Loading...
Agenda - 04/22/1991 CITY OF 270 Montgomery Street · AGENDA WOODBURN CITY COUNCIL APRIL 22, 1991 - 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER AND FLAG SALUTE ROLL CALL MINUTES A. City Council minutes of April 8, 1991 and special meeting of April 15, 1991. B. Woodburn Fire District Board minutes of March 12 & 19, 1991. WOODBURN Woodburn, Oregon 97071 · 982-5922 3A 3B m APPOINTMENTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS , A. Announcement: (1) Value of city clean-up by United Disposal Service, Inc: $10,350 or 30 30-cubic yard drop boxes. 4_~A (2) May 6th - 7:00 p.m.-Hearing on Wastewater Facility Plan. B. C. COMMITTEE REPORTS A. Chamber of Commerce B. Woodburn Comeback Campaign COMMUNICATIONS A. Written - (1) Elimination of DEQ Noise Control Program. 6_~A B. Presentation-Jim Sears: County Solid Waste Rate Increase Impact Presentation: Appreciation to Cleveland Street Citizens Committee Proclamation: (1) Statement of Peace by Bahai Faith of Marion County. Page 1 - Agenda, Woodburn City Council of 4/22/91 BUSINESS FROM THE PUBLIC (This allows public to introduce items for Council consideration not already scheduled on the agenda.) 8. PUBLIC HEARING A. Zone & Plan Map Amendment: Cleveland Street. 8A B. Appeal of Planning Commission Conditions: Stonehedge Apts. 8B C. Establishment of Weed Abatement Liens. 8C 9. TABLED BUSINESS 10. GENERAL BUSINESS A. Council Bill No. 1294- Ordinance establishing Park Rules. 10A B. Council Bill No. 1295 - Resolution authorizing license agreement test well. 1 OB C. Set date for public hearing on vacation of portion of Hayes St. 10C 11. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS 12. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. A. Check 4632 - 5075 for month of March, 1991. PUBLIC COMMENT NEW BUSINESS SITE PLAN ACTIONS A. Retail shopping center at I-5, Site Plan 91-04. B. Izzy's Pizza, Site Plan 91-05. STAFF REPORTS MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS ADJOURNMENT 11A 15A 15B Page 2 - Agenda, Woodburn City Council of 4/22/91 COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES April 8, 1991 TAPE READING 0001 DATE. COUNCIL CHAMBERS, Cl'l'~ HALL, CiTY OF WOODBURN, COUNTY OF MARION, STATE OF OREGON, April 8, 1991. 0003 CONVENED. A workshop was held at 5:30 p.m. with Mayor Kyser presiding. 0005 ROLL CALL Mayor Kyser Present Councilor Figley Present (5:50 pm) Councilor Galvin Present Councilor Hagenauer Present Councilor Jennings Absent Councilor Sifuentez Present (6:00 pm) Councilor Steen Present (6:28 pm) 0010 STATUS REVIEW OF WASTEWATER FACILITIES PLAN. In attendance at the workshop were City Public Works staff members from the Engineering division and Wastewater division, representatives from CH2M Hill and Wastewater Network. Public Works Director Tiwari provided the Council with an overview of the Facilities Planning process along with a review of previous workshop discussions pertaining to discharging of effluent into the Pudding or Willamette rivers. He briefly reviewed population and industrial growth factors projected through the year 2020. O6O9 Daria Wightman, CH2M Hill project manager, reviewed the effect of Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) standards once they are adopted by the Department of Environmental Quality. It is anticipated that the TMDL standards will be available by August 1, 1991. The Wastewater Facilities Planning process must include an informational public meeting to discuss options available to the City to meet state and federal water quality standards. The informational meeting has been scheduled for May 6, 1991, at 7:00 p.m.. Options available to the City include the following: 1) Expansion and/or upgrade of the current wastewater plant to meet the TMDL standards; 2) Irrigation of effluent in a wetlands area; 3) Separation of industrial wasteloads; 4) Construction of a new facility to discharge into Mill Creek following secondary treatment; and 5) storage of effluent. She also provided the Council with a draft copy of a fact sheet which would be available to the public prior to the informational meeting. Page 1 - Council Workshop Minutes, April 8, 1991 TAPE READING 2250 COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES April 8, 1991 Discussion was held regarding the financial aspects of the future improvements. She stated that the second stage of the facilities plan will include a financial plan for Council consideration. Costs indicated within the fact sheet represent estimated figures which include construction and operations through the year 2020. Public Works Director Tiwari briefly recapped the information provided during the workshop and reminded the Council that the informational meeting has been advertised for May 6, 1991, 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers. ADJOURNMENT. The workshop was adjourned at 6:48 p.m.. APPROVED Fred W. Kyser, Mayor ATTEST Mary Tennant, Deputy Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 2 - Council Workshop Minutes, April 8, 1991 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 8, 1991 TAPE READING 0001 DATE. COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALI~ CITY OF WOODBURN, COUNTY OF MARION, STATE OF OREGON, April 8, 1991. 00O3 CONVENED. The Council met in regular session at 7:00 p.m. with Mayor Kyser presiding. 0011 ROLL CALL Mayor Kyser Present Councilor Figley Present Councilor Galvin Present Councilor Hagenauer Present Councilor Jennings Present Councilor Sifuentez Present Councilor Steen Present Staff Present: City Administrator Quinn, City Attorney Shields, Public W0l:k's Director Tiwari, Community Development Director Goeckritz, Park and Recreation Director Holly, Police Chief Wright, Finance Director Gritta, Deputy Recorder Tennant. MINUTES. JENNINGS/SlFUENTF7 .... approve the Council minutes of March 25, 1991; accept the Planning Commission minutes of March 21, 1991, the Ubrary Board minutes of March 27, 1991, and the RSVP Advisory Council minutes of March 11, 1991. The motion passed unanimously. 0036 APPOINTMENT TO WOODBURN PLANNING COMMISSION. Mayor Kyser recommended the appointment of Wes Bauer to the Planning Commission to fill the unexpired term of Bill Shillig. JENNINGS/STEEN .... approve the appointment of Wes Bauer with his term to expire December 1992. The motion passed unanimously. OO5O Mayor Kyser advised the Council that a Special Council meeting has been scheduled for Monday, April 15th, 6:00 p.m., to hold a hearing on the sale of city property adjacent to the K-Mart development. 0073 The Council received a letter from the State General Services Department, Children Services Division, advising the City that they will be leasing office space in Fairway Plaza beginning July 1, 1991. Page I - Council Meeting Minutes, April 8, 1991 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 8, 1991 TAPE READING .0084 Administrator Quinn stated that a League of Oregon Cities joint legislative conference will be held in Salem on April 22, 1991. Registration for the conference must be submitted by April 17, 1991. 012O OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION (OLCC) COMPLIANCE PLANS FOR 1991 MQUOR MCENSE RENEWALS. Lt. Null advised the Council that Compliance Plans have been developed and signed by owners of the following establishments: Crossroads Grocery & Deli, Homeplate Market, Pub 99, The Raven Inn, and La Linda's Tortilleria. JENNINGS/FIGLEY... approve the Compliance Plan on all five establishments and recommend to OLCC the approval of the 1991 liquor license renewals with the compliance plans. The motion passed unanimously. 0208 COUNCIL BILL 1287 - RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A SOFTWARE UCENSE 0243 0281 AGREEMENT WITH MSI GROUP, INC. FOR COURT INFORMATION SYSTEM. Council Bill 1287 was introduced by Hagenauer. The I~ill was read by title only since there were no objections from the Council. On roll cai! vote for final passage, the bill passed unanimously. Mayor Kyser declared Council Bill 1287 duly passed. COUNCIL BILL 1288 - RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SOFTWARE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT AGREEMENT WITH MSI GROUP, INC. Council Bill 1288 was introduced by Hagenauer. The bill was read by title only since there were no objections from the Council. On roll call vote for final passage, Council bill 1288 passed unanimously. The Mayor declared the bill duly passed. COUNCIL BILL 1289 - RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLIC PARKING LOT TIME LIMITATIONS IN LOT ADJACENT TO THE U.S. POST OFFICE AND BORDERED BY LINCOLN AND GRANT STREETS. Councilor Hagenauer introduced Council Bill 1289. The bill was read by title only since there were no objections from the Council. Administrator Quinn stated that the request to close the public parking lot was initiated by the Downtown Association. The parking lot will be closed daily at 11:00 p.m. and will be reopened at 7:00 a.m.. On roll call vote for final passage, Council Bill 1289 passed unanimously. Mayor Kyser declared the bill duly passed. Page 2 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 8, 1991 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 8, 1991 TAPE READING 0349 COUNCIL BILL 1290 - ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR A TRANSIENT 05O4 OCCUPANCY TAX. Council Bill 1290 was introduced by Hagenauer. The two readings of the bill were read by title only since there were no objections from the Council. Administrator Quinn reviewed the changes to the proposed ordinance based on the Council's instructions following the March 25th public hearing. On roll call vote for final passage, Council Bill 1290 passed unanimously. Mayor Kyser declared the bill duly passed. COUNCIL BILL_ 1291 - ORDINANCE ALLOWING A SEWER CAPACITY FEE PAYMENT PLAN FOR CERTAIN PROPERTIES UTILIZING SUBSURFACE 0652 SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS. Council Bill 1291 was introduced by Hagenauer. The two readings of the bill were read by title only since there were no objections from the Council. Public Works Director Tiwari stated that the proposed ordinance is not a subsidy program, however, it allows qualified applicants to pay for the cortnection fees, plus interest, over a four-year period. Connection to the City's system will facilitate the correction of ground water contamination. On roll call vote for final passage, Council Bill 1291 passed unanimously. Mayor Kyser declared the bill duly passed with the emergency clause. COUNCIL BILL 1292 - ORDINANCE RELATING TO SURCHARGES ON WATER FOR THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF MUNICIPAL SEWERAGE O886 O946 SYSTEMS AND REPEALING ORD. 1932. Councilor Hagenauer introduced Council Bill 1292. The two readings of the bill were read by title only since no objections were voiced by the Council. Director Tiwari stated that the sewer rate change only affects users of high strength load processing during seasonal peak periods. On roll call vote for final passage, Council Bill 1292 passed unanimously. The Mayor declared the bill duly passed. SITE PLAN REVIEW - FRONT STREET BUILDING. Community Development Director Goeckritz advised the Council that the Planning Commission had approved a variance to Dennis Peterson DBA Dennis Peterson Equipment Co. at 151 Front Street. No action was taken by the Council on the issue. Councilor Sifuentez advised the Council that she had participated in a local radio talk show on April 7th and she had answered questions regarding the transient occupancy tax. She also suggested that the Police Department utilize the radio program to discuss law enforcement issues. Page 3 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 8, 1991 TAPE READING 1000 1173 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 8, 1991 Mayor Kyser expressed his displeasure in the information disseminated in the Woodbum Independent news article regarding the potential sale of city park property. He also advised the Council that he had received several calls from property owners who own one rental house within Woodburn but are required to register as a business under the recently adopted ordinance. ADJOURNMENT. The meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m.. Approved Fred W. Kyser, Mayor AFl'EST Mary Tennant, Deputy Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 4 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 8, 1991 TAPE READING 0001 0002 0014 .0023 0O60 SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES April 15, 1991 DATE. COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CITY OF WOODBURN, COUNTY _ OF MARION, STATE OF OREGON, APRIL 15, 1991. CONVENED. The Council met in a special meeting at 6:00 p.m. with Mayor Kyser presiding. ROLL CALL Mayor Kyser Present Councilor Figley Present Councilor Galvin Present Councilor Hagenauer Absent Councilor Jennings Present Councilor Sifuentez Present Councilor Steen Present PUBLIC HEARING - SALE OF CITY REAL PROPERTY. Mayor Kyser declared the public hearing open at 6:00 p~m.. Administrator Quinn provided the Council with an informational memo pertaining to the sale of an additional one acre of city owned land located within the Woodburn Industrial Park. In December 1990, the Council had initially authorized the sale of 3.076 acres of the total 7.5 acres owned by the City. The staff recommended that the Council declare the one acre parcel as surplus land and sell the property for the current appraised value of $28,308.00. No one in the audience spoke either for or against the proposed sale of city property. The public hearing was declared closed at 6:02 p.m.. COUNCIL BILL 1293 - RESOLUTION ENTERING INTO AN AGREEMENT TO SELL CITY REAL PROPERTY. Council Bill 1293 was introduced by Jennings. The bill was read by title only since there were no objections. Administrator Quinn stated that the revised agreement attached to Council Bill 1293 includes the full 4.076 acres which is to be sold to GFI - Woodburn Investments, Ltd. in the amount of $115,383.00. On roll call vote for final passage, Council Bill 1293 passed unanimously. Mayor Kyser declared the bill duly passed. 0115 ADJOURNMENT. The meeting adjourned at 6:04 p.m.. ATTEST Mary Tennant, Deputy Recorder APPROVED Fred W. Kyser, Mayor Page 1 - Special Council Meeting Minutes, April 15, 1991 WOODBURN FIRE DISTRIGT BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING MARGH 12, 1991 Meeting called to order by Chairman Reiling at 7:30 p.m. ATTENDANCE: Director Piper Chairman Reiling Director Weathers '- Director McKean Staff Present: Others Present: SET AGENDA: MINUTES: Interim Chief Bob Benck, Lisa Stafney Bernie Zollner at 8:00 p.m. Add Resolution 1991.11 to Item #3 under Business in Process and 1991.12 to Item #4, Business in Process. of February 19, 1991 approved as presented. TREASURER' S REPORT: PAYMENT OF BILLS: Checking - $1,621.01 State Fund - $661,839.69 Checks #8522-8586 in the amount of $68,255.96~ were approved. Piper/McKean motion. BUSINESS - IN PROCESS: Board Policy Msnual Revisions - Piper/McKeanmotion to accept and adopt proposed Amendments to the Board of Directors Policy Manual presented 19 February 1991 as follows: (Bold areas are the changes in the manual.) 1012 Board Rules: 1012.4 The Board President in cooperation with the Fire Chief will schedule a work session for new Board Members to acquaint them with the facilities, equipment and personnel and to provide copies and an overview of: 1. Fire Board Policies 2. District Territory snd Boundarieg MgD 3. District Personnel Manual 4. Civil Service CoemisstonRules and Re~latiorm 5. Barg~iningO~it C~t~act~l~t~ 1012.5 Travel will be covered at the rate of $0.24 per mile when private autos are used, or the actual cost where comercial transportation is provided. Woodburn Fire District Board of Directors Meetin~ March 12, 1991 1014 Powers and Duties of the Board of Directors 1014.7 It shall be a policy of the Board that members are encouraged to attend meetings, seminars and' -trainin~ sessions to enhance their kno~le~ of public mdminis~on mhd ~ relmtin~ to District operations. Reasonable expenses incurred in attendtz~ ~eetin~s, GAO Hiring Process - Set special meeting date for Tuesday, March 19th at 7:30 p.m. to discuss hiring process of Chief Administrative Officer. Bob also informed the Board that Captain Prosser is planning to retire in May and would like to discuss possibilities of filling his position at that time. McKean/Weathers motion to adopt Resolution 1991.11 authorizing the District to expend the proceeds from insurance reimbursement to purchase replacement radio equipment for Fire Station No. & that was stolen January 1991.' Carried unanimously. Piper/McKean motion to adopt Resolution appropriations. Carried unanimously. 1991.12 transfer of CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER REPORTS AND INFORMATION: 9-1-1 Report - Lengthy discussion regarding the letter from Mike Quinn about the 9-1-1 Dispatch Center. Chairman Reiling wants to keep things at the center cohesive and running and to continue pushing for Enhanced 9-1-1. Board members concurred. Bob introduced Bernie Zollner to the Board who is running unopposed for Director Piper's board position. Updated the Board on arrival of the new apparatus; Air Support Unit due to arrive in four to six weeks, Rescue Unit around the 1st of May. Budget Committee Meeting - April 2, 1991 Next Board Meeting - April 9, 1991. Civil Service Co~lnission - April 16, 1991. Meeting adjourned at 8:36 p.m. Wood~ Fir~ Disr. ric~ Board of Direc~ors Heeti~ . Hatch 19, 1991 Meeting called to order by Ghairman-Reiling at 7:30p.m. ATTENDANCE: Director Piper, Chairman Reiling, Director Weathers Director McKean Stmff Present: Bob Benck, Sandee Krupicka, Chief Administrative Officer Hiring Process: Reviewed time line, current j ob description and qualifications, community and department overview and salary information provided from LGPI report. Approved panel concept for selection committee to contain five members; one Board member, two fire service members, one volunteer member, and one community member. Piper/McKean motion to appoint Chairman Reiling to represent Board on selection committee. Carried. Weathers/McKean motion to appoint Charlie Piper to represent voluntee~ firefighters on selection committee. Carried. Piper/Weathers motion to appoint Jacquee Blalock to represent community on select, i,0n committee. Carried. McKean. Piper motion to appoint Larry Pitzer and Rick Hopkins to represent fire service members of the committee. Carried. If Chief Hopkins is not able to participate will contact Bruce Caldwell or Darrel Tedisch as alternates. Discussed process, qualifications, expectation of Chief to live within the District area. Approved process to consist of: 1. initial screen of all applicants for minimums 2. Committee to reach consensus on ten candidates who would participate in series of essay questions to be reviewed and graded by Fire Service committee members. (Questions to be developed by staff and fire service sub-co~mittee) 3. Five finalists would be interviewed by the five selection committee members with three finalists being ranked in order of preference and recon~nended to Board of Directors for final selection. &. Final selection to be made by Board of Directors based upon further investigation, interview, negotiations as necessary to arrive at an appointment. Approved time line, j ob description and community overview as presented to be included with application packet. Discussed salary range and reviewed information from LGPI survey. Piper/McKean motion to set salary range as negotiable between $3600 to ~500. per month. Carried unanimously. Shift Captain Retirement: Discussed possible retirement of Captain Jim Prosser. Bob has asked Jim to present District with letter of intent by April 8 if his intention to retire as of April 30, 1991 is definite. It would be Bob's recommendation that rather than fill the vacant Captain position at this time we fill the Training Coordinator vacancy. The testing process has already been completed and the need for the Training Coordinator position still remains a priority due to federal and state regulations on training and personnel safety. Coverage for evening and weekend Duty Officer on B Shift would be rotated among Administrative personnel and Captain's as necessary. Discussed Training Coordinator overtime compensation; position will require night meetings and weekend drill time. - .... Current ~Training Officer is paid cash overtime since we cannot afford to be without the person during regular shift, and new Training Coordinator would be in same situation. PiperfMcKeanmotion to authorize Training Coordinator position to be filled based on Civil Service eligibility list. Bob reiterated again that at some point in the future as funds become available we will begin examination process with the Civil Service Commission to fill vacant Shift Captain position. This is a short term solution at best. Next meeting April 9. 1991. Adjourned at 9:00p.m. United Disposal Service, Inc. 2215N. FRONT ST. WOODBURN. OR 97071 TELEPHONE 981-1278 RESIDENTIAL- COMMERCIAL- INDUSTRIAL- RECYCLING ACCT. NO SERVICE ADDRESS: CITY OF WOODBURN 270 MONTGOMERY ST. WOODBURN, OR 97071 Please pay this invoice. No statement will be ~nt. PAGE: ,~ INVOICE DATE MO. DAY YR. WOODBURN CITY CLEAN-UP SERVICES TERMS: NET lOTH. A SERVICE CHARGE AT THE ANNUAL PERCENTAGE RATE OF 18% PER ANNUM (MONTHLY RATE IS 1~%) WILL SE APPUED ON ALL PAST DUE ACCOUNTS. FINANCE CHARGES CALCULATED ON 2OTH OF EACH MONTH. la'tEASE DETACH HERE ~i~kANO RETURN TH~S PC~TION WITH YOUR PAYMENT. MO. OAY YR.'-~ QTY. [ DESCRIPTION IREFERENCE Thank You $ AMOUNT ENCLO~< 03/29/91 - 4/1/91 WEEKEND SERVICES CITY CLEAN-UP DROP BOXES 30 30-CUBIC YARD DROP BOXES 109,537# 30 X $345 = $10,350.00 TOTAL VALUE OF DONATED ,SERVICES = $10,350.00 UnitedDispo~,~lSendce, lnc.· 2215N. FrontSt. ~ Woodbum, OR97071 ,, 981-1278 PAY THIS AMOUNT April 5, 1991 ENVIRONMENTAl QUALITY COMMISSION The Department has struggled with a rapidly expanding environmental agenda and limited resources for several years. We have been able to maintain our base programs by stretching available resources. Budget constraints resulting from passage of Measure 5, however, have forced the agency to rethink its priorities and to make some very unpopular program cutbacks. As a cost savings measure, management has decided to cancel DEQ's Noise Control Section effective July 1, 1991. DEQ believes that some activities traditionally performed by the Noise Control Section can be effectively implemented by local governments. Over the past several years I have had the opportunity to personally work with many of you. Together we successfully produced a network of greater than 30 city~ and county noise control programs. The existence of successful local programs should make it easier to transfer enforcement responsibility from the State to the cities and counties. Phaseout of DEQ's Noise Control Section will be painful process. I am, however, optimistic that the loss of service provided to the public can be minimized if the local governments assume a greater role in the prevention and resolution of noise problems in the future. If we endeavor to expand and enhance local regulatory efforts, we can continue to maintain a viable statewide noise management and control program. I need your support to assure the success of this undertaking. Six one-day training workshops will be held at several locations during the months of April and May to facilitate a smooth transition of regulatory responsibility. The curricula will focus primarily on ordinance drafting and the basics of field measurement and enforcement of decibel standards. This training will qualify for Board on Police Standards and Training (BPST) credits, and will be given free-of-charge. The curricula can be amended to accommodate the special needs of those in attendance. I welcome any suggestions you may have. Tim? 8:30 a.m.- 4:30 p.m Date April 22, 1991 Location DEQ Headquarters Conference Rm 3~ 811 s.w. Portland, Orego~ (over) 811 SW Sixth Avenue Portland, OR 97204-139( (503) 229-5696 DEQ-46 April 5, 1991 Page 2 April 24, 1991 April 30, 1991 May 1, 1991 May 7, 1991 May 15, 1991 8:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. Permit Center 244.East Broadway Eugene, Oregon 8:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. Police Department 989 Spruce St. Florence, Oregon 8:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. Council Chambers 1175 E Main Ashland, Oregon 8:00 a.m. - Noon Public Works Bldg 1375 NE Forbes Rd Bend, Oregon 8:00 a.m. - Noon 1:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m. (two sessions) Police Department 330 South 1st Hermiston, Oregon The above training is being offered in preparation of the Programs's termination. Beginning July 1, 1991, only limited assistance will be provided by DEQ. Engineering evaluations, field enforcement, and other forms of technical assistance will be discontinued. The sound level meter loan program be continued through DEQ's regional offices. I invite you to take advantage of the upcoming training sessions. Please pre-register for the session closest to your location. I need an advance head count to assure adequate accommodations. You may pre-register by calling me on the State toll free number, 1-800-452-4011, or locally call 229-5989 (Portland). Again, I welcome your comments and training suggestions. Sincerely, ~~eTe~ O b~a e~r ~-~e ~ntrol Program g Air Quality Division MEMO TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Council through City Administrator Planning Commission Zone map #90-05, Comprehensive Plan Map #90-02, Site Plan Review #90-15 March 21, 1991 At their hearing of December 13, 1990, the planning commission approved with conditions the Public Works Department request to amend the City's land use maps to allow the property to be used as a material storage area. The city council has three alternatives regarding this recommendation: 1. Approve without additional conditions the planning commission's recommendation to amend the City's zoning and comprehensive plan maps. 2. Approve the amendments with modified or additional conditions. 3. Deny the request. Whatever action is taken by the council, city staff will submit an ordinance to substantiate council's action at the next council meeting. SG:Ig STAFF REPORT ZONE MAP AMENDMENT CASE # 90-05 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT CASE # 90 -08 SITE PLAN REVIEW CASE # 90-15 APPL I CANT/PllOPEBTY OWNER: CITY OF WOODBURN P~ERTY L[~ATI[~: CLEVELAND STREET ( SEE ATTACHMENT "A") SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL/OPEN SPACE AND PARKS ,. REQUEST: 1) To consider an amendment to the Woodburn Zone Map to rezone approximately 3.88 acres from SR ( Single Family Residential District to PS Public Services District) with concurrent Comprehensive Plan amendment from Low Density Residential/Open Space and Parks to Public Use. : 8) To consider an application for site plan review to develop a storage facility ( material storage area) STATEMENT OF INTENT: "...This 3.82 acre parcel was donated to the City. The intent of the project is to have the parcel rezoned from its current RS zoner to a PS zone for public use. The next phase is to enclose an area approximately 110 ft. by 170 ft.~ with a site-obscuring chain link fence with a sliding gate at the existing 84-foot driveway apron~ for storing City materials. This phase would also include asphalting a portion of the enclosed lot for the driveway and placing gravel on the remaining fenced-in area. Also~ a concrete equipment washdown area will be installed within the fenced area...". A) ZONE MAP AMENDMENT AND COMPREHENSIVE MAP AMENDMENT I. Applicable Zoninq Ordinance Criteria: 1) Chapter 15. Zone Change Procedure. 8) Chapter 16, Comprehensive Plan Amendment Procedure. Section 16.050. Plan Amendment Criteria. Before a Plan Amendment can be made~ the Planning Commission must find that the proposal meets the following criteria: a) The proposal complies with all applicable Statewide Goals and Guidelines. b) The proposal complies with the remaining Goals and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan. c) There is a clearly demonstrated public need for the proposed amendment. d) The proposal best satisfies the public need. Section 16.060. Burden of Proof. The following specific questions shall be given consideration in evaluation requests regarding plan and zoning amendments and are as follows: a) To support an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, the applicant shall 1) Prove that the original plan was in error; 8) Show that the community has changed since the original plan was adopted; or 3) Show that there has been a change in the planning and growth policy of the City. ,~ b) To support a zone change, the applicant shall: 1) Show there is a need for the use proposed; 8) Show thmt the particular piece of property in questions will best meet that need. II. Staff C~mments a~d Evaluation of the Request. 1. The property is approximately 3.88 acres in area. 2. The property is zoned Single Family Residential. 3. The Comprehensive Plan Map indicates that approximately 6~ of the property is designated as Open Space and Parks and approximately 35~ of this property is designated as Low Density Residential. 4. The property is vacant at present time. 5. Approximately only 80~ of the total area of the parcel may be developable; the ma~or part of the parcel is located within the identified floodplain area ( see Attachment 6. The parcel was donated to the City. ?. The Public Works Department wants to develop the portion of the property directly adjacent to Cleveland Street ( see Attachment "C~ and staff report Site Plan Review # 90-15 included to this report). 8. The intention of the Public Works Department is to use the developable portion of the property as material storage area. 9. There is already a city shop operated by the Public Works Department located one block north from the sub~ect property ( see Attachment "D" 10~ The parcels adjacent to the subject property are zoned Single Family Residential and their Comprehensive Plan designation is Low Density Residential/Open Space Parks. The major part of the surrounding area is located within the identified floodplain area. II. STAFF [~USIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. The property is approximately 3.22 acres but only small part of this parcel is developable ( approximately 20~ of the area). 2. The property i~ vacant at present time at is not suitable for any type of intense development due to the fact that the major part of the property is located in the floodplain area. 3. The property is located one block away from the City shop. 4. The Public Works Department storage area; this type of improvements on the site . wants to utilize this parcel as material development does not require any intense 5. The parcel seems to be the best available site to develop a material storage facility because~ - the parcel is not suitable for any intense development - the parcel is not suitable for residential development; only small portion of the parcel may be developable -the proposed development will not affect the residential character of the neighborhood III. RECOMMENDATION: S~aff recommends approval of Zone Map Amendment Case # 90-05 and Comprehensive Plan Map # ~0-08 based on the following conclusions: 1. The proposal complies with the Goals and Policies of The Comprehensive Plan. 8. There is a clearly demonstrated public need for the proposed amendment. 3. The property will best meet the need for a material storage facility operated by the Public Works Department. PART B. SITE PLAN REVIEW -- MATERIAL STORAGE AREA I. Applicable Ordinance Criteria: - Woodburn Zoning Ordinance: a) Chapter 10. Off-Street Parking, Loading & Driveway Standards b) Chapter 11. Site Plan Review c) Chapter 34. Public~ Semi-Public & Government District - Woodburn Floodplain Ordinance II. Staff Comments: 1. The Public Works Department wants to utilize only a strip adjacent directly to Cleveland Street. 2. The basic idea of the site plan is to enclose an area approximately 1lOft. by 170.~ with a site obscuring chain link fence with a sliding gate at the existing ~-foot driveway apron. ( see Attachment 3. The City wants to use the parcel for storing materials. 4. The development will include asphalting a portion of the enclosed lot for the driveway and placing gravel on the remaining fenced-in area. Also a concrete equipment washdown area will be installed within the fenced area ( see Attachment "E") 5. The driveway approach is ~ feet wide. The Zoning' Ordinance does not provide any specific standards for driveway approach for the Government District. ~.There is already a sidewalk adjacent to the property. III. Staff Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the requested Site Plan Review sub}eot to the following conditions: 1. Engineering: a) Final plan shall conform to the Construction Plan Review Procedures and Standards. b) All work shall conform to Woodburn Standard Specifications and all state building codes. c) Area between the fence and sidewalk shall be landscaped. d) The proposed development shall comply with the Woodburn Floodplain Ordinance. e) Wash area shall discharge into a clarifier prior to discharging into the sanitary sewer system f) Backflow device will be required on water service to this parcel. 2.Planning: a) The fence shall be erected and maintained at a height of at least four feet but not more than seven feet. 'LS, 'ZONE B ZONE C ZONEC ZONE[ KEY TO MAP SOO-Year Flood Boundary tOO-Year Flood Boundary Zone Designations· With I)ate of Identification e~,., 12/2/74 ':00-Year Flood Boundary .';00-Year Flood Boundary · Base Flood Elevation Line With Elevation In Feet"" Base Flood Elevation in Fe~.t Where Uniform Within Zone"* (EL 987) Elevation Reference Mark RM7x River Mile · M1.5 o "*Referenced to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 *EXPLANATION OF ZONE DESIGNATIONS ZONE A A0 AH A1 -A30 A99 B C D V V1 -V30 EXPLANATION Areas of 100.year flood; base flood elevations and flood hazard factors not determined. Areas of 100-year shallow flooding where depths are between one (1) and three (3) feet; average depths of inundation are shown, but no flood hazard factors are determined. Areas of 100.year shallow flooding where depths are between one (1) and three (3) feet; base flood elevations are shown, but no flood hazard factors are determined. Areas of 100.year flood; base flood elevations and flood hazard factors determined. Areas of 100.year flood to be protected by flood protection system under construction; base flood elevations and flood hazard factors not determined. Areas between limits of the 100.year flood and 500- year flood; or certain areas subiect to 100-year, flood- ing with average depths less than one (1) foot or where the contributing drainage area is less than one square mile; br areas protected by levees from the base flood. (Medium shading) Areas of minimal flooding. (No shading) Areas of undetermined, but possible, flood hazards. Areas of 100-year coastal flood with velocity (wave action); base flood elevations and flood hazard factors not determined. Areas of 100-year coastal flood with velocity (wave action); base flood elevations and flood hazard factors determ ined. ZONEB ZONE C CORPORATE LIMITS ATTACHMENT po~'lion 10 be ~, AT TA CHMEN r 'C " ~4 A T TA C~INIEN '1- ~t~.~ MEMO TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Council through City Administrator Community Development Director Appeal a Planning Commission Condition relating to the Stonehedge Apartment Complex April 18, 1991 At their hearing of March 14, 1991 the planning commission approved the building plans for the 192-unit Stonehedge Apartment complex. This development is to be located adjacent to Front Street just south of St. Luke's cemetery. The commission, in rendering their approval, required the developer to build an east/west street along the south property boundary. An additional meeting was held on March 21, 1991 to further discuss this matter. The decision was the same, however, the time frame for completing the street construction of the east/west road was modified from being built at the time of construction of the complex to dedicating the right-of- way and building the street at a time as established by the city council. After the commission rendered this decision, the applicant filed a decision to appeal the condition regarding the east/west street improvement. It should be noted the applicant is not appealing any of the other conditions of approval, only the street dedication and its improvement. Therefore, the council has only to determine one of the following: 1) Confirm the planning commission's decision to require street dedication and improvement based on the existing evidence and testimony from this hearing 2) Modify the planning commission's decision 3) Reverse the commission's condition that an east/west street be built based on the evidence provided in this report and any public testimony. Please reference "Stonehedge Apartment Complex" packet MEMO TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: MICHAEL QUINN, CITY ADMINISTRATOR DATE: APRIL 18, 1991 SUBJECT: WEED ABATEMENT LIENS The hearing has been established by the City Council to review any property owner objections to the abatement cost and process associated with the removal of obnoxious vegetation per Ordinance 1822. Dependent upon the comments received and deliberation by the Council, the City Council will then affirm the corrections of these costs and establish a lien upon the properties. This action will be finalized via a Council resolution at the next meeting. ORDINANCE Ordinance 1822 adopted 6/27/83 by the City Council establishes procedures for the control and removal of obnoxious vegetation. The purpose ,of this ordinance was to control the height of weeds and grass, the growth of harmful vegetation such as varieties of poison oak and ivy, and blackberry brush across property lines. These items were considered a nuisance, a health hazard in the case of poison varieties, a fire hazard, and a traffic safety hazard. Between May I to September 30 of each year this ordinance is in effect and it becomes the responsibility of the property owner or person in charge of the property to be in compliance. A violation involves notice with 10 days for abatement or be subject to City removal and abatement fees. HEARING Section 6 of Ordinance 1822 allows for a reasonable opportunity to be heard in objection to the abatement fees imposed by this ordinance. This is the stage we are currently at with the below designated properties. All designated property owners were noticed prior to their abatement in accordance with the ordinance. In addition, all designated property owners were notified by mail on April 3, 1991, informing them of this hearing. PROPERTY ABATES The following property owners have been notified of this hearing and I have included any responses received. Otherwise, the property owner has elected to disregard this notice or has elected to present testimony in person. Memo to Mayor and Council April 18, 1991 Page 2 PROPERTY OWNER Ivan Kuznetsov Lupe Trevino --~John Beardsley Guenther Lang --Barwish Idriss Alex Afonio William Macklox William Eudy ~trenio Garcia Iosif Kuznetsov Dimitry Kuzmin Richard Jones ~-C.W. Bagley,Trustees ---Dura-Craft John Wiley SE'I-rLEMENT Irenio Garda TAX ACCNT SITE ADDRESS ABATE FEE 92040-161 469 Bradley $100 7/16/90 43P'PP-000 690 Ogle $150 7/16/90 92840-075 1175 Mt. Hood Ave $150 7/16/90 92840-071 1235 Mt. Hood Ave 42555-000 1438 Hardcastle $100 7/06/90 44097-000 3085/3001 Newberg Hwy $400 8/07/90 43223-500 500 BIk "A" St $200 8/07/90 92580-000 349 Hardcastle $100 7/06/90 92790-040 948 N First St $100 7/06/90 92570-030 448 Stark St $100 8/07/90 92570-160 555 Brown St $100 8/PP/90 92590-060 321 Oswald St $100 8/22/90 43053-000 784 Young St $100 9/28/90 42473-000 775 Hardcastle $150 8/22/90 92361~071 National Way property $225 9/28/90 92361-061 1399 National Way $150 9/28/90 43067-000 434 E. Cleveland ' '$250 7/16/90 Has paid abatement fee APPEALS RECEIVED 1. John Beardsley - Letter dated 4/8/91 attached, plus his submittal of $200 check. This left $50 owing on the fee. 2. Darwish Idriss - Letter dated 4/12/91 attached. Apparently when the City sent out a notice in May he contracted to have the property mowed in June. Unfortunately, be the end of summer it had grown back and he was cited at that time without a second notice or followup by local property manager who handled the situation in June. 3. William Macklox Apdl 3rd notice returned as address unknown. Our records indicated the property owner lives in Redondo Beach, CA. A lien could still be applied to the property if desired. Memo to Mayor and Council April 18, 1991 Page 3 4. C.W. Bagley, Trustees - The appellants are represented by Ray Johnson of 1140 Orchard Lane. Their contention is that they had maintained this property and had spent $300 on spraying it with a weed killer on 9/24/90. The lot was contract mowed on 9/28/90. They also contend that the notice was issued too late to comply with the 10 day notice before abatement is to occur. 5. Dura-Craft - Mr. Dave Christie has appealed on the basis that he had not been given notice of the September 14th violation which was moved on September 28, 1990 within two days of the expiration period of this ordinance. He contends that he mows the lot when contacted in May and our observation is that the property was cleared in June. This property is located in the Industrial Park, and he too contends that it was sprayed with a week killer prior to being cut by the City contractor. 6. Lupe Trevino - Letter received 4/18/91 is attached. Their contention is that their contractor failed to mow prior to the City contracting the job. ACTUAL COSTS The City is obligated to charge the abatement fees established in the ordinance at $100 for the first hour and $50 for each hour thereafter. A brief summary of this~stimate is as follows: $ 30 - 15 35- 18 - $100 hourly charge by our contract mower filing fees if recorded at County, otherwise less if done on City lien docket fee for each certified letter of notice staff support for enforcement staff support for administration Each subsequent hour involves the $30 for contract cutting and $20 for staff support on enforcement and administration as necessary. As can be seen, the actual out-of-pocket costs for the City involve the hourly contract mowing fee and the fees for mailing and recording. All other costs involve staff time and supplies to be budgeted. Memo to Mayor and Council April 18, 1991 Page 4 RECOMMENDATION Pending any further justification offered at the hearing, I recommend that liens be filed for the property abates listed above with the following adjustments: 1. Irenio Garcia: Remove since abate fee is satisfied. 2. John Beardsley: Remove since the property owner clearly recognized his responsibility now and has reimbursed us sufficiently to cover out-of-pocket expense in this case. 3. Darwish Idriss: Remove due to a concern that the City has not notified violators for the offending citation. We mailed an earlier notice to everyone in May to which this property owner, being out of town, responded with a contract cut. Section 3 of the ordinance requires that notice be given and I think, in retrospect, it should be for the actual offense. This property owner did initially comply and made arrangements with a local party to manage the property. 4. C.W. Bagley, Trustees: Remove due to the above,qoncern I have about notice requirement, plus the fact that the owners did take some abatement action different than mowing in order to comply. 5. Dura-Craft: Remove due to the above concern. Staff will followup in the future with individual notices as site specific to the actual offense. COUNCIL BILL NO. 727 ORDINANCE NO. 1822 AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE CONTROL AND REMOVAL OF OBNOXIOUS VEGETATION, REPEALING SECTION 18 OF ORDINANCE NO. 1616 (AS AMENDED) AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. THE CITY OF WOODBURN ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. General Definitions. (1) Person. A natural person, firm, partnership, associ'ation or corporation. (2) Person in charge of property. An agent, occupant, lessee, contract purchaser or other person having possession or control of property or the supervision of any construction project. (3) Person responsible. The person responsible for abating an obnoxious vegetation shall include: (a) The owner. (b) The person in charge of property, as defined in subsection (2). Section 2. Definition of obnoxious,,vegetatio~. (1) The term "obnoxious vegetatiOn does not include vegetation that constitutes an agricultural crop, unless the vegetati6n is a health hazard or a fire or traffic hazard within the meaning of'~ubsection (2) of this section. (2) The term "obnoxious vegetation" does include at any time ~etween May i and September 30 of any year: (a) Weeds more than ten (10) inches high. (b) Grass more than ten (10) inches high and not within the exception stated in subsection (1) of this section. (c) Poison oak. (d) Poison ivy. (e) Blackberry bushes that extend into a public thoroughfare or across a property line. (f) Vegetation that is: (i) A health hazard; (ii) A fire hazard because it is near other combustibles, or (iii) A traffic hazard because it impairs the view of a public thoroughfare or otherwise makes use of the thoroughfare hazardous.. (3) Between May I and September 30 of any year, no owner or person in charge of property may allow obnoxious vegetation to be on the property or in the right-of-way Of a public thoroughfare abutting the property. It shall be the duty of an owner or person in charge of property to cut down or to destroy grass, shrubbery, brush, bushes, weeds or other obnoxious vegetation as often as needed to prevent them from becoming unsightly, from becoming a fire hazard, or, in the case of weeds or other obnoxious vegetation, from maturing or from going to seed. Page 1 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 727 · · ORDINANCE NO. 1822 Section 3. Notice of Violation. If any person who owns, or is in charge of, property within the city of Woodburn shall fail or neglect to remove obnoxious vegetation from that property, as herein above required, the City Administrator or his designee shall serve upon said person a written notice to remove the obnoxious vegetation within ten (10) days or the City will cause the same to be done and charge the cost thereof as a lien against the property. Such notice shall be served upon said person if he be found upon said premises or within the city of Woodburn; in case said person cannot be found within the city after a reasonable diligence and inquiry, such notice shall be posted in a conspicuous place upon said premises and a copy thereof mailed by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the last known address of said person. Section 4. Abatement by City. If any person who owns, or is in charge of property within the city of Woo~burn shall fail or neglect to destroy obnox- ious vegetation within ten (10) days after notice is given, the City Administrator or his designee may go upon said property with such assistance as he may deem necessary and destroy and eradicate said obnoxious vegetation in such manner as shall be most effective in hSs judgment. Section 5. Abatement Fees. The following fees shall be required by the City for the abatement of obnoxious vegetation: First hour Each additional hour or fraction thereof $100.00 $ 5o.oo Section 6. State of fees and opportunity to be ~eard. Upon completion of the abatement process, the CitY Administrator shall fi~ with the City Council a statement of the costs thereof. After a reasonable opportunity to be heard in objection thereto, the Council shall then, by resolution, declare the correctness ~of said statement and declare the same to be a lien upon the property involved, to be entered~ in the lien docket and enforced against said property. Section 7. severabilit~. The sections and subsection of this ordi- nance are severable. The invalidity of any section or subsection shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections and subsections. Section 8. Repeal. Section 18, Ordinance No. 1616 (as amended) is hereby repealed. Section 9. This ordinance being necessary for the immediate preserva- tion of the public peace, health and safety, an emergency is declared to exist and this ordinance shall take effect immediately upon passage by the Council and approval by the Mayor. Approved as to form: ~ ~~ City Attorney Date ' Page 2 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 727 ORDINANCE NO. 1822 Passed by the Council Submitted to the Mayor Approved by the Mayor Filed in the Office of the Recorder June 27, 1983 June 28, 1983 June 28, 1983 June 28, 1983 ATTEST: BARNEY O. BURRIS, Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 3 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 727 ORDINANCE NO. 1822 1886 PARTNERSHIP 2525 SW FIRST SUITE 201 PORTLAND, OREGON 97201 (503) 227-3278 April 8, 1991 Michael Quinn City Administrator 270 Montgomery St. Woodburn, Oregon 97071 Dear Mr. Quinn: I am writing in response to your letter dated April 3rd and following up our phone call of yesterday April 8th. At the time you contracted to have the grass mowed, the building at 1175 Mt. Hood Ave. was being remodeled ~y the new tenant, Migrant & Indian Coalition. At that time l'm sure each of us thought that the other was going to take care of the neglected landscaping. When you had the work performed therefore each thought the other had taken care of it but in fact it was the City of Woodburn. The revised lease provides that I am responsible for landscaping so in the future I will contract to have the grass mowed. I am enclosing a check for $100.00 to reimburse the costs you explained to me that the City had actually expended to cure the problem. I hope this explanation & check adequately satisfies our obligation to you. Very truly yours, John P. Beardsley JPB/mkb April 12, 1991 270 Montgone~. Street Re.: 3085 & 3001 Newberg Hwy ~ _)i.. · '.~ ."( '~."!'!! .~]-. · Tax Lot 44097-000 '¢ { .~ ~. '. ;.,[- ' 7:-1 As explained over the telephone,:, few days-ago,.',,'i have-.,-' complied;': :"-~ wi~ City of Woo~ redirects ~to ~..cle~?wegetation_on 3085 3001 Newberg H~, Tax ~t 44097-000 by contracting ~e se~ices of ~~ and paying for it J~e 19~, 1990 by check no. 1565 (copy attached) ....... Living far away from my. prope~y-'-I have ~to'-- relay on 'se~ices '.and. go~.-will of local people or companies wi~out., possibility.: to check if ~e re~ested se~ice '~for which I~~paid was done ~prope~lY or done at all. j.'. ,' ,.:-....((> .. ... ~erefore.. I. kindly re,est-.:City '.Co--oiL-to take my, position into ........... --consideration and delete ~e ~ate fee...~f .$400;00 - ' "' " .. ~"u,:,',~.~:~.~"; ..... L'?~-,:~:'A~-L'~ .~,~ ' :~":": ~'"~'""-" ~ "'~ Sinc r~ly. you~,.-¢..; ' . ._ .:;.. ..................... . ....................................... . .." f' ': .e'Z' - '. T- - -;' C".'"*~~ . - . '-.-~ ¢.-/-;/;;.,% ~ ..... : ...... /.. ~ ~...... ,,....~.-. c,., ' ' IDRISS DEVCO, INC. 5425 OBERLIN DRWE PH. 619-450-5055 SAN DIEGO, CA 92121 PAY · o ~.E LEEANN ORDER OF T~O HITND~ NINETY DOLLARS AND 00/100 JUNE 19 1565 16-339 lo 90 I $- 290.00 DOLLAR~ FOR 0 ;=BO &~ (1~ Sumitomo Bank of' California Property mowed in l~oodburn - l~cetpt .5307 RECEIPT Date &Jill ,9 ,307 Address'.~t tJ'~cx_ w-~'~L_ Ol/tA~ ~'~~ ~ ~ q ZO~ Dollars $ ~~ ACCOU~ ~w P~D AC~ ~ MON~ eKaoo CITY OF '270 Montgomery Street WOODBURN Woodburn, Oregon 97071 · 982-5t222 April 3, 1991 William K. Macklox 200 Ave. G #25 Redondo Beach, CA 90277 Re: Weed Abatement Liens Dear Mr. Macklox.: You have been identified as owning the following described property within the City of Woodburn: 349 E. Hardcastle Ave., Tax Lot 92580-000 This property was cleared by the City of Woodburn for obnoxious vegetation abatement during last summer in accordance with Ordinance 1822. This action occurred after your failure as a property owner to maintain this property in accordance with ordinance standards, thus subjecting you to payment of the abate fee in the amount of $100.00. -I:he city Council has set April 22nd at 7:00 p.m. as the public hearing date to consider the imposition of a lien against this property for the recovery of the abate fee if not paid by said date. You will have the opportunity to address the City Council on this matter and describe any special circumstances as to why your property should have this abate fee imposed, altered, or deleted. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 982-5PPP. Sincerely, _~ Michael Quinn ~ city Administrator CITY OF 270 Montgomery Street · WOODBURN Woodburn, Oregon 97071 · 982-5222 CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION VIOLATION NOTICE OBNOXIOUS .VEGETATION CITY ORDINANCE #1822 Ac :ording to our records', you are o~ner~s) or.resPgnsible~p.~rson(s)_ of the listjId property_ at: /.~4~ ~/'~/'~ ~~~~ T~:', Lot ~'.,q~ _3&/~. _.~91: · ' ' / ~' d--ff~-- T)-ls letter ts to inform you that the condition .of the lot is in' VXOLATION OF WOODBURN CITY O~IN~CE ~1822 which 'provides for the control and removal of obnoxious vegetation. Obnoxious vegetation is defined by ~he City Ordinance to.be grass, weeds, and other undesirable vegetation to be maintained height not to exceed 10" maximum height between ~Y 1st. and .. SEPT~R 30th of any year. If REMOVAL 0F OBNOXIOUS VEGETATION doesn't occur within TEN DAYS of '%his notice you are advised A CONTACT CUTTER WILL'BE CALLED ~M0~ THE VIOLATION(S) and you will be subject to 'abate penalttes by the City of Woodburn':a minimum fee of $100.00'.Plus. SS0.00 per hour's time and/or a Civil CitatiOn Fine, City 0'rdSnance ~1'99.8 of $100.00 in lieu of cutting. THIS WILL BE THE ONLY NOTICE YOU WILL RECEIVE. RESPONSIBLE PERSON(S) OF PROPERTY: Michael Culver Code Enforcement Officer 982-5243 CODE ENFORCEMENT SECTION ' 270 Montgomery Street Woodbum, Oregon 97071 M. CULVER Ordinance Offi7 CITY 0 Ph~.e 982-234-' 982-524~ WOODBURN MEMORANDUM TO: THRU: Mayor Fred Kyser and Woodburn City Council Mike Quinn, City Administrator FROM: Nevin Holly, Director Recreation and Parks SUBJECT: Woodburn Parks Ordinance DATE: April 17, 1991 Tonights agenda includes the repealing of Parks Ordinance 1918 and the introduction of a revised Ordinance for adoption. Parks Ordinance 1918 was passed by the Woodburn City Council on July 22, 1985. The introduction of a revised Parks Ordinance was due primarily to a routine examination of the Ordinance and the consequential analysis of its provisions, and its ability to deal with' current park trends and needs. The Ordinance is also prompted by citizen concerns as:they relate to safe, healthy and compatible park usage by ali. The new OrdinanCe affords all citizens the opportunity to enjoy Woodburn's public parks, while at the same time setting standards for such use. Although there is a certain degree of overlapping in terms of civil and criminal codes, this Ordinance by and large deals with civil infractions and does not address such areas as improper motor vehicle usage or vandalism for example. The key changes in this Ordinance are: The hours of Park operation have been changed from 11:00pm to 6:00am to 10:00pm to 7:00am. It is my feeling that 10:00pm to 7.'00am is more than adequate for the majority of leisure users. Hopefully, the shortening of hours will discourage late night crowds gathering in our parks. The only exceptions will be organized group usage such as our adult softball program or other recreational events operated by the Department. The revised Ordinance gives Woodburn Recreation and Parks Departmental employees the authorization to issue civil citations pertaining to the Park Ordinance. The revised Ordinance deals specifically with acceptable and unacceptable hygiene in the Parks. Specifically, washing of clothes or personnel hygiene are not allowed in sinks and faucets. The revised Ordinance bans the use of glass beverage containers in parks. This measure will provide for safer parks with less broken glass in play areas as well as further discouraging certain type of alcohol which are brought to the Parks in glass containers. The revised Ordinance addresses for the first time the care of pet animals, particularly dogs. It places certain responsibilities on the dog owners The revised Ordinance also includes an entire section of prohibited activities which set specific guidelines of those behaviors which are not appropriate in Woodburn Public Parks. This Ordinance is much more comprehensive than Ordinance 1918. I feel it addresses the concerns of Woodburn residents, and at the same time welcomes citizen park use as long as such uses fall within our set guidelines. In drafting this Ordinance i examines several other City Park Ordinances, including the City of Portland, Eugene and Salem. I attempted to draw from each of these Ordinances those areas concerns which specifically relate to Woodburn neeCl{~, the Ordinance was endorsed by the Woodburn Recreation and Parks on Tuesday, :April 9, 1991. The Ordinance has also been reviewed and received input from other staff including Police Chief Wright and City Attorney Shields. COUNCIL BILL NO. 1294 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE USE OF PARK AREAS: PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION THEREOF; REPEALING ORDINANCE 1918 AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. THE CITY OF WOODBURN ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Policy. The City of Woodburn may develop, construct, improve, operate and maintain park and recreation facilities in a manner which will best afford the public with necessary conveniences and accommodations. In order to protect the health, safety and well-being of the public, and insure the greatest use and benefits from such areas, it is necessary to make regulations and provisions the City Council deems necessary. Section 2. Definitions (1) Board. The Woodburn Recreation and Parks Board. (2) Council. The Woodburn City Council. (3) Director. The person hired by the City of Woodburn who is in charge of the City Recreation and Parks Department of the City of Woodbu~'n or his designee. (4) Park Area. A City Park, wayside area, community rest areas, scenic or h[storical areas, public park open spaces and greenbelt areas. (5) Park Employee. Any employee of the City of Woodburn Recreation and Parks Department. (6) Person. A natural person, firm, partnership, association, or corporation. Section 3. General Rules and Regulations. The general rules and regulations for City of Woodburn Parks shall be as follows: (1) Fires in park areas: No person shall build a fire in any park area unless said fire is confined to: (a) Park camp stoves or fireplaces. (b) Portions of parks designated as permitting fires. Page I - COUNCIL BILL NO. 1294 ORDINANCE NO. (¢) (d) Portable stoves in established picnic areas and designated where fires ars permitted. No fire shall be left unattended, and every fire shall be extinguished before its user leaves the park area. (2) No person in a park area shall unlawful to hunt, pursue, trap, kill, injure or molest any birds or animals or disturb their habitat. (3) No person shall pick, cut, mutilate or remove from any park area flowers, shrubs, foliage, trees, plant life, barkdust, or products of any type without the written permission of the Director or his authorized agent. (4) No person shall, except in areas designated by City Council, erect signs, markers, or inscriptions of any type within a park area without permission from the Director. (5) No person in a park area shall sell, peddle or offer for sale any food liquids, edibles for human consumptions, or any goods, wares, service or merchandise within the park area except under permit by the Director, and then only subject to such laws and regulations as may now or hereafter exist. (6) No person shall, except duly authorized peace officers !n the course of their duties, drive, lead or keep a horse or other farm animal in any park area, except on such roads, trails or other areas designated for that purpose. No horse or such animal shall be hitched to any tree or shrub in such manner that may cause damage tO such tree or shrub. The only exception to this rule would be during a parade line- up or a special event, and only after obtaining written permission from The Director. (7) No person shall wash any clothing, or materials or other substances, or clean any fish in a park araa or in a lake, stream or river, or in a park area. Park sinks, faucets and hydrants within the confines of parks or park restrooms shall not to be used for washing clothes of any type. (8) No person shall use park sinks, other than those provided in public restrooms, for personal hygiene. Faucets, drinking fountains, hose outlets and hydrants shall not be used for this purpose. (9) No person shall clog picnic shelter sinks in a park area with food, debris, grease or any other substances. Page 2- COUNCIL BILL NO. 1294 ORDINANCE NO. (10) No person shall camp in a park area except by written approval of the (11) The Director may restrict to designated zone areas certain activities, including but not limited to, swimming, picnicking, group picnicking, boating, water skiing, fishing, camping, group camping, hiking and horseback riding. (12) No person shall enter or remain in a park area anytime between the hours of 10:00pm and 7:00am the following morning. This section shall not apply to: (a) Persons attending an event for which a permit has been issued. (b) Participants or spectators of athletic events in park areas lighted for these events; or (c) Persons attending events sponsored by the City. (13) No person shall have in their possession, for sale or for distribution, any alcoholic beverages or intoxicating liquor, or consume such liquor while in a park area. (14) Nothing in this ordinance shall in any manner restrict the authority of the City of Woodburn to enforce all State statutes and City Ordinances relating to the use and control of alcoholic beverages. ,, (15) The Director, any Park employee, Code Enforcement'officer, or member of the Woodburn Police Department is authorized to issue a cml infraction citation for a violation of this ordinance. (16) The Council, City Administrator or The Director shall have the authority to close a park area or a portion of a park area to the public at any time and without notice for any reasonable and necessary circumstance including, but not limited to, construction and maintenance in the park area and for the existence of a hazardous condition. Section 4. Fees. Fees may be charged for certain services and privileges, and for the use of designated areas, buildings or facilities. No person shall enter or use such areas, buildings, services or facilities or to be granted those privileges unless the appropriate fee or fees have been paid. Section 5. Rules of Conduct. The City Recreation and Parks Department may adopt administrative rules for the conduct of persons participating in City Programs in the park areas or the Community Center. All persons participating in City Programs shall be registered. The RUles of Conduct shall be administered by the Director, or a park employee. Page 3- COUNCIL BILL NO. 1294 ORDINANCE NO. Section 6. Animals. (1) Persons owning, keeping or harboring a dog within a part area are responsible for the dogs behavior and shall comply with the following regulations: (a) A dog shall be on a leash not more than eight (8) feet in length, or confined in a vehicle at all times. (b) A vicious dog shall not be permitted. (c) A dog may not deposit solid waste matter on any improved park property unless the person owning, keeping, or harboring the dog immediately removes the solid waste. (2) The Director or a park employee may require a person in charge of any animal to undertake any measure, including the removal of an animal from the park area to prevent interference by the animal with the safety, comfort or well being of park area visitors or resources. (3) No farm animal, including, but not limited to, horses, cattle, sheep and goats is allowed in a park area except by permission of the D~irector. Section 7. Glass Beverage Containers. Except by written authorization from the Director or designated park employee, no person shall possess a beverage container made of glass in any park area. Section 8. Additional Prohibited Activities. In addition to any other prohibitions in this ordinance, no person in a park area shall: (1) Set or use a public address system without the written permission of the Director. (2) Operate or use any noise producing device in a manner thatdisturbsother park visitors. (3) Use a metal detector without the wr'~en permission of the Director. (4) Play sports or engage in other recreational activities in areas designated by the Director as unavailable for those activities. (5) Over crowd persons or vehicles so that necessary access to emergency vehicles is unavailable. Vehicles improperly parked will be towed at owners expense. Page 4 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 1294 ORDINANCE NO. Section 9. Penalty. Any violation of this Ordinance constitutes a class 1 civil infraction and shall be dealt with according to the procedures established by Ordinance 1998. Section 10. Severability. Each portion of this Ordinance shall be deemed severable from any other portion. The unconstitutionality or invalidity of any portion of this Ordinance shall not invalidate the remainder of the Ordinance. Section 11. Repeal and Saving Clause. (1) Ordinance No. 1918 is hereby repealed. (2) Notwithstanding Subsection (1) of this Section, Ordinance No. 1918 shall remain valid and in force for the purpose of authorizing arrest, prosecution, conviction and punishment of a person who violated Ordinance No. 1918 prior to the effective date of this Ordinance. Section 12. Emergency Clause. This ordinance being necessary for the preservation of the public peace, health, and safety, an emergency is declared to exist and this ordinance shall take effect immediately upon passage by the Council and approval by the May~)~ .~ ~ ,, Approved as to form: /-~- [ ~ - '~ / City Attorney Date APPROVED: FRED W. KYSER, MAYOR Passed by the Council Submitted to the Council Approved by the Mayor Filed in th Office of the Recorder ATTEST: Mary Tennant, Deputy Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 5- COUNCIL BILL NO. 1294 ORDINANCE NO. MEMO TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Council through City Administrator Public Works Program Manager License Agreement for Monitoring Well on City Land April 18, 1991 RECOMMENDATION: Approve the attached resolution allowing the City to enter into a license agreement with ARCO Products Company. The agreement would allow ARCO to place one monitoring well on City land on the west side of Evergreen Street across from their station on Hwy 214. The well will be approximately 25 feet deep and will allow continued investigation of potential petroleum contamination at the site. ,, BACKGROUND: Brown and Caldwell consultants recently completed an environmental investigation at the ARco station located at HWY 214 and Evergreen Street. The investigation identified petroleum hydrocarbons in the soil and groundwater on ARCO's property. ARCO is presently considering cleanup options at the station under DEQ guidance. In order to evaluate the various cleanup options the possibility of groundwater migration of the hydrocarbon constituents must be assessed. ARCO would like to locate one of the off site monitoring wells needed for the assessment on land to the west of the station for which the City holds a deed. The location is shown in Exhibit B of the enclosed license agreement. It is in the best interest of the City, due to the potential for contamination of groundwater, that the extent of the petroleum contamination at the site be accurately defined. Installation of this well will keep on track efforts to mitigate the problem. COUNCIL BILL NO. /~J5 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION ENTERING INTO A LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH ARCO PRODUCTS TO ALLOW INSTALLATION OF ONE MONITORING WELL ON LAND OWNED BY THE CITY AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN SUCH AGREEMENT. WHEREAS, the City of Woodburn possesses land along Evergreen Street, and WHEREAS, ARCO Products Company desires to install one monitoring well to facilitate a continuing assessment of potential environmental damage as directed by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, and WHEREAS, no cost will be incurred by the City as a result of the agreement, and WHEREAS, the agreement has been reviewed by the City Attorney, NOW THEREFORE, THE cl'rY OF WOODBURN RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the City of Woodburn enter into a license agreement with ARCO Products Company to allow placement of one monitoring well on City land along Evergreen Street. Section 2. That the Mayor is authorized to execute and the City Administrator to administer the attached agreement on behalf of the City. Approved as to form: 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 Al-rEST: Mary Tennant, Deputy Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF WOODBURN, OREGON AND ARCO PRODUCTS COMPANY THIS LICENSE AGREEMENT is made on the day of April, 1991 between the City of Woodburn which holds a deed to a section of property along the west edge of Evergreen Street, herein referred to as "licensor" and ARCO Products Company, a division of Atlantic Richfield Company, hereinafter referred to as "licensee." 1. RECITALS 1.1 Licensor holds a Bargain and Sale deed to certain real property (the "Property") at 2620 Newberg Highway, Woodburn, State of Oregon, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit "A" and, by this reference, incorporated herein. 1.2 Ucensee desires to drill on a portion of the Property, on (1) groundwater monitoring well (the '~Vell"), depicted as Exhibit "B" which is attached hereto and, by this reference, incorporated herein. 1.3 The parties desire to enter into this License Agreement to allow Licensee to install said Well on the Property. 1.4 Neither this Ucense Agreement nor any of the terms hereof shall be constructed as an admission of liability by Ucensee for any contamination, alleged or otherwise, on the licensed area or any adjoining property. 2. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained, the parties hereto do hereby covenant and agree to and with each other as follows: 3. TERMS 3.1 Licensee may drill, use, and backfill at its sole cost and expense, one (1) Well on the Property located at 2620 Newberg Highway, Woodburn, Oregon. 3.2 Said Well shall be completed as shown on Exhibit "C" which is attached hereto and, by this reference, incorporated herein. 3.3 Licensee agrees that in the construction, maintenance, and use of the Well, it will comply with all applicable laws, including, but not limited to, any laws, standards, regulations, or permit requirements relating to environmental pollution or contamination; and Licensee agrees to indemnify Ucensor from any claims, demands, Page I - LICENSE AGREEMENT lawsuits, or liability for loss, fines, damage, injury, and death and all expenses and costs including attorneys fees, resulting from or arising out of the construction, maintenance, or use of the Well or for the violation of any law, standard, regulation or permit requirement. 3.4 Licensee, upon prior notification to licensor, may enter the Property to monitor and sample the Well. 3.5 Licensee agrees not to permit any liens or encumbrances of any kind against the Property for work done or materials furnished to Ucensee, and Licensee agrees to indemnify and hold Ucensor harmless for same. 3.6 ff the surface or the licensed area and/or the surface of the Licensor's adjacent real property and/or improvements thereon shall be disturbed by the emplacement or the backfill of Licensee's Well, then said surface and/or improvements shall be promptly restored by Licensee to their condition just prior to such disturbance. 3.7 Licensee shall, after completion, backfill said borings pursuant to this License Agreement, or after the Well is no longer useful to the investigation, destroy the wells according to the standards set forth by the appropriate state agency. 3.8 It is understood and agreed by Licensee that the Well may increase the dangers and hazards occurring upon the subject property and that this license is subject to all those risks. Therefore, as a material consideration to Ucens0r'for entering into this license and without which Licensor would not grant the same: Licensee agrees to assume and pay for all loss or damage to the subject property and injury to or death of any person, or persons, including all incidental costs and expenses, however arising from or in connection with existence, construction, maintenance, repair, use or removal of the Well, or the failure of Licensee or members, officers, agents, or employees of Ucensee to abide by or comply with the terms and conditions of this Ucense; and Ucensee forever indemnifies Ucensor against any claims, damages, lawsuits or liability for any such loss, damage, injury and death, costs and expense, including attorneys fees. 3.9 This License Agreement shall not constitute a deed or a grant of easement and shall not be deemed irrevocable or an easement by virtue of the work performed under or by reason of the Ucense. 3.10 This License Agreement may be terminated by either party upon thirty (30) days prior wr' ten notice. Page 2 - LICENSE AGREEMENT JO~ IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this License Agreement as of the day and year first above written. ARCO PRODUCTS COMPANY By: TAle: Date: CITY OF WOODBURN, OREGON By: Date: Page 3 - LICENSE AGREEMENT oo BARGAIN ~D SALE DEED .We, SENIOR ESTATES, INC., a corporation duly organized and qualified to do business.in the State Of OreEon, W. O. MALONE and DOROTHY E. MALONE, husband and wife, CHARLES L. 'MALONE and MARGUERITE J. MALONE, husband and wife, and HAZEL SMITH, a single, woman, convey to the CITY .OF WOODBURN, a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon, for use by the general.public for street purposes, all that real property situatedin Marion Coun~y~ State of orego~ described as: A strip of land 100 feet in width, S0 feet on each side of a centerline described as follows: Beginning at a Point in the centerline of~State Highway No. 2lq, also said point being'on the North line Of.A~ Dubois Donation Land Claim No. 98 in Section 12, Town- ship 5 South, Range 2 West of the Willamette Meridian, Marion County, Oregon, and-North 88° 52' 10" West 1276.56 feet from the Northeast. corner of said Donation Land Claim No. 98~ thence South 00° $1' $0" West 780.07 fee~ to the most Westerly Nor~hwes~ corner of Woodburn Senior Estates No. 7 as recorded in Record of Town- plats Volume 22, PaEe q2 for Marion County, Oregon~ thence South 00~ q0' q0" West ~long the Westerly boundary of Woodburn Senior Estates No..7 2636.$6 feet to an iron pipe at the Southwest ~orner of said Woodburn Senior Estates No. 7. DATED this ~_4 da~ of July, 1966. .Page .1 ~ BARGAIN 8 SALE DEED ~, .... · EICHSTEAOT. GUTZLER & BOLl. AND SENIOR ESTATES, INC. By :~ Title :~ ~ DOROTHY E. ~LONE STATE OF OREGON .) ) SS: County of Marion ) 0n the 7~° day of July, 1966,. personally appeared '. ..... /~d¢ ~~.S~ , who, being sworn, stated that ,j~:.- h~':.~s the t'k cc /f,~ j/)~ ~ of gnantor comporation and~hat- """ ~'.~~~e~-to- is-i~S.-s~l and ~hat ~his deed was .' :'F",.Z .,~.. '~flv~h%avily signed and sealed in behalf of the corporation by . ~ ".. authority of it's Board of Di~ec~o~s.~ ~[ STATE OF O~GON ) t7¥ ',J-., '~f~% ' On the /3~ day 'of ~, 1966~ personally appea~ed STATE OF. OREGON ) ) SS: County of Marion ) ....... -~. ............ O~c~i . On the /~/~ day of J*~Ay, 1966, personally appeared CHARLES L. MALONE and MARGUERITE J. MALONE, husband and wife, and acknowledged the fomegoing instrument to be their voluntamy a~. Z ......... .. " ST..~TE OF 'OREGON ) .... ) ss: County of ~&~ion ) On the ,~'¢/"' day of 6u-~y, 1966~ pe~,sona'lly a~p~ared · .~,.: t.tAZEL SP~TH~ a s~ng~ff~--wo, man~-.and acknowledged the fo~,~egoing .{,.'ins. t~ument to be he~ voluntary ac,~. ' ' ': "':" ": ' "~'~"; '; ,.,,,,..,. ': ":'""' .." ~. '~' NOTAR~P'OBLIC .FOR O' ~'GON . ~;':J:'",' .;I. ~,."..~" . ~y ~iss~on Expires: /p-/-~ REGON } ss. NOTARY PUBLIC FOR' OREGON/J ~ ~--- /... My Commission Expimes: Page - 2 - BARGAIN g SALE DEED .EXHIBIT B SITE MAP PROPOSED AND EXISTING WELL LOCATIONS EXHIBIT B I I WELL LOCATION EXHIBIT B April 3, 1991 Page 1 of 1 EXHIBIT C TYPICAL MONITORING WELL EXHIBIT C GROUND SURFACE, PROTECTIVE COVER AT GRADE HOLLOW STEM AUGER BOREHOLE (8-INCH) CEMENT SEAL 2-INCH BLANK PVC CASING - FLUSH THREADED SCHEDULE 40 BENTONITE PELLET SEAL (2-FOOT) 2-INCH SLOT[ED PVC CASING - FLUSH THREADED SCHEDULE 40 CLEAN IMPORTED SAND PVC BOll'OM PLUG NOT TO SCALE Typical Monitoring Well EXHIBIT C April 3, 1991 Page 1 of 1 MEMO TO: CITY ADMINISTRATOR FOR COUNCIL ACTION FROM: RANDY SCO'l-I', C.E. TECH III, THROUGH PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR ~-~:~'" SUBJECT: WEST HAYES STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION CONJUNCTION WITH RETAIL DEVELOPMENT. IN DATE: APRIL 18, 1991 RECOMMENDATION: It is being recommended that the Council initiate vacation proceedings for a portion of West Hayes St. public right-of-way (See attachment "A"). To initiate the process the Council must set a date for a formal public hearing. The publication and notification period for the street vacation shall not be less then 28 days prior to the formal hearing as per ORS 271.110. Also, allowing staff a minimum of 7 days to prepare the proper publication and notification, the hearing date should not be set prior to May 27, 1991. BACKGROUND: Staff has reviewed and established conditions for a proposed retail outlet on a 12 acre site West of Barclay Square Apartments on the North side of West Hayes St.. This development has gone before the Planning Commission and was-approved. One of the staff's conditions for approval is to recommend to Council, a portion of West Hayes public right-of-way be vacated. The following criteria was established by staff to bring this recommendation before the Council: In consideration for vacating West Hayes, the development is required to dedicate a 70 foot right-of-way along the East side of their property. The right-of,way will connect the proposed Stacy Allison Way to an extension of West Hayes St. Traffic will be better served by the proposed dedicated right-of-way when improved, rather than an improvement of West Hayes as now dedicated. Improving West Hayes St. as now dedicated, would benefit only the development. By vacating this portion of West Hayes, the area shall still be improved to provide for public access, but will be private. Property to the South of west Hayes will be served in the future by a southerly extension of the dedicated right-of-way and the proposed Frontage Road also a part of this development. Staff will require utility easements for the existing and future infrastructure needs in the proposed vacated area. ~ LI ~0' EVERGREEN ROAD DATE C HK NO ~/P CHECK LISTING VE ND OR AMOUNT PAGE DESCRIPTION /01/91 /01/91 105191 ! 06191 IOBI91 111191 /11/91 113/91 /13/91 /1~/91 113/91 /13/91 /15/91 /15/91 I 21/91 /21/91 i 21/91 /21/91 /21/91 /21/91 121/91 I 21/91 /21/91 /21/91 /21/91 /21/91 /21/91 121/91 121/91 /21/91 /21/91 /Z1191 /21/91 i 21/91 /21/91 /21/91 /21/9t [21/91 /21/91 /21/91 / 21/91 /21/91 /21/91 /21/91 /21/91 / 21/91 / 21/91 /21/91 /51/91 121/91 /21/91 /21/91 / 21/91 /21/91 4b32 4773 4805 4800 4807 4808 4809 4810 4811 x, 312 4813 451 4 481 5 ~817 ~81S ~Sl 9 4821 ~822 ~823 4B24 4~25 4-~6 ~2T 482~ -'~830 ~831 ~33 4~34 4~35 4836 4~37 ~339 4~41 48~2 4845 4~4b 4847 4~4~ 4849 4~ 5D 4854 4555 4~57 UNITEO STATES POSTAL SERV ORE STATE DEPT OF AGRICUL N~A WEST N~RSVPO, INC. PNPCA CONTINUING EDUC~TIO UNITED STATES POSTAL SERV PNPCA CONTINUING EDUC~TIO BRESLIN PONTIAC GMC T~UCK P_FTTY CASH- CITY H~.LL ~.WW~ / PNWS b. S. N~TIONAL BANK O~ OR OREGON TRANSIT ASSOC C~EMEKETA COMMUNITY COLL UNITED STATES POSTAL SERV BANK OF AMERICA OREGON VOID V 0 I O VOID VOID ~CME LOCK SHOP AL"S ~RUIT R' SHRU5 CENTER ROBERT A~ZOZAN AUTOMATED OFFICE SYS-S&Lt~ AT~T INFORMATION SYSTEMS ~T~.T CONSUMER PRODUCT OIV A SLUE RI~ON JANITORI~.L ~OISE CASCADE JUDY ~RUNKAL ~ROOART · INC B UT TE R WOR TH S CAD DRAFTERS CALL~GHEN & COMPANY CH2M-HILL CIRCLE TELECONFERENCE CLACKAMAS COMMUNICATIONS COPY OFFICE PRODUCTS· EOEN SYSTEMS INC EGGHEAD DISCOUNT SOFTWARE EXECUTIVE BOOK SUMMARIES G~B~ENS COMPANY GLO~AL COMPUTER SUPPLIES G.T.~. MOSILNET C. J. HANSEN CO., INC. MARY H~R~IS HYDRAULIC SPECIALTY· INC. INDUSTRIAL WELDING SUPPLY INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE LIPTON· STEPHEN A.· ATTY ELIZABETH LOS CUT O.~F M~EION COUNTY CLERK ~ARION COUNTY BLOG INSPEC M~RYATT INDUSTRIES METROFUEL lNG, INC. MONITOR CO-OP TEL'EPHONE 157.78 SERVICES - WATER 20.00 SERVICES- STREET 775.0(] SERVICES - VARIOUS 103.00 SUPPLIES- RSVP 150.00 SERVICES - WWTP 209.0B SERVICES - W~TER 90.00 SERVICES - WWTP 12·452.62 SUPPLIES- STREET 158.79 PETTY CASH*** 200.00 SERVICES - PUBLIC WORKS 41,~25.25 SERVICES - NON OEPT ~_O.O0 SERVICES - TRANSIT 75.00 SERVICES - CODE ENFORCE 138.59 SERVICES - WATER 27,435.00 P~YROLL* 0.00 VOI O 0.00 V 0 I D 0,00 V 0 ID 0.00 VOID 20.00 SERVICES - POLICE 40.96 SUPPLIES- PARKS ?0.3~ REIMBURSEMENT - ~UILDT~G 5$0.4?''SUPPLIES- VARIOUS 308.05 S~,RV!CES - VARIOUS 21.b3 SERVICES - 911 COMM 172.27 SERVICES - VARIOUS 895.00 SERVICES - CITY HALL 539.13 SUPPLIES - V~RIOU$ 55.00 REIMBURSE~.ENT - LIBRARy 293.03 SUPPLIES - LZSRARY 70.50 SUPPLIES - CITY ATTORNEY 9-57.50 SERVICES - 911 COMM ~9.25 SUPPLIES - CITY ATTORNEY 20,748.39 SERVICES- PUBLIC WORKS 35.00 SERVICES - POLICE 490.50 SERVICES - 911 COMM 178.75 SUPPLIES - CENTRAL STORES 8,215.52 SERVICES - NON OEPT 22.00 SUPmLIES - WWTP 59.50 SUPPLIES - POLICE 242.15 SERVICES - V~RIOUS 42.81 SUPPLIES - STREET & W~TER 532.07 SERVICES - P~KS & POLICE 320.00 S-~RV~CES - CITY HALL 1·515.00 SERVICES - CITY ATTORNEY 71.0~ SUPPLIES - STREET 240.80 SUPPLIES - PARKS & WWTP 50.00 SERVICES - POLICE 314.~0 SERVICES - COURT -~0.00 SERVICES - COURT 805.00 SERVICES- VARIOUS 2·073.50 SERVICES - ~UILDING 177.93 SERVICES- WWTP 71 6.87 SUPPLIES - V~RIOUS 170.00 SERVICES - 911 COMM /09/91 DATE CHK NO AlP VENDOR CHECK LIS'TING AMOUNT PAGE DESCRIPTION 2 12119t i 21/91 121/91 /21191 /21/91 121191 I;~1/91 121191 / 21191 121/91 121191 121 191 /21/91 121/91 / 21/91 121/91 / 21/91 /~1191 ! 21 191 /21/ql 121191 I 21191 121/91 '/21/91 /~1/91 / 21 191 121191 / 21/91 ;121191 121 191 121191 1 21/91 /21191 121191 ,121/91 121/91 / 21 191 121191 121/91 / 21191 1 21/91 ! 2119t /21 191 121191 121/91 / 21191 121191 121/91 121/91 /21191 / 21/91 121191 /21 191 121/91 /21/91 4858 4859 4861 4~62 4854 48~5 4866 ~867 4869 4870 4871 4872 4573 ~874 ~75 4876 4877 4879 4880 ~881 48~2 4883 4884 --~85 48 ~5 4888 48~9 4~ 90 4891 4893 4894 4895 4896 4897 489~ 4899 4900 490~ 490~ 490~ 4904 4905 4907 4908 4909 49J0 49J~ 4912 MUFFLERS, HITCHES & MORE NEAL°S FRAM-~RY & G~LLERY N~SSCO SUPPLY INC. NORTHWEST NATURAL GAS O-BA GENERAL CONTRACTOR OREGON ~UILOING OFFICIALS US WEST COMMUNICATIONS US WEST COMMUNICATIONS PHOTO & SOUND CO. ARNOLO W. POOLE J~FFREY POGOLOWITZ & ASSC PORTLAND GEN~CRAL ELECTRIC PORTLANO GENERAL ELECTRIC PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC PORTL*ND GENERAL ELECTRIC POWER RENTS, INC P~IER PIP--- ~ SUPPLY, INC R ~ R UNIFORMS OF RADIX CORPORATION ~IN TERRY RAMIREZ RAWLINSON' S LA UND~Y ED RECTOR REDOAWAY TRUCK LINE TERRY L. RICHARDSON ROD°S RENTAL ,~ REPAIR RUSSIC~ BOOK & ART SHOP SALEM FORD NEW HOLLAND SCHETKY NORTHWEST S'LES LES SCHWA-~ TIRE CENTER SECURITY PACIFIC ~NK ORE N. ROBERT SHIELDS SILVERFLEET SYSTEMS SILVERTON FIR.~ DISTRICT SILVERTON SAND & GR.~VEL SOUND ELEVATOR CO ROBERT E. THOMAS III GAVID L TRAPP & ASSOC. TRAPPIST ABBEY BOOKBINO UNOCAL:ERNIE GRAHAM OIL UNITED DISPOSAL SERVICE UTILITY EQUIPMENT INC. VALLEY WELOING SUPPLY VISIONS WATER,FOOD ~ RESEARCH LAB TERRY WILLIAMS kOOgBURN 5ACKHOE SERVIC~ WOODDBURN CONCRETE WOODBURN HIGH SCHOOL WOODBURN INDEPENDENT WOOOBURN OFFICE SUPPLY WOODBURN PHARMACY WADDLE ~ REED LEAGUE OF OREGON CITIES VOID 10.00 32.00 6,2~9.50 392.11 791.00 25.00 2,909.75 557.75 536.92 203.00 2,227.00 3,190.43 6,026.45 8,387.29 b4 · 89 340.00 834.24 777.25 3~9.00 5,91 I . 55 432.50 6.95 29.95 329.91 I O0.0 0 35.00 156.40 190.10 I ,574.48 57.99 397.50 2,626.25 1,898.49 44.77 7 71.24 I 39.75 344.05 75.00 416.00 216.00 41 1.50 535.00 8.70 146.38 172.50 29.45 5.00 14~ .20 300.00 57.50 70.10 8.47 75.00 23,508.23 0-00 SERVICES - TRANSIT SERVICES - MAYOR/COUNCIL SUPPLIES - PUBLIC WORKS S-~RVICES - VARIOUS SERVICES - HOUSING SERVICES- BUILOING SERVICES - VARIOUS SERVICES- VARIOUS SUPPLIES - NON DEPT SERVICES - COURT SERVICES - HOUSING SERVICES- VARIOUS SERVICES - VARIOUS SERVICES - VARIOUS SERVICES- V~RIOUS SERVICES - STREET SUPPLIES - STREET SUPPLIES - POLICE SERVICES- W~TER SERVICES - 911 COMM SERVICES- COURT SUPPLIES - WATER ''REIMBURSEMENT - 911 COMM SERVICES- WWTP s~RVICES - NON DEPT SERVICES - STREET SUPPLIES - LIERARY SERVICES - PARKS SUPPLIES - TRANSIT SERVICES - WWTP BONOS/COUPONS**** SERVICES - CITY ATTORNEY SUPPLIES - VARIOUS SERVICES - 911 COrM SUPPLIES - STREET SERVICES- LIBRARY SERVICES - COURT SERVICES - PUELIC WORKS SERVICES - LIBRARY SUPPLIES- STREET SERVICES - V~RIOUS SERVICES - STREET SUPPLIES- WWTP SUPPLIES - LIBRARY SERVICES- WATER SUPPLIES - P~Ri(S SERVICES - CITY ATTORNEY SUPPLIES- STREET SERVICES- VARIOUS SERVICES - VARIOUS SUPPLIES - VARIOUS SUPPLIES - eUBLIC WORKS REFUND- PARKS PAYROLL* VOID / 09/9 '1 DAT= NO AlP VEND OR CHECK LISTING AMOUNT P~GE DESCRIPTION I 22/91 /22/91 /25191 125/91 128/91 I 281 91 I 28191 129/91 129191 129/91 /29/91 1 291 91 129191 129191 129191 /29/91 / 29/91 / 291 91 /29/91 129191 129191 129191 129/91 / 29191 / 29191 /29/91 129191 /29/91 129191 129191 129191 1 29/91 129/91 1 29191 129/91 I 291 91 129191 129/91 /29/91 129191 129191 1 291 91 129191 129/91 129J91 129191 I 29191 /29191 /29191 ~29191 /29/91 I 29191 / 29/91 ! 291 91 /29191 4913 ~91 4 4915 491 6 ~91 7 491S 4919 492O 4921 4922 4923 ~924 4925 4926 4927 ~928 4929 4930 4931 4932 49 33 4934 4935 4936 4937 4938 4939 -°4940 49 41 4943 4944 ~9~5 4g~ 49 47 ~948 49 ~9 4950 49 51 495~ 4953 495~ ~9 55 4956 49 57 ~95~ 4959 4960 ~961 49~2 ~9 53 49 ~ 49~ ~ UNITED STATES POSTAL SERV kALTER ZENI ORE SECRETARY O~ STATE P~TTY CASH - CITY HALL FIRST INTERSTATE YANK FIRST INTERSTATE ~ANK ~NITEO STATES POSTAL SERV BANK OF AMERICA OREGON U. S. NATIONAL BANK OF OR PETTY CASH- CTTY HBLL VOID VOID ACME LOCK SHOP AFRO-AM DISTRIBUTING CO AMER OIRECTORY PUBLISH CO A~FAB RESOURCES ARATEX SERVICES, INC. AUTOMATED OFFICE SYS-S~LM ASTOR LIBRARY VID~:O BAKER g TAYLOR CO. - NY BAKER & T AYLOq - CA & NV EEACHAM PUBLISHING 8~TTER HOMES ~ GARDENS BgONES FER~Y ELECTRIC ~USIN~SS CONNECTIONS CASE AUTOMOTIVE CASE AUTOMOTIVE CESSCO, INC C:S: CITY-CTY INS. SERVS. CLACKAMAS COMMUNICATIONS COMMERCIAL SEAT COVERS CO COMMTRON CONVENIENCECARD CRITICS' CHOICE VIDEO DBNIELS PHOTOGRAPMY OAVISON AUTO PARTS DAVISON AUTO PARTS DAVISON AUTO PARTS DAVISON AUTO P~RTS O~ HAAS & ASSOCIATES INC EMERY WORLDWIDE ENGELMAN EL-~C TRIC FARMERS OIL FARM PL AN FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP FIRST BANK OF MARIETTA FOCUS ELECTRONICS FRANKLIN WATTS, INC. FURROW BUILDING MATERIALS GAYLORD BROS, INC. G.T.E. MO~ILNET JILL C- H~RVEY, DIRECTOR I .C .M.A. INGRAM DIST. GROUP J~AN KARR 8. CO 153.8B SERVICES - WATER 3,592.35 SERVICES - HOUSING 2OO. OO SERVICES - NON OEPT 150.5~ PETTY CASH*** 1B3.00 BONDS/COUPONS**** 20,700.00 BONOS 1COUPON S**** 158.57 SERVICES - WATER 121,994.30 PAYROLL* 265.00 BONOS/COUPONS**** 162.90 PETTY CASH*** 0.00 V 0 I 0 0.00 V 0 I O 21.00 SERVICES - LIBRARY 3b.57 SUPPLIES - LIBRARY 11.00 SUPPLIES - LIBRARY 37.50 SUPPLIES - WWTP 61.43 SERVICES - POLICE 1~0.00 SUPPLIES - WWTP 84.90 SUPPLIES - LIBRARY 29.73 SUPPLIES - LIBRARY 37.91 SUPPLIES - LIBRARY 107.00 SUPPLIES - LIBRARY 39.80 ''SUPPLIES - LIBRARY 1,429.83 SERVICES - WWTP 2?0.00 S~RVICES - POLICE ~ 911 1,331.33 SERVICES - POLICE 850.21 SERVICES- POLICE 220.1)_ SUPPLIES - STREET 17,632.29 SERVICES- VARIOUS 72.00 SERVICES- 911 COMM 40.00 SERVICES - POLICE 174.70 SUPPLIES - LIBRARY &4.16 SUPPLIES - WATER 114.87 SUPPLIES- LIBRARY 125.00 SERVICES - POLICE 456.68 SUPPLIES - VARIOUS 639.94 SUPPLIES - VARIOUS 03.29 SUPPLIES- VARIOUS 3.99 SUPPLIES - POLICE 956.60 SERVICES- PUBLIC WORKS 98.03 SERVICES - POLICE 53.50 SERVICES - CITY HALL 120.00 SUPPLIES - POLICE 17.1 1 SUPPLIES - WWTP 200.15 SERVICES - WWTP 178.87 SERVICES - CENTRAL STORES 97.00 SERVICES - 'LIBRARY ~00.49 SUPPLIES - LIBRARY 240.92 SUPPLIES - STREET 517.13 SUPPLIES- LIBRARY 100.20 SERVICES - ~11 COMM ~4.00 REIMBURSEMENT- RSVP 33.25 SUP.reLIES - POLICE 222.97 SUPPLIES - LIBRARY 31.30 SUPPLIES - LIBRARY 199191 DATE CHK N3 VENDOR CHECK LISTING AMOUNT PAGF DESCRIPTION / 2919 129191 / 2919 /29191 129191 /29/91 129/91 /29/91 129191 /29191 129191 129191 129191 129191 129191 129191 129191 /29191 1 29191 / 29/91 129191 /29/91 /29/91 129191 129191 I 29/91 129191 129191 129191 IZ9/91 / 29/91 I W9/ I 29/91 /29/91 129/91 129191 / 29/91 / 29/91 129191 129191 129/91 129191 129191 I 29/91 /29/91 I'Z9/91 129/91 129191 / 29t91 /29/91 129/91 129/91 /29/91 129/91 129191 496 ~ 49e9 4970 4971 4972 49 73 4974 4975 4976 4977 4978 4979 4980 49 ~1 4982 4983 49~4 4955 4987 4938 4989 4990 4991 ~Q~2 ~993 ~994 '4' 99 5 ~9Q~ 4997 4993 49 99 5000 SOD1 5O02 500 3 5004 5005 5007 5008 5009 S01 O ~011 501Z 5013 5014 5015 5016 5017 501 8 5019 5020 5021 5022 L & L BUILDING SUPPLIES L & L BUILDING SUPPLIES M4 RYATT INDUSTRIES MR P°S AUTO PARTS NATIONAL INFO CENTER NATIONAL PEN CORP. NESSCO SUPPLY INC. NORTHWEST N~TURAL GAS OREGON FIREWORKS TASK FOR US WEST COMMUNICATIONS PACIFIC SqFETY SU-°PLY, IN P~CIF!C PRINTERS PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC POWELL'S BOOKSTORE~ INC PROCTOR SALES INC PUM~EL TRUCK SUPPLY CO RADIO SHACK R AWLINSON'S LAUNDRY RED LION MOTOR INN REGENT ~OOK COMPANY T-~RRY L. RICHARDSON SAFFRON SUPPLY CO. S ~FEWAY STORES SALEM BLACKTOP & ASmHALT LES SCMWA~ TIRE CENTE~ SCOT SUPPLY INC S_:ARS COMMERCIAL 3REgIT SLATER COMMUNICATIONS SPECIAL OCCASIONS SUSSM~N, SHANK~ WRPNICR T.U. OF OREGON ~HORNDIKE PRESS UNOCAL:ERNIE GRAHAM OIL UNITED OISPOSA1 SERVICE YWR SCIENTIFIC INC. ~.W. WILSON CO kOOOB URN CLEANERS WDBRN COAST TO COAST WOBRN COAST TO COAST WOBRN COAST TO COAST WOOD,URN LUMBER CO, W'3OD~URN OPFICE SUPPLY ~O00BURN PHARMACY WOOOBURN TRUE-V~LUE HOWE X_: ROX CORPORATION Y~S GRAPHICS ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE CO. KIM~ERLY E. KINTZ BEVERLY DALE JANET ¥. J~CK SARAH BARBOUR K_:N SPR~GUE ERIC R. ANGLIN RUTH ~ROWNE 611 .96 22E. 20 200.74 54.31 34.90 I ?4. O0 1 73.30 122.19 15.00 69.80 98.80 ~7.50 6,514.1 ? 60.72 153.00 I ,0~6.00 9.50 ~8.65 12.60 1 65.23 325.50 230.70 109.32 153.33 29.00 1~7.09 41 O. 62 56.50 396. O0 52.50 120.00 208.77 117.60 465.00 144.07 98.00 15.00 156.79 194.70 184.32 180.74 51.01 15.54 36.93 65.50 499. O0 164.50 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 12.18 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICES SERVICES SERVICES SUPPLIES SERVICES SERVICES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICES SERVICES SUPPLIES SERVICES SUPPLIES 'SUPPLIES SUPPLIES gERVICES SUPPLI ES SUPPLIES SERVICES SUPPLIES SERVICES SE RVICE S SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICES SUPPLISS SUPPLIES SERVICES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SERVICES SERVICES SUPPLIES SERVICE S SERVICES SERVICES SERVICES S~RVICES SERVICE S SE RVICE S VARIOUS V~RIOUS PARKS & WWTP VARIOUS FINANCE RSVP PUSLIC WORKS STREET & WATER POLICE 911 COMM WATER RSVP VARIOUS LIBRARY WWTP STREET POLICE VARIOUS BUILDING LIBRARY NON DEPT PARKS RSVP STREET STREET & TRANS LIBRARY W AT ER POLICE RSVP NON DE PT Oll COMM LIBRARY LIaR ARY PARKS VARIOUS WWTP LIBRARY CODE ENFORCE VARIOUS VARIOUS VARIOUS STREET & PARKS PU~ WKS .~ PARK POLICE VAR IOUS 911 COMM 911 & POLICE OARKS COURT COURT COURT COURT COURT COURT RSVP DATE CHK NO VENDOR CHECK LISTING AMOUNT PAGE DESCRIPTION 5 //,q /29/91 1 29 191 129/91 /29/91 / 291 91 I 29/91 129191 ! 29191 129191 I 29/91 / 291 91 I 29191 /29191 129191 /29191 129191 / 29/91 129191 129/91 1 29/91 129191 /29191 / 291 91 I 29/91 / 29191 129191 129191 I 29191 / 2 91 91 I 31 191 131191 /31191 131/91 131/91 /31191 ! 31/91 131/91 /31191 131191 / 31 191 t 31191 ! 31/91 131 191 /29191 5023 5024 5025 5026 5027 5028 5029 5030 5031 5032 5033 5034 5035 5036 5037 5038 5039 5041 5042 504 3 5044 5045 504c 5047 5048 5049 -5059 5060 5061 5062 5063 50~4 5065 5060 5007 5068 5069 5070 5071 5072 50?3 507/, 5075 GWEN GUNTER HUGH 'gUNTER ROBERT JOHNSTON LEO LA ROGUE ERNA OSSCRNE ALMEDA QUIRING JUNE SIMPSON ISA~ELLE SMITH LLOYD WELLS CHARLES WIGLE HATTIE CLARK CORNELIUS OONNELL Y WINNIFRED FACHINI FREMONT GR EEHLING TONY HALTER ERNA M. OSBORNE ~YRON J. PEFFLY GERTRUDE REES J.~M ES STROUP BARBARA STROUP EOITH W ZLLI ~P,S JUOY YOUNG TRACY RENNE~ SHAW C~RLOS SCHERATSKI BASIC FIRE PROTECTION FARMERS HOME ACMIN V 0 I 0 VOID ¥ 0 I 0 B~N~ OF AMERIC~ OREGON OREGON OEP~RT. OF REVENUE P~CIFIC MUT'JA.L LIFE INS ICM~ RETIREMENT TRUST UNITEO WAY M~R-PO FED. CREDIT UNION AMERICAN FAMILY C~NCER WOOD,URN POLICE ATHLETIC CLACKAMfiS COMMUNITY C~LI AFSCME PETE LOOD COLONIAL LIFE & ACC. INS. INTERNAL ~EVENUE SERVICE OHIO NAT°L LIFE I,qS. CO. V 0 I O 14.88 SERVICES - RSVP 29.58 SERVICES - RSVP 32.24 SERVICES - RSVP 363.~4 S-.-RVICES - RSVP 40.74 SERVICES - RSVP ~6.0B SERVICES - RSVP 12.96 SERVICES - RSVP 61.80 SERVICES - RSVP 52.80 SERVICES - RSVP 38.40 SERVICES - RSVP 71.20 SERVICES - DI~L A RIDE 57.00 SERVICES - DIAL A RIDE 31.20 SERVICES - DIAL A RIDE 11.80 SERVICES - DIAL A RIDE 16.80 SERVICES - DIAl A RIDE 47.$0 SERVICES - DIAL A RIDE 174.40 SERVICES - DIAL A RIDE 35.20 SERVICES - gIAL A RIDE 101.80 SERVICES - DIAL A RIDE 47.66 SERVICES - O!~t A RIDE 5~.60 SERVICES - DIAL A KIDE 10.80 SERVICES - OIfiL A RIDE 177.50 65.B0 32.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 57,345.84 12,469.44 20,238.4~ 6,163.47 54.00 ?,372.4~ 258.36 440.00 336.07 825.00 115.60 1,656.13 60.00 2, 1 43.1 6 O. O0 4.95 "REIMBURSEMENT - LIBRARY SIDEWALK SUB - HOUSING R.~FUNO - 8UILOING OVERPAYMENT - W~TER VOID VOID VOID P ~YROLI* P~YROLI* P4YROLL* PAYROLl* PA YROLI* PAYROll* P ~YROLI * PAYROLL* PAY ROLL* PAYROLL* PA YROLL* PAYROLL* PAYROLL* P AY R OL L* VOID ********* ** ** $282,415.5 $.00 $472.24 $21,545.50 P~YROLL* TCOIB.A. ** PETTY CASH*** BONOS/COUPONS**** M AT ER IALStSUPPLIES / ETC- TOTAL FOR THE MONTH OF: MEMO TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Council through City Administrator Planning Commission Site Plan #91-04 Retail Store, Westech Engineering April 18, 1991 At their hearing of Apdl 11, 1991, the planning commission approved with conditions the site plan for a retail store that will be located just west of Barclay Square Apartments. The applicant has agreed to make all necessary infrastructure (water, sewer, street, storm drain) improvements to) improvements to facilitate this site and adjoining properties. If any council member so wishes, planning staff will provide the full packet upon request. SG:lg 15,4 STAFF REPORT SITE PLAN REVIEW # 91-04 RETAIL STORE APPUCANT: MARK ZIMEL & ASSOCIATES PROPER3'? LOCATION: SOUTH-EAST QUADRANT OF INTERSECTION OF HIGHWAY 214 AND FREEWAY I-5 ( see map I ) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN' DESIGNATION: COMMERCIAL ZONE: COMMERCIAL GENERAL Nf MAP I -.- / 5-4 APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF INTENT: ( see map 2, Site Plan Design - next page ) "... The proposed development involves a large nationally known retail merchandising outlet located between the extension of Hayes Avenue, the proposed Stacy Allison Boulevard, and the Interstate 5 Highway Frontage. The 12 acre site will facilitate a 91,000 sq ft building with a future expansion area of 30,000 sq ft, and provide approximately 850 parking spaces. The store will have approximately 30 departments with goods ranging from wearing apparel, fabrics, household wares, electronics to automotive and lawn/garden products. Store hours are usually from 9:00 a.m. to 9.00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. Approximately 200 full-time and 50 part-time jobs will be created by the store. Employees receive an excellent benefit package and a family level wage. Part-time employees working over 28 hours a week receive full benefits. The developer will provide the necessary infrastructure improvements to secure further development to the Western Gateway area. The extension of Lawson Drive, construction of Stacy Allison Way, and major storm drainage, sanitary sewer, and water extensions are the keys to facilitate development of this area... ". STAFF REPORT SITE PLAN REVIEW #91-0~; 1) 3) 4) Applicant: Owner: Location: Zone: Sam F. Taylor, Associated Design Consultants F.G.C. Partnership/Izzy's 1565 N. Pacific Hwy (formerly Woodburner Restaurant) CG (Commercial General) Applicant's Statement: 'q'he proposed intent is to add a 13' x 42' solarium and an 8' x 10' air lock entry to an existing restaurant." 6) Staff Comments: a) The building was originally called the '~/oodburner" restaurant. The interior is to be remodeled to accommodate Izzy's food service design. b) The applicant's proposal would increase the size (~12' x 42') of the facility by approximately 504 square feet for a solarium, and ~n additional 80 square feet for a vestibule. : ' The addition will have an impact on the existing parking stalls fronting the restaurant. The applicant is proposing to shorten five (5) of the stalls from the standard 19' to 16'6". These five (5) stalls would be used for compact cars only. d) The number of stalls would not be diminished by the addition. Staff Recommendations and Conditions: Staff recommends approval with the condition that all necessary building permits are secured. PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED THIS SITE PLAN ON APRIL 11, 1991 SPR91 -O5.STF .. 155 U Il I ! i - LESS T~ - ~4,L ~ ORAWIN~ INOEX 1. SITE PI, N~ & E{TERIOR ; 2. DEHOL.ITZOH & CONSTRUCC. 3. SECT]~OHS & DL'TA.ILS 4. FU~ITI]~ pL,ld~ & FINI.' $. I~P~O~ ~I~&?ION-~ & I~I~i~D (~II. ZN~ PI~ MEMO TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: City Council through City Administrator Community Development Director Appeal a Planning Commission Condition relating to the Stonehedge Apartment Complex April 18, 1991 At their hearing of March 14, 1991 the planning commission approved the building plans for the 192-unit Stonehedge Apartment complex. This development is to be located adjacent to Front Street just south of St. Luke's cemetery. The commission, in rendering their approval, required the developer to build an east/west street along the south property boundary. An additional meeting was held on March 21, 1991 to further discuss this matter. The decision was the same, however, the time frame for completing the street construction of the east/west road was modified from being built at the time of construction of the complex to dedicating the right-of- way and building the street at a time as established by the city council. After the commission rendered this decision, the applicant filed a decision to appeal the condition regarding the east/west street improvement. It should be noted the applicant is not appealing any of the other conditions of approval, only the street dedication and its improvement. Therefore, the council has only to determine one of the following: 1) Confirm the planning commission's decision to require street dedication and improvement based on the existing evidence and testimony from this hearing 2) Modify the planning commission's decision 3) Reverse the commission's condition that an east/west street be built based on the evidence provided in this report and any public testimony. STONEHEDGE APARTMENT COMPLEX INDEX Appeal from Mike Kelly Page lA Staff Repo~ Staff Repo~ A~achmen~ 1-7 A1 - A7 Addendum Alternative Site Design 1 -11 City Administrator Memo Evens and Zeeb Letter 12- 14 15- 19 Planning Commission Minutes March 14, 1991 March 21, 1991 I -10 1-5 STAFF REPORT SITE PLAN REVIEW # 91-01 STONEHEDGE APARTMENTS APPLICANT: STONEHEDGE PARTNERS PROPERTY LOCATION: FRONT STREET (SEE MAP -- A'i-I'ACHMENT ZONE: MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL "Al ") APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The applicant wants to develop a 192 unit apartment complex on 11.34 acres located at Front Street. ( SEE ATTACHMENT "A2") APPLICANT'S INTENT: "... Stonehedge Partners is proposing to develop a piece of property ( approximately 11.5 ac ) bordering Highway 214 and Front Street. After extensive research, it has been determined that Woodburn has a shortage of quality apartment complexes. To meet this housing shortage, we are proposing to build 192 units in two separate phases. The first phase will consist of 108 units and the second will be 84 units. We will be managing the construction, rental and maintenance of the project when it is complete...". APPLICABLE ORDINANCE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CRITERIA: 1. Woodburn Zoning Ordinance Chapter 10. Chapter 11. Chapter 26. Off-Street Parking, Loading & Driveway Standards Site Plan Review Multiple Family residential District 2. Woodburn Comprehensive Plan Chapter IX. Goals and Policies A. Residential Land Development Policies G.Housing Goals and Policies H.Public Services Goals and Policies I. Transportation Goals and Policies ~N SUBJECT PROPERTY' ATTACHMENT A1 t / ? ? / / I/ / / ,J ? A'I-I'ACH MENT A2 Chapter X. The Land Use Plan C. High Density Residential Lands F. Access Control 3. Woodburn Transportation Plan II. Goals And Objectives EVALUATION OF THE PROJECT: A. GENERAL FEATURES 1. The applicant wants to develop a 192 unit apartment complex on an 11 ac site located at the corner of Hwy 214 and Front Street. 2. The property is zoned RM and apartments are uses permitted outright in this zone. 3. The applicant intends to develop only 2 bedroom apartment units. 4. The property borders Hwy 214 to the North and Front Street ~o the East; the area located to the South of the parcel is zoned SR ( Single Family Residential) and is developed; the area located to the West of the parcel is zoned RM ( Multi-Family ) and is not developed. 5. The site plan submitted to the City shows the following design features: -- two picnic areas located in the west and east parts of the parcel; -- two play areas located in the west and east parts of the parcel; - landscaped strips surrounding the complex; 6. The northwest corner of the property ( bordering Hwy 214 ) is steep and not suitable for any residential development. The developer did not present any specific plans to utilize this area. 7. The site plan submitted to the City shows two driveways accessing the apartment complex from Front Street. It should be noted that this driveway configuration stays in conflict with the recommendations and requirements of approval prepared be the Public Works Department [ see CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL--ENGINEERING, page 1, staff report] 2 In short, the recommendations from the Public Works require the developer to provide one driveway access from Front Street and a public residential road running along the south edge of the property. This alternative site plan proposal including a public road is also attached to the staff report as ADDENDUM. ADDENDUM consists of the alternative site plan with the public residential road along the south edge of the property and a slightly different set of recommendations generated to reflect the design difference caused by the road. It shoul be noted that the Transportation Map adopted as an element of the Woodburn Transportation Plan does not include locations of any residential roads within the Woodburn area -- it shows only arterial and collector streets. Therefore, city staff applied the following policy statements to evaluate the apartment complex: Transportation Plan -- Goals and Objectives: ( page 2) * Goal II, Objective D: Encourage the design and development of transportation facilities than can be readily modified to accomadate future demands. * Goal III, Objective B: Provide a level of transportation services to the urban area that are compatible with the environmental, economic and social objectives of the community~' B. EVALUATION OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 1. Use. Within any RM District apartment houses are uses permitted outright. Every development of four or more units in a RM zone is required to submit a site plan the Planning Commission prior to issuance of a building permit. The site plan shall be submitted in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 11 of the Ordinance. 2. Side and Rear Yards According to Section 26.050 of the Zoning Ordinance the requested apartment has to have at a minimum a 14 ft side and rear yards. The applicant provides for 16 ft side and rear yards and meets the required standards. 3. Front Yard In an RM District there shall be a minimum front yard of 20 feet. In addition, any development proposal located at Front Street shall meet the 40 ft special setback requirement [special setback distance is measured at right angles to the center line of the street] All structures located at Front Street shall setback from the center line at a minimum -- 60 ft. Also, no parking shall be allowed within the required front yard. The applicant provides for a 60 ft setback and meets the required front yard criteria, including the special setback requirements. 4. Landscaped Yards. In an RM District the following landscaped yards shall be provided for apartment complexes -- 400 sq ft for each two bedroom apartment unit. Applicant proposes 192 two bedroom units -- Required landscaped area = 76,800 sq ft ( 192 x 400 sq ft ) The applicant provides 77,500 sq ft of landscape area and meets the required standard. 5. Lot Area and Building Coverage Area. In an RM District no main building'or group of main buildings shall occupy than 30 percent of the lot area. In the proposed development the ratio of the main building area to the site area equals 17% and meets the required standard. 6. Parking Standards. Off-street automobile parking shall be provided to meet the following standard: - two spaces per dwelling unit having two or more bedrooms The applicant provides 424 parking spaces which exceeds the required minimum of parking spaces for this development ( required number -- 192 x 2 = 384 ) more 4 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: PLANNING: 1. The ornamental fence or wall shall be maintained at a height of at least four feet nor more than seven feet. 2. Provide basic information regarding the type of management / safety measure for the northwest corner of the property prior to occupancy permits. 3. Provide basic information to identify more specifically type and location of recreational facilities ( play grounds, picnic areas, walkways ) prior to occupancy permits. ENGINEERING: 1. GENERAL A. Final plan shall conform to the construction plan review procedures and standards. B. All work shall conform to the City of Woodburn's standards and specifications and all state building codes. C. Public utilities on private property will require 16 foot easements. D. All work within Hwy 314 will require a permit and approval from the Oregon State Highway Department E. Developer is responsible for any permits required from state and federal agencies within drainage basin or wetlands F. If the project is to be phased in, some modifications may be required. 2. STREET AND DRAINAGE A. This development shall dedicate and fully improve a public street adjacent to the south property line, subject to the following conditions: * Dedicate a 60 foot right-of-way to the city, free of all encumbrances and encroachments 5 * The improved width from curb to curb shall be 34 feet * The intersection with Front Street shall be aligned between 60° and 90° * Provide 20 foot property line radius at Front St. on north right-of- way * Install permanent barricades at west end * Staff will require a sidewalk on north side, but not south side unless the Planning Commission so desires; B. Front Street: * Dedicate to the City ten feet of property along Front St. adjacent to this development * A full street improvement shall be required on Front St. adjacent to this development. The street shall be improved with two 12 foot and one 13 foot traffic lanes, complete with the required tapers. Cost of east half of improvement to be paid by City, this includes asphalt and curb. ' * The west side shall be constructed with a 12 foot sidewalk and bike path. / C.* A public storm sewer will need to be constructed for the proposed street storm water runoff. This could be constructed also to accommodate the proposed development ( see Attachment A3 ) * Provide City storm runoff calculations 3. WATER * An 8" diameter water main shall be required to be installed from the existing main on Front St. ( approximately 500 ft south of this development ) northerly along front to the connection point of the fire line proposed for this development * An 8" diameter water main shall be required to be installed from Front ST. to the west end of the proposed street and shall be looped to the existing water main on 2nd Street ( see Attachment A4 ) 6 8 \ t ATI'ACHMENT A.3 TO SEGOND STREET 0 Z m I \ r_ A'i-i'ACHMENT A4 * Fire protection and hydrant locations shall be as per Fire Department's recommendations. Depending on the hydrant locations, the fire line may be required to be loped from Front to the proposed street. This fire line will also be a public line, not private ( see Attachment A5 ) * Water meters will need to be located within the right-of-way or easements. Units can be metered individually or grouped, whichever is most cost effective. * If a lawn sprinkler system is installed, backflow prevention devices shall be required. 4. SANITARY * Service to this development can be provided from the existing sanitary main located on the south side of Hwy 214. * Depth of sanitary main will need to be verified in field. To confirm, sanitary service can be constructed under drainage way. * The following backflow devices will be required: -- irrigation system a double check or pressure vacume breaker device -- fire system (if any ) - a DCDC device -- laundry room/domestic line or DC may be required. --aRP FIRE DEPARTMENT SEE ATTACHMENT A5 POLICE DEPARTMENT SEE ATTACHMENT A6 RECREATION AND PARKS DEPARTMENT SEE ATTACHMENT A7 BUILDING: 1. All permits and fees shall be paid for prior to construction 2. All plans shall be submitted for plan review. 7 ~E~O TO: FROrl: RE: DATE: II Barbara Sochacka Planning Department Bob Benck Fire Marshal Stonehedge Court Apartments - revised February 86, 1991 Site Plan Review Comments Woodburn Fire District ACCESS: Access is acceptable as presented on the February t9, 1991 plot plan. FIRE FLOW: The twelve unit buildings require a minimum of 2,750 gpm and the eight unit buildings a minimum of 2,250 gpm. The fire flows for the 12 unit complexes will require three fire hydrants within 250 feet of any particular unit and two hydrants within 250 feet of the eight unit buildings. Each hydrant must have a minimum water flow of 2,000 gpm. If a NFPA approved residential sprinkler is used, then a two-thirds reduction of hydrants would be granted. (UFC Appendix III - A, B) Ce PREMISE IDENTIFICATION: A system for addressing the project and identifying individual units must be developed and approved by the city and fire district. The numbers on the individual units must be of contrasting background and visible from the drive area. Dm CONDITIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION: As required by the Uniform Fire Code 10.301 (c) and 87.103, on site water supply must be in place, acceptable to the city, and operational before any combustible construction can begin. During construction these buildings present an exceptional high fire hazard and no exception will be granted for this needed water 'supply. IFTnX~'w/,,'rgltiAh~nv A-I-r/I~HMPNT AR_ Page BUILDING CONSTRUCTION: All buildings must meet Uniform Building Code Requirements, Fire and Life Safety Standards as reviewed by the City of Woodburn and Marion County Building Department. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: Au Alarm System - A supervised heat detention system designed to provide early fire detection in each dwelling unit will be required. The system must be monitored at a twenty-four hour central station and provide an on site panel to indicate which dwelling is in alarm. The Fire District must approve the proposed system prior to installation. (UFC 10.301) Bo Trash dumpster - These units must be stored in compliance with UFC ll.201 (d). An acceptable location should be provided. Co Combustible Landscaping - Low fire risk landscaping should be provided with adequate separation of combustible vegetation away from buildings. BB/l ~.'I-FA~.I-IMI=NT AR_ ~.~ FROM THE DESK OF LIEUTENANT PAUL E. NULL SERVICES DIVISION WOODBURN POLICE DEPARTMENT EXT. 352 January 30, 1991 TO: PUBLIC WORf'~ RE: SITE PLAN REVIEW STONEHEDGE APARTMENTS RECOMMENDATIONS POLE LIGHTING, HIGH SODIUM VAPOR LIGHTS TO BE INSTALLED AT FilCH DRIVEWAY [.E~DING INTO COMPLEX. LIGHTS TO BE INSTALLFD AT EACH PARKING AP~_2% INTERSECTION. ;%DEQ. IIATE LIGHTING H~S SHOWN TO REDUCE TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS, INSURE SBaVER PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC, ANT; REDU£~S THEFT FROM MOTOR VEHICLES. F2~TRY DOORS TO BE SOLID CX1RE, EQUIPPED WITH 1" DEAD f~LT LOCKS, WITH REINFORCED STRIKER PLATES. SLIDING GLASS DOORS-SLIDER PORTION OF DOOR ~J BE MOUNTED ON INSIDE. £~30R TO BE EQUIPPED WITH HARDWARE TO PREVENT PRYING OPEN OR LIFTING OUT OF DOOR CASING. BY TARGET HARDENING POTENTIAL POINTS OF BURGLARY ENTRY, WE CREATE A SAFER ENVIRONMENT FOR TENANTS. ALL APARTMENTS BE PLAINLY MARKED WITH APARTMENT NUMBERS, MINIMI~ ~" HIGH, AND VISIBLE FROM THE PARKING AREA. QUICK RESPONSE BY EITHER POLICE OR FIRZ, ON LIF5 Tf~P~ATENING CALL~, IS BASED ON THEIR ABILITY TO LOCATE A ~PF, CIFIC APARTMENT IN LARGE COMPLEXE~ 5. STOP SIC, NS-TO BE PLACED AT THE COMPLEX EXITS ENTERING PUBLIC ROADS. 6. TURNING LANE-TIrRNING LANE TO BE CREATED ON FRONT STREET, TO ALLOW TP3%FFIC ~.3 TUP4~ ~ ON'U:; VILLAGE DRIVE AND INTO APARTMENT C~_)MPLF~V~ OFF FRONT ST. 7. STOP SIGN TO BE ERECTED ON VILLAGE DRIVE AT FRONT ST. 8. STREET LIGh~ TO BE ERECTED AT FROI~rT ST. AND V!LL~GE DRIVE. ATTACHMENT A6 Janua~ 30,1991 WOODBURN RECREATION AND PARKS Staff Report: Stone Hedge Court Apartments In reviewing the proposed development which includes 192 two bedroom apartments. The attached Calculation Table indicates monies owed the City of Woodbum Recreation and Parks Department as required by the Woodburn Land Dedication Ordinance. According to the designated formula, 1.68 acres of land is the development requirement. The Woodbum Recreation and Parks Department and Board currently have a policy of accepting the cash-in-lieu of land. Your cash requirement f. or the project is $16,800.00. These funds should be paid in full at the time a buil;cling permit is issued. You may pay these fees in full, or if the project is phased, you may pay the appropriate level at $87.50 per lot. In reviewing the project plat I can find no definitive leisure space areas identified. A complex of this size should include recreational amenities to meet the in, house needs of its tenants. This particular project will include young children. It is the Woodburn Recreation and Parks Department's assessment that this complex should include as a minimum standard: One: .25 acre Tot Lot. The Tot Lot should include at minimum: a 3 seat swing, a sand box area and a Iow climbing apparatus. One: .50 acre play area which should include at minimum: a 3 seat swing, a 6 to 8 foot slide and one other intermediate climbing apparatus. Both of these areas should include a minimum of 2 six feet park benches. The play area should include a ddnking fountain. These play areas should be clearly identified as play area and must have access entdes which accommodate a handicap entry. The Woodburn Recreation and Parks Department wishes to review your play area plans and will assist you in playground equipment selection and recommendations if you desire. NH:swp Department of Recreation and Parks/Ciey of Woodbuna - 491 North Third Street, Woodburn, OR 97071 -- (503) 982-5264 Nevin Holly, l)irec~or Recre.~tion and Parks ATTACHMENT A7, p.1 'ARK DEDICATION CALCULATION TABLE )EPARTMENT OF RECREATION AND PARKS ~ITY OF WOODBURN )evelopment: Stone Hedge Court Apartments 'repared by: Nevin Holly, Director Recreation & Parks DATE: 1/29/91 'his form is provided to developers in the calculation of parkland [edications or cash-in-lieu of fees as determined by City of Woodburn ]oning Ordinance. Section 39. Please refer to that Ordinance for [etailed information about the background and administration of the ,arkland requirements. 'OPULATION GENERATION TABLE [ousing TypeI No. of units X people per unit = population generated ~etached Single Family 2 bedroom homes 3 bedroom homes 4 bedroom homes X 2.5 = Persons X 3.5 = Persons X 4.0 = Persons ~ttached Single Family 1 bedroom u~its 2 bedroom units 3 bedroom units ,ow Density Apartments Efficiency units 1 bedroom units 2 bedroom units 3 bedroom units X 1.5 = Persons X 2.5 = Persons X 3.5 = Persons X 1.0 = Persons X 1.5 = Persons X 2.5 = Persons X 3.5 = Persons igh Density Apartments Efficiency units 1 bedroom units 2 bedroom units 3 bedroom units X 1.0 = Persons X 1.25 = Persons 192 X 1.75 = 336 Persons X 2.75 = Persons TOTAL POPULATION GENERATED = 336 Persons AND DEDICATION opulation generated X 5 acre/1000 persons = PARKLAND ACRE REQUIRED 336 persons X .005 acre/person = 1.68 acres. ASH-IN-LIEU OF FEES arkland acres required X $10,000/acre land value standard - cres X $10,000/acre = $16,800.00 fee. 1.68 ATTACHMENT A7, p.2 ADDENDUM STONEHEDGE COURT APARTMENTS ALTERNATIVE SITE DESIGN RECOMMENDED BY CITY STAFF PART I. PART !1. SITE PLAN MAP ( including road CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THE ALTERNATIVE SITE PLAN ALTERNATIVE SITE 'PLAN MAP ' ' ' - "~: ;:'- · '" :' "'" ": '" ' :'~' ' "· -'i. '-' " ' '~'' .... "'" 'i~'~-" : - :.'." =:.":. ? =~..."' ~' .... '"!-..- "...'-' ":~- .~-"".' ~' :' '. :' ':'..~;"~"i"::' ' '"?"-.' ':.' :';'"":'"=.':'. ' --' i I t I I I ? ? RESIDENTIAL PUBLIC ROAD STONEHEDGE COURT APARTMENTS ' . . . -..- . ...: :; ':. . ..... : . ,..:~..... - . .~?........:..:.'.~. . .~ '.':..:'-'... .... -... - .~.... .-.~:.!.- .-. '..coNDITiONs;oF:AP-~ROV~E' i~.0TM ~E'AI'TE'~NATiVE OEStGN RECOMMENDED:'BY' ' :i;' -:i ~ ' ~: ? -?. !~ ::':':i"-. "-'. ~ ~; ~-:'. ': :'~ :~'. :~.~-''i::'-' '-i.-'.. :',:.'..::?--..:-.: :~. :'.CI.~.. .. STAFF":':~. ,.~,"..:.~-.:-~t. ::.:..;:':i' ';-' .:'.." ~.;:i!.::"-"::-::.:'. i'~':'-':"!:'' :? :"-":: i:i!:.'..: .~'-' i:'?-:' i~i' ::~ A. PLANNING' 1. Side yards adjacent to the proposed public street ( Village Drive ) shall be at a minimum 20 feet. 2. Side yards adjacent to Front Street shall meet the special setback requirements ( 40 feet from the center line of Front Street plus 20 feet of the zone setback ) 3. The landscaped areas shall be at a minimum 76,800 sq ft. 4. The ornamental fence or wall shall be maintained at a height of at least four feet but nor more than seven feet. 5. Provide basic information to identify more specifically type, location and time of completion of recreational facilities ( play grounds, picnic areas, walkways ) prior to construction. . 6. Provide basic information on s~fety measure / management plan to utilize the northwest corner of the property prior to construction. B. BUILDING 1. All permits and fees shall be paid for prior to construction. 2. All plans shall be submitted for plan review. C. SEWER The following backflow devices will be required: 1. Irrigation system - a double check or pressure vacuum breaker device. 2. Fire system ( if any ) a DCDC device 3. Laundry room/domestic line - a RP or DC may be required. D. ENGINEERING GENERAL I "Final plain'Shall, conf0~m-to':the-c°nstructi0n.Plan'r(~vi~pr°°edures'and -standards' ''''':~' :':"" 4. All work within Oregon State Hwy 214 will require a permit and approval from the Oregon State Highway Department. 5. The developer is responsible for any permits required from state and federal agencies within drainage basin or wetlands. 6. If project is to be phased in, some modification to these conditions may be required. STREET & DRAINAGE 1. PROPOSED STREE'[..'(Village Drive) A. The improved width from curb to curb shall be 34 feet, not 30 as shown. El. Frye-foot sidewalks will be required on both sides, not just the north side as shown. C. Street shall be barricaded with permanent barricades at west end. D. The intersection with Front Street shall be realigned, the intersecting angle shall not be less than 60° and should be between 75° and 90°. E. The right-of-way shall be deeded to the City free of all encumbrances and encroachments. F. Provide 20-foot property line radius on north right-of-way. 2. FRONT STREET A. Dedicate to the City an additional ten feet of property along Front St. adjacent to this development. A full street improvement shall be required on Front St. adjacent to this development. The street shall be improved with two 12-foot and one 13-foot traffic lanes, complete with the required tapers. C. The west side shall be constructed with a 12-foot sidewalk and bike path. 3. A public storm sewer will need to be constructed for the proposed street storm water ~eneO. ~tta~neCe.~?.~,,be constructed also to accommodate the proposed development... .:...."' WATER 1. An 8" diameter water main shall be required to be installed from the existing main on Front St. (approximately 500 ft south of this development) northerly along Front Street to the north line of this development. See Attachment "B" 2. All 8" diameter water mains shall be required to be installed from Front Street to the west end of the proposed street; the City will complete the loop to the existing main on the Grace Village property. See Attachment "B" 3. Fire protection and hydrant locations shall be as per the Fire Department's recommendation. Depending on the hydrant locations, the fire line may be required to be looped from Front to the proposed street. This fire line will also be a public line, not private.' See Attachment "B" 4. Water meters will need to be located within the right-of-way or easements. Units can be metered indMdually or grouped, whichever is most cost effective. 5. If a lawn sprinkler system is installed, backflow prevention devices shall be required. SANITARY Service to this development can be provided from the existing sanitary main located on the south side of Oregon State Hwy 214. Depth of sanitary main will need to be verified in field. To confirm, sanitary service can be constm(~ecl under drainage way. · t\ Z I- Z 133B15 (]N0035 Ol dOO9 ~..~ wood,un,. .......: ........ ........ :i Staff RepOrt: Stone Hedge Court Apartments In reviewing the proposed development which includes 192 two bedroom apartments. The attached Calculation Table indicates monies owed the City of Woodbum Recreation and Parks Department as required by the Woodbum Land Dedication Ordinance. According to the designated formula, 1.68 acres of land is the development requirement. The Woodbum Recreation and Parks Department and Board currently have a policy of accepting the cash-in-lieu of land. Your cash requirement (or the project is $16,800.00. These funds should be paid in full at the time a building permit is issued. You may pay these fees in full, or if the project is phased, you may pay the appropriate level at $87.50 per lot. In reviewing the project plat I can find no definitive leisure space areas identified. A complex of this size should include recreational amenities to meet the in house needs of its tenants. This particular project will include young children. It is the Woodbum Recreation and Parks Department's assessment that this complex should include as a minimum standard: One: One: .25 acre Tot Lot. The Tot Lot should include at minimum: a 3 seat swing, a sand box area and a. Iow climbing apparatus. .50 acre play area which should Include at minimum: a 3 seat swing, a 6 to 8 foot slide and one other intermediate climbing apparatus. Both of these areas should include a minimum of 2 six feet park benches. The play area should include a drinking fountain. These play areas should be clearly identified as play area and must have access entries which accommodate a handicap entry. The Woodbum Recreation and Parks Department wishes to review your play area plans and will assist you in playground equipment selection and recommendations if you desire. NH:swp Department of Recreation and Parks/City of Woodburn -- 491 North Third Street, Woodburn, OR 97071 -- (503) 982-5264 Nevin Holly, Director Recreation and pazks DEDICATION CALCULATION TABLE ~PARTM~.NT OF RECREATION AND pARKS 2'DY OF."~OODBURlq.._ ..'3-.:..-- .,. :.-. ' .... "i'i.:' ' .~'k '..' .... . . '--. ~.~' .;..:' . :.-.. ~. ' . ...~ . · .. · : . ... · '- . . · · . ..- ~i~ form.-is~pr~vided· to"degeloPers &n~the' CalculatiOn'O'f parkland'-'.'.'-'.'.-.''- ~dications or cash-in-lieu of fees as' determined by City of Woodburn )ning Ordinance. Section 39. ~lease refer to that Ordinance for ~tailed information about the background and administration of the ~rkland requirements- )PO--~ATION G~Nw. KATION TABLE ~usingTyDe~ No. of ,3n{ts X peoDle per ,3nit = DoDulation generated ~tached Single Family 2 bedroom homes 3 bedroom homes 4 bedroom homes X 2.5 = Persons X 3.5 = Persons X 4.0 = Persons :tached Single Famil~ i bedroom units 2 bedroom units 3 bedroom ~its X 1.5 = Persons X 2.5 = Persons X 3.5 = Persons ~w Density Apartments Efficiency units l bedroomunits 2 bodroomunits 3 bedroom units X 1.0 = .. Persons X 1.5 = .. Persons X 2.5 = Persons X 3.5 = Persons .ghDensity Apartments Efficiencyunits i bedroom units 2 bedroom units 3 bedroom units X 1.0 = Persons X 1.25 = Persons 192 X 1.75 = 336 Persons x 2.75 = Persons TOTAL POPULATION ~ENERATED = 336 Persons DEDICATION ,pulation generated X 5 acre/1000 persons = PARKLAND ACRE REQUIRED 36. persons X .005 acre/person = 1.68 acres. SH-IN-LIEU OF FEES rkland acres required X $10,000/acre land value standard - res X $10,000/acre = $16,800.00 fee. 1.68 .. ...... ,..~.: ., .': ...... ... -'......i.:.:,..:.' ...... ~-.~.... ;:...:..':, ;;....: .: .;,.. - ' "-""-..': "'~-~k:., ' '¥. '~'~i¢; ~-~'~.---' '""'-' '"": %' '"" "'~-'-:::""" """ ': ': .......... ; :ti: ..:'-:.' ~ {.:~: Fire Marshal RE: Stonehedge Court Apartments DATE: January 30, 1991 ACCE~: 1. More than one access point w~ll be required for emorgency servicem. If Village Drive is not provided then alte~native access roadways will be required per-UFC 10.207. 2. Turning radius within the project m~st be mod£fied to allow Fire District apparatus the ability to maneuver arc. nd corners without having to stop and change direction. The presenfplans do not provide for a minimum radius that will allow our aerial ~niz:to maneuver within the project. tinimum inside fuming radius of 46 feet and outside radius of 60 feet when the driveable width is twelve feet. The radius may be reduced when width i~ increased proportionally. 3. ~o dead end strips will be allowed over 150 feet in lengr_hwithout turnaround capabilities approved by the Fire District. The twelve unitbuildings require a minimum 2750 glmaand the eight unit buildin~s a minimum of 2250 ~pm. The fire flows for the 12 uni~ complexes will require 3 fire hydrants within 150 feet of any particular unit, We would reco~nend a mi~imumof 12 hydrants for r. he project. Each hydrant must have a mtnimum w~r~r flow of 2,000 gpm. If a NFPA approved residential sprinkler is ~sed, then a reduction oi hydrants would be granted, PREMISE IDENTIFICATION: A system for addressing the project and identifying individual units ~st be developed and approved.by the city and fire district. The numbers on the individual units must be of contrasting background and visible from the drive area. CONDITIONS FOR CONSTRUCrlON~ As required by the Uniform Fire Code 10.301 (c) and 87.103, on site water supply must be in plsce acceptable to the city ~nd operational bafoz~ any combustible constr~ction can begin, During consCrucnion r~eS~buildin~s present ~n excepnional high fire h_-?ard ~nd no exception will be g~anted ior this needed water supply. .]~UIT.,DING CONSTRUOTIO~ All buildings mu~t meet Uniform Building C~xie Requirements, Fire and Life Safety St~rds as reviewed by the City of W~bum ~d H~ion County Buildin~ Depar~ent. A. Alerm System - A supervised heat detection system designed no provide early fire detection in each dwellln~ ~unit will be reguired. The syste~ must be moninored an a ~wenty-four hour central station and provide an on site panel to indicate which dwellint is in alarm. The Fire District must approve the proposed system prior to in~tallttion. (U~¢ 10,301) B. Trash D~mpster - These units must be stored in compliance wi~h 11.201 (d), An acceptable location should be provided. Combu6tible Landscaping - Low fire risk landscaping should be provided with adequate separation of combustible vegetation sway from buildings, INTER--(]Fi--- I CE MEMO FROM THE DESK OF LISTFf~ PAUL E. NULL SERVICES DIVISION WOODBUP, N POLICE DEPARTMENT EXT. 352 i I I January 30, 1991 TO: PUBLIC WORKS RE: SITE PLAN REVIEW STONEHEDGE APARTMENTS RECOMMENDATIONS POLE LIGHTING, HIGH SODIUM VAPOR : LI(~ TO BE INMT;;L~.EI) AT EACH DRIVEWAY LEADING INTO COMPLF~. LIGHTS TO BE INSTALLED AT EACH PARKING ARF21 INTERSECTION. ADEQUATE LI(~ITING fI~S SHOWN TO REDUCE TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS, INSURE Sl%FER PEDF_~TRIAN TRAFFIC, AND REDUCES THEFT FROM MOTOR VEHICLES. ENTRY DOORS TO BE SOLID CORE, EQUIPPED ;4ITH 1" DEAD BOLT LOCKS, WITH REINFORCED STRIKER PLATES. SLIDING GLASS DOORS-SLIDER PORTION OF DOOR TO BE MOUNTED ON INSIDE. DOOR. TO BE EQUIPPED WITH HAR~ TO PI~ PRYING OPEN OR LIFTING OUT OF DOOR CASING. BY TARGET HARDENING POTENTIAL POINTS OF BURGLARY ENTRY, WE CREATE A SAFER ENVIRONMENT FOR TI~. ALL AFAI~S BE PLAINLY MARKED WITH APARTMENT NDMBERS, MINIMUM ~" HIGH, AND VISIBLE FROM THE PARKING AREA. QUICK RESPONSE BY EITHER POLICE OR FIRE, ON LIFE TMREATENING CALL~, IS BASED ON THEIR ABILITY TO LOCATE ]% SPECIFIC APARTMENT IN LARGE COMPn~ 5. STOP SIGNS-TO BE PLACED AT THE COMPLEX EXITS ENTERING PUBLIC ROADS. 6. TURNING LANE-TURNING LANE TO BE CREATED ON FRONT STREET, TO ~LI~W TRAFFIC TO TURN LEFT ONTO VILLAGE DRIVE AND INTO APARTMENT COMPLEX OFF FRONT ST. 7. STOP SIC4~ TO BE ERECTED ON VILLAGE DRIVE AT FRONT ST. 8. STREET LICIT TO BE ERECTED AT FRONT ST. AINT~ VILLAGE DRIVE. MEMO ...... -'. -. ~..'.' '.~'~ ~ - ..'-'" -......,. ~: '..'. ..~. FROM: PLANNING COMMISSiONs '"* . . 'MicHAEL QUINN, :" ClTY' AD M iNISTRA'TOR~~ DATE: SUBJECT: March 14, 1991 SITE PLAN REVIEW 391-01, STONEHEDGE APARTMENTS I am submitting this memo as an alternative opinion as part of your process for public hearing on the above project. Unfortunately, I am unable to attend your meeting due to prior commitments involving the City's Budget Committee review. I recognize this memo as very unorthodox and do not want it to be interpreted as being anything more than an alternate opinion related to a specific site plan recommendation. Generally, I am only involved in complex development projects; but like the rest of the staff, I can offer my professional advice as do the Public Works or Community Development Directors. i ask the Planning Commission to accept this:letter as it would testimony from any concerned citizen at a public hearing. I am Supportive of staff's site plan report in this case with the exception of Public Works requirement of a 'public residential road running along the south edge of the property" and likewise identified in the addendum plan. My reasons for this difference of opinion are as follows: 1. The adopted Woodbum Transportation Plan does not include local residential streets and, therefore, does not give any substantive support for this particular street placement. · a. The stated transportation goals are very general and do not give much support in defining the need for this road connection. This transportation element needs to be updated and coordinated through our ClP process. b. The adopted transportation pl.ar~, never contemplated this roadway as a collector or arterial street need; and while Public WORKS has termed it a residential road, I believe there is some room in the definition that it's function is a collector street disguised as a 'residential road." The purpose of a local residential street is primarily to provide access and is not generally designed for carrying through traffic. The primary purpose of a collector street is to drain traffic from local streets and lead them to an arterial street or a local generator of traffic like public buildings. In looking at the function Page 2 of this roadway, it appears to be odented more toward a collector function between Front Street and Highway 214 with pote.ntjal connections to Fifth, Third and Second Streets. c. If we were to assume this street to be residential and not covered in the plan, I believe there is reasonable doubt to its functionality being a residential street. If we were to assume this street to be a collector street, then it was never identified in currant plans and should rightfully be so included before developers are impacted by these requirements. In any case, if the roadway is determined to be a necessity, it certainly raises the issue of benefit impact and whether the community receives and should be responsible for its share of the cost. 2. The inclusion of this required roadway may serve some basic interests in establishing a street grid, but it may be detrimental in other concerns affecting the planning quality and integrity of this residential development. a. Recent planning theory has emphasized maintaining neighborhood integrity and stability beyond the basic infrastruct~..re, needs.of the d.eve, lopm~., _nt", ~ _g__o~l~ of a multi-family residential project is to create a mnng emnronment wnere me a-~reas~u densities can be tolerated and controlled; therefore, not being detrimental to the surrounding area. This roadway will encourage more through usage of traffic. b. This roadway will separate the access points to the project, thereby reducing the project's control and security of internal traffic circulation. Separate access points may encourage cut-through traffic to avoid controlled intersections, and may impact overall tenant security and safety through external exposure to non-tenants access to the project. 3. One of the major tasks of planning is to ensure that the community's resources are used effectively and economically. New facilities must be balanced between the benefits derived and the magnitude of resources divested including future maintenance costs. I offer consideration that this roadway is not the wisest use of such resources and would not be a high priority of the City to build with its own resources. a. This particular project has access to a major street and does not need this secondary roadway access, although the applicant could propose it if interested. b. The property south of the proposed roadway is single-family residentially developed and has long opposed any connection to a collector street. They enjoy the integrity of their local residential neighborhood and tolerate any inconvenience beyond having only southerly-directed access in favor of having less traffic. Planning Commission. '.-M~r~.l'4,.ig9i'". :'.-":";.':" :" "'.:-.' "'""-. ~.'' ".:' ..-i.,..' ~" -..'-'-..--'' "~.::'::'"':'"i''': 'i; "' "' "' Page 3 c. The Grace Village site is proposed for sale and has access via 5th Street to Highway 214. d. By orienting this parcel to Front Street for access, and the Grace Village parcel to Highway 214 for access, we can separate these traffic generators and not combine them onto one street which could collectively increase the traffic friction points at either Highway 214 or Front Street. e. Through-traffic access between Highway 214 and Front Street is not significantly improved since access already exists at an intersection of these two roads less than a quarter-mile north of the proposed roadway and involves higher speed traffic patterns in those areas in an improved fashion. It simply serves a very small traffic pattern between Front Street and Highway 214 because it does not continue beyond those points through the Office Park or Legion Part at the other end. I recognize that to be effective we must be equally loose-fight in our management approach to community development. We must be flexible in responding to specific needs, and also have standards relating to general needs. I believe this project is technically sound without the addition of this roadway. If. however, in the Planning Commission's judgment, you feel it is necessary then I ask that you consider an option to have the City's Public Works Department participate in this construction based upon perceived benefit in some degree. In this case some benefit could be derived from just having the right-of-way donated by the developer and cons'muction done in the future as part of the City's ClP. I personally consider the requirement for this roadway based more upon an opportunity for this development rather than a need for this development. I appreciate the Planning Commission's patience in reviewing my opinion statement and wish you the best in your difficult task as Planning Commission members to decide such land use judgments. EVANS ATTORNEYS AT L~W MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: RE: DATE: WOODBUmq PL&m,r~G Rov~rm, C. Zmm, ^rmmmY FOR HOmZON CONSmUC-'noN Srm PL~ Rm, mw# 91-01 L~GAL MEMO~'~DUM REOARDINO VALIDITY OF PROFOSED EXACTIONS MA~.CI-~ 14, 1991 ISSUES PRES~D Are the Exactions Proposed by the City of Woodburn Authorized by Woodburn City Ordinance? Bo Are the Exactions PrOposed by the City of Woodburn Constitutionally Permissible Exactions? FACTUAL INTRODUCTION Horizon Construction (Horizon), an Oregon corporation, is seeking site plan approval from the City of Woodburn (the City) to develop and build Stone Hedge Court Apartments (Stone Hedge). Stone Hedge would contain 192 apartment units located on approximately 11 acres. This properly is zoned MR Multi-Family Residential. The City has proposed a number of conditions that Horizon must satisfy before the City will approve the site plan. Those of concern in the memorandum are: 1. Horizon must dedicate and fully improve a new public street -- the proposed name is Village Drive. This street will run along the South property line and coimect with Front Street. To satisfy this condition, Horizon must: A. Dedicate a 60 foot right-of-way to the City; Make the improved width of the street from curb to curb 34 feet; Install permanent barricades at the West end of the street; PAGE 1 - Mmaom~rouM oF LAw De Provide a 20-foot property line radius at Front Street on the North fight-of-way; and Eo Connect the street with Front Street at a 60-90 degree angle. Horizon must make several improvements on and around Front Street (Front Street runs along the Southeast side of the property): Dedicate to the City ten feet of property along the West side of Front Street; Be Undertake a full improvement on the portion of Front Street adjacent to the property, with two 12- foot and one 13-foot traffic lanes complete with the required tapers; and Construct a 12-foot sidewalk and bike path on the West side of Front Street. II. DISCUSSION OF ISSUE ONE Are the Exactions ProPOsed by the City of Woodburn Authorized by Woodburn City_ Ordinance? In its Site Plan Review Information Sheet the City points to several city ordinances that may apply to a new development. Site Plan Review Information 'Sheet 34. Several of these ordinances are pertinent to this discussion: Ord. No. 1180 -- Relating to Driveways Ord. No. 1842 -- Relating to Connecting Property to Public Street and Drainage Ord. No. 1917 -- Relating to the Construction and Alteration of Sidewalks A. Woodburn'$ City Ordinances Do Not Authorize the ProPOsed Exactions. None of the above mentioned ordinances authorize the City to require the exactions and conditions it seeks to impose on Horizon. Without authority from a City Ordinance, the City has no ability to require these exactions. Ordinance No. 1180 regulates the construction of driveways. Current plans call for driveways to connect Stone Hedge to Front Street. The ordinance requires a permit before a driveway may be constructed. The ordinance provides technical specifications on width and surface height of the driveway. It does not, expressly or impliedly, authorize the exactions the City seeks in this case. Ordinance No. 1842 regulates the connection of private property to city streets and storm drains. It requires an application for permission to connect to the city streets and PAa~. 2 - MEMORANDUM OF LAW payment of an application fee. In Horizon's case, the fee would be $150 per dwelling unit. No where in this ordinance is the City given the ability to require more than the authorized permit fee. It certainly can not be construed to allow the City to require improvements to existing public streets, dedication of land for public street, and construction of new public streets. Ordinance No. 1917 regulates the construction, repair, and alteration of sidewalks. It imposes a duty on real property owners to maintain all sidewalks adjacent to the property in good repair. No where in the ordinance is the City authorized to condition approval of a cite plan on dedicating land to be used for sidewalks or public streets. The ordinance does not mention or authorize bike paths. Although this ordinance may enable the City to require sidewalks to be built on streets adjacent to the property, it certainly does not authorize the City to condition approval on repairing or building sidewalks on the opposite side of a street. Likewise, review of other ordinances reveals no authorization for the City's actions in this case. Since the City is acting without authority, the requirements and conditions it seeks to impose on Horizon are invalid. IV. DISCUSSION OF ISSUE TWO Arc the Exactions Proposed by_ the City_ of Woodburn Constitutionally Permi~l'ble Exactions? Even if authorization for imposing exactions and conditions on a developer is found, the City must operate within the limitations imposed by the U.S. Constitution (the Constitution). Any exaction that violates the Constitution is invalid and may not be enforced against the developer. The Proposed Exactions Violate the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution. Courts consistently hold that exactions may run afoul of the Constitution's Due Process Clause. This clause provides that neither the federal government nor any state government may deprive a person of property without due process of law. Courts have developed several methods for applying due process requirements to exactions. They include: the "reasonable relation" standard, see Hayes v. City of Albany, 7 Or. App. 277, 285, 490 P.2d 1018 (1971); the "specifically and uniquely attributable" standard, see McKain v. Toledo City Plan Commission, 270 N.E.2d 370, 374 (Ohio Ct. App. 1971); and the "rational nexus" standard, see Jordan v. Village of Menomonee, 137 N.W.2d 442 (Wis. 1965); Wald Corp.. v. Metropolitan Dade County_, 338 So.2d 863, 866-68 (Fla. App. 1976). Prior to the United States Supreme Court decision in N011an v, California Costal Com'n, 107 S. Ct. 3141 (1987), Oregon appeared to have adopted the "reasonable relation" standard. See Hayes, 7 Or. App. at 285 (sewer connection charge was "reasonably commensurate" with burdens caused by development); O'Keefe v. City of West Linn and PAa~- 3 - MmO~,~DUM OF Lnw SkCand Investments, Inc. v. Cit~ of West Linn, 14 Or. LUBA 284, 293 (1986) ("reasonable relation" standard adopted by LUBA). This standard is highly deferential and merely. requires that the exactions be reasonably related to the needs and burdens imposed by the new development. However, in Nollan the U.S. Supreme Court held that to satisfy the Due Process Clause of the Constitution, any exaction must have a causal connection with the public purpose sought to by met by the exaction. N011an's holding casts serious doubt on Oregon's "reasonable relation" standard. Beery & Ramis, Exactions: The Providing of Public Improvements, 2 Land Use § 22.4, at 22-2 (OR CLE Supp. 1988). Be Th~ Pro_rinsed F_~a_efi_'ons Do Not Bear A ~Rational Nexus' To The Development of Stone Hedge. After N011an it appears that the Constitution requires a court to review all exactions using at least the "rational nexus" standard. Under this standard, Horizon can only be "compelled... to bear that portion of the cost which bears a rational nexus to the needs created by, and benefits conferred upon, the [development]." L0ngridge Builders. Inc, v. Planning Board, 245 A.2d 336, 337 (NJ. 1968). This standard compels a court to specifically inquire into who will enjoy the benefits of any exaction. In Longridge. the court found the connection between a proposed development and the city's requirement that the developer pave a roadway 361 feet away too attenuated under the rational nexus test. In State ex rel Noland v. St, L0ui$ County_, 478 S.W.2d 363 (Mo. 1972), the court applied the rational nexus standard to invalidate a requirement that the developer relocate one road and widen and pave another. Under this standard of review, the exactions proposed by City can not stand. The City would require Horizon to grant it a 60-foot right-of-way and on it construct a 34-foot wide road with sidewalks on each side. No roadway currently exists here and all the land is privately owned. Clearly this would fail the rational nexus test. Rational nexus searches for a need created by the development. That need is not present here. Horizon has proposed a plan which eliminates this road and routes traffic into the development through driveways connecting with Front Street. Instead of meeting a need created by the development, the City hopes to acquire a road which will later benefit it. The City owns property on the South side of the development and a 'roadway constructed at Horizon's expense would greatly benefit the City's future development of that parcel but would provide Horizon little, ii~ any, benefit. Here, Horizon neither creates the need nor would it enjoy the benefit. The City's second exaction concerns Front Street. The City wishes Horizon to completely improve the portion of Front Street adjacent to the development. Again this requirement bears no rational nexus to thc development. Although the development may increase the use of Front Street adjacent to the development, the "Rational Nexus" requirement prevents the City from imposing the entire cost of the Front Street improvements on Horizon. The need for this improvement is not solely attributable to Horizon's proposed development and therefore the cost of the improvement should not be born solely by Horizon. Rather, Woodburn may impose only that cost that bears a "rational nexus" to the needs created by the development. Clearly requiring improvement of a three lane street used by the public does not bear this required relationship. P^GE 4 - Mm~o~,a)u~ oF Lnw IV. CONCLUSION The exactions proposed by the City are not authorized by Woodbum City Ordinances. Akhough the ordinances may give the City some discretion, they do not allow the City to require exactions of the magnitude proposed in this case. Additionally, even if the City was authorized by ordinance to seek these exactions, the exactions in this case violate the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution. Under the Due Process Clause, the City may impose only those exactions that bear a "rational nexus" to the new development. In this case, the City seeks too much. Much of the proposed exactions do not bear this required relationship. Respectfully Submitted, Rodney C. Zeeb, OSB #86322 Of Attorneys for Applicant ].14.91 14'.35 PAOE 5 - MEMORANDUM OF L~w MARCH 14, 1'991 President ' Vice President Commissioner Commissioner C~mmissioner ;~missioner · Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Mr. Johnson Present Mr. Vallieres. Present: Mrs. Warzynski Present Mrs. Sprauer Present Mr. Park Present Mr. Shillig . Present Mr. Rappleyea Present Mr. Scott Absent Mr. Guerra Present Steve Goeckritz, Community Development Director Barbara Sochacka, City Planner 4) MINUTES: The Woodburn Planning Commission Minutes of February 28, 1991 were accepted as written. , The Woodburn City Council minutes of February 25, 1991 were accepted received. The Woodburn Downtown Association minutes of February 26, and March 5, were accepted as received. BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE: None COMMUNICATIONS: None :...:-:....:?. ~- ~': ..,. . · ...... · .. . . .-. -..-~",~. ~:.- i'-' '-!'- .' -..::'i. :'.'Site Pian':'RevieW'~#91~01· .-' :'-' .'Stonehedge: Partners '- ' '. :"...-: '.' .:.." - ., .................. . ....... ..... Planning..staff. read ..the..necessary..Public: Notice.: statement .to~. begin the .... · ..... -.. public hearing. ~ Planning staff reported that the proposal was 192 unit apartme'R~.~.'.co, mplex, -- 11.3 acres located on Front Street. Staff then went over the two.altemative ~' site designs as 'Presented in the staff report. Of which a portion of the report focused on the need for a street between Front and P'Lf~.._ Streets. Staff then went over the conditions and recommendations of aPp~ ..:v~ of the site plan. Frank T'nNari, Public Works Director, stated that he would be talking about the water, sewer and street. The street area has been raised whether it should be required as to be provided by the developer and built by the developer. He talked about how in the near future the school would be growing from 600 students to 1200 students, there will be more traffic on Front Street. There is a need for an east/west road to help accommodate the 192 unit complex along with ali other traffic., He went over the prior improvement of Front Street and told the Commission that it was an assessment project, not an up front cost. It was reCOmmended the street be constructed by the developer and dedicated by the developer except for the sidewalk on the southside. He stated that the intent of the proposed street would be to connect Front Street to Fifth Street. A turn lane on Front would be necessary to make the turn into the complex and on to the street safer. By providing two different ways to arrive at this location would be safer for the school children. He stated that it has been a policy of the city to have the water, sewer and street go from one end of the property to the other. He stated that the 192 units to be built would need the street to get to Hwy 214. He felt that the city was not being unfair by requiring the street to be built. From the traffic point of view it was necessary to have this street built. He stated he was open for questions from the Commission. Commissioner Vallieres asked when Mr. Tiwari would expect the south part of Front Street to be 37' like the north part of Front Street. Mr. 'riwari stated that it is expected to be done in the future. He couldn't put an exact date to the improvements. Commissioner Vallieres asked the difference in the cost of a 34' street to a 37' street. 2 Mr. Tiwari stated, that new street cost is not cheap, but less than the ~:... .~ _..,..~. -..... ..... ....ilr~odificatiol~.0f~th.e:.e~iSting road,S' .'.-_:' '~.- '."' · ,;:..~ .~- -~- :'..---?--.. i." "'" ' '..i:'.- .- .. · Commissioner...Vallieres. asked,that if.the property c).wners.t .o the s° 'utb. ' o.f the aPartmeht comPiex'wOuid have t° 'help' pay for the road~ .... " ' ;"Mr~ '~:nm~ri ~t~'tec~'-~at'0~ie"de~i~ic~n ;,hat~'ne'eded' {0''l~e' ~a~ie'~vas'thAt if' ~e'." '''~ ....... ' street was needed or not. Cleveland street could not be built if it was to be constructed by the assessment of the properties which are already there. A single family house may not want access to the street, they may want a fence there. He stated he was talking from traffic point of view. Commissioner Vallieres asked if this project could go ahead and give permission for that road later on. Mr. 'l-nNari stated that it was one option. They could dedicate it and it be constructed later. Their fair share could be paid when the city constructs the street. The fair share would be decided by the City Council. Commissioner Vallieres asked what the street would cost. Mr. T'rwari stated that he was not sure of the cost,per foot, maybe $125.00, that would make it at 650 ft. or so around $81,000.. Commissioner Vailieres asked if that would make a difference in this project being successful or not. Mr. Thvari stated that he could not answer that. He stated that it is a good project. It does not have any water problems, wastewater problems but it does have certain traffic impacts. Commissioner Park asked Mr. Tiwari if when the rest of the properties were developed wouldn't their access be from Fifth Street. It seemed reasonable to limit access from Hwy 214. Mr. 'l-~ari answered that Fifth was not connected at this time. It was poor planning to have so many streets in Woodburn with no cross streets. '~q3ether the street is needed or not, that is the first judgmental decision based on where we are, the second one is that somebody has to make a decision as to whether a development is being penalized unduly or not." He had to go by policy, saying from one end to the other of the property. President Johnson asked if the large open area south of the road would that property have to share some future development costs. 3 · Mr..Tiwari answered that Woodburn T,r.ucking-.a. Ir.,eady:had that.: property. ~. -,;.~ ...... ,... :..?'.''-... :.... .... ."": : ..... ....~ . '.'....'::::..'...";~,:.:: .... ~ ..... ~.-.- . .'....;.~ ...~..:..~.~..... Commi§sioner Shillig asked Mr. 'i3wari'if the proPosed'road was 'good for .. ...:.... . -;WoOdbu?O.'".. .'.,:'. ,":'--: .. :..'.;.~ ::'.- .. ,'.:.:..:. -..- .. -.': ;.~.. :'..' . . '.'...' :" . . Mr.-.'i'~ari..answered .that. in his-opinion-from technical engineering,.ther, e should be a road. Commissioner Warzynski stated that the difference of opinion was due to calling it a residential road and the way it is being explained wouldn't it be a collector if it extends over to Second or Fifth. Mr. Tiwari answered that it all depends, it is relatively a small road from Front to Fifth. These are assessed by the property owners. There is a middle portion which is not included due to property owners not wanting to pay their fair share. Maybe in another ten years it will be improved. You may or may not require that there be a dedicated road and some later date they will be accessed. He didn't recommend it that way. Commissioner Warzynski stated that she felt that the road was needed. Riding to the perimeters of this town there were dead ends everywhere. CommiSsioner Guerra asked if future development in the Glatt Circle area and assuming expansion of the high school and' the residents of the proposed apartment complex, if Mr. T'rwad thought that the ramp to Front Street off of Hwy 214 will become an obsolete unused ramp. Mr. Thvari stated that turning left to get to the area would not be practical. Commissioner Guerra stated that it would require a well developed street that would divert towards the downtown area and access to the proposed apartments to handle the traffic. Mr. Trwad answered yes. Commissioner Vallieres stated that access to the area would increase the value of the surrounding property. Mr. Trwari stated that he not in favor of a lot of streets to be accepted by the City. The city can not waste city resources on internal streets. From the maintenance point of view he was not in favor of having a lot of public streets. But when he looks at the traffic situation public streets are needed. 4 There was some discussion between.Mr. T~wad and ..Commissiq.n.e[..V..a. llieres... . ..,.::..~ . ~ ....... .. . ..... . .......... . .... . ~. ~ '. . .:,~. ?.' ..,.. : '..; '~ ': ' ab'6:u~'f~ir'~shar'~ cost of the"propetty owners'.: :" Presidentl johnson ;aSked if."the'-Street.was put' in; WOUld. loosing the :40: or. :'.'-; -.~": 50' parking stalls be a problem for the developer? · -~.... ....· ........ ~.. . -,, .:.-.;. -.,- .... ~ .......... -. . .... : ~ .... .,, ...... . ...... ..... .. ,- .....=....,.....--. . · ..... . ~.. Staff answered thatif the street is put in the proposal still meets the parking criteria. President Johnson asked if the applicant wished to speak. Mike Kelly, 4004 NE Royal Ct, Portland, stated that he represented the applicants. He stated that he wanted to talk about the project overall. He stated that currently the applicants owned and manage 600 units in Marion County. He stated that they have extensive experience in developing and managing small and large units. This project has been in the working for the past few months. He stated that in the first phase there would be 108 units and the second would have 84 units. He feels he could fill 192 units. He talked about how they surveyed the area and felt that Woodbum needed the apartments. He talked about the intended proposal they presented the city. He presented legal draft to the staff and copies to the Commission. He stated that the public road was something they felt that wasn't necessary for this project. It would cause management problems. He went over the legal draft from his attorney concerning the public road. · He commented on the cost of water and sewer hookup fees. He stated that they didn't need the street for the project and if they were responsible for the cost of the construction of the public street, the project could very well not happen due to this condition. He did state that they were willing to give the City the 10 feet necessary to improve Front Street, it would enhance their property. He commented on the request from the fire department about the alarm system. He felt that the proposed fire alarm plan was sufficient, it met State requirements. Commissioner Vallieres asked if the proposed plan would be maintained by the developer. Mr. Kelly answered yes, it would be a private drive for the units and all the maintenance would be done by them. Commissioner Warzynski asked if the driveway to the south was just extended into the parking area. Mr. Kelly answered yes. It would allow the fire department continuous access through the project without turning around or having to back up. 5 Commi..,ssioner Sprauer asked to be e$cused. ,....:.,.~ :..., ...:., .,... .~....':.:""~..'" "'"' .... !.'"?'~'"'?":"-. 'i'~:.'"".:'-'.:' .'.- ~:'.ii: ' . .... ..-..~' ....:" ' '- :¥'"-~'" ~':~-'-.:~'""'~'""'"- " .... ' ' Commissioner Gue~'ra 'asked What Would be developed on the slope by .:..-- '.. ':.Hwy 21.4.., .:. :.. '..:.:- i-.::: ~..' '-.- ".:: "./..: ': '-i':'. i'.-.:' '-i..~. -'..'' .' ':-.~.i' -': '" ." ":'-""-'- '~"'~' ': ':: '~"' :~-::" '.°':'- ......... Mr... Kelly .answered ..th. at.,thex, e. was no current plans due.~te this being, the-. ....... State of Oregon right-of-way for their drainage easement. They plan to landscape up to the fence which would be located 15 feet away from the units. Staff asked that in regards to the staff report there were two conditions that you have any objections to which are the 1) the road to the south, and 2) the fire control system. He asked if there was anything else in the report that Mr. Kelly objected to. Mr. Kelly stated that other than those two, no. Staff felt that in regards to the Fire Department request, he thought that this should be left up to the county and state safety code people. Staff told the Commission that he felt they should not act upon this condition but let that be handled by the Fire Dept. Mr. Kelly stated that he would like it to go on re.cord that the City of Woodbum Planning staff have been very cooperative with them. Commissioner Warzynski asked about the north end of the property by the cemetery. She stated that the fence along this area was very poor. Mr. Kelly stated that a six foot fence would be built there. President Johnson asked staff that in the future on Hwy 214 if it were curbed would this developer be responsible for any of that. Staff stated that they didn't even want to guess at this time. President Johnson asked if this needed to be made one of the conditions of approval. Mr. T'rwad answered that as far as Hwy 214 improvements are concerned. If there were a curb and sidewalk required it is usually accessed against the property. Widening is usually State funded. It will probably be curbed and sidewalk in the future. 6 President Johnson stated that in the past the Commission has asked for tot '..~, ii-" .- ,." '"'~: '-':,'.'." ,iots.-'or' ~51ay ~e~is tO'be fi~r~--ed~.-,.He 'askec~. E.there~w~'atd'be'~J/omething':'.lik'e '~ -:' :"';':'~':~ '-that. '..~.~:::.'..-.-.:'..i';.~ :":' '-. ~'.';'~-- -'-~-: i.~..'.:'..... ~......-.". ,.'....: :....~'...---'~ .---'- ..:':' .-.' ';' ''~, . ~ ::.:'.-.." '-" .. "Mr; Kelly stated that the'onlY'problem they hadwith that is the'playtoys that' they are liabl.e, for. He would be happy to work out with the Parks "'-'""' .:-De~)artm~nt'a-'~a{~· ~iay'ar"e'~. .... = ....... ' .......... ' ........ ' staff asked if the developer had a chance to looked at what the Parks and Recreation Department was recommending. Mr. Kelly stated that yes, those kind of things were not a problem. President Johnson stated that what he was getting at was specific separation of the age group areas as far as the play park areas. Mr. Kelly stated that they have basically put in picnic tables for the tenants, benches, barbecues and play areas, he didn't want to get into cutting up those areas to the point where kids aren't able to play in the grass and run back and forth. This way parents will come out sit on the bench and watch their children play. He did not want to fence off an area where a parent could put their child into shut the gate and go back to their apartment. He preferred it be a parent supervised play area. President Johnson stated to staff that he didn't : read the Park and Recreation memo thoroughly. He asked staff if they addressed two different play areas. Staff replied that the Parks and Recreation Department had asked for two tot lot play area. Staff felt there was enough play area. President Johnson asked if there was anyone else who wished to speak for this proposal. There were none. He asked for anyone who wished to speak against this proposal. Lavon Shaffner, 1455 N. Front St., stated that he agreed with the need for housing in Woodburn. He felt that two bedroom complexes would not do the job. Three and four bedroom complexes are needed. He was concerned about the traffic the complex would bring to Front Street. He felt that the extra traffic would be dangerous for the school children who walk down Front Street to and from school. The .property owners, who abut this proposed street, would be assessed for this one and assessed for Front Street improvements. He felt that a double assessment wouldn't work. He stated that their properties were along the south side of the proposed street. 7 ·..Mr~:.Tiwad stated.that if itis, determin?.d:;that.the p.r:op,e..rty be,.n,e,,ffi..s frOnmdith..e. ' · '"'"~'"" '":". i'. "';":'".':'~".':" .'*' ';'street ahd~ :~;~il'.~i~h~'(~'E ~'~'~'~.~'~'~ec~::'~aff'is:~me 'ng.::.- ":-'-'::!"' " . that ~t will be a public street and should be built bY. the developer. .... :-'; - ".i ''-".'.. ..... .i':~' . .: ... ' .'-.i. :'~';...,' ..... ' ';' '.:: '-"-'- '-- ' :'~'' '""~'~' ':: """ ..... :' - :':"? 'i .';' :~--''''.'; '~ :' .~ President Johnson asked if 'Mr. Tiwari meant that it was Possible that the ............... .. .... ...... property owners could be assessed, on. both sides..~ - ...... · .... . ................ Mr. Tiwari answered yes, unless a decision was made not to assess. Mr. Shaffner asked Mr. Kelly how dose to the south border the parking area was. Mr. Kelly stated that had been surveyed. He stated that he would have to look at the plans. President Johnson stated that it was 12 feet. Rosa Martinez, 1495 Front Street stated that she lived at the comer, in a small triangle, the proposed plans showed the property line as straight line. She asked what this was going to do to her property. Staff answered that the develope, r would not be allowed to encroach upon her proPerty. Mrs. Martlnez stated she was also concerned about the traffic. President Johnson asked if there was anyone else who wished to speak for or against this proposal. There were none. He asked if the applicant had anything further. Mr. Kelly stated that they do have surveyors to survey the property and they wanted to keep the integrity of their neighbors. He stated that they were aware of the problems that exist with properties that have sit vacant for years. He felt that this was the best way to develop his property. He said that if the City of Woodbum wanted to build the street, he and his partners would only buy a portion of the property and the city could purchase the other part and build the street. The street doesn't help his development. He did not want the accesses to the proposed street. Commissioner Vallieres stated that he agreed with the developer that from a safety point only the two entrances were necessary not the proposed street. 8 resident Johnson stated that he had concerns with the street.. There is " ' :"nothifl§":tO ..-gu~antee'~at Me : ~th6 r ~Pt0~erfi~S' 'cO'~ldil"{-d~ve 10p oEi°f H~ · .P : :...~: .. ~.... '7_~.'.. :.'.-, .,.'.?....,':.- - . . . . . " 214 and not want the Street baCk of their'properties'unless it is forced .. ~. :........ : ....~ · aCross,... He stated that .he ..would'.like staff to 'look at the-eastJw,.est-'street .... and see if it is reallY neCesSary fo~' 'tl~e future~ 'He t~elt that this had. not been .... ... , . ...fully thought O .ut.. He.w.0uld like to. see more,irlp~, a0. d.~h._a;t., the .impa, ct.of ...... ' "" the Hwy 214/Front Street interse~on might be if this were completed. He felt that the Commission would be asking the developer to spend too much money that potentially the city would not gain anything from. Commissioner Rappleyea stated that he felt that the road was needed. He did feel that the developer was being asked to do a lot. He felt that a workable solution would be to dedicate the road so that the developers property could be assessed at a later date if Grace Village should be developed and the road be built. Commissioner Vallieres stated that he felt that to get the street developed on Front Street was more important than getting the proposed street built, Commissioner Shillig stated that if the City does Front Street, the developer should buuild the street to the south. He felt that the alternative site plan was good for Woodburn. ~ Commissioner Warzynski stated that she felt FrOnt Street was more important'at this time. She did agree with the dedication of the road instead of development at this time. Commissioner Park stated that he felt that a street being built in there was absolutely essential. He did feel that dedication of the street at this time was the correct way to go. Commissioner Guerra stated that there was much to be gained by building the road on the south side and connecting to Hwy 214. President Johnson asked if the Commission was assuming that the homes to the south would take half of the responsibility and the developer put in his fair share. Staff stated that the Council would have to make a decision as to which way this would be handled, President Johnson asked what if the developer didn't want access to the road then why should he have to pay for the development of the street. 9 · . . .. Staff stated that might b.,e. the case and. they m!ght state that the de, dic~:..~?,.n . . . . " .... .,---"' "~". ..... . :*':::,' "~?:'"'~3f :the :i~ria'-i~self.t~:;a~l~c~t~{e~'~d::~q'oi~a'ble -at~d':~'0w ~ is.' bl~ ,~6:t~--~:'~'0*" ::' ..:. ? -~'':' pay for the improvements. " "' ' President ·johnson dosed the pUblic hearing; asking for final discussion ............ from the Commissionor any motions,. He stated, that.he was in,fa.vor of,the...... ...... project, he felt that the security aspect should be considered. He would like more input on the street, if it is found that the street is necessary that the developer build the street but not have to until after Phase II is built. Commissioner Shillig made the motion to accept Site Plan #91-01 and to include the alternative map which includes the street to the south with the developer paying the full expense of the road, Commissioner Park seconded the motion. A vote was taken and there was four yes, three no. Staff asked for a clarification. He understood that the motion was for the street to the south and the developer paying for it. The Commission answered yes. Staff Stated that the developer could now start develOping their proposal or if they disagreed appeal to the City Council in the next ten days. 6) REPORTS: A. The Planning Fees Resolution was approved by Council. B. Staff asked the Commission if they had any questions about the Code Enforcement or Building Reports. There were none. 7) BUSINESS FROM THE COMMISSION: None 8) ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business the adjourned. Planning Commission meeting 10 MINUTES WOODBURN PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 21, 1991 1) 2) 3) ROLL President Mr. Johnson Present Vice President Mr. Vallieres Absent Commissioner Mrs. Warzynski Present Commissioner Mrs. Sprauer Present Commissioner Mr. Park Present Commissioner Mr. Shillig Present Commissioner Mr. Rappleyea Present Commissioner Mr. Scott Present Commissioner Mr. Guerra Present Staff Present - Steve Goeckritz, Community Development Director MINUTES: The Woodburn Planning approved as written. Commission minutes,, of March 14, 1991 were MOTION TO RECONSIDER: Staff read the statement from the City Attorney on the motion to reconsider. Staff then read the three alternatives that were brought up at the meeting of March 14, 1991. Staff made clear that no testimony could be heard from anyone in the audience and staff could only discuss with the Commission what was already on record. Commissioner Warzynski made the motion to reconsider Site Plan #91-01. Commissioner seconded the motion. A vote was taken and passed five yes, one no. Commissioner Shillig abstained. President Johnson asked if there was any discussion on the motion made at the March 14, 1991 hearing. Commissioner Guerra had a question about the financing of the road. He understood that the developer and the City would work out a compromise in lieu of the building of the road. He felt that the entire burden should not be put on the developer. The previous vote implied that the developer would be burdened with the entire improvement of the road. Commissioner Park stated that all decisions that have been made in the past required the developers build the roads. He felt that the Com .~ssion should not change its policy. Commissioner Warzynski stated that the way she understood it was the developer who was going to pay for Front Street and she felt they would be getting the double whammy if they would be required to pay also for the east/west road. President Johnson asked staff if the developer was going to pay part of Front Street. Staff answered that Mr. T'rwari stated at the earlier hearing the City would pay for the east side of Front Street and the developer would be responsible for the west side. The widening of Front Street would be from the south property line to the north property lin. e. President Johnson asked what the rational was for requesting this road. Staff answered that in the statement in the minutes from Mr. 'l-nNari, "from an engineering point.., the street makes good sense". Mike Quinn, City Administrator, questioned the utility of the east/west street. He stated that he would be happy to answer any questions. He did remind the Commission that the public hearing had been closed and that he could only answer questions on the information received at the hearing. Commissioner Guerra stated that if the Commission decided that the project frontage was on the south side of the property when discussing the public road, he felt that there was no question that the developer as well as the city were obligated. If we are defining the frontage as on Front Street then the developer wouldn't be obligated to any cost except to the cost on Front Street. Staff stated that he wanted to make one additional point. In talking about cost, the City Council will determine who pays what cost, the Commission can only recommend there be a street there. 2 Commissioner Warzynski asked for the motion to be read that was to be voted on, presented at the last meeting. Staff read the motion from the minutes of March 14, 1991 which called for the developer to build the road at the time of the building construction. Commissioner Warzynski asked if a vote could be called for and then go on with more discussion. A motion was made by Commissioner Warzynski and seconded by Commissioner to overturn March 14, 1991's condition to require the developer to build the street at the time of building construction. The condition was overturned 5 .to 3. Commissioner Rappleyea felt that with no access out to Hwy 214, it is very important that an east/west road be built. He made the motion to approve Site Plan #91-01 with the condition that the developer improve Front Street and dedicate the east/west road and this road be built when Grace Village property is developed. The two people who would be assessed in the building of the road would be Stonehedge Apartments and Grace Village property because these two properties will benefit. Commissioner Warzynski seconded the motion.. Staff asked for clarification,if this motion was similar to the motion that was voted on March 14, 1991, just a different time frame. Commissioner Guerra stated that yes, they would be assessed in the future,no up front cost. He believed that this road should be built. Commissioner Sprauer stated that her understanding is that the road is simply dedicated for the future and not stipulated who will pay. Commissioner Park stated that a roadway would enhance this development because it would make it easier for the residents, to get in and out without the traffic on Front Street. He felt that this was a good compromise. President Johnson asked staff to clarify Commissioner Sprauer's understanding. Staff stated the City Council would decides who pays for the road. Commissioner Scott asked what was the LID process for Woodburn. 3 Staff answered it was similar to any other community in which those people that benefit are those who participate. Commissioner Scott asked what if they dedicate the road, the Commission couldn't put a stipulation on it of who is to pay. If there is access to Hwy 214 they will be increasing traffic in their development. President Johnson asked since the State is restricting access to Highway 214, does this shift any responsibility of subsequent roads to the city or State. Staff answered, in this case you would either access one property from 5th Street or the other from Front Street therefore the state does not have any jurisdiction. President Johnson stated that he was not comfortable with the fact of dedication of the road. The development would have multi-accesses round the property, the developer has some legitimate concerns regarding the security. Commissioner Park asked for clarification, if the Commission ask the developer to dedicate the road, when it comes time to build the property owners to the south will have to share in this cost. He asked if the City Council would make that decision. Staff answered that if they benefit from the road they could be assessed as part of the improvement under a local improvement district. Commissioner Warzynski asked if the Woodburn Trucking Company is commercial, is that a commercial zone by it's self and do they have direct access on to Front Street. Staff answered yes to both questions. Commissioner Guerra clarified the motion, if this motion passes the road will not necessarily be built, but the developer will be dedicating the property for future use. Commissioner Warzynski asked for Commissioner Rappleyea repeat the motion. Commissioner Rappleyea did. 4 Mike Quinn stated that Commissioner Rappleyea has made a motion as a requirement to the developer to dedicate the land but not have to do the up front development cost. He also included an additional section on his motion, "the Planning Commission recommendation to the City Council that in the future it shall be developed as required by the d~y. Mr. Quinn wanted to clarify that if this was the motion, it should be understood the developer has no control over the section that says that Grace Village and Stonehedge has to pay for the roadway. That can still be the Commissions recommendation to the Council. He wanted the distinction in his mind that this was not a requirement of the developer, his requirement is to dedicate the land and in the future he will participate in what ever the city plans in the future, whether it is an LID or participation or whatever. He wanted the Commission to know that is how he understood the motion. Commissioner Rappleyea stated that what he meant in the motion. President Johnson asked if there was any further discussion. He asked if every one was clear on what the motion was. He asked if there was any further questions on that. There were none. A vote was taken by Roll Call: 4 yes, 3 no, I abstention President Johnson clarified it with staff that the developer could still appeal to the City Council. Staff said yes. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business the Woodburn Planning Commission meeting adjourned. 5