of the remainder or larger portion of the sign, then the logo shall be counted as a separate sign. (B) Sign Height. (1) The overall height of a free standing sign shall be measured from the average grade surrounding the sign structure for a distance of 20 feet. SECTION 7. SETBACKS AND VISION CLEARANCE AREAS. (A) Vision Clearance Area. No temporary or free standing sign shall be erected or maintained in a vision clearance area. Vision clearance areas. in addition to any prescribed by other ordinances, shall include: (1) At the intersection of two street-front property lines. or a street front and an alley property line. a triangle formed by drawing a line 30 feet back along the street or alley fronting property lines and connecting them with a diagonal line. (2) Along any frontage where there is an entrance onto or exit from any street or highway within 10 feet of the curb or edge of roadway. PAGE 6 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 1421 ORDINANCE NO. 10A SECTION 8. SIGNS IN RIGHT-OF-WAY. No sign shall be placed in the public right-of-ways. SECTION 9. CERTAIN SIGNS PROHIBITED. The following signs are prohibited in all cases: (A) Signs resembling official traffic signs or signals, for example signs stating "stop," "go slow," "caution," "danger" and "warning," except officially authorized or installed by the City of Woodburn, State of Oregon or Marion County. (B) Signs that create a safety hazard by obstructing clear view or pedestrians or vehicular traffic. (C) Signs that glare, flash, reflect or appear to do any of these things. (D) Signs on public property or within a street right-of-way except when authorized by the appropriate public agency. (E) Any signs or advertising statuary which move or give the appearance of movement, except for barber poles. (F) Signs or sign structures which produce movement achieved by normal wind currents. SECTION 10. SIGN REGULATIONS BY TYPE OF SIGN. (A) Proiectina Sign (1) Projecting signs shall not project more than 5 feet from the building and no closer than 3 feet to the curbline. (2) Minimum clearance below projecting signs shall be 8 feet. PAGE 7 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 1421 ORDINANCE NO. 10A (8) Free Standing Signs (1) A free standing sign shall be directly supported by poles or foundation supports in or upon the ground and meet the appropriate requirements outlined in the State of Oregon Structural Specialty Code. (C) Roof Signs (1) No roof sign shall extend more than a 4 feet above the eave line of a roof or parapet. (D) Signs Under a Canopy (1) Signs may be located under a canopy if vertical clearance or 8 feet is maintained between the sign and the grade below. (2) No supporting member of any signs suspended under a marquee shall pierce or extend through the canopy. (3) Canopy signs shall be limited to a vertical height of 12 inches and a maximum sign area of 4 square feet. (E) Off-Premise Signs (1 ) a) All off-premises signs shall be approved by the Woodburn Planning Commission prior to issuance of a permit. b) The Woodburn Planning Commission shall grant a permit for off-premises signs only when the property owner or business owner can demonstrate that the existing signs allowed under this ordinance fail to relieve an unreasonable hardship and that the hardship can only be relieved by the erection of an off-premised sign, and erection of the sign will not in any away detract from any other property or be a detriment to the community. c) All off-premises signs erected in the light Industrial District shall not exceed 200 square feet in area nor a height of 30 feet. PAGE 8 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 1421 ORDINANCE NO. 1r lOA d) The minimum distance between off-premises signs erected in the light Industrial District on the same side of the street, road, or highway shall be 1000 feet. e) Any permit issued under this section is nontransferable and the sign may only be used for the purpose for which it is granted. f) Any decision by the Woodburn Planning Commission may be appealed to the City Council and the City Council may call up any action of the Planning Commission for reviewing using the same procedures as for a variance. (F) lawn Signs. lawn signs may be erected subject to the following limitations without first obtaining a sign permit. (1) For single family, duplex and multi-family uses. a) They shall only be temporary pole or A-frame signs. b) Number: On a property being offered for sale, one sign per public street frontage, but on properties other than the property being offered for sale, no more than 3 signs total may be erected. An unlimited number of additional lawn signs may be erected during the period preceding and extending no more than 12 days after a general, primary or special election. c) Number of Sides: No more than two. d) Height of Sign: Temporary pole signs shall be no higher than 6 feet. Temporary A-frame signs shall be no higher than 2 feet. Additional lawn signs erected during the election period specified above shall be no higher than 3 feet. e) Sign Face Area: No more than 6 square feet, but additional lawn signs erected during the election period specified above shall be no more than 4 square feet. PAGE 9 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 1421 ORDINANCE NO. ~ lOA f) Illumination: Not permitted. g) Removal: On a property being offered for sale, they shall be removed within 30 days of sale or transfer of possession, whichever occurs first. Additional lawn signs shall be removed within 12 days after the election. h) Consent: They shall be erected only with the documented consent of the property owner or authorized representative. (2) For undeveloped residential subdivision lots and undeveloped land in the RS Planning District. a) They shall only be temporary pole or monument signs. b) location on Site: On private property. c) Number: Only one per public street frontage. An unlimited number of additional lawn signs may be erected during the period preceding and extending no more than 12 days after a general, primary or special election. d) Number of Sides: No more than 2. e) Height of Sign: No higher than 6 feet, except additional lawn signs erected during the election period specified above shall be no higher than 3 feet. f) Sign Face Area: No more than 12 square feet. g) Illumination: Not permitted. h) Consent: They shall be erected only with the documented consent of the property owner or authorized representative. PAGE 10 - COUNCil BILL NO. 1421 ORDINANCE NO. ~ 10A (3) For undeveloped land in multi-family, commercial and industrial planning districts. a) They shall only be temporary pole or monument signs. b) Number: Only one per public street frontage. An unlimited number of additional lawn signs may be erected during the period preceding and extending no more than 12 days after a general, primary or special election. c) Number of Sides: No more than 2. d) Height of Sign: No higher than 12 feet. Additional lawn signs erected during the election period specified above shall be no higher than 3 feet. e) Sign Face Area: No greater than 64 square feet for properties fronting on arterial or collector streets, and no greater than 32 square feet for properties fronting on local streets. Additional lawn signs erected during the election period specified above shall be no more than 4 square feet. f) Illumination: Indirect only. g) Consent: They shall be erected only with the documented consent of the property owner or authorized representative. (4) Awning Signs a) Awning signs shall be permitted in commercial and industrial zones only. SECTION 11. ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS (A) Signs in a Residential Zone. No sign or outdoor advertising of any character shall be permitted in an RS, RD, RL, RM, or RH zone except: PAGE 11 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 1421 ORDINANCE NO. 1t" 10A (1) Those signs permitted in Section 5(A)(2) for which no permit is required. (B) Signs in CO and P Zones. No sign or outdoor advertising of any character shall be permitted in a CO or P zone except the following: (1) One sign placed flat against the building, not exceeding one-half (Y:z) square foot of sign area per each lineal foot of parcel frontage occupied by such building fronting on a city street. Such sign may be illuminated. (2) One detached, non-illuminated sign for a business center use, not to exceed 32 square feet in area. (C) Signs in Commercial and Industrial Zones No sign or outdoor advertising of any character shall be permitted in a CR, CG, ID, CB, IS, IP, IL or IH zoning district except the following: (1) A total of 2 signs per each business, which may be wall signs or roof signs, the total combined area of which shall not exceed 50 square feet or 1 square foot per foot of frontage, which ever is greater. (2) Only one projecting or free standing sign is allowed per business. (3) No sign shall be illuminated unless the wall of the building or side on which such sign is displayed or painted, or to which such sign is applied or attached, faces upon a street where the property on the opposite side thereof is in a CO, CR, CG, CB, ID, IP, IL, or IH district. (4) If a building has two or more frontages, each secondary frontage shall be allowed one additional wall sign attached to the building. The area shall be limited to one half square foot of area for each lineal feet of building frontage. Only one principal frontage is allowed per business. (5) Free standing signs are limited to a maximum height of 35 feet. PAGE 12 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 1421 ORDINANCE NO. 10A (6) Free standing signs are limited to a maximum of 75 square feet in area. (7) A business fronting on an alley may have one wall or projecting sign attached to the building limited to 16 square feet. (8) Directional signs, one such sign is permitted near each driveway in a commercial zone. Area of each sign shall not exceed 12 square feet. (9) Projecting signs are limited to a minimum of 32 square feet in area. SECTION 12. SIGNS ALLOWED FOR A INTEGRATED BUSINESS CENTER. (A) One free standing sign with a maximum area of 150 square feet for the business center. The height of such sign is limited to 35 feet. (B) The business center may have the same directional and temporary signs as allowed in the applicable zoning district. (C) One wall or roof sign is permitted for each individual business fronting on a street or parking lot, which is limited to a wall or roof sign with an area of the larger of 30 square feet or one square foot per foot of frontage on a street or parking lot. (D) One Under the Canopy sign for each frontage or each business not to exceed 6 square feet in area. (E) Individual businesses may also share the principal sign area of the center. SECTION 13. NONCONFORMING SIGNS. (A) Existing signs which have been legally erected prior to the effective date of this ordinance either in the City or in those portions of Marion County which were annexed to the City after erection of the sign and do not comply with the provisions of this ordinance are nonconforming signs. They shall be allowed to remain provided they comply with the provisions of this section. (B) To retain nonconforming sign status, nonconforming signs shall not be structurally altered. The sign face or the copy on the sign face, or both, may be PAGE 13 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 1421 ORDINANCE NO. 1t" 10A changed without first obtaining a sign permit. Sign maintenance and repair are required and may occur without first obtaining a sign permit. (C) Nonconforming signs shall comply with the provisions of this ordinance when one or more of the following occurs. (1) A nonconforming sign is relocated from one location to another location. (2) A nonconforming sign's structure, including but not limited to the support elements or framework, is changed. (3) A nonconforming sign is damaged by an act of God, including but not limited to wind, earthquake, floodwater, to the extent that the sign contractor's estimated cost of the repair exceeds by more than 75 percent the original cost of the sign or the cost of the most recent renovation to the sign, whichever is greater. The original cost or cost of the most recent renovation shall be determined by sign value information submitted at the time a sign permit was issued. If such information was . not submitted, the property owner or other person having such information shall submit documentation showing the cost. (4) A sign permit is issued for a new conforming sign on the same property or on adjoining property under the same ownership containing a nonconforming sign of the same type as the one for which the sign permit is issued. A "sign of the same type" means a pole sign for a pole sign or a monument sign for a monument sign or a wall sign for a wall sign. Before a new conforming sign is constructed all nonconforming signs of the same type, on the same property or on adjoining property under the same ownership shall be brought into conformance. The Building Official shall issue a sign permit for a new conforming sign provided the following condition of approval, or condition with words to the same effect, is stated on the permit, "A nonconforming sign of the same type for which this sign permit is issued and located on the same property or on adjoining property under the same ownership shall be brought into conformance prior to erecting the new conforming sign approved by this sign permit." PAGE 14 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 1421 ORDINANCE NO. ~ 10A The condition shall be met by removing the nonconforming sign. (D) Signs for which variances were granted prior to the effective date of this ordinance may remain provided the provisions of the variance approval are met. SECTION 14. VARIANCES All request for variances to this ordinance shall be processed in accordance with the variance procedures set forth in the Woodburn Zoning Ordinance. SECTION 15. PENAL TIES/INSPECTION/ENFORCEMENT (A) Penalties. It is a violation of this ordinance to fail to comply with or to violate any of the provisions of this ordinance or to erect, maintain or use a sign contrary to this ordinance. In addition to the remedies provided by this section, a violation of any provision of this ordinance may also be enforced in accordance with the City of Woodburn Civil Infractions Ordinance. Each day that a violation exists shall constitute a separate offense. (B) Inspection. All signs for which a sign permit is required shall be subject to inspection by the Community Development Director and/or the Building Official or other appropriate inspector. Inspection may include, but shall not be limited to the following: (1) Site inspection to ensure compliance with the sign permit and any provisions in this ordinance. (2) Structural inspection, including but not limited to braces, anchors, supports and wall connections. (C) Enforcement. The Community Development Director is authorized to enforce the provisions of this ordinance and to direct the removal of any illegal sign in accordance with this ordinance and the City of Woodburn Civil Infractions Ordinance. (D) Responsibility for Sign Violations. It is intended that sign violations be enforced even though the responsible party does not knowingly or intentionally violate the provisions of this ordinance. The mere fact that a violation exists and that a person is responsible or owns or controls the property on which the sign violation occurs is sufficient to initiate enforcement proceedings and impose forfeitures. A person may be found liable or responsible for an alleged sign violation by reason of ownership, control, possession or use of the sign, by having constructed or erected PAGE 15 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 1421 ORDINANCE NO. 1t" 10A the sign, by ownership, control or possession of the property on which the sign exists or has existed or by reason of such person being the proximate cause of such sign's condition. (E) Cumulative Remedies. The rights, remedies and penalties provided in this ordinance are cumulative and not mutually exclusive, and are in addition to any other rights, remedies and penalties available to the City under any other provisions of law. All officials, departments and employees of the City vested with authority to issue permits or grant approvals shall adhere to and require conformance with this ordinance, and shall issue no permit or grant approval for any sign which violates or fails to comply with the conditions of or standards imposed by this ordinance. Any permit or approval issued or granted in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance, whether intentional or otherwise, shall be void. SECTION 16. REPEAL OF PRIOR ORDINANCE. Ordinance Number 1827 adopted on July 26, 1983, is repealed. SECTION 17. SEPARABILITY CLAUSE. If any provision of this ordinance should be declared void or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, then the remaining portions of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 18. EMERGENCY CLAUSE. This ordinance being necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety, an emergency is declared to exist and this ordinance shall take effect immediately upon passage and approval by the Mayor. / J Approved as to form?Y1 n Cf / z.2.. <=J 2- City Attorney Date I APPROVED: FRED W. KYSER, MAYOR Passed by the Council Submitted to the Mayor Approved by the Mayor Filed in the Office of the Recorder ATTEST: Mary Tennant, City Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon PAGE 16 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 1421 ORDINANCE NO. IT 10B MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Chris Childs, City Administrator {A,t& SUBJ.: Hearing Date - Northland Cable TV Franchise Renewal DATE: September 23, 1992 RECOMMENDATION: Approve accompanying Resolution setting a Public Hearing for October 12, 1992 on the renewal of the Northland Cable Television, Inc. franchise. BACKGROUND: A tentative renewal Ordinance has been negotiated with Northland which received preliminary approval from the Cable TV Advisory Committee on Sept. , 22, 1992. The Oct. 12 hearing date will facilitate enactment of the 1 Q-year renewal Ordinance without the need for an additional 3D-day temporary extension of the existing franchise agreement. Copies of the draft renewal Ordinance will be distributed for Council review prior to the hearing date. If 10B COUNCil BILL NO. 1422 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE FRANCHISE RENEWAL OF NORTHLAND CABLE TELEVISION, INC. WHEREAS, pursuant to the franchise granted by Ordinance 1784, Northland Cable Television, Inc. has provided cable television service to Woodburn residents since 1982; and WHEREAS, Northland Cable Television, Inc. desires the renewal of this franchise to continue providing cable television services to the residents of Woodburn; and WHEREAS, a tentative 1 O~year franchise renewal ordinance has been negotiated with Northland Cable Television, Inc.; and WHEREAS, the Woodburn Cable Television Advisory Committee has reviewed said renewal ordinance and recommends its approval, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF WOODBURN RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That pursuant to Section 7(b) of Ordinance 1766, the City Council shall conduct a public hearing on the renewal of the cable television franchise of Northland Cable Television, Inc. Section 2. That the City Recorder, pursuant to Section 6 (9) (2) of Ordinance 1766 is hereby directed to give notic~ o~id hea~ L Approved as to torm;ol ~ ~ '9"22. / '1 L City Attorney Date APPROVED: FRED W. KYSER, MAYOR Passed by the Council Submitted to the Mayor Approved by the Mayor Filed in the Office of the Recorder ATTEST: Mary Tennant, City Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 1 - Council Bill No. 1422 Resolution No. 10C COUNCil BIll NO. 1423 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN. THE CITY OF WOODBURN RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: 0:..--+ t l d-, Section 1. Pursuant to' ORS 222.120, 7:00 p.m. on Sept9A"113e. 28, 1992 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" and Exhibit "B" 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 a like period. Approved as to form'1l:Y"\r ~ City Attorney APPROVED: FRED W. KYSER, MAYOR Passed by the Council Submitted to the Mayor Approved by the Mayor Filed in the Office of the Recorder ATTEST: Mary Tennant, City Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 1 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 1423 RESOLUTION NO. 10C EXHIBIT "A" Beginning at a point which is 1348.51 feet North 88053' West and 786.11 feet North 89006'47" West from the most Easterly Northeast corner of the William Darst Donation Land Claim No. 60 in Township 5 South, Range 2 West of the Willamette Meridian in Marion County, Oregon; thence South 8031 '01" West 624.06 feet; thence North 89023'29" West 713.37 feet; thence South 30019'50" West 396.07 feet; thence North 89020' West 119.59 feet to a point on the West line of a tract of land conveyed to Ray Scampley by deed recorded in Volume 340, Page 306, Deed Records for said County and State; thence South 0058'26" East 400.00 feet to the most Southerly Southwest corner of said tract of land; thence South 89020' East along the South line of said tract of land 931.03 feet to a point on the Westerly right-of-way line of the Interstate Highway No.5; thence North 35021' 14" East along said right-of-way line 1653.93 feet to a point on the North line of said tract of land; thence North 89006'47" West 769.52 feet to the place of beginning SAVE AND EXCEPT all that portion of the above described property lying within County Road No. 511, also known as Arney Road. Real Property Tax Account No: 44114-000 Situs Address as disclosed by Marion County Tax Roll: 2797 Arney Rd. Woodburn, Oregon 97071 10C EXHIBIT IIBII ... .. .. .. .. , .. .. .. ~--..-:: .. =-4 =-" ~!- . :'I/'! /GI -- -< ~~ r-=-r~-=--t< = . I~. I -. :! .::of <i):-" >- 1/ I <3 ~ @: ~ 0- .F/1 " . I 'U---H+-~~:- _......!)-:WD -ci~ ~-II('~ . .JfZ;:' CD< ~- . 103 00 03 0 .,f<, ~ / JI{ .,.1t' ~ ./' It ~'f "' / 17\ ~ 1" ----~--- #1 .,'t- / o :iJf( - - ---,,1" ~ / Ji----.---.----~ ~f -i::'<:i / ~. _ I -tf' / .~ >00 IJ:' ~<v / ....J.i~~. $'t- /. ~~iit(t~' -VI $' ,~~<<;'/ : ~f /_ ~ ;~f <-; // /r 103 ~ 03 0 _~__~.~_ . ~ J ~ ---- L ... _ J ~ .==-=--.i1 J"/..!!-~/ ( / ~ Q) .- / . ~ '00 / :=, pJ..,j\1 / 1/1101'1 / ,,:-.R r 103 03 03 0 (~ / -~~--Jirl~. t= PROPERTY ~OCATION -" _ ___ 'if -: . // I 1 ~, .-~*- @ Nt URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY ::--..-:: crlY UMITS ~I -f I 'S(( ..,..... c ~ 103 03 03 0 - IEE1 + a o co -$- =- : ROAO ''''' ~ __ ~\ .J-. 1t" 100 CITY OF WOODBURN POLICE DEPARTMENT M[EM(Q)~AN[))l1JM 270 Montgomery Street Woodburn, Oregon 97071 982-2345 Ken Wright Chief of Police Date: ;September 21, 1992 / Mayor and Council \ \ \ K n Wright, Chief of Police Temporary License Extension - La Linda's, 297 N. Front Street Authorizing OAR: 845-08-025 On Friday, September 18, 1992 I received the attached request of Temporary Extension of liquor license and closure for a private party at La Linda's Restaurant. As stated in Mr. Carbajal's letter, the council has only authorized live entertainment Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays. In reviewing licensee's activities these past months, I would provide a favorable recommendation towards this license extension on a one-time basis. RECOMMENDATION: Approve request to extend live music and closure of premises for private party on Thursday, October 1, 1992, 8:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m. only. That music noise be kept within the building. T 100 OREGoN ADMINISTRATIVE RULES CHAPTER 845, DIVISION 8 . LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION menu during meal hours. (D) An increase in the ratio of seating capacity for food service compared to seating for alcoholic beverage service. (E) Decor and atmosphere conducive to dining. (F) An increase in food service advertising. (G) Increase in the number of hours worked by food service personnel. (H) Food service inventory reports, purchase orders and invoices which show an increase in the amount of food purchased and available. (I) Promotions to increase food sales. (1) Description of the licensee's market, competition, and community economic conditions which directly affect the licensee's food sales. (6) Operating as Proposed. Commercial establishments must provide at least the food service last approved by the Commission, including number of meal periods, hours of meal service, and type of cuisine. Failure to provide this level of service is a violation and may result in a notice of violation or be grounds for refusing to renew a license. Stat. Auth.: ORS Ch. 471 .t 472 Hilt.: Lee 26, f. S-12~ Lee 27. f. 9-15-60; Lee 28. f. 12-19-60; Lee 29, f. 5-21-64; Lee 65. f. 9-22-17, ef. 10-4-17; Lee 12-1978. f. 9-28-78, d.10-1-78; Lee 6-1980,f.I-28_80, d. 3-1-80; Renumbered fraon 845-10-185; Lee 9-1982. f. 8-27-82. ef. 10-1-82; Lee 4-1984. f. 8-2-84, ef. 9-1-84 Minimum Operation of Certain Dispenser Outlets 845-08-020 Premises licensed with a D~ Class "A" or Dispenser Class "C"licenseshall be open for business serving the general public a minimum of five days per week, during the normal hours the business is open, unless excused from this requirement by the Commission. Stat. Auth.: ORS Ch. 471 .t 472 HIlt.: Lee 20-1980, f. 6-20-80. d. 7-1-80; Renumbezed fraon 84S-10-078 Closure of Premises for Private Parties 845-08-025 (l) Licensees may close their premises for private parties under the following circumstances: (a) Licensees holding a I>ispenseiClass "A", Dispensez- Class "C", Seasonal Dispenser or Restaurant license may close their entire premises to the general public in order to cata to private parties without losing their status as commcn:iaI establishments so long as the licensed premises are open to the general public at least five days a week during the regular hours of operation of the premises, unless exempted at the time of licensing. (b) Retail Malt Beverage licensees may close their entire premises, to the general public at any time to cater to private parties. (c) The Commission shall be notified at least 48 hours in advance of any closure to the general public of a premises licensed with a Dispenser Class "A". Dispenser Class "C", Seasonal Dispenser, Restaurant. or Retail Malt Beverage license in order to cater a private party. However, such licensees may close a portion of their premises at any time without notice to the Commission. (d) While closed to the public for a private party, at least one door which is normally used for public entry must remain unlocked so that inspectors from the Commission may have unrestricted access to the premises. (2) The COmmission may, at its discretion, require that licensed premises be open to the public should it be deter- (April 1990) 2 - Div. 8 mined that the community needs are not being met within a particular locality. (3) Private clubs or sports facilities, such as athletic clubs, tennis orracquetball clubs, or health spas, which have Retail Malt Beverage licenses may choose to sell to or serve only their members and guest of members without notice to the COmmission. Stat Auth.: ORS Ch. 471 .t 472 HIst.: Lee 6-1979, f. 4-2-79. d. 4-S-79; Lee 20-1980. f. 6-20-80, d. 7-1-80; Renumbered from 84S-10-077 Tap LabeUng; Service of Wine 845-08-030 (1) Licensees retailing draugJu beer shall disclose at all times the true brand name of the beer by attaching the brand name to the tap or pipe from which the beer is drawn, in such a manner as to make the brand name visible to the customer. (2) Licensees of the Commission who have the privi- lege of selling wine for consumption on the premises may transfer wine from the original container to another container prior to service to the customer. Stat Auth.: ORS Ch. 471 HIlt.: LCc 26, t. 5-12~ Lee 27. f. 9-15-60; Lee 28, f. 12-19-60; Lee 29. f. 5-21-64; Lee 31,f. 12-'ki7. d.12-26-67; Lee 49. f. 7-26-74, d. 9-1-74; Lee 4-1 979(Temp), f. ct d. 4-2-79; Lee 9-1979, f. 5-24-79. d. S-25-79; Renumbered from 84S-10-20S(4) IIId (S) {ED. NOTE: The ten oCTempomy RulC8 is not printed in the <>:elan Administrative RulC8 Compilaliaa. Copies may be obtained from the adoptina alCllCy or the S=uy of Slate.l Premlxlng of Drinks; Notice Requirements 845-08-035 (1) The JrOYisions in ORS 472110 which allow dispenser licensees to sell distilled spirits "from the original container" are not interpreted so as to prohibit a dispenser licensee from premixing drinks containing dis- tilled spirits. (2) Whenever a licensee premixes drinks in quantities of more than one liter, notices must be posted inside the licensed premises, in the bar area or such other location as to be visible to largenumbersofpatrons. Thenotices must slate that the ~ drink has been pteJnixe<f and the ingredients in the mix. Stat Auth.: ORS Ch. 471 .t 472 H1st.: Lee 7-1980. f. 1-28-80. d. 3-1-80; Renumbered from 84S-10-068 ( ~ Limitation on Container Size 845-08-040 (Lee 21-1979(Temp). f. 9-24-79. ef. 10-1-79:LCC28-1979,f. 11-23-79, ef. 11-26-79: Renumbered from 845-10-066: Repealed by Lee 1-1986, f. 2-6-86, ef. 4-1-861 ServIce to Guests by Class "B" Dispenser LIcensees 845-08-045 (l) Purpose. The Commission grants Class B dispenser licenses to private clubs so that they may sell and serve alcoholic beverages to members and guests. The purpose of this rule is to define member and guest (2) Prohibited Sale of Alcoholic Liquor. Licensees holding a Class "B " dispenser's license may not sell or make f~; '. ,. ,. '. ".. 100 q{lG [qz. th\e0 o~ ~(lCe.. ~\i~ W~nkT, C;C, cA WDcJbu_ycvJ lliv CJ",Jj lJlLt'1k +- 1> be.. .c, v>c\ .e V\C bsd Cl. o,f?i c~ Q l.J>ik>v- .r hc..LL\ e.. '('€.c.:, €. Jf J ~ \-\... ?'l ~{s. G:"~J;,\-\-lc~~ ~Cil}ilS~-b \)1;<.. DJ-v- ~c~lL-Jj OiZ- es4e~ b tl~ t\lt~ DY\ TfJ\.u-r;sdtU.l u+ 1., tQQ2" -b ~ w-el\ '(.;.~ .fu ceN:\.\\:1~ &t- 1=Ca-+t,,- b'1 -K"-L. c:' L \ we-' ul fl (I"(l.,,--U peV-f..G.sS'I~ ~ \"CLJe. levee--,^-, ,'k~~ 0-~ bv\. ~ck1s) 9(:--..LvclcU-f' (L''''\ S'u.rJa.,~ l.=Vt, YV'\. Cj ~ 60 f' h. ~ "2: 00 0........ \--Is TLL,,,- {. ~ V\c~ j~{l{catc~-k ~ "S~ w\\\ \'\0-~e l~0e ~~(AStC) al(~o~L WD~\J be fk:nJ&l) o.v~ aJtev--lb-~~~.~ ~J~ \ne- 6~ ~Jt l~+jCD1-.S ~ \'\.t~ " . AT .+t\.t S {1 ~ I l~ G. ~ iv l"-e,] LLe-S +- YD L,\ Gll'iltA-~ uS ~x\-Uss ~M.-It, Q.(e.c!"'-o~ \{s lLt.t'-UuV~ OY\. ~:tQ QeJebya{t~.. We... v.)~cO ho-ue G 0e-- ~,-4ev ~l ~"H'\A(J,~f-. (Je. tubufcl &>Jf '" ~H"-t ,okokL {hvl W"lllA..l~ ~u\d.e_ ()..l~ ~l<.1 fuR ~ 1f\.M.Y~ cR ~'DOr~ -\0 G."00 O-M. 01 f\..CJL~t1 /\ r., CI /'('>. (' \'J ,'.. (<'t-v1o ~ 100 September 11, 1992 La Linda's Restaurant Attention: Ed Carbajal Woodburn, OR Dear Sir(s): I, Rose Marie Garza-Tuntland, am requesting the use of your facilities on Thursday, October 1, 1992, from 8:00 p.m. to 12:00 Midnight. We would like to have a family gathering for mine and my sister's birthdays. This event will be in good taste. Please let us know if this will be possible. I may be contacted at (206) 690-2879 (work) or (206) 256-6762 (home). Please feel free to call me with any questions or concerns that you may have. Your consideration is much appreciated. Thank you very much. Sincerely, ~ '7/1aIL;j ,J1y,~-aJ ~~ Rose Marie Garza- Tuntland I 10E MEMO FROM: City Council through the City Administrator Public Works Program Manager ,e...u 4L-- TO: SUBJECT: Bid Award for Loader Backhoe DATE: September 23, 1992 RECOMMENDATION: Award the equipment purchase contract for a loader backhoe to the low bidder, Hessel Tractor and Equipment, for $41,546.00. Note: Approved FY 92/93 budget item under account number 096.960.711.052 BACKGROUND: City of Woodburn Bid No. 93-06 for a loader backhoe was opened and publicly read at 2:00 pm on September 21, 1992. Results were: Bidder Hessel Tractor and Equipment Star Rental and Sales Case Power and Equipment Salem Ford New Holland The Halton Company Amount $ 41,546.00 42,995.00 44,300.00 45,200.00 45,627.00 The loader backhoe will serve as the primary unit for the Street Division. It will replace the current unit, purchased in 1977, which is becoming unreliable for the utilization rate of the primary backhoe in the division. RR:lg BACKHOE. B ID 11' 14A MEMO TO: City Council Through City Administrator FROM: Community Development Department SUBJECT: Carl's Jr. Restaurant DATE: September 18, 1992 At their hearing of September 10, 1992 the Planning Commission approved, with conditions the request to place a Carl's Jr. restaurant adjacent to Lawson Avenue and Stacey Allison Way. See attached staff report for additional information. - 11' ----- . 14A -- STAFF REPORT SITE PLAN REVIEW #92-11 I. Applicant: Carl's Jr. Restaurant II. location and Zone: The northwest corner of Stacy Allison and Lawson Avenue (see Attachment "A") The property is zoned CG (Commercial General). III. Applicant's Statement: The intent of the proposed development is to operate a fast food restaurant serving primarily hamburgers. The restaurant is approximately 3,400 sq ft and will seat 108 people. At this time, construction documents are being prepared and upon completion will be submitted to the city for plan check. Construction of the project will start shortly after obtaining a building permit (see Attachment "A"). IV. Staff Comments and Findings: 1. The property is zoned CG (Commercial General). A restaurant is a permitted outright use in this zone. The only requirements of the applicant is that he fulfill the requirements as established in the site plan review process. 2. This development is directly south of the Taco Bell Restaurant and has street frontage on both Stacy Allison Way and Lawson Avenue. 3. Adequate water, sewer and storm drain connections can be made available to the applicant's property. 4. The applicant's site plan in regard to off-street parking and setbacks are met. V. Recommendation: Planning staff recommends approval with conditions. VI. Conditions of approval: 1 . Planning a. Parking The applicant is providing 48 parking spaces; only 17 are required by ordinance. b. Landscaping Prior to Woodburn Planning Commission review, provide a landscape plan that incorporates Section II through VII relating to the landscape plan policies a,nd Section VIII(B) landscape and buffering requirements for zoning districts. The painted stripping area on each side of the 40-foot parking stalls will be curbed and landscaped for tree plantings. c. Signage Provide a site plan that identifies the location, size, height and type of signage for your free standing and building signs. Page 1 - Staff Report/CARL'S JR lr ~ -- . 'I 14A -------,-1 I I I I i I I ' t I I . , I /FAIRWAY PLAZA j RE ALIGNED ,COUNTRY CLUB R( f (PROPOSED) r- NEW TRAFFIC j LIGHT i GAS . t I L:ATION V I ____J HIGHi I- Z <: a: \ ::J \ <I: \ I- . \ (f) , \. w ! \ a: I LEATHERS \ ! OIL / \ /' \ /'. J \ /~/' FUTURE ~_/ DEVELOPMEN,T TACO BELL McOONALOS FITNESS CENTER w > ----.------ <( CI\RlS Z o 3ft en ::s: <( --1 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT m APARTMENTS NEW ROAD DOCTORS OFFICE ,-________ . 7 --e-- STACY ALLISON WAY ) --e-- ~ A \\/\( \--\ ~\ t. N\ II!\ lr ~T~""- ALU........oi.J :,..tAl' HI I ; . ~ :z:: ... z: Q 1>- 1'1 It ;> I 'v ~ <. I I I I I ".J Jit:., 0, I , ~: ,''''0-' o."o,~ ~Ii.r {'\' v -~, I - 'r- I I, rCO f! I (l- :;)! -., a~ ~~ l!~ ~.ro .. ~~ ry f~ u" Z~ ~/I ,) Q ;I '" j I I I ""l )- I J: ~l: ." "'l .!\~ '- r (t-l < ). ~ ~ . 1'1 z: ... ~E 1" ,':' I I L '" ! I 1'1'1> " "' S\'l H -.J , I ~~~ > ~a j;ln ;:g' {l' 1;] g~ ~~ "' ~ l'~~ > 1:" -l ~ Q~ tt - I ~~ 1 ).('1 ~, 1 71 ~I ~~ (' [lI .....' .......1 11' ' '" ";4'-..-- '"' N Cl !: it Ir, ., ~I :'1 tl ~- 2.4-'-0" , ~ i'1 \) ~ 1\ ... <. " r" l' i'lj ~. t Afil ~\; -i r ? l> Z -i Ii I '" I I '1' J... ; {} =IV~ TH~ (l I) o ~ )i (" 7< =C-CO...1Cl' 4t{J ~P!..ANTING ----4 129.00 ?\ TI P\c \-\ ~1 \:.NT "B" it ;- ~ ~ is 'j lI\ C 11 ,,11 ..n: "0 ~~ f.. i]~ z< ,;l~ ).. r,f)E-- j;l:E 1'l~ h(li (\if) ~~ ::;f. ;: I- ..; ---1 ~ o..z: "!\~l\l ~zi (ji~~ :1 I: 'E ~ =~~ (JR'~ ~~ -1' E~ iii r. -V' I :r o r [I 14A If 15A CITY OF WOODBURN POLICE DEPARTMENT M[EM(Q)~A~[))QJM 270 Montgomery Street Woodburn, Oregon 97071 982-2345 Ken Wright Chief of Police Date: $.eptember 21, 1992 Council and Mayor Ken Wright, Chief of Police Renewal of DUll Traffic Safety Grant The Department is renewing it's Traffic Safety Grant with the Oregon Department of Transportation. This is the final year of the Grant, and runs from October, 1992 through September, 1993. Through the O.T.S.C. DUll Grant, the City has been able to provide an additional officer to its police force. We are funded with this position through October, 1993. At that time, the City will either terminate or budget the position. Through the Department's efforts of going after grants, we have been able to provide funding for Police Services above the General Fund allocation, thus adding additional officers. As with all grants, they come to an end, creating a decision point for budget committees. The activities for the DUll Officer for the past three years are as follows: DUll ARRESTS DUll Officer Other Officers Total Feb. 89 - Sept. 89 84 73 157 Oct. 89 - Sept. 90 92 193 285 Oct. 90 - Sept. 91 137 102 239 Oct. 91 - Sept. 92 113 123 236 'II'" 15A OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TRAFFIC SAFETY DNISION TRAFFIC SAFETY PROJECT SUMMARY 1. Agency/Jurisdiction Woodburn Police Department 2. Project Title Woodburn DUll Enforcement Project 3. Project No. J6-93-11-64 Project Period: From 10-1-92 To 9-30-93 4. Project Description One officer will be dedicated to DUIIltraffic enforcement within the city limits of Woodburn. This officer will also provide training and education to all citizens of Woodburn. Newspaper articles will also be prepared to increase awareness of the DUll issue. 5. Objectives a. To maintain fatal and injmy accidents occurring in the city of Wood bum at or below 33, the level of the 1991 calendar year, during the 12 month period starting October 1, 1992 and ending September 30, 1993. b. To reduce nighttime fatal and injury accidents occurring in the city of Woodburn by 20% from 19, the average of calendar years 1990 and 1991, to 16 during the 12 month period starting October 1, 1992 and ending September 30, 1993. c. To maintain DUll arrests for the department at or above 259, the level for the 1991 calendar year. d. To make 150 DUll arrests by the DUll officer by September 30, 1993. e. To increase citations for violation of the safety belt and child restraint laws from 48, the level for the 1991 calendar year, to 75 by September 30, 1993. 6. Project Director Don Eubank TItle StreetIP.O. 270 Monteomety Street City Woodburn Zip Code 97071 7. Project Coordinator Qperations Lieutenant Telephone 982-2345 FAX 982-2370 Tele.phone 8. Grant Manager Jill V os.per 9. Recommended Budget TSD Match Total $ 14.000 $ 45.100 $ 59.100 24% 76% 100% 10. Approval/Award Summary a. Federal (HSP) Approval: Date: b. OTSC Approval: Date: c. Final Award Letter: Date: d. Grant Adjustment 01: Date: e. Grant Adjustment 02: Date: Match $ Match $ Match $ Match $ Match $ TSD $ TSD $ TSD $ TSD $ TSD $ 737-1004 ill - If)2 If 15A . TRAFFIC SAFETY GRANT APPLICATION I. INTRODUCTION A. GENERAL INFORMATION Our demographic make-up consists of various ethnic groups and a large retirement community. Our best "estimate" for percentages are 30% Hispanic, 21 % Russian, 24% Retired and 25% Caucasian or other. As can be readily seen, our community is unique from other cities our size. Traffic enforcement/safety in the City of Woodburn has been inconsistent, however, with the DUll Officer, partially funded by the Traffic Safety Division (TSD), Oregon Department of Transportation, it has become more consistent over the last four (4) years. We have nine square miles to patrol and primarily due to the increase of calls for service, other than traffic, our traffic enforcement was somewhat reduced. We provide various community classes in traffic laws including public, private schools and civic groups. B. TSD GRANTS RECEIVED DURING THE LAST FIVE YEARS The Woodburn Police Department became involved with the TSD on February 6, 1989, for the first year funding. We are currently in the fourth year funding of our DUll project at a 28% level, Project J6-92- 11-64. II. PROBLEM STATEMENT A. WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? Consistent and continuous enforcement in any area of police work is essential for proper suppression and more importantly, reduction. Our totals for DUll arrests have ranged from 105 per year to 264 per year. This was primarily due to focusing our efforts in criminal enforcement vs. traffic enforcement. During the last three and one-half years, traffic enforcement along with DUll enforcement has become more consistent due to the addition of the DUll Traffic Enforcement Officer. 1 - "Ir 15A . With the enormous influx of migrant labor and the rapid growth we have been experiencing the last two years, coupled with the gradual rise of serious criminal violations, less time was dedicated to the enforcement of traffic laws. In a May 1991 survey, 11 % of the public still think drinking and driving is acceptable social behavior. In that same survey, 46% of the sample consider their chances of being stopped for DUll to be low if they drink and drive.' It is estimated that one in every 100 to 300 DUll trips is detected. Enforcement efforts are too limited and not visible enough. DUll enforcement is not considered a high priority in many agencies. Safety belt use is lowest in rural areas and among youth and low socioeconomic groups. With the continuation of this grant, the Woodburn Police Department will continue to place a high priority on the enforcement of DUll and Safety Belt Violations by the grant officer and other officers within the department. There has been a continuing decline in the enforcement of traffic laws. With our unique demographic make-up, total community involvement is necessary. As stated in the Community Development Director's letter, during the last two years the City has experienced unusual growth. During this year alone, we will add another 14,500 trips to our transportation grid due to new development. B. WHAT IS CURRENTLY BEING DONE TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM AND BY WHOM? As stated above, we are currently funded by the TSD for one DUll Enforcement Officer and have realized the positive effect of this position by seeing a more consistent effort in the area of DUll enforcement. The three years of our project definitely showed the progress to be positive with a definite improvement in consistency. The fourth year of this project shows the same positive aspects with consistent enforcement. Listed below are our current objectives and the progress to date on them. 2 - 15A OBJECTIVES 1991-1992 GRANT 1. To maintain fatal and injury accidents occurring in Woodburn at or below 32, the level for the 1990 calendar year, during the 12 month period starting October 1, 1991 and ending September 30, 1992. PROGRESS: To date, 23 have occurred. 2. To reduce nighttime fatal and injury accidents occurring in Woodburn by 20% from 8, the average for the 1987-89 period, to 7 during the 12 month' period starting October 1, 1991 and ending September 30, 1992. PROGRESS: To date, there has been Lb. 3. To maintain DUll arrests for the department at or above 299, the level for the 1990 calendar year. PROGRESS: To date there has been a total of 118 DUll arrests. 4. To make 150 DUll arrests by the DUll officer by September 30, 1992. PROGRESS: To date, the DUll officer has made 52 arrests. 5. To increase citations for violation of the safety belt and child restraining law from 20, the level for the 1990 calendar year, to 24 by September 30, 1992. PROGRESS: To date, 19 citations have been issued. III. OBJECTIVES A. To maintain fatal and injury accidents occurring in the City of Woodburn at or below 33, the average of the 1991 calendar year during the 12 month period starting October 1, 1992 and ending September 30, 1993. B. To reduce nighttime fatal and injury accidents occurring in the City of Woodburn by 20% from 19, the average of calendar years 1990 and 1991 during the 12 month period starting October 1, 1992 and ending September 30, 1993 to 16. C. To maintain DUll arrests for the department at,or above 259, the level for the 1991 calendar year. D. To make 150 DUll arrests by the DUll officer by September 30, 1993. E. To increase citations for Violation of the Safety Belt and Child Restraint laws from 48, the level for the calendar year 1991, to 75 by September 30, 1993. 3 lI' 15A IV. PROPOSED ACTIVITIES A. MAJOR ACTIVITIES A Veteran officer will be assigned to the traffic officer position by the Project director, and will be involved in the continual planning process to insure continued success. The officer will be involved to assure that the listed activities are accomplished. 1. Patrol will be highly visible. Selective enforcement techniques will be utilized to determine high accident locations and times Patrols will be fielded accordingly. Agency will maintain data on specific locations to develop a strategic plan. 2. All enforcement personnel will receive training in improved field sobriety techniques. Currently, the Woodburn Police Department has three (3) such instructors. This training is provided at our annual inservice training as needed. All of our Officers have been trained with the exception of one who will be trained in April of 1992 at a class to be conducted by our Officers. 3. The program will include a public information program to inform citizens about the increased enforcement effort in DUll and Safety Belt laws. This includes a bi-monthly newspaper article with the local paper and radio spots through the local radio station. Public information handouts will also be distributed by all Officers of the Woodburn Police Department. 4. The agency will inform involved agencies about the program and provide the TSD with letters of commitment from such agencies, including the District Attorney and Courts. This has been handled by the Project Director. 5. The agency will communicate the importance and benefits of safety belts and child safety seats in call contacts with the public. This will be handled by all Woodburn Police Officers on each violator contact. The agency will actively enforce the Child Restraint and Safety Belt laws. 6. We will include a public information program to inform citizens about the continued increased enforcement effort. We will 4 11' 15A continue to encourage all citizens to report drunk drivers to the police immediately and to comply with all safety belt laws. 7. We will maintain our bi-monthly crime spots in the local newspaper. We have recently done several radio spots on our local radio station about DUll, holiday travel and safety belt use. Education to the general public is very important and will continue to be included in classes at the high school along with civic club presentations. B. COORDINATION Interagency cooperation has been a long-standing tradition with the Woodburn Police Department. The Marion County Sheriff's Office has a substation in Woodburn and we will continue to coordinate our efforts daily. The Oregon State Police and our officers communicate daily, and at times, coordinate our efforts in relation to DUll Saturation Patrols. The Woodburn Police Department has informed various involved agencies about our program. Letters of endorsement from the District Attorney, District Court, the Marion County Sheriff and the Oregon State Police are attached. C. CONTINUATION If granted, this will be the fifth year of this project. We started with 75% funding from the Oregon Traffic Safety Commission. The level of funding for the current project is at 28%. Our commitment to continue this project and its activity should be clear by now. Even with the effects of Measure 5, the Police Department, City Council, Budget Committee and the citizens of Woodburn gave this project a very high priority. Several programs were eliminated, but not the DUll program. If this project receives continued funding this next FY (October 92- September 93), and no funds are available for the following year, we are confident that this position can be absorbed by the city. As you can see with the recent rapid growth plus the imminent growth in the City of Woodburn, Traffic Enforcement must be a priority to provide citizen safety. 5 - lr 15A V. EVALUATION PLAN A. EVALUATION QUESTIONS 1. Were fatal and injury accidents occurring in the City of Woodburn maintained at or below 33, the level for the 1991 calendar year. 2. Were nighttime fatal and injury acci~ents occurring in the City of Woodburn reduced by 20% from 19 to 16, the average for the years 1990-1991, during the 12 month period starting October 1, 1992 and ending September 30, 19931 3. Did the Woodburn Police Department maintain DUll arrests at or above 259, the level for the 1991 calendar year? 4. Did this DUll Officer make 150 DUll arrests by September 30, 19931 5. Did the Woodburn Police Department increase citations for the violation of the Safety Belt Law and Child Restraint Law from 48, the level for the 1991 calendar year, to 75 by September 30, 19931 B. DATA REQUIREMENTS 1. Data to be collected: The data table presented as exhibit A will be submitted with required quarterly reports. 2. Data will be collected weekly and then compiled monthly with use of action logs, complaint computer logs and the Law Enforcement Data System and Oregon Uniform Crime Reporting printouts. C. EVALUATION DESIGN 1. The data for Woodburn will be recorded monthly on the Data Table (Exhibit A), then tabulated each 90 days of the program for the required quarterly report. These statistics will be evaluated every 90 days plus on a 6 month and 12 month basis to determine trends and/or patterns enabling us to make more accurate projections. 6 lr 15A D. PROJECT EVALUATION PREPARATION A project evaluation will be submitted to the Traffic Safety Division following the requirements given in the agreements and assurances, Section B, Paragraph 6. VI. BUDGET AND COST SHARING (see attached) VII. EXHIBIT A: Data Table EXHIBIT B: Job Descriptions EXHIBIT C: Letters of Commitment EXHIBIT 0: Alcohol Traffic Safety Expenditures 1981 to present VIII. AGREEMENTS AND ASSURANCES 7 158 MEMO FROM: City Council through City Administrator Public Works Program Manager ~ L Water Curtailment Plan Approval TO: SUBJECT: DATE: September 24, 1992 On July 17, 1992 the Water Resources Commission, reacting to the statewide drought situation, ordered various state agencies and political subdivisions, including the City of Woodburn, to prepare a Water Curtailment Plan. Plans were required to be submitted to the Water Resources Department by August 31, 1992. Public Works prepared a plan in accordance with guidelines established by the Water Resources Department and submitted it in late August. The City recently received notification that the Water Curtailment Plan had been approved. A copy of the approval letter and the Water Curtailment Plan that was prepared are attached for your information. lr RECEWEO SEP 2 l 1992 158 OregOn- September 17, 1992 WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT City of Woodburn 270 Montgomery Street Woodburn, OR 97071 The Water Resources Department has received the water curtailment plan submitted by City of Woodburn in accordance with the July 17, 1992 order of the Water Resources Commission. We appreciate your prompt attention to the matter given the limited time available. The Department has reviewed your plan and has found that it satisfactorily promotes uniformity in water curtailment practices and that consideration was given to local conditions consistent with Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 690, Division 19. We found your plan to be particularly well done and commend your efforts. The water curtailment plan for City of Woodburn is approved. The Department received a favorable overall response to the request for submittal of water curtailment plans. The response demonstrates that a good level of preparedness exists to effectively deal with water shortages or other interruptions in water service. Thank you again for your cooperation in this program. If you have any further questions concerning water curtailment or water conservation planning, please contact Doug Parrow or Jack Donahue of my staff at 1-800-624-3199. Sincerely, ~i~ Martha O. Pagel Director 3850 Portland Rd NE Salem, OR 97310 (503) 378-3739 FAX (503) 378-8130 11 15B . .. CITY OF WOODBURN WATER CURTAILMENT PLAN The City of Woodburn is currently supplied water from groundwater resources from six operating wells. A seventh well has been drilled and should be fully developed by July 1, 1993. Average daily water use is approximately 1.7 million gallons with peak demand occurring in the summer months when average daily use exceeds 3 million gallons. The system has the capacity to produce approximately 6 million gallons per day from all wells. The system supplies approximately 14,000 residents and 5,000 service connections. The City draws its water from the Troutdale Formation. This is the major aquifer within the northern Willamette Valley. The formation ranges from 45 to 310 feet generally and is composed of slightly cemented sand and gravel with alternating layers of clay, silt, and fine sand. This productive aquifer is recharged by rainwater and at times from surface water sources. The Troutdale aquifer system is one of the best in the state. Three of the City's wells produce in excess of 1000 gallons per minute. The City's wells draw from various intervals of the formation ranging from 160 to 270 feet. The City currently has 810,000 gallons of elevated storage. The City water system is currently untreated. Water is pumped directly from the wells into the distribution systems. The existing wells are located in various locations throughout the City and are not situated in a well t1fieldll. There are no known limitations due to water right dates or supply agreements. There are no current opportunities to obtain or develop an alternative water supply. All water delivered by the City is metered to the consumer. All water pumped from the City wells is also measured and loss within the system is closely monitored. During the summer of 1992 well static levels were slightly lower than normally experienced. The City asked residents to use water wisely especially during warmer days when water use had historically been high. Citizen response was good. Peak use on hot days later in the summer was lower then early summer peaks and past years experience. All conservation and curtailment measures undertaken to this point have been voluntary. No regulating measures have been adopted by the City Council. Water curtailment will over the long run tend to improve the reliability of the groundwater supply. Static levels in City wells have historically recovered during the winter to levels that have been relatively constant for several years. Drawdown has occurred during the summer months and replenishment during the winter and spring. The City's utilization is small compared with the agricultural use that surrounds it. - r 158 ~ . Any groundwater that is conserved will remain in the aquifer and be available for future use. Following are three action stages that the City will follow when faced with the need to curtail water use for any reason. The need to curtail water use will be determined by the Public Works Director. If time is available the City Council will be advised and concur with the imposition of the actions. In higher stages the Council will have to enact enforcement ordinances, as required, to complete necessary actions. Stages and associated actions are as follows: Stage 1 - Conservation of Water Alert. Activities at this stage will be to ask for voluntary cooperation of consumers to reduce their use of water. Curtailment request will be directed to discretionary uses of water which are primarily outdoor related. Examples include yard watering, garden watering, car washing, washdown of parking areas, etc. Consumers will be informed of the reasons why the curtailment measures are required and what they can do to help. Consumers will be informed through newspaper articles, water bill notices, and possibly radio announcements. Wise and efficient use of water such as evening watering, not over-watering and watering grass not concrete will be emphasized. Emphasis will be placed on the need and why the reductions are required. Stage 2 - Critical Water Conservation Situation This stage will be recommended to the City Council by the Public Works Director. It will be based upon a worsening water supply situation which voluntary measures have not adequately reduced water use. This stage will involve ordinances passed by the City Council which will regulate water use. The regulatory actions will be determined by the severity of the shortage. Possible actions could include limiting outside water use to certain hours, limiting watering to odd/even days as determined by house number, a combination of the two previous measures, prohibiting lawn watering, restricting certain industrial water users, or prohibiting all outside water use. It would be anticipated that less restrictive measures would be employed initially to determine if the desired effect is obtained. If desired effect is not realized or the situation worsens more stringent measures may be required. The final step in this stage would be actions prohibiting all outside water use. Stage 3 - Water Emergency This stage will be recommended to the City Council by the Public Works Director. It would be based upon a critical water shortage which would not allow normal quantities of water to be produced and delivered. l1' 158 Since this stage would be the result of lower than normal quantities being available an ordinance invoking some sort of water rationing for all water use would be enacted. Legally binding penalties for those who fail to comply would have to be enacted. Industrial and commercial water users would be required to severely restrict or halt operations. An important consideration that will be actively pursued in all of the above stages is informing the customers of the City's water service. It will be vital to the success of the program that the consumers know why they are being asked to curtail their water use. In a drought or area wide situation the cause may be well known but if the problem is isolated to the City system due to a system malfunction more effort in getting information to the consumer will be required. Public meetings in addition to the normal communication measures may be helpful. " 15C MEMO NO ACTION REQUIRED Subject to initial review and comment by the Planning Commission. TO: City Council Through City Administrator ~~":~O" ' Community Development and Public Works Departments - FROM: SUBJECT: Transportation Task Force DATE: September 15, 1992 The City Council is well aware that transportation issues have been cine of the major focal points of discussion over the last few months. These discussions regarding transportation issues have been brought to the forefront more and more as the city realizes unprecedented growth. It is estimate by staff that if our growth rate remains at its present level we will realize a 35% increase in population over the next ten years. Such growth without reservation is going to have a marked impact on the City's transportation system. In addition to our growth potential the state, in January 92, implemented the State Transportation Rule, which in its general context, requires city's such as Woodburn to put in place by 1994 a detailed transportation plan. This plan must take into consideration not only future intra city street networks but also State Highway improvements, bicycle paths and lanes, pedestrian walkways and public transportation plan. To fulfill the obligations of planning the city's immediate transportation needs and meet the spirit of the State Transportation Rule will require a concerted effort on the part of the City Council and Planning Commission. To meet these obligations substantial efforts in the policy development area will need to be made that will require more time than either the Council or Commission may have time to address. Therefore, staff is requesting the Mayor and Council to appoint a special transportation task force that would formulate a draft document for Council/Commission review. The intent would be provide both bodies with progress reports as the document is developed. Staff envisions a task force made up of the fOllowing members: A Council person to chair the group A Planning Commission member A State Hwy Division Representative A Marion County Public Works Official A Capital Development Representative Two citizens at large A Planning staff member A member of Public Works staff 15C .- t.', The basic tasks of this group are as follows: Address short term transportation issues , eg traffic mitigation techniques for new development proposals, street realignments, access management, computerized transportation model and ,funding issues. Long term projects will involve positioning of future collector and arterial street patterns, interchange access design, by-pass routes and funding issues. It is anticipated the completion of a city wide transportation plan will take approximately 18 months. ~ T