Agenda - 04/25/2005CITY OF WOODBURN
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
APRIL 25, 2005 - 7:00 P.M.
KATHRYN FIGLEY, MAYOR
WALTER NICHOLS, COUNCILOR WARD 1
RICHARD BJELLAND, COUNCILOR WARD II
PETER McCALLUM, COUNCILOR WARD III
JAMES COX, COUNCILOR WARD IV
FRANK LONERGAN, COUNCILOR WARDV
ELIDA SIFUENTEZ, COUNCILOR WARD VI
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 270 MONTGOMERY STREET
e
e
CALL TO ORDER AND FLAG SALUTE
ROLL CALL
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND APPOINTMENTS
Announcements:
A. The Woodburn Public Library concludes the spring concert
series with Juliet Wyers on May 8, 2005 at 2 p.m. at City Hall.
Appointments:
None.
PROCLAMA11ONS/PRESENTATIONS
Proclamations:
None.
Presentations:
None.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
A. Chamber of Commerce
B. Woodburn Downtown Association
COMMUNICATIONS
None.
BUSINESS FROM THE PUBLIC- This o/lows/he public ~'o in/roduce i/ems
for Council con~ideroffon no/already ~chedu/ed on fhe agenda.
"Habr ~ bt~rpretes bisponi[~[es para aq.~[[as personas que no ~a[~[a. I.O[~s/ previo acuerbo.
Comuniquese a[ (5o3) 98o-2485."
April 25, 2005 Council Agenda Page i
e
10.
CONSENT AGENDA -ffems/isled on lhe consenl agenda are considered
routine and may be enacted by one moffon. Any #em may be removed
for discussion al fhe reques! of a Counci/ member.
Woodbum City Council minutes of April 11, 2005, regular and
executive session
Recommended Action: Approve the minutes.
Be
Woodbum Recreation and Parks Board draft minutes of April
12, 2005
Recommended Action: Accept the minutes.
C. Woodbum Planning Commission minutes of March 24, 2005
Recommended Action: Accept the minutes.
D. Woodburn Public Ubrary Board minutes of April 13, 2005
Recommended Action: Accept the minutes.
Woodbum Public Library Monthly Report for March 2005
Recommended Action: Receive the report.
Claims for March 2005
Recommended Action: Receive the report.
TABLED BUSINESS
None.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Six, th Street Vacation, South of West Lincoln
Recommended Action: Conduct public hearing, receive
public comment, and instruct staff to prepare an ordinance
vacating that portion of Sixth Street right of way, south of West
Lincoln Street to its south terminus, subject to the conditions as
outlined.
Be
Measure 37 Claim M37 04-01 (Delbert Goffsacker)
Recommended Action: Conduct public hearing, receive
public comment, and pass a motion to deny Measure 37
Claim M37 04-01 based upon the staff report dated April 21,
2005 prepared by the Community Development Director.
13
17
23
27
29
April 25, 2005 Council Agenda Page ii
11.
12.
GENERAL BUSINESS -Members of lhe public wishing lo commenl on #ems of
genero/ bus/ness musl comp/ele ond submi! o speoker's cord lo lhe C/ly
Recorder prior lo commencing lhis porlion of the Council's ogendo.
Commenl lime rook' be l/m/led by Moyoro/ prerogolive.
Ae
Legislative Amendment 05-01; Woodbum Comprehensive Plan
Update
Recommended Action: Commence deliberations on
Legislative Amendment 05-01, the Woodburn Comprehensive
Plan update, establish a time limit for deliberation in this
meeting and continue deliberations to May 23, 2005.
Be
Council Bill 2569 - Resolution authorizing the transfer of
operating contingency appropdaflons dudng fiscal year 2004-
Recommended Action: Adopt the resolution, and authorize
the City Administrator to execute an agreement with the firm
of Williams, Zografos and Peck for labor representative
services.
Insurance Agent of Record - Properly/Casualty Lines of
Coverage
Recommended Action: Appoint Huggins Insurance Services
Inc. as the City's Insurance Agent of Record for property,
liability, workers' compensation, and risk management services
and authorize the City Administrator to sign a personal services
agreement with Huggins Insurance Services, Inc. for a three-
year term of July 1,2005 through June 30, 2008.
De
Acceptance of Bancroft Bond Applications
Recommended Action: Accept the Bancroft Bond
application submitted by Badolo's (]024 Orchard Lane) and
Sanchez's (1052 Orchard Lane), which were filed after the
initial ]O-day filing period on fha East Hardcastle LID.
E.
Urban Renewal Reimbursement Agreement
Recommended Action: Approve and authorize the City
Administrator to execute a reimbursement agreement
between the City of Woodburn and the Woodbum Urban
Renewal Agency for fiscal years 2004-05 and 2005-06.
NEW BUSINESS
77
81
91
95
April 25, 2005 Council Agenda Page iii
13.
14.
15.
16.
PLANNING COMMISSION OR ADMINISTRATIVE LAND USE ACTIONS- 7-hese
ore Planning Commission or Adminisfrafive Land Use aclions fha!
may be called up by/he C#y Council
A. Planning Commission's Approval of Partition 05-01 and
Variance 05-06 (1515 West Uncoln Stzeet)
Be
Planning Commission's Approval of Design Review 04-22,
Vadance 04-30, Variance 05-01 and Vadance 05-07 (Nodheast
comer of Harvard Drive and West Hayes)
CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS
EXECUTIVE SESSION
None.
17. ADJOURNMENT
103
105
April 25, 2005 Council Agenda Page iv
8A
TAPE
READING
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 11, 2005
0001
0025
0060
0108
0145
DATE. COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, CITY OF WOODBURN,
COUNTY OF MARION, STATE OF OREGON, APRIL 11, 2005.
CONVENED. The meeting convened at 7:00 p.m. with Mayor Figley presiding.
ROLL CALL.
Mayor Figley Present
Councilor Bj elland Present
Councilor Cox Present (7:06 pm)
Councilor Lonergan Present
Councilor McCallum Present
Councilor Nichols Present
Councilor Sifuentez Present
Staff Present: City Administrator Brown, City Attorney Shields, Public Works Director
Tiwari, Public Works Manager Rohman, Community Development Director Mulder,
Police Chief Russell, Park & Recreation Director Westrick, Recorder Tennant
Special Legal Counsel: Paul Elsner- Beery &Elsner
ANNOUNCEMENTS.
A) Legion Park Master Plan - Recreation and Parks Board will host an open house on
Tuesday, April 12, 2005, 6:00 p.m., City Hall Council Chambers, for the purpose of
receiving community input on the Legion Park Master Plan.
B) Friends of the Library Book Sale will be held at the Woodbum Public Library on
April 22 and 23, 2005 between 10:00 am and 4:00 pm.
C) Public Hearing will be held before the City Council on Monday, April 25, 2005,
7:00 p.m., to consider the vacation of Sixth Street near Lincoln Street.
D) Council deliberation will begin on April 25, 2005 regarding Legislative Amendment
05-01 Woodbum 2005 Comprehensive Plan Update.
APPOINTMENT - WOODBURN BUDGET COMMITTEE.
Mayor Figley appointed Alma Grijalva to Position 1]/of the Woodburn Budget
Committee with her term expiring on December 31, 2005.
MCCALLUM/SIFUENTEZ... approve the appointment of Alma Grijalva to the Budget
Committee. The motion passed unanimously.
PROCLAMATION: NATIONAL LIBRARY WEEK 2005.
Mayor' Figley proclaimed April 10 - 16, 2005 as National Library Week in Woodbum and
encouraged local citizens to take advantage of our library resources and to thank our
Page 1 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 11, 2005
TAPE
READING
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 11, 2005
Library employees for making information accessible to Library patrons.
0265 PROCLAMATION: MONTH OF THE YOUNG CHILD - APRIL 2005.
Mayor Figley proclaimed April 2005 as Month of the Young Child in the City and urged
citizens to recognize and support the needs of young children within our community.
0370
PROCLAMATION: VOLUNTEER WEEK.
Mayor Figley proclaimed April 17-23, 2005 as Volunteer Week in the City of Woodburn
and encouraged governmental agencies, businesses, and local residents to honor this
observance with appropriate programs, ceremonies, and activities.
0450
PRESENTATION: WATER TREATMENT PROJECT UPDATE.
Public Works Manager Rohman reviewed the project objectives which included (1) water
quality improvement, (2) ability to meet current and future federal and state regulations,
(3) provide increased storage capacity for firefighting and emergency use, and (4)
increase water supply capabilities. Currently, the City has 800,000 gallons of water in
two elevated storage tanks and the 3 new storage reservoirs will hold a combined total of
4.7 million gallons of water which should take the City to its estimated population needs
of the year 2020. The treatment process will remove iron and manganese from the water,
reduce the amount of arsenic level to well-under the federal limits, and reduce the radon
level to below the proposed federal standard. He provided several illustrations to give the
Council a better understanding as to how the process works and interior/exterior photos
of the sites to explain in more detail the operational aspects. He stated that the treatment
process is an automated operation and computers will be used for this purpose. The
Country Club Road plant is being operated during the day in order for staff to become
familiar with the process and check out the backwash. Small amounts of treated water is
being pumped into the distribution system from this plant. The Pan' Road and National
Way plants are going through final acceptance and it is anticipated that operational testing
will begin in May 2005. It is anticipated that the system will be fully operational
sometime during the summer with an open house to be planned for late summer or early
fall. In regards to the use of water softeners, he stated that staff feels that water softeners
should not be needed once the plants are operational. Staff is also working on a flushing
program to try and get as much of the untreated water out of the distribution system as
soon as possible so that there is more treated water in the lines.
1450
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE REPORT.
Jeanine Hohn, representing the Chamber Board, updated the Council on the following
Chamber activities:
1) Community-wide Auction will be held on April 16, 2005 at the K-Man building. This
auction is a partnership between the Bulldog Association, Woodbum High School FFA
Page 2 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 11, 2005
TAPE
READING
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 11, 2005
Alumni Association, and the Chamber of Commerce. Tickets are still available for
purchase through the Chamber office.
2) Chamber Forum Lunch will be held on April 20th from 12:00 noon until 1:00 pm at the
Tukwila Center for Health & Medicine. Councilor McCallum with be this month's host
who will be presenting the "State of the County" presented by Marion County
Commissioners.
3) Tickets are still being sold for the Tulip Festival Raffle which is a gift basket worth
over $2,000 and has been put together by Woodburn Company Stores with funds raised
being donated to the Chamber.
4) Greeter's Program will be held on Friday, April 15th, at the Woodbllrn Art Gallery and
on April 22" at A & D Chiropractic in Hubbard between 7:30 am and 9:00 am.
This last weekend, the Chamber and surrounding communities (Hubbard, Aurora, St.
Paul, Mt. Angel, Silverton) were out at the Tulip Festival to market the entire French
Prairie region to visitors outside of the area.
1750
WOODBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT REPORT.
Jeanine Holm, School District Communications Specialist, provided the Council with
packets of information that were presented at the last Key Communicator's meetings.
Included in the packets are (1) updates that were made and approved by Strategic Plan
Board Members, (2) last year's state assessment test results which has been desegregated
by the No Child Left Behind categories sub-groups for comparison purposes against
benchmark levels, (3) an article from the National Staff Development Council which
featured Heritage Elementary as an exemplary school in their practices for curriculum
mapping and their work to close the language gap, and (4) an informational paper on the
International Baccalaureate Program at the High School.
1969
Amberly Miller, owner of property located on the comer of Highway 99E and Cleveland
Street, stated that the building on her property was built in 1962 and has been commercial
general property since that time. She has been operating a business at that location and
would like to use her drive-thru but was told that the side of the building the drive-thru is
on was currently in a single family residential zone and a drive-thru is not allowed in that
zone.
Community Development Director stated that the map has shown a diagonal line through
her property since about 1980 and this is one of the issues he has addressed in the
Periodic Review amendments. He stated that the Comprehensive Plan shows the whole
comer area as commercial but for whatever reason the zoning line cuts arbitrarily across
property line.
Mayor Figley suggested that she make an appointment with Director Mulder to discuss
this issue.
Page 3 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 11, 2005
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 11, 2005
TAPE
READING
233O
CONSENT AGENDA.
A) approve Council meeting minutes of March 28, 2005;
B) receive the Building Activity report for March 2005;
C) receive the Planning Tracking Sheet dated April 4, 2005; and
D) receive the report on the removal of the tree on Boones Ferry Road.
Councilor McCallum requested that the City Administrator review the tree removal report
since this is a very large old tree which no longer has a crown that is present due to
pruning over the years by PGE in order to maintain clearance from overhead power lines.
Administrator Brown stated that the black walnut tree is located on Boones Ferry Road
between Country Club Road and Constitution Avenue. The majority of the tree sits on
property that is either in private ownership or viewed as a perpetual easement that should
be held by the Heritage Park Homeowners Association with a very small portion of the
tree extending into City right-of-way. The property owner has been concerned for some
time since the tree tends to drop limbs some of which land in the back yard and others
have hit the house. The overhead power lines have been removed but the tree has a
pronounced U-shape without any crown. The City was contacted by the Homeowners
Association and, based on an arborist's report, staff is recommending that the tree be
removed. The report indicates that there are a number of cracks in the main trunk of the
tree that make severe pruning or cabling of this tree unlikely to resolve the situation and it
will continue to be dangerous. Another larger diameter tree would be planted at that
location. Pursuant to City ordinance, staff proposes the expenditure of $500 for tree
removal which is the maximum allowed by ordinance with the balance to be paid by the
Homeowners Association once the Homeowners Association secured an easement for
tree maintenance.
BJELLANDfMCCALLUM... adopt the consent agenda as presented. The motion
passed unanimously.
2669 PUBLIC HEARING: CLARIFICATION AND REEVALUATION OF
ALLOCATION OF COSTS FOR ARNEY ROAD REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT
IMPROVEMENT.
Mayor Figley stated that, because of the nature of the hearing, this was an extremely
abbreviated heating for the limited purpose of making some factual determinations that
the City was asked to make on behalf of the Court of Appeals.
The Mayor opened the hearing at 7:20 p.m..
Paul Elsner, attorney representing the City on this issue, stated that a report from Public
Works Director Tiwari was provided in the agenda materials for Council review. The
Reimbursement District had gone through the trial court to the Court of Appeals who
issued an opinion in November 2003 to remand the decision to make one minor
clarification in terms of determining whether the location of frontage attributable to Mr.
Baker was appropriate. In the Public Works Director's report, there is an extensive quote
Page 4 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 11, 2005
4
TAPE
READING
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 11, 2005
out of the Court of Appeals opinion where the court makes a factual miscalculation
relating to Arney Road and "Old Amey Road". The Court had assumed that there were
two roads but, in fact, there is only Arney Road which makes a bend. That factual
confusion can be explained in part by an ambiguity contained in the written description
that accompanied a photograph in the Public Works Director's initial report showing a
view east along Arney Road which described an intersection "...to connect the old Amey
Road segment with the new roadway..". The Court of Appeals misread that phrasing
such that it read it to mean Old Amey Road and Amey Road were separate thoroughfares.
In November 2004, the Public Works Director was directed by the Council to make a
clarification clear in a written form and he has looked again at his allocation scheme that
he originally developed and determined that the allocation scheme was appropriate.
Councilor Cox questioned if the letter from Mr. Alfred from Perkins Cole that was
distributed to the Council just prior to the meeting will be made a part of the record.
Mayor Figley stated that the letter is part of the record and Mr. Alfred is also present to
provide testimony at this hearing.
Roger Alfred, Attorney representing Craig Realty Group - Woodburn, LLC, stated that he
concurs with the Public Works Director's report and feels that the issue before the
Council is a very minor narrow issue that needs to be clarified with respect to whether or
not the entire area around the comer of the frontage of Mr. Baker's property was included
as part of the reimbursement district. Attached to the Director's report as Attachment B
is a revised version of the map that was before the Court of Appeals. The key element of
the confusion at the Court of Appeals level can be identified by comparing that
Attachment B to what he has attached to his letter as Attachment A. This is the map that
was part of the Council material back in 1999 and he noted that the map attached to
Director Tiwari's current report correctly identifies that the reimbursable portion of the
street improvement did in fact wrap around the comer of Amey Road following the
frontage of Mr. Baker's property and was correctly included as part of the reimbursable
improvements that are part of the reimbursement district. As stated in his letter, he felt
that it was clear from the Council's prior decision in 1999 that the City did include that
whole area around the comer in 1999. In his Attachment C, it shows that Mr. Baker's
street frontage was 458 feet which is the entire area that wraps around the comer of the
property. The transcript of the 1999 meeting also confirms that the frontage included area
that wrapped around the comer. He requested that the Council adopt the clarified report
including the map which identifies that small leg of frontage going down Amey Road.
3258 Don Kelley, attorney representing Dale Baker, stated that he disagrees with Mr. Elsner
and Mr. Alfred's comments and proposed that the section in the Court of Appeals
decision read by Mr. Elsner makes clear that there was no question at the Court of
Appeals as to whether there was one Amey Road or two Amey Roads, but the question
was whether Mr. Baker's assessment was consistent with the reimbursable portion of the
roadway identified. He stated that the Council did identify a portion of the roadway when
Page 5 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 11, 2005
5
TAPE
READING
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 11, 2005
the Resolution was adopted in 1999. Contrary to Mr. Alfred, Mr. Craig testified at the
hearing as to what he understood the reimbursable portion of the district to be frontage to
Woodland Avenue. Mr. Kelley stated that there is only place in the City's Resolution that
would describe the reimbursable portion of the improvements and those start at the comer
of the ODOT property and go along Amey Road to Woodland and tums south. He
argued that the Council adopted the frontage area that went to Woodland Avenue and did
not turn south on Arney Road. Therefore, the frontage along Amey Road was never
considered as part of the reimbursable portion of the improvements. It was possible that
the Council intended to so something that they were not asked to do by Mr. Craig and it is
possible that the Council intended to adopt another map then the one adopted. However,
this was the map that was adopted and the Court of Appeals was saying that it this was
inconsistent. With this map, the City charged Mr. Baker for the frontage on "Old Amey
Road" and, if this is the only reimbursable portion of the street improvements as it is
called in the resolution, then it would be in error to charge for the frontage that goes
around the comer. The Court of Appeals has asked the Council to reconcile this by
justifying how, if no change is made to the calculation, a charge can be made for the
frontage around the comer. He read an excerpt from the legal brief submitted by Craig
Realty and the City to the Court of Appeals that states that the map which was attached to
the Resolution identifies the portions of the road to be included in the reimbursement
district. He stated that Craig Realty is now requesting that the City correct a mistake that
Craig Realty made. He requested that the Council accept what Mr. Craig asked the City
to do which is to not wrap the frontage around Amey Road and to recalculate the fees
owed by Mr. Baker by subtracting the frontage foot portion that would come down to
"Old Amey Road". He felt that it would be fair in that Mr. Baker cannot develop the
same property twice since it goes around the comer. He also stated that the full land area
is being reimbursed under Director Tiwari's schedule and he asked that the Council take
what would amount to the long side of Mr. Baker's property and include it in the fee
calculation but not the portion that would be duplicate around the comer. He requested
that the Council not accept Director Tiwari's report.
Councilor Cox questioned if the map shown on the overhead screen was a part of the
Resolution adopting the district along with the schedule of cost attachment.
Attorney Kelley stated that this map was in Director Tiwari's report to the Council which
was adopted and incorporated into the Resolution and it is the only description of what
the reimbursable portion would be. He stated that he has submitted a letter to the Council
for the record which includes a copy of the map, copy of the portion of the Court of
Appeals brief which reproduces this map, and a copy of Mr. Craig's testimony at the
September 13, 1999 Council meeting.
Councilor Cox requested clarification from Mr. Kelley that Attachment C of Mr.
Alfred's letter shows the street frontage of Mr. Baker's property was part of the Public
Works Director's report which was also incorporated into the Resolution.
Page 6 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 11, 2005
6
TAPE
READING
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 11, 2005
Mr. Kelley confirmed Councilor Cox's statement, however, he stated that the map is the
only place the reimbursable portion of the improvements is identified. He understood
what Councilor Cox was indicating is that the full amount shown on Attachment C could
be reimbursed but stated that Attachment C is not an identification of which frontage or
how it is arrived at but it clearly goes outside of the only map.
Mayor Figley declared the public hearing closed at approximately 7:40 p.m..
Councilor Bjelland stated that the Council has two documents with conflicting
information but that he very clearly remembers the discussion that took place regarding
this reimbursement district since he was the person who asked the question about what is
involved on Baker's property and whether it wrapped around the comer. In the public
hearing record of September 13, 1999 before the Council, it clearly indicates that Mr.
Tiwari said that it did wrap around the comer. In his opinion, it was the Council's
intention at that point in time to include that portion of the Arney Road frontage into the
reimbursement district. There was discussion on whether it was fair to have it on a comer
lot but there are two modes of determining the amount of reimbursement - one of which
is acreage and the other is road frontage. This road improvement was a part of the
improvement to Amey Road therefore it is his strong recollection that the Council made
the decision to include that frontage as part of the reimbursement district. It may not have
been picked up in the map but it was certainly included in the calculations of the
reimbursement formula and allocation of that reimbursement to the property owners.
Even though the Courts have indicated that there is some discrepancies between the
records, the Council's intention at that point of time was to include the entire frontage of
the Baker property as part of the reimbursement district.
Councilor Cox stated that he was not on the Council at the time this action was being
taken and was glad to hear comments from those that were present. If there is an
ambiguity in the map, then he would look at the attached schedule which states 458 feet
of linear frontage and no one has challenged the fact that the frontage would wrap around
the comer in order to get that linear footage. Based on comments made by Councilor
Bjelland and the Attachment C schedule, he still feels that it was the Council's intent to
assess the frontage around the comer as part of Mr. Baker's benefit.
Mayor Figley stated that she was also at that meeting and her recollection is that of
describing the area then subtracting the property that could not appropriately be assessed
because it was already developed such as the Texaco station, small motel access frontage,
and Miles Chevrolet. The net results is that the front footage that went around the comer
would be assessed.
Councilor Sifuentez also stated that she recalled the front footage to wrap around the
comer.
BJELLAND/MCCALLUM... accept and approve the report. The motion passed
unanimously.
Page 7 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 11, 2005
7
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 11, 2005
TAPE
READING
4549 COUNCIL BILL NO. 2551 - RESOLUTION SETTING THE AMOUNT OF THE
PARKS AND RECREATION SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT CHARGE,
ALTERNATIVE RATE REVIEW FEE, ALTERNATIVE PAYMENT REQUEST
FEE IMPOSED BY ORD. 2250, AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
5045
Councilor Sifuentez introduced Council Bill 2551. Recorder Tennant read the bill by title
only since there were no objections from the Council.
Councilor Bjelland requested clarification on the collection of System Development
Charges in the past for Parks.
Administrator Brown stated that the misapplication of that mechanism has taken place
over several years and the City has overcharged for some of these projects. Staffwill be
going back though the projects to calculate the overcharge and, if applicable, provide
refunds to the various parties. Staffwill let the Council know what the repayments look
like once they are calculated.
Councilor Bjelland questioned if the rate in the proposed Resolution is the recalculated
current rate.
Director Westrick stated that it is the recalculated current rate and it was arrived at by
going back to the beginning and then moved forward to get to this new current rate. He
stated that the old current rate was about $1,500 and the difference varies each year with
it being no more than $30 per year.
Councilor Bjelland stated that he had raised the issue about the concept of average market
value. He questioned if (1) this would be a concept that would apply in other places and
(2) how staff arrived at the change in average market value.
Director Westrick stated that the actual increase factors are directly from the County
Assessor's office. It is complicated in that the Assessor trends five different types of
property and each amount of property has to be weighted. Annually, the Assessor
changes methods that they use to trend property and staff has taken all of that into account
to get to the current rate.
On roll call vote for final passage, the bill passed unanimously. Mayor Figley declared
Council Bill 2551 duly passed.
COUNCIL BILL NO. 2568 - RESOLUTION ENTERING INTO AN
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH MARION COUNTY
THROUGH ITS JUVENILE DEPARTMENT FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF
A STATE GANG REDUCTION GRANT.
Councilor Sifuentez introduced Council Bill 2568. The bill was read by title only since
there were no objections from the Council. On roll call vote for final passage, the bill
passed unanimously. Mayor Figley declared Council Bill 2568 duly passed.
Page 8 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 11, 2005
8
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 11, 2005
TAPE
READING
5142 RESOLUTION OF CONFLICT THROUGH WATER OPERATOR POSITION
5386
UPGRADE.
Staff requested authorization to upgrade the Water Operator I position allocated in the
2004-05 budget to a Water Operator II position following an evaluation of position needs
since the budget was originally adopted.
NICHOLS/SIFUENTEZ... authorize and upgrade the Water Operator I position
approved for 2004-05 to a Water Operator II.
The motion passed unanimously.
Councilor McCallum questioned the difference between a level I and level II
Public Works Manager Rohman stated that a Water Operator II has a higher certification
level in that it requires a Water Distribution certification as well as a Water Operator
certification.
SPONSORSHIP OF A CDBG GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE MARION
5458
5525
COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY.
A request has been made by the Marion County Housing Authority and Marion County
Board of Commissioners to consider sponsoring an application for a Community
Development Block Grant on behalf of the Housing Authority for the purpose of
obtaining additional grant funds towards Hazelwood Estates development which will be a
32-unit affordable senior housing project on Carol Street in Woodbum.
BJELLAND/MCCALLUM... Council agree to sponsor an application for a Community
Development Block Grant on behalf of the Marion County Housing Authority. The
motion passed unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS: PROPOSED LETTER TO STATE REPRESENTATIVE
BETTY KOMP 1N SUPPORT OF HB 3038.
Mayor Figley stated that the City has been asked by the League of Cities and others to
formally express the City's support on this legislative bill, however, she would only sign
the letter if the Council was also supportive of I-lB 3038.
It was the consensus of the Council for the Mayor to sign the letter in support of the bill.
CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT.
A) Administrator Brown stated that he would be accompanying Terry Cole and another
member of the ODOT Transportation Planning Group on April 12th to visit the City of
Eugene and Medford to make some contact with Transportation Commissioners to try
and gain some support from the Commissioners for the I-5 Interchange project. The
message they would like to share with the Commissioners is that Woodbum has come a
long way in trying to meet the State's requirements for both matches and preservation of
interchange capacity and, as a partner in this project, the City's project deserves better
consideration than what the City has received in the past. He stated that they will be
Page 9 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 11, 2005
9
TAPE
READING
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 11, 2005
meeting with all 5 Commissioners over the next few weeks to try and move the City's
project forward. One of the topics to be discussed will be the proposed Interchange
Management Area (IMA), however, the Council has not had an opportunity to make a
final decision on the IMA. In meeting with the Commissioners, they will discuss the
IMA methodology or something similar to try to preserve the interchange capacity once
the expansion has been made.
B) Administrator Brown stated that, in the past, he has asked the Mayor and Council for
personal contributions to help fund a team for the Relay for Life event. Staff would like
to sponsor a team at either a Platinum level ($1,000) or Gold level ($750) so he will be
asking the Mayor. Council, and department heads privately if they are willing to
contribute to this cause. He reiterated that this sponsorship will not involve any tax payer
dollars.
C) Lastly, he stated that he had some tickets available for the "Taste of Woodbum" event
which is a benefit for the AWARE Food Bank. This event will take place on Friday,
April 22na, 12:00 noon to 1:00 pm, at the Tukwila Center for Health and Medicine.
5940
MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS.
Councilor Nichols stated that the "Taste of Woodbum" event includes good food and all
of the proceeds go to the AWARE Food Bank which is in need of financial help to
provide food to those in need. He also stated that there are traffic counters out on
Highway 214/219 in the vicinity of the 1-5 interchange.
On behalf of the Relay for Life organizers, Councilor McCallum expressed his
appreciation to the Mayor, Council, and staff for their past and hopefully continued
support. He also congratulated the Mayor and former Mayors for their groundbreaking
efforts on the Plaza dedication and the City will soon have a great addition to the
downtown area.
Councilor Bjelland approved of Administrator Brown's efforts to meet with the OTC
Commissioners since this is a very important task that will go a long way in overcoming
some of the past difficulties the City has had with the OTC with regard to the Woodburn
Interchange. He felt that this is an opportunity to enlighten the new OTC members as to
the need for the interchange improvement and that Woodbum is making an effort to
advance the project. MWACT has been hearing that the OTC is looking for projects in
which the local communities are leveraging in whatever manner possible to move their
projects up for funding. Some potential earmarked funds from the federal government
would be another incentive for OTC to fund this project. At the last MWACT meeting,
the group approved the potential distribution of funds if Seaside votes down the by-pass
and they give up the $33 million of funds that are located for that project. It was noted
that Woodburn could receive about $500,000 from that funding source.
Councilor Sifuentez thanked all volunteers within the City who give so many hours of
their time to make Woodbum a better place to live.
Page 10 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 11, 2005
l0
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
APRIL 11, 2005
TAPE
READING
Tape 2
0001
Councilor Cox stated that the Council has been aware of the IMA concept for over a year
and, even though a final decision has not been made, he strongly feels that something
similar to the [MA will be adopted as part of the Periodic Review process.
Mayor Figley stated that the concrete in the downtown plaza is now gone and she feels
that the City will have a plaza that they can be proud of within the next 3 months. She
will be donating a palm tree and she encouraged citizens to also consider making a
donation in order to finish the project.
EXECUTIVE SESSION.
Mayor Figlcy entertained a motion to adjourn into executive session under thc authority
of ORS 192.660(1)(h) and 192.660(1)(0.
NICHOLS/MCCALLUM... adjourn into executive session under the statutory authority
cited by the Mayor. The motion passed unanimously.
The Council adjourned into executive session at 8:30 pm and reconvened at 8:46 pm.
0025 Mayor Figley stated that no action was taken by the Council while in executive session.
0045
ADJOURNMENT.
MCCALLUM/SIFUENTEZ... meeting be adjourned. The motion passed unanimously.
The meeting adjourned at 8:47 p.m..
APPROVED
KATHRYN FIGLEY, MAYOR
ATTEST
Mary Tennant, Recorder
City of Woodburn, Oregon
Page 11 - Council Meeting Minutes, April 11, 2005
Executive Session
COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
April 11, 2005
DATE. CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY. HALL, CITY OF WOODBURN, COUNTY OF
MARION, STATE OF OREGON, APRIL 11, 2005.
CONVENED. The Council met in executive session at 8:34 p.m. with Mayor Figley presiding.
ROLL CALL.
Mayor Figley Present
Councilor Bjelland Present
Councilor Cox Present
Councilor Lonergan Present
Councilor McCallum Present
Councilor Nichols Present
Councilor Sifuentez Present
Mayor Figley reminded the Councilors and staff that information discussed in executive session is not
to be discussed with the public.
Staff Present: City Administrator Brown, City Attorney Shields, Community Development Director
Mulder, City Recorder Tennant
The executive session was called under the following statutory authority:
1) To consult with counsel concerning the legal rights and duties of a public body with regard to
current litigation or litigation likely to be filed pursuant to ORS 192.660(1)(h); and
2) To consider records that are exempt by law from public inspection pursuant to ORS 192.660(1)(0.
ADJOURNMENT.
The executive session adjoumed at 8:43 p.m..
APPROVED
KATHRYN FIGLEY, MAYOR
ATTEST
Mary Tennant, Recorder
City of Woodbum, Oregon
Page I - Executive Session, Council Meeting Mj~es, April 11, 2005
Minutes
Woodburn Recreation and Parks Board
Tuesday, April 12, 2005
7:00 p.m.
DRAFT
8B
Page 1
Open House for the Legion Park Design
MIG made the suggested changes to the Master Plan and narrowed the
concepts down to three plans. Two of the plans included a Community
Center and one without. The public was invited to give their comments and
to made suggestive changes.
Call to Order
Herb Mittmann, Board Chair called the meeting to order at 7 p.m.
Roll Call
Members present: Herb Mittmann, Chair, Ann Meyer, Member; Bruce
Thomas, Member; Joseph Nicoletti, Member, Eric Yaillen, Member
Members absent: Rosetta Wangerin, Board Secretary; Cristal Sandoval,
Member
Staff present: Randy Westrick, Director; Barbara Nugent, Recreation
Services Manager, Steve Newport, Facilities and Aquatics Manager,
Paulette Zastoupil, A.A.
Approval of Minutes from February 8, 2005.
Motion to accept the minutes was made by Bruce Thomas and seconded by
Herb Mittmann.
Business from the Audience:
None.
Division Reports
Recreation and Leisure Services - Barbara Nugent, The Recreation
Division
Barbara reported that the Summer Recreation Reporter was mailed. Youth
and Adult soccer kick-off started April 16, 2005. Barbara informed the Board
that she resigned, effective April 22, 2005. Steve Newport is taking over
recreation responsibilities until the hiring process has been completed.
Barbara shared that Dusky Steyaert will have a table representing the
Recreation Department, City of Woodburn at Day of The Child located at
French Prairie Middle School on April 30, 2005. This yearly event has
representatives from area schools and agencies which hand out information
on existing programs and activities for Woodburn children.
Aquatics Division - Steve Newport
Steve reported that this year's Mother's Day Spa has been changed to the
weekend after Mother's Day, so gift certificates may be purchased. Also, he
shared that swim fees are $1.00 on holidays through the summer. A new
non-competitive swim team is being offered 3 days a week during the
summer.
13
Minutes
Woodburn Recreation and Parks Board
Tuesday, April 12, 2005
7:00 p.m.
Parks and Facilities - Randy Westrick
Randy reported that Centennial Park ball field #3 and the ball field plaza
concrete would be completed by July 2005 with the help of volunteers. The
ribbon cutting will take place sometime in July.
Legion Park Master Plan
· Dave Walters, from MIG presented 3 plans to the Board, and
explained that the plans were created from suggestions given on the
first 7 designs that were presented at the open house on March 8th'
The next process will be to take the new suggestions and narrow the
options down to one final plan. This process is to develop a new
Legion Park Master Park plan. The final plan will be presented at the
May Board meeting. Herb opened the discussion up to the audience.
Comments from the audience
· Richard Jennings
Richard stated he feels very strong about Legion staying an open green
space park. He feels that Option #1 is a good choice. He stated that the
fences need to come down and more picnic family areas created.
· Silas Harvey
Silas stated that he was new to the project, but was in agreement with
Richard Jennings in keeping the park an open green space. He felt that the
Community Center should not be built in the park. He shared that a Senior
Center that appeals to a multi-racial environment is needed in Woodbum.
· Juan Hernandez
Juan felt that the old community center felt off-limits to Hispanics. He feels
Legion Park is a nice park, but the bleachers are not good. He also felt the
park needed to stay open green space.
· Dan Evers
Dan stated that he had been on the Community Task Force for a year. He
also felt that Option I was the best choice with the addition of basketball
courts, vendor booths and multi-use fields.
Comments from the Board
· Eric Yaillen
Eric was in full agreement with Richard Jennings on keeping Legion Park an
open green space. He felt the need to focus community center efforts on
the remolded Association Building on Front St. He also stressed the need
for basketball courts, covered structures with lights to extend the hours the
park.
· Ann Meyer
Ann stated that she was in full agreement to keep Legion Park an open
green space. Also, she expressed the need to have basketball courts.
· Bruce Thomas
Bruce stated that he was in full agreement with keeping Legion Park an
open green space. He stated that Option I was the best choice and that the
stadium needed to come down. He also stressed that the fences need to
come down to make the park more open and inviting.
Page 2
14
Minutes
Woodburn Recreation and Parks Board
Tuesday, April 12, 2005
7:00 p.m.
Joseph Nicoletti
Joseph stated that he was in full agreement with keeping Legion Park an
open green space. His concerns were on traffic control. He felt the fences
needed to stay. He felt the soccer field in Option I was the best choice.
Herb Mittmann
Herb stated that the Community Center question has been around along
time. He felt that putting a Community Center in Legion Park would change
the whole atmosphere of the park. In talking to Mayor Figley, he shared that
no other site was selected for a Community Center. The City would need to
acquire 5 acres. He also stated, that what ever plan the Board chose, the
health of the trees would be the first task to be evaluated. He stated the
Board would give their final recommendation to the Council on May 10th.
o
Mill Creek Greenway Master Plan
Randy Westrick gave a Power Point presentation of the draft Mill Creek Greenway
Master Plan. Alex Stone described the proposed tails and pathways and gave a
handout that illustrated each type. She stated that the bus stops and trail heads
would all tie in together. Bruce Thomas stated that the quality of construction,
environmental condition and financial investments would be major factors in the
implementation of trails. The final plan will be recommended to the Board in May.
=
Capital Improvement Program
Randy reviewed the CIP with the Board and explained the ClP process. Bruce
Thomas asked for clarification on whether the ClP funds were already in the
budget. Randy explained that the CIP was a proposal that would go to the Budget
Committee on April 23, 2005, then on to the Council for approval. Joseph Nicoletti
asked what happened to the Teen Scene money and how it would affect the
program. Randy explained that after September 30, 2005 the carry over money
that Woodburn Together will issue to the City will carrying the program for 2-3
months after expiration. He stated that Dusky Steyaert, Teen Scene Coordinator
was working on obtaining PAL (Police Action Leaque) grant funds to continue the
program.
J
Future Board Business · Next meeting, May 10, 2005
· Final Recommendation - Legion Park Master Plan
· Final Recommendation- Greenway Master Plan
10. Board Comments - none
Meeting adjourned at 8:45 PM
Rosetta Wangerin, Board Secretary
Date
Paulette Zastoupil, Recording Secretary
Date
Page 3
15
THIS PAGE WAS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
8C
WOODBURN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
March 24, 2005
CONVENED The Planning Commission met in a regular session at 7:10 p.m. in City Hall Council
Chambers with Chairperson Lima presiding.
ROLL. CALl.
Chairperson Lima P
Vice Chairperson Bandelow A
Commissioner Vancil P
Commissioner Gdgorieff P
Commissioner Hutchison P
Commissioner Jennings P
Staff Present: Jim Mulder, Community Development Director
Jason Richling, Associate Planner
Chairperson Lima provided an opening statement for Public Hearing.
MINUTES
A~. Woodbum Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of March 10,2005
Commissioner Hutchison moved to approve the minutes as presented. Commissioner Gri~orieff
seconded the motion, which unanimously carried.
BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE
None
COMMUNICATIONS
A_~. Woodburn City Council Meeting Minutes of February 28, 2004
PUBLIC HEARING
A__~. Partition 05-01 and Variance 05-06, request to partition one lot into three lots at 1505 W.
Lincoln St., Ben Shevchenko, applicant.
Staff read the applicable ORS Statement and provided a presentation as reflected in the Staff Report.
Staff recommended approval of the requests based on the information in the report, the information
provided by the applicant and the applicable review criteria subject to conditions of approval listed in the
Staff Report.
TESTIMONY BY THE APPLICANT
Zina Shevchenko, 334 N. Settlemier Ave., Woodburn, OR 97071 commented they wish to go with the
flow of the current development.
TESTIMONY BY PROPONENTS
None
TESTIMONY BY OPPONENTS
None
DISCUSSION
Chairperson Lima closed the public hearing and opened for Commission discussion.
Planning Commission Meeting - March 24, 2005
Page 1 of 5
17
Commissioner Vancil applauded the use of the land for infill because that was an area of town that has
been crying for development for at least two decades and he appreciated the efforts the applicants have
gone through to make this a developable piece. He stated he would support the application.
Chairperson Lima said he was in favor of the project.
Commissioner Vancil moved to approve Partition 05-01 and Variance 05-06. Commissioner Grig0rieff
seconded the motion, which unanimously carried.
B__~. Design Review 04-22, Variance 05-06, Variance 05-01 and Variance 05-07, request tO
construct a 4,012 sq. ft. offlce building at the Northeast comer of W. Hayes St. and Harvard
Dr., Kirlan Enl~erprises, LLC, applicant.
EXPARTE CONTACTS
Commissioner Jennings reported for the record that he has known Roger Midura for a very long time
although he has never done any business with him or had any financial actions.
Staff noted Variance 05- 07 was not listed on the agenda and there is no Property Line Adjustment.
Staff read the applicable ORS Statement and provided a presentation as reflected in the Staff Report.
Approval of the requests was recommended by Staff based on the information in the report, the
information provided by the applicant and the applicable review criteria subject to conditions of approval
listed in the Staff Report.
Commissioner Jenninas indicated the applicant is also the managing partner of the property next door,
Barclay Square Apartments.
Chairperson Lima expressed concerns with the Variance not to allow a brick wall and was not convinced
it is something the Commission should grant unless he is convinced that it is absolutely not necessary.
Commissioner Jenninos further commented Barclay Square is surrounded by arborvitae and landscaping
and tonight's request makes that whole thing complete and he saw no need to block off and separate that
from the other piece of property.
Commissioner Vancil remarked he shared Chairperson Lima's concern regarding the wall. He stated just
about every development that has asked for a Variance on the wall over the last 8-9 months have been
denied because that is a key portion of the Woodburn Development Ordinance to have a wall between
Commercial and Residential. However, in this case the 90 f. distance is what convinced him that it would
be okay. Commissioner Vancil described the Mormon Church steeple addition as one of the notorious
cases concerning the wall issue where they also had a wall in the back between themselves and Henry's
Farm and one of the concerns the Commission had there had to do with the headlights going into
residences and the Variance was not granted in that case. However, in this case it being a 90 ft. distance
and this being, what he assumed a predominantly daytime business, he thought was reasonable to do so.
TESTIMONY BY THE APPLICANT
Scoff Beck, Architect, 361 NE Third Ave., Canbv. OR 97013 was present tonight on behalf of Kirian
Enterprises, LLC. He stated it is a fairly small and somewhat difficult site to develop and the two front
yard setbacks pose interesting challenges in order to use the site efficiently and provide a parking lot and
circulation path, which is reasonable and safe. Mr. Beck further commented there are no current
provisions in the code for a one-way drive aisle, although they are quite common in commercial activities.
The dimensional standards used in this layout are consistent with others and seem to work pretty well.
He stated the current strip of land North of the property line and South of the Barclay Square drive aisle,
which is really unusable for much of anything, is a separate tax lot. The property will just sit there and be
under utilized and something that would be difficult to maintain. Mr. Beck further remarked the idea came
along that it was undevelopable by Barclay or Kirian and therefore, made some sense to consider
Planning Commission Meeting- March 24, 2005
Page 2 of 5
18
possibly utilizing it for an exit way from the project. It was also a bonus if they were to construct the drive
aisle egress to also build an emergency access to Barclay Square, which seemed like a win-win
combination in that regard. As far as the Variance proposal for the wall, in this instance the Barclay
Square parking lot comes right up to the edge of the Barclay Square parking, westerly face, occurs right
on the property line and there would be no landscaping in front of it and therefore, it would be a fairly
harsh visual to look out from the apartment complex and see this blank wall, He indicated there are
concerns about graffiti and the overall maintenance difficulties that might pose. It was their hope that it
would be possible to plant arborvitae along the edges in lieu of the wall and they also felt that would
provide adequate buffering between properties. Mr. Beck stated it would be a different story if the
apartments were built right next to the line as opposed to 90 ft. away. However, with cars pulling in the
opposite side of the arborvitae buffer it seems like there will be some lights just from their activity. The
use of the site will be primarily during normal daytime business hours and should not pose any difficulties.
He further indicated they could make some adjustments to the landscape plan regarding the items that
were mentioned to accommodate the code. In closing, Mr. Beck briefly described the building as
primarily having earth tones accented with batten siding treatments, with a covered walkway, sloped roof
and some accentuating gable and wall elements to break up the planes of the building as well as the roof
line of the structure. He felt the building would be a good addition to the existing neighborhood.
Chairperson Lima commented there was mention in the Staff Report that there are no prospective tenants
at this point.
Scott Beck replied at this point in time there is no prospective tenant. He believed that to be true. He
stated it made sense to contemplate with the uses across the street some kind of a health care type
office, professional insurance offices, accountants or tenants of that nature would make sense there as
well. Mr. Beck indicated he did not believe there was any anticipation of retail or anything of that nature
because it did not seem like a good site and does not have that great of exposure for that type of a
business. Additionally, at this point the building would be constructed as a shell and they would do tenant
improvements to develop the interior as the tenants would come on. The exterior would be paved,
landscaped and painted to look completely finished from the exterior. Mr. Beck also commented the
narrow sliver of land would be continued to be maintained as a landscape. He also stated the wall would
be somewhat inconsistent with the overall character. All of the edges of Barclay Square are fairly mature
and seem to do a pretty good job of buffering and softening that development from the street Therefore,
it would be quite consistent if they were to continue that theme.
TESTIMONY BY PROPONENTS
None
TESTIMONY BY OPPONENTS
None
BlSCUSSlON
Chairperson Lima closed the public hearing and opened for discussion among the Commissioners.
Commissioner Jennings remarked it is a good looking building and was very pleased to see that property
covered. Although he realizes what the WDO states regarding the wall, the arborvitae fits and it is 90 ft.
to the closest building.
Commissioner Hutchison liked the aspect of the arborvitae softening the look of the structure and the
density that plant provides.
Commissioner Vancil commented for the record that it truly is exceptional that we are not enforcing the
wall on this project. The fact that it is infill makes it more reasonable that it have an exception made.
However, we need to be extremely careful about Variances on the walls because it really has helped the
separation in town between commercial and residential properties. Although he was not necessarily on
board with that about a year ago, he is on board with that now as he sees different projects develop. He
Page 3 of 5
Planning Commission Meeting - March 24, 2005
19
supports this project but it truly is an exception and not one that he would support often.
Chairperson Lima. found it ingenious the way Mr. Beck created the one-way because it is a great way to
use infill. He stated he was in favor of the application.
Commissioner Vancil made a motion to approve Design Review 04-22, Variance 04-30, Variance 05-01
and Variance 05-07. Commissioner Grigorieff seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
ITEMS FOR ACTION
A_=. Final Order for Design Review 04-15, Variance 05-03 and Variance 05-04, request by the
Woodburn Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses for Design Review aDgroval to construct
a 4,947 sq. ff. Kingdom Hall (house of worship) at 1557 June Way and Variance approval to
reduce the required 24 ft. rear yard setback tO 10 ft. and to allow off-street Darkin;I in a
yard abutting a street ~Hwv. 211).
Commissioner Grigorieff moved to accept the Final Order as written. Commissioner Hutchison seconded
the motion. Motion carried.
B. Appoint Planning Commissioner to focus group reviewing annual WDO update.
St--afl reported a focus group was appointed by the Mayor to review the annual update of the WDO.
Additionally, the City Council recently approved the first portion of that process, which involved
amendments that did not require a Measure 56 notice being sent out to property owners. That portion
has been adopted and will become effective May 1st. Now we move on to the amendments that will
require Measure 56 notice and they are more complex. Staff stated Commissioner Knoles was appointed
by the Planning Commission to be on the focus group, however, he is no longer on the Planning
Commission. The focus group is planned to start probably in the next few weeks and a replacement is
needed for Commissioner Knoles. He further explained the focus group will probably meet once a week
or once every two weeks depending on how things progress and how much needs to be worked on in
between the meetings, However, he did not imagine it would be more than a three-month period.
Commissioner Jennings volunteered to be on the focus group and stated he is well aware of what is in
the WDO as it sits today.
Commissioner Vancil stated one of his concerns about the project is that there are approximately half
dozen or so issues that have come up consistently over the last 18 months that we had to grant
Variances about and he thought this is part of the process where those issues can be addressed. He
hoped this review would take care of some of those issues.
Staff interjected the City Council have already specified the items that the focus group will be focusing on.
Some of the items that have been brought up more recently are not included in this round. Those items
would come up the next time around.
Commissioner Vancil requested he be able to see the list so he could review it and see what is missing
so he can lobby the governing body about adding some of those issues. He stated we have been told for
a year that this would be when those issues would come up and now the review process is here, he does
not want to have to wait another year.
Staff stated he will bring the list for the Commission to review at the next meeting and they could certainly
mal~ a recommendation to the Council on any additional items they would like the focus group to focus
on.
A motion was made by Commissioner Vancil to appoint Commissioner Jennings to the focus group.
Motion was seconded by Commissioner Grigorieff, which unanimously carried.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
None
Planning Commission Meeting - March 24, 2005
Page 4 of 5
20
REPORTS
None
BUSINESS FROM THE COMMISSION
Commissioner Jenninqs thought it is a great step in the right direction to get infill land developed because
it is good for the City and will go a long way towards obtaining the Urban Growth Boundary changes and
the Comprehensive Plan approval when we can show by our actions that we are actually trying to get the
infill taken care of.
Staff remarked the decisions of the Planning Commission and the City Council do have a direct impact on
that. That is one reason in the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan that we are
intentionally recommending constraining commercial land because that is one thing that does lead to the
infill. He further added we are trying to balance constraining commercial land but yet creating a very
opportunistic economic development program.
Commissioner Jenninqs commented he is on the Design Committee for the Police Facility and indicated
he would like to take 5-minutes during the next meeting and bring the Commission up to date regarding
that project.
Staff stated that project would probably come before the Commission some time in May.
ADJOURNMEN.______~T
Commissioner Jennin,qs moved to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Grigorieff seconded the motion,
which carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 8:30 pm.
APPROVED
CLAUOlO LIMA, CHAIt~PERSON
Al-rEST
Jim M~er,
Comn~tunity Development Director
City o~Woodburn, Oregon
Date
Planning Commission Meeting - March 24, 2005
2i
Page 5 of 5
THIS PAGE WAS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
8D
MINUTES
MONTHLY MEETING OF WOODBURN PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD
DATE:
ROLL CALL:
STAFF PRESENT:
GUESTS:
CALL TO ORDER:
SECRETARY'S
REPORT:
April 13, 2005
Mary Chadwick - Present
Yesenia Chavez - Present
Neal Hawes - Present
Ardis Knauf- Present
Kay Kuka - Present
Patricia Will - Present
Catherine Holland - Present
Linda Sprauer, Library Director
Vicki Musser, Recording Secretary
None.
President Catherine Holland called the meeting to order at 7
pm.
The minutes of March 9, 2005 were approved.
CORRESPONDENCE:
PUBLIC COMMENT:
The Woodburn Library received a thank-you card from Kay
Kuka, on behalf of AARP. The AARP tax-aide group used the
Carnegie Room several days a week from January through
April 11, 2005 and wanted to express their appreciation. They
assisted about 500 people with their taxes this year.
None.
DIRECTOR'S REPORT:
The Library celebrates National Library Week April 11-15.
Kathy Figley, Woodbum's mayor, issued proclamations in
both English and Spanish testifying to Woodburn's
participation in National Library Week. Tuesday, April 12,
was National Library Workers Day, and to celebrate, Library
Director Linda Sprauer provided a luncheon for all employees.
Monthly Statistics: There are still some gaps in the statistics.
Millennium capabilities are evolving, and in a matter of
months, full statistical capability is expected. Circulation
increased by about 2,000 compared to March, 2004. The
People Count for March was 19,537, which is also up
approximately 2,000 from March of 2004. People entering the
Library to have their taxes done may account for part of that
increase.
23
Activities: The regular Library Activities continue as usual.
Thursday, April 7 was Tax Night at the Library, and the final
chance for people to take advantage of the AARP tax aid
program. Ricardo Cardenas, a Spanish guitar player,
performed as part of a continuing Adult Programming series on
Sunday, April 10, at City Hall. Approximately 90 people
attended and the program was well-received. Deeda Stanley,
Youth Services Librarian, has reformatted the monthly Youth
Services Activity Page. The new page features both regular
and special Children's programming in English and Spanish,
shown side by side on the same page. On the other side is a
more detailed description about the special events being held in
the month ahead, again presented in a bilingual format. The
Woodburn Library Kids Book Club, Infant-Toddler Time,
Spanish Storytime, Library Storytime and Third Thursday
Teens are all being held on a regular basis. On Saturday, April
15, Youth Services presents "Survival", a team game that uses
Library tasks and crafts to enable families to become more
familiar with the Library. The Day of the Child is April 30, and
will be celebrated at Lincoln Elementary School. Deeda
Stanley and Connie Constante, both from the Woodburn
Library's Youth Services department, will attend. On
Thursday, April 21, Third Thursday Teens will present an
improvisation workshop.
Volunteer of the Month: The Volunteer of the Month is Lola
Speratos. Lola has been volunteering 35-40 hours a month at
the Library since 1996. Her primary responsibility is mending
Library materials. She also processes magazines and new
books if needed. April is National Volunteer Month, and Lola
is the perfect example of a reliable, hard-working volunteer.
OLA: Catherine Holland, Mary Chadwick and Linda Sprauer
reported on the recent Oregon Library Association event that
took place in Portland on April 6-8th. Catherine Holland,
Library Board President, who attended OLA on Friday, April
8, reported that she enjoyed the event. She attended several
sessions, among them "Library 101", a class that detailed the
history of libraries in general, as well as the present day goals
of OLA. Mary Chadwick, Library board Member, had
attended OLA before, and described some of the exhibits and
classes that were offered. Linda, a veteran of OLA, attended all
three days of OLA. She said that this year was an especially
interesting conference, with plenty of new faces and new ideas.
She noted that it was encouraging to see young people there,
24
2
since as the older librarians retire, up and coming librarians are
needed to take their places.
Friends of the Library: Neal Hawes, Library Board Member
and Treasurer for the Friends of the Library, reported that
preparation for Music in the Park is progressing.
The Friends are still negotiating with All Tech Sound to
provide equipment and sound assistance at the concerts, as
some bands may need a certain amount of technical support.
John Brown, City Administrator, is arranging for electricity to
be installed onstage in the Library Park. He has assured the
Friends that the electric work will be completed before July 5,
the date of the first Music in the Park concert.
Thirty sponsors are needed to support Music in the Park. Mid-
Valley Bank has committed to sponsoring three groups.
Renaissance Homes will sponsor ten groups, which constitutes
one third of the needed budget. PGE is a new sponsor this
year, and has promised a $1,000 sponsorship. Neal has
received funds from five sponsors so far, and is confident that
the Friends will be able to find a sufficient number of
Woodbum businesses willing to sponsor Music in the Park.
A Fourth of July committee meeting took place on Wednesday,
April 13 at the Parks and Recreation building. Neal Hawes and
Sandy Kinney, the treasurer and secretary of the Friends of the
Library, attended, and Neal reported that progress is being
made. Plans include a 4th of July picnic, with hotdogs,
hamburgers and soda being provided at low cost, as well as a
parade, sidewalk art, crafts, tie-dye t-shirts, fireworks, and a
free concert. The concert stars Joni Harms, country singer,
with Bill Coleman opening and closing the show.
Neal read aloud the upcoming Music in the Park concert series.
All the bands for the ten concert series have been chosen now,
beginning with Joni Harms in the 4th of July concert, and
ending with Molly Bloom, a bluegrass band, on August 30th.
There will be a Friends of the Library Book Sale on the 23rd
and 24th of April. This is slightly later than usual, due to
AARP Tax Aid needing the Carnegie Room until the tax
deadline of April 15th. Anyone available on Wed, April 20th at
noon in the Carnegie Room, to help get books ready for the
sale, would be welcomed.
OLD BUSINESS:
NEW BUSINESS
Library Budget: The Library is operating under a "hold-the
line" budget, which means keeping costs within the same dollar
25
amount as the previous year. Inevitably, less can be purchased
as prices rise. Linda Sprauer, Library Director, requested and
has been approved to receive $1400.00 for Children's books
and services, as well $2800.00 for Adult materials. Two capital
outlay items have been approved: two generators in the HVAC
system will be replaced, as well as some cracked windows.
The Budget Committee had their third workshop on
Saturday, April 7, and is going over next year's budget. These
meetings are open to the public, and input is welcome. One
further workshop will be offered on Saturday, April 23 to
discuss the Capital Improvement Fund.
Beulah Leder, Library Page, has tendered her resignation as of
May 20th. The City is advertising her position. The application
deadline is Friday, April 22.
Linda noted that the upcoming July 13th Board Meeting
coincides with her vacation dates. It was decided that Dan
Peterson, Assistant Library Director, would take her place on
that date.
BUSINESS TO/FROM
THE CITY COUNCIL
AND/OR MAYOR:
ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 7:35 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Vicki Musser
26
8E
WOODBURN PUBLIC LIBRARY
MONTHLY REPORT FOR MARCH 2005
I. CIRCULATION:
Current: 12,826
Previous: PEOPLE COUNT
2,004 10,837 Curre~:19,537 Feb. 2004
2,003 11,817 Feb. 2003
2,002 11,696 Feb. 2002
Previous:
17,403
11,817
11,696
In-House Use: 2,303
II. INTERLIBRARY LOAN
Books Loaned:
CCRLS:
In-state special:
All other in-state:
Out-of-state:
Books Borrowed:
CCRLS:
In-state special:
III. REFERENCE
Woodbum Referrals Other
2005 633 3 603
2004 682 8 781
2003 904 41 1,071
2002 1,036 68 1,254
Database Usage:
(Not all databases include~
Mar. 2005
801
IV. COMPUTER USAGE
Mar. 2004
893
2005 2004 2003
Adults 2,903 2,123 2,558
Children: 1,131 1,013 1,092
V. LIBRARY SPONSORED PROGRAMS
Adults: 1
Children: 30
VI. VOLUNTEER HOURS WORKED:
200.25
VII. FINANCE
1,180.19
No. Affending:
No. A~ending:
Mar. 2003
416
All other in-state:
Out-of-state:
Total
1,239
1,471
2,016
2,358
2005 2004 2003
Avg/open hrs 11.25 8.53 10.31
Avg/open hrs 4.38 4.07 4.40
90
473
MARCH 2005
27
THIS PAGE WAS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
PAGE 1
C I T Y 0 F W 00 D B U R N AP0460
wOODBURN LIVE VEEOT
DATE 4/19/05 CHECK REGISTER
TIME 11:50:43
CHECK ~ CHECK DATE pAYEE NAME STATUS UPDATED CHECK AMOUNT RECONCILED AMT DIFFERENCE
BANK ACCOUNT AP A/P AccounTs payable 378 00 378.00 .00
77963 3/31/2005 DORA E VELA$CO RECONCILED YES .00
RECONCILED YES 63.50 63.50
77964 3/31/2005 OR DEPT OF MOTOR VEHICLE
77966 3/31/2005 VALLEY MAILING SERVICE IN RECONCILED
77967 3/31/2005 JEFFERSON PILOT FIN/ENCIAL RECONCILED
77968 3/04/2005 ADVAMCED LASER If{AGING IN RECONCILED
77969 3/04/2005 ALEXIN ANALYTICAL LAB INC RECONCILED
77970 3/04/2005 ARMOR HOLDINGS RECONCILED
77971 3/04/2005 ASSOC TRkNS ENGR & pI~ I RECONCILED
RECONCILED
77972 3/04/2005 AT & T
779'73 3/04/2005 AT&T WIRELESS RECONCILED
77974 3/04/2005 BI-MART CORPORATION RECONCILED
779']5 3/04/2005 BLL~ENTHAL UNIFORM & EQUI RECONCILED
RECONCILED
77976 3/04/2005 BRODART CO
7797'] 3/04/2005 C3~NBY TELEPHONE ASSOC RECONCILED
77978 3/04/2005 CASE AUTOMOTIVE INC RECONCILED
77979 3/04/2005 CATHERINE BELIN RECONCILED
77980 3/04/2005 CHAEL SONNEN RECONCILED
77981 3/04/2005 CHEMEKETA COMMUNITY COLL RECONCILED
RECONCILED
77982 3/04/2005 CITY OF WOODBURN
77983 3/04/2005 COMPLETE WIRELESS SOLUTNS RECONCILED
77984 3/04/2005 COOKE STATIONERY COMPANY RECONCILED
77985 3/04/2005 DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE RECONCILED
RECONCILED
77986 3/04/2005 DEX MEDIA EAST
77987 3/04/2005 DIGITAL ARCHIVE SERVICES RECONCILED
77988 3/04/2005 EBSCO SUBSCRIPTION SERV RECONCILED
77989 3/04/2005 ERNIE GP,~ OIL, INC RECONCILED
77990 3/04/2005 FARMWORKERS EOUSING DEVEL RECONCILED
77991 3/04/2005 FREE INQUIRY RECONCILED
77992 3/04/2005 GALL'S INC RECONCILED
77993 3/04/2005 GENERAL ELECTRIC CAPITAL RECONCILED
77994 5/04/2005 GRAINGER INC RECONCILED
77995 3/04/2005 MACM C~EMICAL CO. RECONCILED
77997 3/04/2005 IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS RECONCILED
77998 3/04/2005 INGPJEM DIST. GROUP RECONCILED
77999 3/04/2005 IsoLUTIONS CONSULTING, IN RECONCILED
RECONCILED
78000 3/04/2005 JOE ALLEN
78001 3/04/2005 LEAGUE OF OREGON CITIES RECONCILED
78002 3/04/2005 LES SCHWAB TIRE CENTER RECONCILED
78003 3/04/2005 METROFUELING, INC. RECONCILED
78005 3/04/2005 MOLALLA COMMUNICATIONS RECONCILED
78006 3/04/2005 MULTI TECH ENG EER¥ INC RECONCILED
78007 3/04/2005 MUY INTERESANTE RECONCILED
78008 3/04/2005 NATIONAL WATERWORKS INC RECONCILED
78009 3/04/2005 NEW WORLD SYSTEMS RECONCILED
78010 3/04/2005 NORTH COAST ELECTRIC CO RECONCILED
NORTHWEST NATURAL GAS RECONCILED
78011 3/04/2005
78012 3/04/2005 OPEN SPACES PUBLICATIONS RECONCILED
78013 3/04/2005 OR CAREER INFO SYSTEM RECONCILED
78014 3/04/2005 OR DEPT OF MOTOR VEHICLE RECONCILED
78015 3/04/2005 OR DEPT OF MOTOR VEHICLE RECONCILED
78016 3/04/2005 OR CORRECTIONS ENTERPRISE RECONCILED
78017 3/04/2005 OR MAYOR'S ASSOC RECONCILED
YES 829.80 829.80
YES 3.24 3.24
YES 509.80 509.80
YES 3,500.00 3,500.00
YES 227.00 227.00
YES 1,260.00 1,260.00
YES 51.49 51.49
YES 541.71 541.71
YES 3.49 3.49
YES 1,822.50 1,822.50
YES 110.89 110.89
YES 19.95 19.95
YES 610.91 610.91
YES 40.87 40.87
YES 36~92 36.92
YES 403.25 403.25
YES 11,212.98 11,212.98
YES 176.25 176.25
YES 264.42 264.42
YES 97.50 97.50
YES 19.62 19.62
YES 323.81 323.81
YES 182.45 182.45
YES 59.15 59.15
YES 1,228.50 1,228.50
YES 35.00 35.00
YES 351.42 351.42
YES 195.40 195.40
yES 246.60 246.60
YES 156.70 156.70
YES 257.38 257.38
YES 2,714.47 2,714.47
YES 240.00 240.00
YES 5.00 5.00
YES 100.00 100.00
YES 45.95 45.95
YES 572.10 572.10
yES 149.70 149.70
YES ?6.76 76.76
YES 16.50 16.50
YES 687.50 687.50
YES 1,146.63 1,146.63
YES 604.25 604.25
YES 1,817.43 1,817.43
YES 25.00 25.00
YES 308.08 308.08
YES 3.50 3.50
YES 23.00 23.00
YES 6,264.00 6,264.00
YES 125.00 125.00
,00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.O0
.00
.03
.0O
.00
.00
.O0
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.O0
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
PAGE 2
C I T Y 0 F W O O D B U R N AP0460
WOODBURN LIVE VEEOT
DATE 4/19/05 CHECK REGISTER
TIME 11:50:41 ATE pAYEE NAME STATUS UPDATED CHECK AMOUNT RECONCILED AMT DIFFERENCE
.... ======================================
CHECK ~ CHECK D .... =, ,=___= ................... = ............ ~ 24 .00
......... = ...................== .................... YES 51.24 5x. _
............... PLATT ELECTRIC CO RECONCILED 125.00 125.00
78018 3/04/2005 pNCWA CONTINUING EDUCATIO RECONCILED YES .00
78019
78020
78021
78022
78023
78024
78025
78026
78027
78028
78029
78030
78031
78032
.78033
78034
78035
78036
78037
78038
78039
78040
78041
78042
78043
78044
78045
78046
78047
78048
78049
78050
78051
78052
78053
78054
78055
78056
78057
78058
78059
78060
78061
78062
78063
78064
78065
78066
78067
78068
78069
78070
3/0412005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
310412005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
]/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
]/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/04/2005
3/31/2005
3/31/2005
3/31/2005
3/i1/2oos
3/11/2005
3/11/2005
3/11/2005
3/11/2005
3/11/2005
3/11/2005
3/11/2005
3/1i/2oo5
3/11/2005
]/11/2005
3/11/2005
3/11/2005
PORTLI~ND GENERAL ELECTRIC
pORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC
pUBLIC WORKS SUPPLY INC
QUINLAN pUBLISHING GROUP
QWEST
QWEST
RADIX CORPORATION
REGENT BOOK COMPANY
RICK HUDDLE
RYAN HERCO CO.
S.O.S, LOCK SERVICE
SALEM PRINTING-BLUEPRINT
SCHETKY NORTHWEST SALES
SE-ME PROFESSIONAL PHOTO
SIERRA MAGAZINE
SIERRA SPRINGS
SIRCHIE FINGER pRINT LABS
SLAYDEN CONSTRUCTION INC
SOFIA LORENZA LOPEZ
SOUTHERN OR HISTORICAL SO
SPRINT
U.S. B~/qK
VALLEY PACIFIC FLORAL
VERIZON WIRELESS
VICTOR KAMKIN BOOKSTORE
WALLING SAND & GRAVEL
WEST CON INC
US FILTER
WILSONVILLE LOCK WORKS
WOLFERS HEATING & AIR CON
WOODBURN INDEPEiS'DF./4T
WOODBURN L, ANDSCAPING INC
WORLD BOOK INC
XEROX CORPORATION
YES GRAPHICS
ERIC JAbIES
GENE HAGEN
VALLEY MAILING SERVICE IN
ACE SEPTIC & F~CAVATING I
AG WEST SUPPLY
AMERICAM WATERWORKS ASSN.
~d~%MARK UNIFORM SERVICE I
ARCH WIRELESS
AT & T
BLUMENTHAL UNIFORM & EQUI
BROOKS PRODUCTS
CANBY FORD
CORPORATE EXPRESS
CTL CORPORATION
DC DOORS
DAILY JOb-RNAL OF COMMERCE
RECONCILED YES 23,762.72 23,762.72
RECONCILED YES 8,821.38 8,821.38
RECONCILED yES 593.30 593.30
RECONCILED YES 390.49 390.49
RECONCILED YES 169.40 169.40
RECONCILED YES 1,322.35 1,322-35
RECONCILED YES 190.05 190.05
RECONCILED YES 12.27 12.27
RECONCILED YES 15D.00 150.00
RECONCILED YES 21.74 21.74
RECONCILED YES 18.50 18.50
RECONCILED YES 191.00 191.00
RECONCILED YES 44,050.00 44,050.00
RECONCILED YES 289.99 289.99
RECONCILED YES 12.00 12.00
RECONCILED YES 70.25 70.25
RECONCILED YES 300.90 300.90
RECONCILED YES 213,046.64 213,046.64
RECONCILED YES 24.38 24.38
RECONCILED yES 35.00 35.00
RECONCILED yES 147.35 147.35
RECONCILED YES 560.19 560.19
RECONCILED YES 80.90 80.90
RECONCILED YES 53.83 53.83
RECONCILED YES 593.72 593.72
RECONCILED YES 1,938.14 1,938.14
RECONCILED YES 7.00 7.00
RECONCILED YES 61.00 61.00
RECONCILED YES 59.00 59.00
RECONCILED YES 831.25 831.25
RECONCILED YES 243.55 243.55
RECONCILED YES 150.00 150.00
RECONCILED YES 995.00 995.00
RECONCILED YES 285.44 285.44
RECONCILED YES 3,415.00 3,415.00
RECONCILED YES 300.00 300.00
RECONCILED YES 500.00 500.00
RECONCILED YES 743.85 743.85
RECONCILED YES 311.91 311.91
RECONCILED YES 95.96 95.96
RECONCILED YES 82,00 62.00
RECONCILED YES 203.20 203.20
RECONCILED yES 105.11 105.11
RECONCILED YES 23.42 23.42
RECONCILED YES 1,576.01 1,576.01
RECONCILED YES 338.20 338.20
RECONCILED YES 199.00 199.00
RECONCILED YES 354.58 354.58
RECONCILED yES 98.00 98.00
RECONCILED YES 36.00 36.00
RECONCILED YES 162.50 162.50
.00
.00
.00
.00
.O0
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
,00
.00
PAGE 3
C I T Y 0 F W O O D B U R N AP0460
WOODBURN LiVE VEEOT
DATE 4/19/05 CHECK REGISTER
TIME 11:50:43 NAM~ STATUS UPDATED CHECK AMOUNT RECONCILED AMT DIFFERENCE
ECK ~ CHECK DATE PAYEE · ~ ....... =
CH. · ............. === .....== .........= ..... = ...... ~ ~a~ 50 .00
............................ YES ] 091 b0
== .......... DANIEL T DANSKEY RECONCILED '775.00 7'15.00
78071 ]/11/2005 RECONCILED YES 99.00 .00
78072 3/11/2005 DAVID M COREY pHD, PC
78073 3/11/2005 DEFFENBAUGH & A$SOC PC CO RECONCILED YES 99~00
78074 3/11/2005 DP NORTHWEST INC RECONCILED YES 407.00 407.00 .00
78075 3/11/2005 FBINAA RECONCILED YES 130.00 130.00 .00
78076 3/11/2005 FRA~NK M MASON RECONCILED YES 195.00 195.00 .00
78077 3/11/2005 FRED SCHINDLER RECONCILED YES 4,709.00 4,700.00 .00
78078 3/11/2005 FRY'S ELECTRONICS RECONCILED YES 139.98 139.98 .00
78079 3/11/2005 GROUP MACKENZIE ENGR INC RECONCILED YES 26,130.05 26,130-05 .00
78080 3/11/2005 HELEN'S PACIFIC COSTUMERS RECONCILED YES 60.00 60.00
78081 3/11/2005 MIRE CALLING INC RECONCILED YES 909.90 909.90 .00
78082 3/11/2005 IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS RECONCILED YES 4.93 4.93 .00
78083 3/11/2005 INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO. RECONCILED YES 354.08 354.08 .00
78084 3/11/2005 INTL MI~ICIPAL LAWYERS AS RECONCILED YES 600.00 600.00 .00
78085 3/11/2005 KESSELRING GUN SHOP, INC. RECONCILED YES 362.00 362.00 .00
78086 3/11/2005 KlM DENNIS RECONCILED YES 128.00 128.00 .00
78088 3/11/2005 LENON IMPLEMENT CO. RECONCILED YES 331.18 331.18 .00
78089 3/11/2005 LIGHTNING POWDER CO RECONCILED YES 624.05 624.05 .00
78090 3/11/2005 MA~qION COU~qTY BLDG INSPEC RECONCILED YES 1,287.08 1,287.08 .00
78091 3/11/2005 MARION COUNTY pb~LIC WORK RECONCILED YES 276.00 276.00 .00
78092 3/11/2005 MARTHA ROBLES-ZAMORA RECONCILED YES 90.00 90.00 .00
78093 3/11/2005 METROFUELING, INC. RECONCILED YES 1,576.86 1,576.86 .00
78094 3/11/2005 NATIONAL BUSINESS FURNITU RECONCILED YES 264.00 264.00 .00
78095 3/11/2005 NE CONTROLS LLC RECONCILED YES 1,512.35 1,512.35 .00
78096 3/11/2005 NORCOM RECONCILED YES 24,420.75 24,420.75 .00
78097 3/11/2005 NORTHWEST NATURAL GAS RECONCILED YES 12,584.39 12,584.39 .00
78098 3/11/2005 NORTHWEST TREE SPECIALIST RECONCILED YES 90.00 90.00
78099 3/11/2005 NORTHWOOD HEALTH CENTER RECONCILED YES 18.00 18.00 .00
78100 ]/11/2005 NWGIA RECONCILED YES 310.00 310.00 .00
78101 3/11/2005 OAKMEADOWS RECONCILED YES 1,791.27 1,791.27 .00
78102 3/11/2005 OREGON TURF & TREE FARMS RECONCILED YES 90.00 90.00 .00
78103 3/11/2005 OREGONIAN PUBLISHING CO. RECONCILED YES 411.12 411.12 .00
78104 3/11/2005 PACIFIC TRUCK COLORS INC RECONCILED YES 2,130.00 2,130.00 .00
78105 3/11/2005 PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC RECONCILED YES 34,007.4] 34,007.43 .00
78106 3/11/2005 PORTLAND WINTER HAWKS RECONCILED YES 175.00 175.00 .00
78107 3/11/2005 QUALITY CONTROL SERVICES RECONCILED YES 403.80 403.80 .00
78108 3/11/2005 QWEST RECONCILED YES 2,168.82 2,168.82 .00
78109 3/11/2005 SALEM BLACKTOP & ASPHALT RECONCILED YES 2,810.47 2,810.47 .00
78110 3/11/2005 SIERP~A SPRINGS RECONCILED YES 311.77 311.77 .00
78111 3/11/2005 SILVERFLEET SYSTEMS RECONCILED YES 1,901.01 1,901.01 .00
78112 3/11/2005 TAYLOR HONDA RECONCILED YES 14.96 14.96 .00
78113 3/11/2005 T]{REE SON'S CONCRETE RECONCILED YES 600.00 600.00 .00
78114 3/11/2005 ENDRESS+HAUSER RECONCILED YES 1,875.08 1,875.08 .00
78115 3/11/2005 UNEQUALLED JANITORIAL SVC RECONCILED YES 438.00 438.00 .00
78116 3/11/2005 UNITED DISPOSAL SERVICE RECONCILED YES 1,468.35 1,468-35 .00
78118 3/11/2005 WESCO DISTRIBUTION INC RECONCILED YES 219.80 219.80 .00
78119 3/11/2005 WEST GROUP pAYMENT CTR RECONCILED YES 201.50 201.50 .00
78120 3/11/2005 WOLFERS HEATING & AIR CON RECONCILED YES 197.20 197.20 .00
78121 3/11/2005 WOODBURN GARAGE DOOR RECONCILED YES 125.00 125.00 .00
78122 3/11/2005 WOODBUP~N HEARING CENTER RECONCILED YES 66.00 66.00 .00
78123 3/11/2005 WOODBURN INDEP~q~DENT RECONCILED YES 103.60 103.60 .00
78124 3/11/2005 WOODBURN RENT-ALL RECONCILED YES 60.00 60.00
78125 3/11/2005 XEROX CORPORATION RECONCILED YES 66.38 66.38 .00
PAGE 4
C I T Y 0 F W 00 D B U R N AP0460
WOODBURN LIVE VEEOT
DATE 4/19/05 CHECK REGISTER
TiME 11:50:43
K CHECK DATE PAYEE NAME STATUS UPDATED CHECK AMOUNT RECONCILED AMT DIFFEREN
· YES 154.00 lb~.u '
................. YES GRAPHICS RECONCILED 300 00 300.00 .00
78126 3/11/2005 YES .00
78127 ]/31/2005 VEE OTT RECONCILED
78128 3/31/2005 RICHARD MCCORD RECONCILED yES 900,00 900.00
78129 3/31/2005 ALEXIS RESTAURAMT RECONCILED YES 65.00 65.00
78130 3/31/2005 SCOTT STINSON RECONCILED YES 350.00 350.00 .00
78131 3/31/2005 VALLEY MAILING SERVICE IN RECONCILED YES 638.10 638.t0
78132 3/18/2005 AEROTEK INC RECONCILED yES 700.00 700.00 .00
78133 3/18/2005 ANCHORTEX CORPORATION RECONCILED YES 111.35 111.35 .00
78134 3/18/2005 AppLIED ELECTRICAL TRAINI RECONCILED yES 282.00 282.00 .00
78135 3/18/2005 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICE I RECONCILED YES 24.50 24.50 .00
78136 3/18/2005 AT&T RECONCILED YES 63.09 63.09 .00
78137 3/18/2005 BARKER SURVEYING CORP RECONCILED YES 5,880.00 5,880.00 .00
78139 3/18/2005 BLUMENTHAL UNIFORM & EQUI RECONCILED YES 420.99 420.99 .00
78140 3/18/2005 BOONES FERRY ELECTRIC INC RECONCILED YES 1,689.25 1,689.25 .00
78142 ]/18/2005 CASH REGISTER SALES CO RECONCILED YES 48.88 48.88 .00
78143 3/18/2005 CHEMEKETA COMMUNITY COLL RECONCILED YES 129.00 129.00 .00
78144 3/18/2005 CITY OF WOODBURN RECONCILED YES 1,950-00 1,950.00 .00
78145 3/18/2005 COMPLETE WIRELESS SOLUTNE RECONCILED YES 110.16 110.16
78146 3/18/2005 CONTENT WATCH INC RECONCILED YES 129.90 129.90 .00
78147 3/18/2005 COOKE STATIONERY COMPANY RECONCILED YES 193.96 193.96 .00
78148 3/18/2005 CORPORATE EXPRESS RECONCILED YES 425.75 425.75 .00
78149 ]/18/2005 CRANE & MERSETH INC RECONCILED YES 1,241.50 1,241.50 .00
78150 3/18/2005 CYNTHIA HOCKING RECONCILED YES 40.00 40.00 .00
78151 3/18/2005 DAVID HUTTULA RECONCILED YES 33.29 33.29 .00
78152 3/18/2005 DE HAAS & ASSOCIATES INC RECONCILED YES 20,068.t0 20,066.10 .00
78153 3/18/2005 DORA E VELASCO RECONCILED YES 154.00 154.00 .00
78154 3/18/2005 DP NORTHWEST INC RECONCILED YES 1,471.00 1,471.00 .00
78155 3/18/2005 DRUCK INCORPORATED RECONCILED YES 4,334.25 4,334.25 .00
~"~ 78156 3/18/2005 GERALDINE COOLEY RECONCILED YES 40.00 40.00 .00
~%~ 78157 3/18/2005 HELEN DUBUQUE RECONCILED YES 40.00 40.00 .00
78158 3/18/2005 IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS RECONCILED YES 571.97 571.97
78159 3/18/2005 INGRAM DIST. GROUP RECONCILED YES 1,526.07 1,526.07 .00
78160 3/18/2005 JACK RAWLINGS RECONCILED YES 89.00 89.00 .00
78161 3/18/2005 JOHN PILAFIA~N WINDOW CLEA RECONCILED YES 26.00 26.00 .00
78162 3/18/2005 KIM DENNIS RECONCILED YES 280.00 280.00 .00
78163 ]/18/2005 KITTLESON & ASSOC INC RECONCILED YES 3,879.68 3,879.68 .00
78164 3/18/2005 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY RECONCILED YES 33.15 33.15 .00
78165 ]/18/2005 L~GUAGE LINE SERVICES RECONCILED YES 249.55 249.55 .00
YES 195.65 195.65 .00
.00
78167 3/18/2005 LyRFN PEAVEY CORPORATION RECONCILED
78169 3/18/2005 MEDTRONIC pHysIO-CONTROL RECONCILED YES 3,590.00 3,590.00
78170 3/18/2005 MICRO MARKETING LLC RECONCILED YES 115.00 115.00 .00
78171 3/18/2005 MUFFLERS, HITCHES & MORE RECONCILED YES 225.00 225.00 .00
78172 3/18/2005 NORTHWEST NATURAL GAS RECONCILED YES 238.57 238.57 .00
78173 3/18/2005 OR DEPT OF ADMINISTRATIVE RECONCILED YES 346.60 346.60 .00
78175 3/18/2005 OREGON STATE LIBRARY RECONCILED YES 85.00 85.00 .00
78176 3/]8/2005 OREGON YOUTH AUTHORITY RECONCILED YES 8,780.00 8,780.00 .00
78177 3/18/2005 PACIFIC HABITAT SERVICES, RECONCILED YES 1,138.49 1,138.49 .00
78178 3/18/2005 PENWORTHY CO RECONCILED YES 926.81 926.81 .00
78179 3/18/2005 PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC RECONCILED YES 2,594.92 2,594.92 .00
78180 3/18/2005 PORTLA/~D ROSE FESTIVAL RECONCILED YES 242.60 242.60 .00
78181 3/18/2005 RECORDED BOOKS INC RECONCILED YES 200.76 200.76 .00
78182 3/18/2005 REGENT BOOK COMPA~NY RECONCILED YES 13.97 13.97 .00
78183 3/18/2005 RUTH ZOLLNER RECONCILED YES 108.00 108.00 .00
WOODBURN LIVE
DATE 4/19/05
TIME 1~:50:43
PAGE 5
C I T Y O F W O 0 D B U R N AP0460
VEEOT
CHECK REGISTER
....... CHECK AMOUNT RECONCILED A~ DIFFERENCe_
CHECK DATE pAYEE NAME STATU .... -=- ...........=== .... =====~====== ................. 00
....... - ...... = ............... = ........ 99.40 99.40
........... = .........= .................... ~ RECONCILED YES -- 00 80.00 .00
3/18/2005 RyAN HERCO C · RECONCILED YES ~u. 30 O0 .00
78184
78185
78186
78187
78188
78189
78190
78191
78192
78194
78195
78196
78197
';8198
78199
78200
78201
78202
78204
78205
78207
78208
78209
78210
78211
78212
78213
78216
78217
78218
78220
78221
78222
78223
78224
78225
78226
78227
78228
78232
78233
78235
78236
78237
78238
78240
78241
78244
78245
78246
78248
78250
78252
3/18/2005 $ILAS HARVEY 30.00
3/18/2005 SUE FOFANA-DURA RECONCILED YES
3/18/2005 TEK SYSTEMS INC RECONCILED YES 1,472.00 1,472.00
3/18/2005 TRANSAMERICAN CONTRACTORS RECONCILED YES 37,050.00 37,050-00
3/18/2005 U.S- BANK RECONCILED YES 500.00 500.00
3/18/2005 UNIVERSITY OF oREGON RECONCILED YES 57.00 57.00
3/18/2005 VALLEY PACIFIC FLORAL RECONCILED YES 4O.90 40.90
3/18/2005 VELMA R PRIDEAUX RECONCILED YES 32.10 32.10
3/18/2005 VERIZON WIRELESS RECONCILED YES 80.04 80.04
RECONCILED YES 40.00 40.00
71.46
3/18/2005 VERNA HALL 71.46
3/18/2005 VIKING OFFICE PRODUCTS RECONCILED YES
RECONCILED YES 227.95 227.95
47.80
3/18/2005 WEISS RATINGS INC
3/18/2005 WEST CIRCLE BOOKS RECONCILED YES 47.80
3/18/2005 WILLAMETTE VALLEY SECURIT RECONCILED YES 59.85 59.85
3/18/2005 WOODBURN FERTILIZER RECONCILED YES 162.71 162.71
3/18/2005 WORLD MEDIA EXPRESS RECONCILED YES 341.99 341.99
3/18/2005 YES GRAPHICS RECONCILED YES 1,731.40 1,731.40
3/31/2005 VALLEY MAILING SERVICE IN RECONCILED YES 443.25 443.25
3/25/2005 A-1 COUPLING RECONCILED YES 27.76 27.76
3/25/2005 A/~K UNIFORM SERVICE I RECONCILED YES 55.34 55.34
3/25/2005 ARTISTIC SIGNS & GRAPHICS RECONCILED YES 747.00 747.00
3/25/2005 AT & T RECONCILED YES 119.24 119.24
3/25/2005 BBC AUDIOBOOKS AMERICA RECONCILED YES 6.50 6.50
5/25/2005 BEN_KOrMATIC INC. RECONCILED YES 65.71 65.71
3/25/2005 BOOKS IN MOTION RECONCILED YES 6.00 6.00
3/25/2005 BRINKS HOME SECURITY RECONCILED YES 31.99 31.99
3/25/2005 CHF24EKETA COMMUNITY COLL RECONCILED yES 132.00 132.00
3/25/2005 CITY OF WOODBURN RECONCILED YES 362.32 362.32
3/25/2005 COOKE STATIONERY COMPANY RECONCILED YES 7.50 7.50
3/25/2005 EAGLE WEB PRESS INC RECONCILED YES 1,000.00 1,000.00
3/25/2005 FRED PRYOR SEMINARS RECONCILED YES 128.00 128.00
3/25/2005 GALE GROUP RECONCILED YES 45.30 45.30
3/25/2005 GENERAL BINDING CORPORATI RECONCILED yES 126.00 126.00
3/25/2005 GEOENGINEERS, INC RECONCILED YES 950.00 950.00
3/25/2005 H D FOWLER CO, INC. RECONCILED YES 4,135.86 4,135.86
3/25/2005 HALTON COMPANY RECONCILED YES 73.99 73.99
3/25/2005 HIRE CALLING INC RECONCILED YES 1,381.70 1,381.70
3/25/2005 KENNEDY JENKSCONSULT INC RECONCILED YES 50,254.02 50,254.02
3/25/2005 MANAGE INC RECONCILED YES 4,820.13 4,820.13
3/25/2005 MASONS SUPPLYCO. RECONCILED YES 62.50 82.50
3/25/2005 METROFUELING, INC. RECONCILED YES 3,594.17 3,594.17
3/25/2005 MICRO MARKETING LLC RECONCILED YES 46.00 46.00
3/25/2005 MILES CHRYSLER JEEP DODGE RECONCILED YES 442.44 442.44
3/25/2005 MINITAB INC RECONCILED YES 1,205.00 1,205.00
3/25/2005 NEWSOUND RECONCILED YES 410.39 410.39
3/25/2005 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS RECONCILED YES 1,737.12 1,737.12
3/25/2005 OR DEPT OF TP~SPORTATION RECONCILED YES 1,183.21 1,183.21
3/25/2005 POOL & CREW RECONCILED YES 58.90 58.90
3/25/2005 PORTL~D COMMUNITY COLLEG RECONCILED YES 315.00 315.00
3/25/2005 PRESTON GATES ELLIS LLP RECONCILED YES 12,500.00 12,500.00
3/25/2005 pUMP TECH SYSTEMS INC RECONCILED YES 58.42 58.42
RECONCILED YES 5.95 5.95
3/25/2005 RECORDED BOOKS INC
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
,00
,00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
,00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
,00
PAGE 6
C I T Y O F W O O D B U R N AP0460
WOODBURN LIVE VEEOT
DArE {/19/05 CHECK REGISTER
TIME 11:50:43
CHECK~ CHECK DATE PAYEE NAME STATUS UPDATED CHECK AMOb'NT RECONCILED AMT DrFFERENCE
78254 3/25/2005 REGIONAL FINANCIAL ADVISR RECONCILED YES .00
23.58 23 .58
78256 3/25/2005 RYAN HERCO CO. RECONCILED YES
'18258 3/25/2005 STATESMAN~JOURNAL NEWSPAP RECONCILED YES 62.40
78259 3/25/2005 TERMINIX RECONCILED YES 27.69
78260 3/25/2005 TOTAL COMFORT WEATHERIZAT RECONCILED YES 1,021.30
78262 3/25/2005 VAREC BIOGAS INC RECONCILED YES 3,170.59
78263 3/25/2005 VERIZON WIRELESS RECONCILED YES 431.21
78264 3/25/2005 VIKING OFFICE PRODUCTS RECONCILED YES 182.86
78265 3/25/2005 WATERSHED INC RECONCILED YES 34.76
78266 3/25/2005 WESTERN WRECKER SALES INC REC~NCILED yES 2,239.45
78267 3/25/2005 WILLIAM H. REILLY & CO RECONCILED YES 633.00
78268 3/25/2005 WINTERBROOK PLANNING LLC RECONCILED YES 13,554.50
78270 3/25/2005 WOODBURN HF2%RING CENTER RECONCILED YES 66.00
78271 3/25/2005 WOODBURN INDEPENDENT RECONCILED YES 93.50
78272 3/25/2005 WORLD MEDIA EXPRESS RECONCILED YES 227.14
78273 3/25/2005 YES GRAPHICS RECONCILED YES 50-15
78274 3/31/2005 DHS CROSS CONNECTION PROG RECONCILED YES 35.00
78275 3/31/2005 DHS CROSS CONNECTION PROG RECONCILED YES 35~00
78276 3/31/2005 DHS CROSS CONNECTION PROG RECONCILED YES 35.00
BANK AP TOTAL: 284 CHECKS
62.40
27.69
1,021.30
3,170.59
431.21
182.86
34.76
2,239.45
633.00
13,554.50
66.00
93.50
227.14
50.15
35.00
35.00
35.00
730,869.73 730,869.73
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
RECONCILED .... : 284 CHECKS 730,869-73
NOT RECONCILED - . : CHECKS .00
VOIDED ...... : CHECKS .00
~.A~PDATED ..... :
NOT UPDATED - - - :
284 CHECKS 730,869.73
CHECKS .00
IOA
April 16, 2005
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Honorable Mayor and City Council through City Administrator
Randy Scott, Senior Engineering Technician through the Public
Works Director,:~_.~_
Sixth Street Vacation, South of West Uncoln
RECOMMENDATION:
After public hearing, by motion, instruct staff to prepare an ordinance vacating
that portion of Sixth Street right of way, south of West Lincoln Street to its south
terminus, subject to the conditions as outlined.
BACKGROUND:
This portion of Sixth Street, south of West Lincoln is currently unimproved gravel
surface. The right of way is 40 feet in width and approximately 280 feet in length.
The unimproved right of way is used as parking for the Oregon Child
Development Coalition {OCDC) property and it also serves as alternate access
to this property. In addition, one single family residential property located at 722
West Lincoln uses a portion of the gravel road for their private parking and
approach to it. Sixth Street is a dead end street and is not scheduled for
improvement in the Capital Improvement Program. Although, this portion of
Sixth Street under consideration has no value from a transportation point of view,
it does have city and franchised utilities in the right of way that will require
easements.
All franchised utilities have been notified of the vacation. Only Podland General
Electric responded with a need to retain an easement over their existing facility
and a need for access to provide future maintenance which has been dealt
with through the recommended conditions of approval.
Oregon Child Development Coalition, in consideration for the vacation, will
dedicate public right of way along West Hayes and Settlemier to the city. A 25-
foot wide strip of land adjacent to their frontage along West Hayes Street and a
7-foot strip of land adjacent to a portion of their frontage along Settlemier
Agenda Item Review:
City Administrato~~-~'~ City Attorney
Finance~
35
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Apdl 16, 2005
Page 2
Avenue will be dedicated to the city. This dght of way dedication will facilitate
the future intersection improvements of West Hayes and Settlemier Avenue.
The city council initiated vacation proceeding on February 28, 2005 by adopting
Resolution 1785, which set 7:00 P.M. on Apdl 25, 2005 in the Woodbum City
Council Chambers, 270 Montgomery Street, Woodburn, Oregon, as the time
and place for the public headng on whether the Sixth Streel dght of way shall be
vacated.
DISCUSSION:
A. FINDINGS OF FACT:
Location: The proposed right-of-way to be vacated is Sixth Street from
West Lincoln to its southerly terminus located South of West Lincoln. A
location map is provided on Exhibit 1. A legal description of the area
to be vacated is provided on Exhibit 2.
2. Judsdlction: The City has jurisdiction over the right-of-way proposed to
be vacated.
3. Current land use and zoning: The majority of the property surrounding
the area to be vacated is zoned Medium Density Residential (RM).
The surrounding land use and zoning will not change by vacating the
proposed podion of Sixth Street.
Current use of right-of-way proposed for vacation: The right-of-way
proposed for vacation is unimproved with substandard gravel surface
with no curb, substandard drainage facilities and no pedestrian
facilities. It currently being used as access and parking {private) to the
OCDC Woodburn Head Start Facility. Access to one single-family
residence located at 72:2 West Lincoln is also currently being provided
Transportation needs: By vacating this podion of the public right-of-way
the needs of the public will not be prejudiced. The right of way
currently dead-ends mid way through the OCDC property.
36
Honorable Mayor and City Council
April 16, 2005
Page 3
B#
PROPOSED CONDITIONS OF VACATION
OCDC, the property owner shall complete through the City of
Woodburn Community Development Depadment, a lot
consolidation for tax lots 4000,4100 and 4400. Until such time this
process is completed, a temporary access easement shall be
retained for the parcels of land that would be considered land
locked with out such easement.
The existing public sanitary sewer main within the area to be
vacated that serves OCDC property shall be rehabilitated for
infiltration removal for continued use as a private line or it shall be
abandoned. A standard manhole shall be constructed over the
existing main at the south end at city maintained portion. An
Easement shall be retained over the city maintained podion. A
bond shall be provided to the city for this improvement prior to
adoption of the Vacation Ordinance, the bond pedod will be for a
maximum two years and in the amount of 120% of the improvement
cost.
Agreements and or easements shall be provided to all franchised
utilities for service arrangements, if needed. The OCDC shall
relocate any utility in the vacated right--of-way, which may require
relocation. This shall be provided prior to adoption of the Vacation
Ordinance.
OCDC shall dedicate to the City of Woodburn a 25-foot wide strip
of land along their frontage adjacent to West Hayes Street and a 7-
foot wide stdp of land along their frontage adjacent to Settlemier
Avenue, the east line of which is 37 feet from centerline of
Settlemier Avenue to a point 130 north from West Hayes. This shall
be provided prior to adoption of the Vacation Ordinance or within
90 days from the closing date of the hearing, which ever is sooner.
OCDC shall construct a standard curb and sidewalk section on
West Lincoln, now the unimproved portion of Sixth Street. This will
include a 20 wide standard driveway approach to the Residence
located at 722 West Lincoln. This will also be used for access for
PGE, future maintenance, as they require. A bond shall be provided
87
Honorable Mayor and City Council
April 16, 2005
Page 4
to the city for this improvement prior to adoption of the Vacation
Ordinance, the bond pedod will be for a maximum two years and in
the amount of 120% of the improvement cast.
A public utility easement shall be retained over the existing right of
way of Sixth Street, from West Lincoln Street, 40 foot wide by 85 foot
in length.
A 24 foot wide shared private access easement shall be retained,
12 feet each side of existing centerline, from West Lincoln Street, 85
feet in length.
CONCLUDING REMARKS AND COUNCIL'S OPTIONS
A. Remarks
1. The consent of majority of the owners of the requisite area has been
obtained.
2. Notice of the public headng has been duly given in accordance with
ORS 271.110.
3. As of this date, no objections have been filled by property owners
within the affected area.
B. Council's Options
Council may reject the vacation application and stop the vacation
process.
Council may approve the vacation of the street right of way with
conditions as outlined under discussion.
Council may modify the conditions of approval and/or direct staff
to provide additional information.
38
Honorable Mayor and City Council
April 16, 2005
Page 5
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the city council choose option "2" and instruct staff to
prepare an ordinance vacating that podion of Sixth Slreet public dght of way,
south of West Uncoln Street to its south terminus, subject to the conditions as
outlined under discussion
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The Street Vacation Service Fee of $569.00 paid by OCDC is being used to fund
the process.
Honorable Mayor and City Council
April 16, '2005
Page 6
APPENDIX ONE
Two petitions have been submitted to the city to vacate this portion of Sixth
Street. The first by the praperty owner Mr. George Lizer in August of 2001. Staff
reviewed the petition and requested additional information be provided and
the petitianer pay the required city of woodbum process fee for street vacation.
The petitioner took no further action with the city. The second petition was
submitted with the appropriate fee in October 2003 by OCDC, now the property
owner. Staff reviewed the petition and determined that it did not comply with
the petition requirements of ORS 271.080. The petition included all af the
adjacent property owners but lacked the required two-thirds majority in area of
the real property affected. The petition cantained 63% of consenting property
owners, not the required 67%. The petitioner provided no further consenting
property owner signatures to the city.
40
Honorable Mayor and City Council
April 16, 2005
Page 7
APPENDIX TWO
Applk:able Statues
In accordance with ORS 271.130 The city governing body may
initiate vacation proceedings. The council initiated such
proceedings on February 28, 2005.
In accordance with ORS 271.1 00, Action by the Council, Resolution
No. 1785 was passed on February 28, 2005, which set a date, time
and place for the public hearing on the question whether that
portion of Sixth Street right of way, south of West Lincoln Street to its
terminus should be vacated.
Do
Notice of public hearing has been published in the local paper in
accordance with ORS 271.110. Notice of the hearing was also
posted on-site at each end of lhe proposed area to be vacated.
Eo
ORS 271.1 20 Hearing Determination, provides for the governing
body to hear the testimony and objections filed, determine whether
the consent of the owners of the requisite area have been obtained,
whether notice has been duly given and whether the public interest
will be prejudiced by the vacation of such street. The criterion as
stipulated above has been meet and as of the date of this memo
no written objections have been submitted to the city.
Fo
The vacation meets all other state and local guidelines concerning
street vacation.
41
EXHIBIT 1
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
That portion of Sixth Street. South of West Lincoln Street, ~ocated in. Section
7, Township 5 South, i~ange 1 West, of the Willamette Meridian, City of
Woodburn, Marion County, Oregon
A diagram of above described area is attached as Exhibit 2.
42
EXHIBIT 2
RIGHT-OF-WAY
FOR
PROPOSED
VACATION
59I
~64
~69
ST
ATED
iRTION
PLAN 8c^~.,. ~'-,60' /
CITY OF WOODBURN
ENGINEERING DIVIStON
43
THIS PAGE WAS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
WOODBURN
10B
April 25, 2005
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
John C. Brown, City Administrator~
Measure 37 Claim
M37 04-01 (Delbert Gottsacker)
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council pass a motion to deny Measure 37
Claim M37 04-01 based upon the staff report dated April 21, 2005 prepared by
the Community Development Director.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
This Measure 37 claim was filed on December 2, 2004 and has been evaluated
by Community Development Director. His attached staff report recommends
that the claim should be denied because:
the Claimant has not demonstrated how a City land use regulation has
restricted his use of private real property; and
(2)
the Claimant has not demonstrated that a City land use regulation has
reduced the fair market value of private real property; and
(3)
because the Claimant has not provided the City the required information
to show that a City land use regulation has restricted the use of his
property and has reduced the fair market value of his property, no
"enforcement" of a City land use regulation has occurred and no claim
has accrued under Measure 37 and Ordinance 2378.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
No present financial impact.
Agenda Item Review:
City Administrator~~z~/
45
City Attorney __ Finance
To:
From:
Report Date:
Claim #:
STAFF REPORT
MEASURE 37 CLAIM
Woodburn City Council through City Administrator
Jim Mulder, Community Development Director
April 21, 2005
M37 04-01
I1.
CLAIMANT INFORMATION:
CLAIMANT/PROPERTY OWNER:
Delbert Gottsacker
STREET ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:
500-510, 514 N. Pacific Highway
Woodburn, Oregon
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY:
Beginning at the Northeast corner of Lot Seven (7), Block One (1), Wynn's
Addition to Woodburn, Marion County, Oregon, (See Volume 13, Page 7, Record
of Town Plats for said County and State); thence Northwesterly to the Northwest
corner of Lot Five (5) in Block One (1) of said Addition; thence Southerly along
the Pacific Highway, 61.3 feet to the Southwest corner of Lot Six (6), of Block
One (1) in said Addition; thence Northeasterly along the North line of Lot Seven
(7) to the place of beginning. Also Lots Seven (7), Eight (8) and Nine (9), Block
One (1), Wynn's Addition to Woodburn, in Marion County, Oregon. (See Volume
13, Page 7, Record of Town Plats for said County and State.
Save and Except: Beginning at the Northeast corner of Lot Seven (7), Block One
(1), Wynn's Addition to Woodburn, Marion County, Oregon, (See Volume 13,
Page 7, Record of Town Plats for said County and State); for a place of
beginning; thence South 32019, West 33.40 feet; thence North 60059' West
121.05 feet to a point 44.4 feet South 76°10' East from the Northwest corner of
Lot Five (5); thence South 76016' East 127.26 feet to the Northeast corner of said
Lot Seven (7) being the place of beginning.
Date Claim Filed:
Public Hearing Date:
12/02/2004
04/25/2005
RELIEF REQUESTED: The Claimant is requesting that the Woodburn
Development Ordinance not be applied to his property. The Claimant's
December 2, 2004, claim states "in lieu of payment, I will accept waivers of any
M37 04-01
46
Page 1
III.
IV,
and all regulatory restrictions..." However, the Claimant's January 24, 2005,
letter states that "there will be no appraisal, I am not seeking compensation."
Claimant lists the claim amount of $165,000.
OWNERSHIP HISTORY/DATE ACQUIRED BY CURRENT OWNER: The
Claimant entered into a contract to purchase the property in 1960. The Claimant
received a Warranty Deed to the property on June 7, 1965, which was recorded
on June 10, 1065, in Vol. 602, Page 232, of the Deed Records for Marion
County.
ZONING HISTORY: When the Claimant acquired the property, it was located in
unincorporated Marion County and was unzoned. According to the Marion
County Planning Department, zoning was first applied to the property by county-
wide zoning established by Ordinance No. 176 adopted by the Board of
Commissioners on July 31, 1968. At that time, the county-wide zoning maps
applied a C-2 Business District Zone to the property and adjacent area along
Highway 99 outside the City of Woodburn. Ordinance No. 176 amended
previous County Ordinance No. 24, which was adopted February 3, 1960 and
established zoning primarily around the Salem area. On September 17, 1976,
the Board adopted County Ordinance No. 448 which involved a county-wide
rezoning in accordance with the County comprehensive plan at that time and
included the Woodburn-Hubbard Area (Zone Area 6 at that time), and applied a
CR (Commercial Retail) zoning to the subject property/area.
The City enacted Ordinance 2289 annexing the property, and other "islands"
throughout the City, on June 12, 2001. Effective July 1, 2002, the Woodburn
Development Ordinance zoned the property General Commercial (CG).
CLAIMANT'S ALLEGED BASIS FOR REDUCTION IN FAIR MARKET VALUE:
The Claimant contended in his December 2, 2004, claim that the value of his
property had been reduced and calculated the reduction in value as follows:
An Investment Broker, Commercial Service Division, Prudential
Real Estate, waned to research my zoning and get comparable
property sales and he would tell me what I should list it for, I said
O.K...
He gave me the figure of $ 235,000.00 and he wanted to list it. I
told him I wouldn't think of it until after the election.
On October 28, 2004 a Mr. And Mrs. Kim called me to see my
building on Hwy. 99#. After they looked at it they told me they
didn't want to rent it they wanted to buy it. They offered me
$400,000.00 Cash, If Measure 37 Passed. When Measure 37
passed, that established the value of my building, Without the
zoning that did me the damage. When Mr. Crosby gave me the
M37 04-01
47
Page 2
VI.
Value of $ 235,000.00 with the zoning that is doing the damage.
This gives me the value I need for my claim.
Value Without The Damaging zoning. - ................... $400,000.00
Value With The Damaging Zoning ................
$235,000.00
Claim Amount .................................. $165,000,00
On January 6, 2005, staff sent a letter to the Claimant requesting that he
specifically state how a City land use regulation restricted the use of his property
and caused a reduction in the fair market value. Pursuant to the ordinance
requirement, staff requested that the Claimant submit an appraisal establishing
the reduction in the fair market value of the property as of the date of this claim.
In response to staff's January 6, 2005, letter, the Claimant's letters dated January
10, 2005, and January 24, 2005, provide the City no further information on how a
City land use regulation restricted the use of the Claimant's property and caused
a reduction in the fair market value. However, the Claimant did make it clear that
he would not provide an appraisal. The Claimant's letter dated January 10,
2005, stated:
I don't feel there is a need to an appraisal at his time, unless the
city wants to go to court at this time. I will order the appraisal after I
file for a jury trial. It will then be up to date for the Jury on it's value.
As you know I didn't ask for compensation, I agreed to a waiver.
APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA:
Measure 37
Ordinance 2378 (Regarding the processing of Measure 37 claims)
To qualify for Measure 37 relief, the Claimant must establish that:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
The City "enacts" or "enforces" a new "land use regulation" or
The City "enforces" a "land use regulation" that was in existence
prior to the passage of Measure 37 and
That the enactment or enforcement of the land use regulation has
restricted the use of private real property and
That the enactment or enforcement of the land use regulation has
the effect of reducing the fair market value of the property
Under Ordinance 2378, "no enforcement of a land use regulation under Measure
37 shall be deemed to have occurred and no claim under Measure 37 shall have
accrued until the City is provided necessary information under this Ordinance to
M37 04-01
48
Page 3
evaluate and decide the Measure 37 claim presented by Claimant on a rational
basis."
A. Enactment/Enforcement of a Land Use Regulation
This claim does not involve the enactment or enforcement of a new land
use regulation, but rather involves the enforcement of a land use
regulation that was in existence prior to the passage of Measure 37.
"Enforce" or "enforcement" is not defined by Measure 37. However,
Ordinance 2378, regarding the processing of Measure 37 claims, states
that "no enforcement of a land use regulation under Measure 37 shall be
deemed to have occurred and no claim under Measure 37 shall have
accrued until the City is provided necessary information under this
Ordinance to evaluate and decide the Measure 37 claim presented by
Claimant on a rational basis."
STAFF FINDING AND CONCLUSION: Measure 37 gives the City the
legal authority to pass a claims processing ordinance and the City Council
did this when it enacted Ordinance 2378. Since the Claimant has not
provided the City the required information to show that a City land use
regulation has restricted the use of private real property and had the effect
of reducing the fair market value of the property (as is further explained
below), no "enforcement" of a City land use regulation has occurred and
no Measure 37 claim has accrued.
B. Land Use Regulation has Restricted the Use of Private Real Property
After receiving the Measure 37 application dated December 2, 2004, staff
wrote a January 6, 2005 letter to the Claimant, which stated as follows:
Please provide as soon as possible the following items and
information so that your claim can be evaluated by the City:
2. The specific land use regulation that allegedly
restricts the use of your property and causes a
reduction in fair market value of your property must be
provided.
In response to staff's request, the Claimant responded in his January 10,
2005 letter:
#2
A.
B.
C.
Woodburn Development Ordinance-July 1,2002.
Conditional Uses.
Change in occupancy in existing buildings.
No percentage of a refund of deposit of conditional
use is denied.
M37 04-01
49
Page 4
VII.
VIII.
Similarly, in his January 24, 2005, letter, the Claimant responded:
2. Special land use regulations that restricts the use of my
property
Woodburn Development Ordinance, July 1, 2002
A. Conditional Uses.
B. Change in Occupancy
C. Design Review.
STAFF FINDING AND CONCLUSION: In order to be granted relief under
Measure 37, the Claimant must demonstrate how the City land use
regulation restricts the use of his private real property. The Claimant has
not demonstrated how property use is restricted.
Reduction in Fair Market Value of Property
As referenced above, the Claimant declined to provide an appraisal as
required by Ordinance 2378. Without the appraisal, there is no
mechanism for the City to determine whether, because of a City land use
regulation, the fair market value of Claimant's property has been reduced.
The payment of compensation to the Claimant would require the
expenditure of public funds which must have some legal basis. Likewise,
"waiver" of an existing City land use regulation must be based upon some
legal authority. The Claimant has provided no legal basis justifying the
expenditure of public funds or the "waiver" of a City land use regulation.
STAFF FINDING AND CONCLUSION: In order to be granted relief under
Measure 37, the Claimant must demonstrate that enforcement of a City
land use regulation has reduced the fair market value of his private real
property. The Claimant has not demonstrated how the fair market value of
the property is reduced.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Measure 37
claim M37 04-01 be denied by the City Council for the reasons noted in this staff
report
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment "A" - Measure 37 Application dated December 2, 2004
Attachment "B" - Letter to Claimant from Staff dated January 6, 2005
Attachment "C" - Leter from Claimant to Staff dated January 10, 2005
Attachment "D" - Letter from Claimant to Staff dated January 24, 2005
Attachment "E" - Title Report provided by Claimant dated January 21, 2005
M37 04-01
5O
Page 5
WooDBuRN
Measure 37 Claim Form
City of Woodbum
Community Development Department
270 Montgome.ry Street · ~W, _o~3dbum. Oration 97071
Phone: 503:982-5246 ~ax: 503-982-5244
NAME AND CONTACT INFORBA'RON OF CLAIMANT/PROPERTY OWNER:
ame of Claimant: rrelephone ~..---
r'xI IIUIL /~
,A- REC'D
DEC 0 ~ 2004
WOODBURN C0MMUNITY
OE~LOPMENT DEPT.
a~ing Address: . _.., /
¥~'/g ~:),~--/,,/ /'/'~/V£ _, .
NAME AND CONTACT INFORMATION OF PER$OH SUBMI11IING CI_~M (AGENT):
~F ~ 7'NAN/N ,SECT/ON f
~a~ ~ ~ ~el~ ~
Address:
City:. ~te: [Zip:
Must attach a written notarized statement signed by the owner(s) or a Power of Attorney giving authority to submit this claim.
PROPERTY FROM WHICH CLAIM DERIVES:
Street Address:
ro~hip, ~e, S~n ind ~¢s T~ bt ~: )
Comprehensive Plan Designation/Zone Map Designation:
I ATTEST THAT I HAVE FILLED OUT THIS FORM COMPLETELY AND THIS CLAIM IS TRUE AND CORRECT. (Signatures of all
~Sig~n~..~ grtl~ Rrepari. l~ .tlJ/e fort. Including ~hose claiming own--hlp ln the proplrty ovlr whJ.ch ,,. clalm i~ belng mede.,
Print Name
I I
Signature Date
Print Name
I I
Signature Date
Print Name
51
Woodbum Mayor and Council Members
270 Montgomery Street
Woodburn, OR 97071
Woodbum Mayor and City Council:
,A, REC'D
DEC 0 200¢
WOODBURN COMMUNffY
DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
I am filing a claim pursuant to Measure 37.
My property is 500, 510 and 514 N Pacific Hwy.
Woodbum, Oregon 97071
FR Lots 5,6,7,8 and lot 9 BLK 1 Wyrm's add. Woodbum, Oregon.
I purchased my property September 10, 1960 in Marion County. And on November 13, 1970
they adopted the Marion County, Uniform Zone Code. I was zoned Commercial Retail, CR..
I rented my building under there regulations. None of my buildings was ever vacant more than
30 days between renters.
My property was in an enclave, adjacent to the city of woodbum. Thc Woodbum City Council
annexed us into the city June 11, 2001, with opposition. The Mayor and City Council all agreed
to Grandfather all the commercial properties into the cities Commercial General Zone, CG.
On July 1, 2002 the city council enacted the Woodburn Development Ordinance and has
enforced it every since. Thisis the zoning that has done damage to my property.
On January 1, 2004 my 4200 sq. fi.building became vacant nd it is still vacant, this December 2,
2004. I have had many, many people who wanted to rent it. I sent them all to the planning
dept. and all the uses were Conditional Uses in the Woodburn Development Ordinance. For a
conditional use application approval it costs $1,400.00 and then it increased to$1,725.00 and up
to 120 days to get an approval or denial and no money refunded if denied. There was no one
who would try to get a conditional use under these conditions. They all felt that you were taking
advantage of them.
Many of the potential renters wanted to know why the building hadn't rented. I gave them all
the same answer, because of the zoning and after them going to the planning department, they
allcamc back and agreed with me.
An Investment Broker, Commercial Service Division, Prudental Real Estate, wanted to research
my zoning and get comparable property sales and he would tell me what I should list it for, I said
O.K...
He gave me the figure of $ 235,000.00 and he wanted to list it. I told him I wouldn't think of it
until after the election.
52
On October 28, 2004 a Mr. And Mrs. Klm called me to see my building on Hwy. 99E. After
they looked at it they told me they didn't want to rent it they wanted to buy it. They offered me
$400,000.00 Cash, If Measured 37 Passed. When Measure 37 passed, that established the value
of my building, Without the zoning that did me the damage. When Mr. Crosby gave me the
Value of $ 235,000.00 with the zoning that is doing the damage. This gives me the value I need
for my claim.
Value Without The Damaging zoning.
Value With The Damaging Zoning ........................... $ 235,000.00
Claim Amount-----
165,000,00
In lieu of payment I will accept waivers of any and all regulatory restrictions that prevents me
from using my property as I could have when I purchased it in 1960.
Time is of the essence, my building has been vacant one year, and without relief, it will continue
to be vacant and devalued.
Measure 37 Claimant.
Delbert Gottsacker
8518 Parr Rd. NE
Gervais, Oregon 97025
Phone:503-981-5000
November 2, 2004
Claimant
Enclosures:
copy of warranty deed
copy of title insuranec
certified list property owners, 250 feet radius
If you need any additional information please call; 503-981-5000
53
John Brown
Woodbum City Administator
270 Montgomery Street
Woodburn, Oregon 97071
James Mulder
Re: Measure 37 Claim filed 12/2/04
Dear John:
This morning I delivered the property owners report from the Title Co., to Woodbums planning
department, which should make the claim complete and ready to move forward. Also following
is an inventory of the documents in the file.
Inventory of Documents and Information in Measure 37 Claim File.
1. Completed City Claim Form,
2. Claim I had typed when the city form was not available the night before December 2, 2004.
And to be attached to the city claim form. Information= Address. Legal Description. Date
when property was purchased. County zone. Annexation. City zone code that did the damage.
Property value with damaging zone. Cash offer if Measure 37 Passed. Claim Amount.
Statement, In lieu of Payment.
3. Copy of title insurance policy. Information= Owner. Legal Description. Restrictions,
Contract of Purchase 9/15/60. Proof of Purchase. A newer title report would not have shown
this. This title report is the same as a I month old policy, except that the 1 month old policy
would not show the contract purchase on it.
4. Copy of Warranty Deed. Information.= Owner. Legal Description. Date 617/65. Revenue
Stamps.
5. Copy of property tax statement. Information.= Owner. Account No. Property address.
Acres. Map No. Total Value, and they are suppose to take into consideration the zoning.
Amount of taxes.
6. Property report from Fidelty Title Insurance Co. = Information.= Certified list of 47
property ownerships. 47 addressed labels and 4 Maps of ownerships,(500 R.). They only use
the address of one of the buildings (510).
7. Occupants of Buildings.
A. 514-Building. Information.= Since building was built, Businesses and types of uses.
B. 500 & 510 Building. Information.= Types and uses in general.
54
C. Zone code used when property purchased. Information. = Woodburn ORD.999
8. Property Income. 2004 and proposed 2005 income. Information= Income on each
building and the total of all 3 buildings. Proposed for 2005, hopefully the zoning will be
corrected. Purpose of income.= In the event some council members would want the income, to
determine a value.
I have probably included a lot of information that wasn't necessary, but if the council members
are anything like me, they would like to have everything before them when they get started, then
there are no holdups. If I am missing something, Please let me know.
John, would you please let me know who the one person I could go to, to fred anything out about
my claim, during the process.
The other day on the phone you said you had appointed James Mulder your designee, so I will
give him and the Mayor a copy of this letter, as I think the Inventory and information could be
very helpful to them. You might also think about giving each Council Member a copy.
Dam:December 13, 2004
Delbert Gottsac
55
7-A
DEC !
City of Woowbum
Woodburn, Oregon
WOODBURN COMMUNITY
To become part of Measure 37 claim information, Filed 12/02/04.
Dee. 8, 2004
Occupants of 514 N. Pacific Hwy. Building since it was built.
1945 to 1949
Burrights Automotive Repair.
Cars, Trucks, and Semi-Trucks
1950 to 1963
Butteereek Pickle Co.
Pickles & Relishes, Wholesale & Retail
Rolands Food Produ~s
Pickles,Relishes, Sauerkraut, Manufacturing & Distmbition, Wholesale & Retail.
Portland Can~ing Co.
Pickles, Sauerkraut, Relishes,Manufacturing and Receiving Cherries, Cane Berries and
Strawberrics, Wholesale & Retail
Woodbum Enterprises, Inc;
Pickles, Cucumbers 100 Tons. Sauerkraut, Cabbage 80 Tons, Manufacture, Packageing &
Distribution, Wholesale & Retail and Bulk Sales
1964 to 1979
Blem Co.
Manufacturing of Prehung Doors & Windows
Builders, Lumber Yards, Wholesale & Retail
1979 to 1981
Dans Window Co.
Sales & Distribution
Daves GlassCo
Cars and Misc..
Installation, Retail & Wholesale
1981 to end of 2002
Carpet Warchousc
Carpets, Retail, Wholesale and Installation
Furniture, Retail
Page # 1.
56
Jan. To Dec. 2003
Lees Tile and Carpet
Retail Sales and Installation
Dec. 8, 2004
January to December of 2004
Vacant, Because of zoning, Length of time, High cost & no provision for Refund if Denied.,on
Conditional Uses.
Woodbum Muffler
David Fontini, Owaer has had two Business Licenses applications turned down for my building
since the end oflqovember 2004.
7-B
500 and 510 Building, Occupancy since being built.
Real Estate Office, Accounting, Used Book Store, Children Cholthing Store, Knitting Supplies,
Shoe Repair, Bookeeping, Computer Sales & repair, Knitting School, Cheek cashing & Sending
Mattress Sales, Grass Seed Sales,Fortune Telling, Cell phone sales & Sevcice,Counseling,
Custom Jewelry, Driving School.
7-c
When I purchased my building I felt some day I would be in the city, so I followed Woodburns
Zone Code and I never had any problems with Marion County, but I think Woodburn ws ahead
of them. I used ordinace No 999, and I followed it for 12 years, I didn't have any problems with
it or Woodburn and I don't think Marion County or Woodburn had any problems with me,
anyway if they did they didn't tell me, because it would have been taken care of. I was very
comfortable with Ord. 999.
I may furnish you with a lot of information that you don't need to make your decisions, but I
would rather you have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.
When I receive the property owners list, I am quite sure that I will be the longest property owner
in the 500 fl. radius.
I also think you should have a list of my income on these properties for this year 2004 and also
my projected income for 2005, since I have an annual rent increase, January 1'~ of each year.
Page # 2
57
City of Woodbum
Woodbum, Oregon
Dec. 8, 2004
To become part of Measure 37 claim information, Filed 12/02/04
500, 510, & 514N. Pacific Hwy .Woodburn, OR
Claimant, Delbert Gottsacker
Income and Projected Income for the years 2004 and 2005 on the rentals at 500, 510 and 514 N.
Pac. Hwy. Woodburth OR. You may need this information, if you would rather compensate
than grant a waiver.
2004 Income:
500 BuildIng; $600.00 Mo. X 12 = $7,200.00
510 Building: $575.00 Mo X 12 = $6,900.00
514 Building $ 2.050.00 Mo.Vacant for 12 Months due to zoning
regulations, conditional uses, cost & time involved. 00.00
Total 2004 Income $14,100.00
Projected 2005 Income.
500 Building; $610.00 Mo. X 12 = $ 7,320.00
510 Building: $590.00 Mo. X 12 = $ 7,080.00
514 Building: $2,200.00 Mo-- PROJECTED 12 months $26,400.00
Depending on being rented: Re:measure 37
Projected Income $ 40,800.00
Purpose of these figures are, Property Value determined by income.
58
ODBURN
Incorporated ~889
Exhibit "B"
January 6,2005
Via Regular Mail
Delbert Gottsacker
8518 Parr Road NE
Gen~ais, OR 97026
Re:
Case File No. M37 04-0!: Measure 37 claim for property located at 500, 510, and
514 North Pacific Highway
Dear Mr. GoUsacker:
The Woodbum City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2378 to authorize processing of
Measure 37 claims. Section 2 of this ordinance provides:
Section 2. Accrual of Claims,. Except in cases where the enactment of a
new land use regulation by the City is shown by Claimant to restrict the use
of private real property and have the effect of reducing the fair market value
of the property, no enforcement of a land use regulation under Measure 37
shall be deemed to have occurred and no claim under Measure 37 shall
have accrued until the City is provided necessary information under the
Ordinance to evaluate and decide the Measure 37 claim presented by
Claimant on a rational basis.
Please provide as soon as possible the following items and information so that your claim
can be evaluated by the City:
A title report issued by a title company no more than 30 days prior to submittal of
the claim must be submitted. This is necessary to identify any persons with a
recorded interest in the property and to determine chain of title.
2. The specific land use regulation that allegedly restricts the use of your property and
causes a reduction in fair market value of your property must be provided.
A specific remedy to the claim must be specified. You ask for either a waiver of the
City's regulations or compensation, but you do not specify what regulation should be
modified or removed and you have not supported any compensation claim with an
appraisal by an appraiser licensed by the State of Oregon. If you seek
compensation, the amount of the claim must be supported by an appraisal by an
Community Developmeat Depaxtmeat
Z70,1,1antgarnery Street ' 9goodbutn, Ore.g~n 9707f
503-982-5244
appraiser licensed by the State of Oregon establishing the reduction in the fair
market value of the property as of the date of the claim.
4. Copies of any leases or CC&R's that impose restrictions on the property or may
affect its valuation must be provided.
5. The particular use that is proposed for the property must be specified and proof that
the requested use was allowed when the property was acquired must be submitted.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at (503) 982-5246.
Sincerely,
o~munity Development Director
cc: John Brown, City Administrator
Bob Shields, City Attorney
6O
Exhibit "C"
James Mulder
Community Development Director
City Of Woodlmm
279 Montgomery Street
Woodbum, Oregon 97071
January 10, 2005
Dear Mr. Mulden
Thank you for your letter of January 6, 2005. Everthing you have asked for, I have given to you
between the date I filed the claim and now, with the exception of the age of the Title Policy,
which would not show the contract purchase now. I paid the property off June 7, 1965, look at
thc date on thc Deed.
I am going to answer thc numbers in your letter.
#1. Title Policy dated September 15, 1960
#2 Woodlmm Development Ordinance-July 1, 2002.
A Conditional Uses.
B. Change in occupancy in existing buildings.
C. No percentage of a refund of deposit if conditional use is denied.
#3.
A. On my letter to John Brown on 12/13/04, which I thought was part of my claim folder when
it went to him. I stated on Page 2 -C, Zone code used when I purchased thc property,
Woodbum ORD. 999, I did Fail to put down Commercial-3- Which
a my property was. I felt this was my remedy, if it wasn't, then it is now.
B. I agreed to: in lieu of payment I will accept waivers of any and all regulatory restrictions
that prevents me from using my property as I could have, when I purchased it in 1960.
C. On #2 1 specified what regulation reswicted my use, and I assumed that you would
understand that Woodburn Development Ordinance. Would have to be removed. I want to
stress again, this is the Regulation that needs to be Modified or Removed, #3 of your letter of
116/05.
I don't feel there is a need for an appraisal at this time, unless the city wants to go to court at this
time. I will order the appraisal after I file for a jury trial. It will then be up to date for the Jury
on it's value. As you know I didn't ask for compensation, I agreed to a waiver.
#4 I do not lease my properties, I rent them month to month.
61
#5 Them is not one particular use thai I have proposed for. I would like all the uses I would
have had when I purchased the property. It is my intention to follow fig new law Measure 37.
The four uses that was turned down or refused occupancy permits for my building were.
Tile Factory Store, # 82-(2-2.
Car and Truck Detailing, g4--C-3
Sales and lnstaltntion of Mufflers #34-&55 -C3
Auto Parts and Installation # 4-C-3
These are all listed in ORD. 999 --C-3
I can't believe the city would not have the zone book ORD 999 with the C-l, C-2, & C-3, but if
they don't I will get them the pages.
I feel you are going to be concc-med about the old Title Policy and if I am trustworthy and you
can trust my word.
There are three of the council members that I have known over 1 $ or 20 years, ask them or I can
give you names of some of the old city employees that you can ask..
Sincerely,
Delbert Gottsacker
8518 Parr Rd NE
Gervais, OR 97071
Phone 503-981-5000
Mayor Figley and Council Members
City Adminisi~ator, John Brown
City Attorney, Bob Shields
62
James Mulder
Community Development Director
270 Montgomery Street
Woodburn, Oregon 97071
REC'D
Exhibit "D"
January 24, 2005
JAN
W001~URN COMMUNITY
0EVELDPMEHT DEPT.
Rc: Measure 37 Claim, Case File No.M 37 04..01
De~r Mr. Mulder:
Find enclosed all the items and information you requested in your letter of Januaxy 6,2005.
1. A preliminary title report from Fidelity National Title Co. Of Oregon, on property at 500-
510-514 N. Pacific Highway, Woodburn, Or 97071. Effective December 30, 2004
Policy No. :00-504437-22 Dated January 20, 2005.
2. Special land use regulations that restricts the use of my property
Woodburn Development Ordinance, July 1, 2002
A. Conditional Uses.
B. Change in Oceu~
C. Design Review.
3. A specific remedy to the claim must be specified.
A. A waiver of the cities land use regulations and allow me to use the property for the uses
permitted at the time I purchased the property, which would be Ordinance 999 -C-3, which also
includes C-2 and C-I.
B. There will be no appraisal, I am not asking for compensation. I thought I made it plain on
my letter that was attached to the City form. It is on page 2, just above my signature, which
states: In lieu of payment I will accept waivers of any and all regulary restrictions that prevents
me from using my propemy as I could have when I purchased it on contract in 1960.
4. Copies of any leases or CC&R's that impose restrictions.
A. There are no leases on the property and one Restriction on the title report.
5. Particular use that is proposed for the property must be specified and proof that the
requested use was allowed, when the property was acquired.
A Use and page number of Ordinance 999
l. Sales and installation of mufflers--ORD. ,999--(page) ord. 25= # 4 & # 55
63
2. Tire store w/installation ORD. ,999--(~age) ord.22===~ 85
3. Cax & truck detailing--ord.20 #11, ord.22 #70, ord. 23 #4
4. Auto parts and installation--ord.22 #11
5. Antque shop--ord.20 # 8
6. Vehicle to~ ord. 22 #70
7. Pawn shop--ord. 21 # 65
8. Ambulance serw'~--ord. 23 # 2
9. Upholstery shop--ord.25 # 51
10. Veterina~ clinic---oral 25 # 52
11. And all other uses in Ordimmce 999, C-3, C-2, C-1.
B. Proof of uses allowed, when property was acquired.
1. Copy of Ordinace 999, pages 17 through 25, C-l, C-2, & C-3.
Sincerely,
Delbert Gottsacker, claimant
Enclosures:
preliminary title report
copy of ordinance 999 pages 17 through 25.
64
Exhibit "E"
Fidelity National Title Company of Oregon
~98 Commercial St. SE//200 · Salem, OR 97301
(503) 585-7219 · FAX (503) 585-0326
-A, REC'D
JAN ~ 4
WOOOBURN COMMUNITY
OEVELOPMENT DEPT.
January 21, 2005
Delbert Gottsacker
8518 Parr Road
Gervais, OR 97026
Order No.: 00-504437-22
We have enclosed 1 copy(s) of the Preliminary Report for our Order Number 00-504437-22.
Please call us immediately if you have any questions or concerns.
Fidelity National Title Company
65
Fidelity National Title Company of Oregon
PRELIMINARY REPORT
In response to the application for a policy of title insurance referenced herein, Fidelity
National Title Company reports that it is prepared to issue, or cause to be issued, as of
the specified date, a Policy or Policies of Title Insurance describing the land and the estate
or interest described, insuring against loss which may be sustained by reason of any defect,
lien or encumbrance not shown or referred to as an Exception below or not excluded from
coverage pursuant to the printed Schedules, Conditions and Stipulations of the Policy forms.
The printed Exceptions and Exclusions from the coverage of said Policy or Policies are set
forth in Exhibit A attached. Copies of the Policy forms should be read. They are available
from the office which issued this report.
This report (and any supplements or amendments) is issued solely for the purpose of
facilitating the issuance of a po/icy of title insurance and no liability is assumed.
The Policy(s) of title insurance to be issued hereunder will be policy(s) of Fidelity National Title
Insurance Company, a California corporation.
Please read the exceptions shown or referred to below and the exceptions and exclusions set
forth in Exhibit A of this report carefully. The exceptions and exclusions are meant to provide
you with notice of matters which are not covered under the terms of the title insurance policy
and should be carefully considered.
It is important to note that this preliminary report is not a written representation as to the
condition of title and may not list all liens, defects and encumbrances affecting title to the
land.
This report is for the exclusive use of the parties to the contemplated transaction, and the
company does not have any liability to any third parties nor any liability until the full prem/um
is paid and a policy is issued. Until all necessary documents are placed of record, the
company reserves the right to amend or supplement this preliminary report.
Countersigned
66
Fidelity National Title Company of Oregon
198 Commercial St. SE #200 · Salem, OR 97301
{503) 585-7219 · FAX {503) 585-0326
PRELIMINARY REPORT
TITLE OFFICER: Patty Smith
TO: Delbert Gottsacker
ORDER NO.:
00-504437-22
OWNER/SELLER: Delbert Gottsacker
BUYER/BORROWER:
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 500-510-514 N Pacific Highway, Woodburn, OR 97071
EFFECTIVE DATE:
1.
December 30, 2004, 05:00 P.M.
The policy and endorsements to be issued and the related charges are:
AMOUNT PREMIUM
Owner's Standard To Come 200.00 Partial Billing
Government Service Charge 50.00
THE ESTATE OR INTEREST IN THE LAND HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED OR REFERRED
TO COVERED BY THIS REPORT IS:
A Fee
TITLE TO SAID ESTATE OR INTEREST AT THE DATE HEREOF IS VESTED IN:
Delbert Gottsacker, an estate in fee simple
THE LAND REFERRED TO IN THIS REPORT IS SITUATED, IN THE CITY OF
WOODBURN IN THE COUNTY OF MARION, STATE OF OREGON, AND IS DESCRIBED
AS FOLLOWS:
SEE EXHIBIT "ONE" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF
MP\MP 01/20/2005
67
Order No. 00-504437-22
EXHIBIT "ONE"
Beginning at the Northeast corner of Lot Seven (7), Block One (1), Wynn's Addition to
Woodburn, Marion County, Oregon, (See Volume 13, Page 7, Record of Town Plats for said
County and State); thence Northwesterly to the Northwest corner of Lot Five (5) in Block One
(1) of said Addition; thence Southerly along the Pacific Highway, 61.3 feet to the Southwest
corner of Lot Six (6), of Block One (1) in said Addition; thence Northeasterly along the North
line of Lot Seven {7) to the place of beginning. Also Lots Seven (7), Eight (8) and Nine (9),
Block One (1), Wynn's Addition to Woodburn, in Marion County, Oregon. (See Volume 13,
Page 7, Record of Town Plats for said County and State.
Save and Except: Beginning at the Northeast corner of Lot Seven (7), Block One (1), Wynn's
Addition to Woodburn, Marion County, Oregon, (See Volume 13, Page 7, Record of Town
Plats for said County and State); for a place of beginning; thence South 32° 19' West 33.40
feet; thence North 60 o 59' West 1 21.05 feet to a point 44.4 feet South 76 o 10' East from the
Northwest corner of Lot Five (5); thence South 76°16' East 1 27.26 feet to the Northeast
corner of said Lot Seven (7) being the place of beginning.
68 2
Order No. 00-504437-22
AS OF THE DATE OF THIS REPORT, ITEMS TO BE CONSIDERED AND EXCEPTIONS TO
COVERAGE IN ADDITION TO THE PRINTED EXCEPTIONS AND EXCLUSIONS IN THE POLICY
FORM WOULD BE AS FOLLOWS:
GENERAL EXCEPTIONS:
Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing
authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records,
proceedings by a public agency which may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of
such proceedings whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the public
records.
Any facts, rights, interests or claims which are not shown by the public records but which
could be ascertained by an inspection of said land or by making inquiry of persons in
possession.
Easements, or claims of easements or encumbrances, not shown by the public records,
reservations or exceptions in patents or in acts authorizing the issuance thereof; ware[
rights, claims or title to water.
Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments or any other
facts which a correct survey would disclose.
Any statutory liens for labor or material, including liens for contributions due to the State
of Oregon for unemployment compensation and for worker's compensation, which have
now gained or may gain priority over the lien of the insured deed of trust, which liens do
not now appear of record.
SPECIFIC ITEMS AND EXCEPTIONS:
City Iie~$ in favor of the City of Woodburn, if any.
A report has been ordered and the Company reserves the right to add additional items or
make further requirements after review of the requested report.
Covenants, conditions and restrictions (deleting therefrom any restrictions indicating any
preference, limitation or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap,
familial status or national origin) as set forth in the document
Recorded:
July 10, 1941, Book 261, Page 144
Please Note: We find no Mortgage's and/or Trust Deeds recorded for the herein described
property. If this is incorrect, please contact the title department as soon as possible.
NOTES:
END OF ITEMS AND EXCEPTIONS
69 3
Order No. 00-504437-22
Note A.
Property taxes for the fiscal year 2004-2005, paid.
Amount: $2,221.68
Account No.: R65022
Map No.: 051W17BC-00200
Affects:
Note 6. There are no judgments of record against Delbert Gottsacker.
Note C. There are no tax liens of record against Delbert Gottsacker.
Note D.
Note: According to the public records, there have been no deeds conveying the land
described herein within a period of 24 months prior to the date of this report, except as
follows:
None,
The last deed was recorded June 10, 1965, in Vol. 602, Page 232, Records for Marion
County, Oregon.
Grantor: Chris C. Burright and Emma Burright
Grantee: Delbert Gottsacker, a single man
Note E.
YOU WILL BE REVIEWING, APPROVING AND SIGNING IMPORTANT DOCUMENTS AT
CLOSING, LEGAL CONSEQUENCES FOLLOW FROM THE SELECTION AND USE OF
THESE DOCUMENTS, THESE CONSEQUENCES AFFECT YOUR RIGHTS AND
OBLIGATIONS, YOU MAY CONSULT AN ATTORNEY ABOUT THESE DOCUMENTS, YOU
SHOULD CONSULT AN ATTORNEY IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS ABOUT
THE TRANSACTION OR ABOUT THE DOCUMENTS. IF YOU WISH TO REVIEW
TRANSACTION DOCUMENTS THAT YOU HAVE NOT YET SEEN, PLEASE CONTACT THE
ESCROW AGENT.
70 4
Fidelity National Financial Group of Companies' Privacy Statement
July 1. 2001
We recognize and respect the privacy expectations of today's consumers and the requirements of applicable federal and state
privacy laws. We believe that making you aware of how we use your non-public personal information ("Personal Information').
and to whom it is disclosed, will form the basis for a relationship of trust between us and the public that wa serve. This Privacy
Statement provides that explanation. We reserve the right to change this Privacv Statement from time to time consistent with
applicable privacy laws.
In the couru of our business, we may collect Personal Information about you from the following sources:
, From applications or other forms we receive from you or your authorized representative;
* From your transactions with, or from the services being performed by, us, our affiliates, or others;
· From our internal web sites;
· From the public records maintained by governmental entities that we either obtain directly from those entities, or from
our affiliate~ o~ others; and
· From consumer or other reporting agencies.
Our Policies Regarding the Protection of the Confidentiality and Security of Your Peresnal Information
We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards to protect your Personal Information from unauthorized access or
intrusion. Wa limit access to the Personal Information only to those employees who need such access in connection with
providing products or services to you or for other legitimate business purposes.
Our Policies and I~acticee Regarding the Sharing of Your Per~onal Information
We may share your Personal Information with our affiliates, such as insurance companies, agents, and other real estate
settlement service providers. We also may disclose your Personal Information:
· to age, ts, brokers or representatives to provide you with services you have requested;
· to third-party contractors or service providers who provide services or perform marketing or other functions on our
behalf; and
· to others with whom we enter into joint marketing agreements for products or sorvices that we believe you may
find of interest.
In addition, we will disclose your Personal Information when you direct or give us permission, when we are required by law to
do so, or when we suspect fraudulent or criminal activities. Wa also may disclose your Personal Information when otherwise
permitted by applicable privacy laws such as, for example, when disclosure is needed to enforce our rights arising out of any
agreement, transaction or relationship with you.
One of the important responsibilities of some of our affiliated companies is to record documents in the public domain. Such
documents may contain ,/our Personal Information.
Right to Acc. ese Your Personal Information and Ability to Correct Errors or Request Changel or Deletion
Certain states afford you the right to access your Personal Information and, under certain circumstances, to find out to whom
your Personal Information has been disclosed. Aisc, certain states afford you the right to request correction, amendment or
deletion of your Personal Information. We reserve the right, where permitted by law, to charge a reasonable fee to cover the
costs incurred in responding to such requests.
All requests must be made in writing to the following address:
Privacy Compliance Officer
Fidelity National Financial, Inc.
601 Riverside Avenue
Jacksonville, FL 32204
Multiple Products or Services
if we provide you with more than one financial product or service, you may receive more than one privacy notice from us. We
apologize for any inconvenience this may cause you.
71
~ _J" ~, ._ LAUREL AVE?dE
9100
-
_ _ _ _~
9300
I
I
1
I
t
t
I
I
I
i
I
I
MAP FURNISHED AS A CONVENIENCE BY FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE COMPANY
This sketch is made solely for the purpose of assisting in locating said premises and the Company
assumes no liability for variations, if any, in dimensions and location ascertained by actual survey.
MAR~51WI7BC00200
WOODBUR N
llA
April 25, 2005
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council through City Administrator
FROM:
John C. Brown, City Administrator
SUBJECT:
Legislative Amendment 05-01; Woodburn Comprehensive Plan
Update
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council commence deliberations on Legislative
Amendment 05-01, the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan update. It is also
recommended, due to the probable duration of deliberations, that the Mayor
establish a time limit for deliberation in this meeting and continue deliberations
to May 23, 2005, and future meetings as may be necessary.
BACKGROUND:
On March 28, 2005, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the City's
draft periodic review work program and draft transportation system plan. The
Council received oral testimony from 30 individuals and organizations, and
received 34 pieces of written testimony. The Mayor closed the public hearing to
oral testimony, but allowed for submission of additional written testimony until
April 20, 2005. Based on hearing testimony, the Mayor and Councilors expressed
the need for further information regarding the draft plans. The Council agreed
to commence deliberations at its April 25, 2005 meeting but sought to use the
meeting, and potentially subsequent meetings, to review the material with staff
in greater depth. April 25th was set as a meeting date, to allow time for staff to
prepare responses to the testimony received on March 28th, and the written
testimony received by April 20th. The Mayor encouraged each Councilor with
questions or concerns to contact staff in the interim, so staff would be prepared
to discuss those matters on the 25th.
Agenda Item Review:
City Administrato~"'~
75
City Attorney
Finonce~ ,~/ff
Honorable Mayor and City Council
April 25, 2005
Page 2
DISCUSSION:
Staff analysis of the testimony provided at the March 28, 2005 hearing is
ongoing. Eighteen pieces of additional written testimony were received by the
April 20th deadline, and staff and the City's consultant are currently analyzing
this material and developing responses. Due to the volume of the written
material received, that analysis will not be completed by April 25th. Your
deliberations will not be well served by bringing staff's responses to this material
forward in a piecemeal fashion. Rather, analysis should be completed, and
presented in total, to assist you in determining what changes are necessary to
the plan updates. There are approximately 300 pages of material to review in
this regard, excluding staff responses. To provide the Council with sufficient
opportunity for review and consideration, staff proposes to provide this material
to you on or about May 9, 2005, for deliberation at your May 23, 2005 meeting.
The Mayor and Councilors raised sufficient questions at, and subsequent to, the
March 28th hearing to provide the basis for dialog at your April 25th deliberations.
Similar questions were raised by the Mayor and Council, and sought, in general,
additional information on the following subjects:
· Public Facilities Plan methodology employed to determine the public
facility costs for each of the study areas, and a recap of the analysis
results for each area, with particular emphasis on the Serres property;
· The rationale for, function of, and potential affect an properties within, the
Interchange Management Area;
· The justification for including School District property on East Lincoln Street
within the proposed urban growth boundary;
· Alternatives that provide flexibility in protecting large industrial parcels
from subdivision;
· The rationale far proposed commercial zoning on the nodh side of
Highway 211, east of Highway 99 E;
· The rationale for excluding properties north of the factory outlet mall;
· The rationale for excluding properties in Study Area 4;
· The rationale for including the nodal overlay area in the plan; and
· An analysis of why the Fessler property was included in the plan, and the
Serres property was not.
City and ODOT staffs and consultants will be available on the 25th to discuss
these matters with you. If you would like to discuss any additional topics at that
meeting, please contact me at your earliest convenience.
76
11B
April 25, 2005
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Honorable Mayor and City Counci~ ~_~/
John C. Brown, City Administrator
Labor Representative for WPA Negotiations
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council:
1. Authorize the City Administrator to execute an agreement with the firm of
Williams Zografos and Peck for labor representative services; and
2. Adopt the attached resolution approving the transfer of $5,280 from
General Fund Contingencies (001-901-5921) fo the "Management"
account (001-121-5413) in the City Administrator's budget.
BACKGROUND:
Labor negotiations between the City and the WPA, and between the City and
AFSCME represented-employees, for successor agreements to their separate
contracts that expire June 30, 2005 have commenced. The Police Chief and I
(WPA) and the City Recorder and I (AFSCME) bargained the last two contracts
for each group, respectively, without a professional labor negotiator. The WPA
was represented by its president and bargaining team; AFSCME was
represented by the union president, bargaining team, and a representative
from the AFSCME local. Pdor to 1998, both the City and the WPA used
professional labor negotiators.
DISCUSSION:
The WPA is using a professional negotiator, an attorney from the firm of
Garretson, Goldberg, Fenrich and Makler for this round of bargaining. The firm
specializes in representing police unions, and serves as ongoing legal advisor fo
the WPA. AFSCME represented employees continue to bargain with the
assistance of their Local representative.
Agenda Item Review:
City Administrator
77
City Attorney
Finance
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Apdl 25, 2005
Page 2
I have two concerns regarding the current bargaining that prompt the
recommended actions. Bargaining is taxing and time consuming. Bargaining
with both unions simultaneously will be especially difficult and time consuming,
particularly during Periodic Review and annual budget development, and as
construction commences on important City projects. Time spent bargaining two
contracts at once negatively impacts my ability to focus on these ma]or
activities, adequately coordinate with City departments, and address day to
day issues. Although my negotiating skills have served the City in past
bargaining, I also believe a trained labor law attorney better serves the City's
interests if an attorney who specializes in labor law represents the WPA. I have
discussed these concerns with you, and my intention to retain a professional
labor representative to bargain on the City's behalf with the WPA this year.
The City worked in the past with the firm of Bullard Smith Jernsted and Wilson.
The firm represented the City in negotiations and interest arbitrations prior to
2000, and provides legal support for grievance actions and other questions of
law enforcement-related labor law. It has been several years since the City
solicited bids for these services. Due to the specialized nature of the work, few
organizations provide these services, and fewer are considered experts in the
field.
Staff recently solicited bids from three firms with broad experience representing
management: the law firms of Bullard Smith Jernsted and Wilson, and Williams
Zografos and Peck, and the Local Government Personnel Institute (LGPI). Each
firm responded with a proposal that discussed labor law experience, bargaining
philosophy and approach, and rates. The Police Chief, the City Attorney and I
interviewed representatives of these firms dudng the week of Apdl 11, 2005. All
three firms appeared well able to represent the City. Based on her interview,
negotiating style, references, and ability to provide ongoing labor advice to the
Police department, however, I recommend that Kathy Peck of Williams Zografos
and Peck be retained to act as the City's labor representative in negotiations
with the WPA. These services would be obtained pursuant a fee-for-services
contract, at an hourly rate of $220 per hour. This rate is less than the .$240 per
hour quoted by Bullard Smith Jernsted and Wilson, and more than the $107 per
hour quoted by LGPI. LGPI's proposal, however, provided a labor
representative, not an attorney. It should also be noted that experience and
qualifications, rather than hourly rates, are the primary factors in evaluating
proposals for specialized services such as labor representation. There is
considerable difference between the broader range of services and legal
i'8
Honorable Mayor and City Council
April 25, 2005
Page 3
expedise that the City can utilize from Williams Zografos and Peck, and those
that can be utilized from LPGI.
With your approval of the recommended action I will continue to serve as chief
negotiator and to represent the City in negotiations with AFSCME, but will serve
only as a member of the City's negotiating team when bargaining with the
WPA. Ms Peck will serve as head negotiator in those sessions. I will be available,
on a periodic basis, to convey your Council's policy direction.
A copy of the proposed agreement for services with Williams Zografos and Peck
could not be completed prior to your April 25, 2005 meeting. With your
approval, I will execute an agreement with the firm later this week.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
It is difficult to predict the length of negotiations, particularly if they were to lead
to arbitration. Based on previous years' negotiations, it appears a reasonable
estimate of time needed to conclude an uncontested agreement is
approximately 24 hours. This results in an estimate total cost of $5,280, at Ms.
Peck's rate of $220 per hour, which will hopefully be sufficient to cover these
costs for the remainder of the 2004-05 fiscal year. Due to spending restrictions
related to the Norpac decision, monies are not available in my 2004-05 budget
to cover these costs. Thus, a contingency fund transfer of $5,280 is
recommended. $5,000 is currently budgeted for miscellaneous professional
support in the City Administrator's budget for 2005-06, and would be available if
negotiations extend beyond June 30, 2005, or if the parties cannot reach
agreement and must go to arbitration. A balance of $768,400 currently exists in
contingencies.
79
COUNCIL BILL NO.
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF OPERATING
CONTINGENCY APPROPRIATIONS DURING FISCAL YEAR 2004-05.
WHEREAS, Oregon Revised Statutes 294.450 allows for the transfer of operating
contingency appropriations within a fund to an existing appropriations category within the same fund
during the year in which appropriations are made, and
WHEREAS, a transfer of General Fund operating contingency appropriation is necessary
to provide additional Materials & Services appropriations during fiscal year 2004-05 for professional
labor negotiator services, now, therefore,
THE CITY OF WOODBURN RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That authorization is hereby given to transfer the following operating
contingency appropriation during fiscal year 2004-05:
GENERAL FUND:
Transfer From:
Operating Contingency (001.901.9971.5921)
Transfer To:
Administration -
Materials & Services (001.121.1211.5413)
Approved as to Form:~-~ ,~~
City Attorney
$ 5,280
$ 5,280
q- 2_t/2
late 00.~
APPROVED
KATHRYN FIGLEY, MAYOR
Passed by the Council
Submitted to the Mayor
Approved by the Mayor
Filed in the Office of the Recorder
ATTEST
Mary Tennant, Recorder
City of Woodbum, Oregon
Page 1 - COUNCIL BILL NO.
RESOLUTION NO.
80
OODBUgN
11C
April 21,2005
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Mayor and City Council through City Administrator
Mary Tennant, City Recorder /'--"~'~
Insurance Agent of Record - Property/Casualty Lines of Coverage
RECOMMENDATION:
Appoint Huggins Insurance Services Inc. as the City's Insurance Agent of Record
for property, liability, workers' compensation, and risk management services and
authorize the City Administrator to sign a personal services agreement with
Huggins Insurance Services, Inc. for a three-year term of July 1, 2005 through
June 30, 2008.
BACKGROUND:
The City designates an Insurance Agent of Record for the purpose of insurance
procurement and servicing of our insurance requirements for property / casualty
lines of coverage. Requests for proposals were received from four (4) insurance
firms all of which included the basic service for marketing and placement of our
insurance needs, on-going monitoring of our insurance account, and providing
various levels of risk management and loss control services to reduce our
exposure to losses.
DISCUSSION:
Insurance proposals were received from the following agents (Cost proposals
were for a 3-year term beginning July 1,2005}'
(1) Huggins Insurance Services, Inc.
(2) Gustafson Insurance Agency
(3) JBL&K Risk Services
(4) Western States Benefit Planning
$10,500 annual fee each year
$13,850 annual fee each year
$18,500 annual fee each year
Commission only (exceeds $18,500
annually)
Agenda Item Review:
City Administrata~~-~ City Attorney
81
Finance,
Mayor and City Council
April 21,2005
Page 2
Following interviews of each agency, it was the consensus of our interview panel
to retain the services of Huggins Insurance Services Inc. This firm has serviced our
account since 1994 and they have been ve~/ responsive to our needs. They
continue to keep us informed of insurance market issues, coverage updates,
and legal issues, whicl~ may have an impact on our insurance requirements.
Loss control services are provided on an as-needed basis since City County
Insurance Services (CIS) has an excellent loss control program that we utilize as
part of our coverage agreement under their liability, property and workers'
compensation insurance programs. A copy of the agreement is attached for
your review. The term of the agreement is for three years, however, either party
can elect to terminate the agreement at anytime with written notice.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The City's fee for fiscal year 2004-05 was $9,750 and, based on this proposal, the
annual fee will increase to $10,500 annually. The annual tee for 2005-06
represents just under 5% of the total property/casualty lines of coverage that the
City has Jn place for fiscal year 2004-05.
82
AGREEMENT FOR PERSONAL SERVICES
INSURANCE AGENT OF RECORD
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into between the City of Woodburn, an Oregon
municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City," and Huggins Insurance Services,
Inc., whose address is 1786 State Street, Salem, OR 97301, hereinafter referred to as
"Agent."
SCOPE OF WORK.
Agent shall provide the following services to City:
Ao
Be designated and serve as the Insurance Agent of Record of City for
property and casualty, bonds, workers' compensation, and risk
management insurance.
Consult and meet with the City Recorder, Executive Safety Committee,
and other staff for general insurance related issues as necessary. Assist
the City in identifying the City's risk exposures, develop solutions, analyze
retention, and transfer of risk.
Annually review the City's insurance program to include general and auto
liability, property, employee dishonesty, workers' compensation, and other
insurance issues related to the coverage represented.
Be an advocate for the City in marketing and retaining insurance
coverage. Develop a detailed renewal calendar, with specific timelines,
which are agreed upon between the City and the Agent.
Administer the insurance policies, including review and analysis of policy
terms and conditions. Verify insurance and issue certificates of insurance
as needed.
Fo
Develop annual schedule of coverage which lists the policy by coverage,
company, policy number, policy duties, premium, and a brief description.
Advise and prepare written reports regarding Risk Management including
updates on regulations, condition of insurance marketplace, new legal
requirements, and other insurance changes.
Provide consulting services in the area of insurance requirements in
contract/agreements that the City may enter into.
INSURANCE AGENT OF RECORD AGREEMENT 83 PAGE 1
Jo
Assist the City with administration of risk management and safety
programs, timely reporting and settlement of claims, and property /
casualty loss control.
Additional services the Agent may have available, as requested by the
city.
=
CONSIDERATION.
As consideration for services during the period of July 1, 2005 through June 30,
2008, the City agrees to pay an annual fee of $10,500.00 with the annual
payment due and payable by August 15th of each year. Any commissions
received by the Agent for placing the insurance provided by this agreement will
be used as an offset against compensation owed to Agent to the extent legally
possible.
In the event the City elects to receive additional services outside of the scope of
work outlined in the Request for Proposal dated February 11,2005, the City and
Agent will negotiate an hourly rate for such services on an "as needed" basis.
STATUS OF AGENT AS INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR.
Agent shall be an independent contractor for all purposes and shall be entitled to
no compensation other than the compensation provided for under paragraph 2 of
this Agreement.
TERM.
This Agreement shall be effective July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2008 unless
either party notifies the other of termination pursuant to Sections 11 or 12.
INDEMNITY AND INSURANCE.
Indemnity: Agent acknowledges responsibility for any and all liability
arising out of the performance of this Agreement and agrees to hold City
harmless from and indemnify and defend City for any and all liability,
settlements, loss, costs, and expenses in connection with any action, suit,
or claim resulting or allegedly resulting from Agent's acts, omissions,
activities or services in the course of performing this Agreement.
Liability Insurance: Agent shall maintain in effect a comprehensive
general liability (including professional liability) policy with an Errors and
Omissions policy with a minimum limit of $1,000,000 per occurrence. Said
policy shall include a 30-day notice of cancellation clause to City. A
certificate of insurance evidencing all insurance required by this
INSURANCE AGENT OF RECORD AGREEMENT 84 PAGE 2
Sm
Agreement shall be delivered to City prior to commencement of any
services.
METHOD AND PLACE OF GIVING NOTICE~ SUBMITTING BILLS~
MAKING PAYMENTS.
All notices, bills and payments shall be made in writing and may be given by
personal delivery or by mail. Notices, bills and payments sent by mail should be
addressed as follows:
CITY:
Mary Tennant
City Recorder
City of Woodburn
270 Montgomery St.
Woodburn, OR 97071
AGENT:
Chuck Huggins
Huggins Insurance Services, Inc.
P.O. Box 270
Salem, OR 97308
When so addressed, such notices, bills and payments shall be deemed given
upon deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid.
WORK IS PROPERTY OF CITY.
All work, including, but not limited to documents, drawings, papers, electronic
media, and photographs, performed or produced by Agent under this Agreement,
shall be the property of City.
LAW OF OREGON.
The Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Oregon. Venue
shall be in the Marion County Circuit Court. Agent, by executing this agreement,
hereby consents to the in personum jurisdiction of said court.
SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNMENTS.
A. Each party binds itself, and any partner, successor, executor,
administrator, or assign to this Agreement.
Neither City nor Agent shall assign or transfer their interest or obligation
hereunder in this Agreement without the written consent of the other.
Agent must seek and obtain City's written consent before subcontracting
any part of the work required of Agent under this Agreement. Any
INSURANCE AGENT OF RECORD AGREEMENT
85
PAGE3
10.
11.
assignment, transfer, or subcontract attempted in violation of this
subparagraph shall be void.
C. In the event Agent assigns, transfers or subcontracts any of the work
contemplated or necessitated by the terms of this Agreement to some third
party, Agent will ensure that said third party is made subject to all the terms
and conditions of this Agreement.
RECORDS.
Agent shall retain all books, documents, papers, and records that are directly
pertinent to this Agreement for at least three years after City makes final payment
on this Agreement and all other pending matters are closed.
Agent shall allow City, or any of its authorized representatives, to audit, examine,
copy, take excerpts from, or transcribe any books, documents, papers, or records
that are subject to the foregoing retention requirement.
BREACH OF AGREEMENT.
Agent shall remedy any breach of this Agreement with the shortest reasonable
time after Agent first has actual notice of the breach or City notifies Agent of the
breach, whichever is earlier. If Agent fails to remedy a breach in accordance with
this paragraph, City may terminate that part of the Agreement affected by the
breach upon written notice to Agent, may obtain substitute services in a
reasonable manner, and may recover from Agent the amount by which the price
for those substitute services exceeds the price for the same services under this
Agreement. If the breach is material and Agent fails to remedy the breach in
accordance with this paragraph, City may declare Agent in default and pursue
any remedy available for a default.
12.
13.
TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE.
City may terminate all or part of this Agreement at any time for its own
convenience by written notice to Agent. Upon termination under this paragraph,
Agent shall be entitled to compensation for all services rendered prior to actual
notice of the termination or the receipt of City's written notice of termination,
whichever is earlier, plus Agent's reasonable costs actually incurred in closing
out the Agreement.
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY.
The interest in any intellectual property, including, but not limited to copyrights
and patents of any type, arising from the performance of this Agreement shall
vest in City. Agent shall execute any assignment or other documents necessary
INSURANCE AGENT OF RECORD AGREEMENT
86
PAGE4
14.
15.
16.
17.
to affect this paragraph. Agent shall transfer to City any data or other tangible
property generated by Agent under this Agreement and necessary for the
beneficial use of intellectual property covered by this paragraph.
INCOME TAX WITHHOLDING.
Agent shall pay, if applicable, all sums withheld from employees pursuant to
ORS 316.167.
PAYMENT OF CLAIMS BY CITY.
If Agent fails, neglects, or refuses to make prompt payment of any claim for labor
or services furnished to Agent or a subcontractor, or by any person in connection
with this Agreement as the claim becomes due, City may pay the claim to the
person fumishing the labor or services and charge the amount of the payment
against funds due or to become due to Agent pursuant to this Agreement. City's
payment of a claim under this paragraph shall not relieve Agent or Agent's
surety, if any, from responsibility for those claims.
NO THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES.
Agent hereby represents that no employee of City, or any partnership or
corporation in which a City employee has an interest, will or has received any
remuneration of any description from Agent, either directly or indirectly, in
connection with the letting or performance of this Agreement, except as
specifically declared in writing.
WORKER'S COMPENSATION COMPLIANCE.
Agent, its subcontractors, if any, and all employers working under this Agreement
are subject employers under the Oregon Workers' Compensation Law and shall
comply with ORS 656.017, which requires them to provide workers'
compensation coverage for all their subject workers. Agent and their
subcontractors, if any, shall show proof of such coverage in a form satisfactory to
City prior to commencing any of the work to be done under this Agreement.
Agent, if declaring an exemption from any requirement to provide workers
compensation coverage for the labor to be performed under this Agreement,
understands and agrees that under ORS 656.006 (13), an "employer" is any
person who contracts to pay a remuneration for and secures the right to direct
and control the services of any person. Agent understands and agrees that if it is
exempt from coverage under ORS 656.027 and engages individuals who are not
exempt under same in performance of the Agreement then Agent shall provide
workers compensation insurance coverage for all such individuals. If Agent does
not provide that insurance it may be deemed a noncomplying employer for
purposes of Oregon law and agree to hold City harmless from and indemnify it
INSURANCE AGENT OF RECORD AGREEMENT 87
PAGE 5
18.
19.
20.
against any and all claims for compensation benefits made against Agent as a
noncomplying employer.
COMPLIANCE WITH STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS/RULES.
Agent shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, rules and
regulations.
HOURS OF LABOR.
Agent agrees that no person shall be employed for more than 10 hours in any
one day, or 40 hours in any one week, except in cases of necessity, emergency,
or where the public policy absolutely requires it, and in such cases, except in
cases of contracts for personal services as defined in ORS 279.051, the
employee shall be paid at least time and a half pay:
For all overtime in excess of eight hours a day or 40 hours in any one
week when the work week is five consecutive days, Monday through
Friday; or
For all overtime in excess of 10 hours a day or 40 hours in any one week
when the work week is four consecutive days, Monday through Friday;
and
For all work performed on Saturday and on any legal holiday specified in
ORS 279.334.
Agent agrees that all persons employed under this Agreement shall receive at
least time and a half pay for work performed on the legal holidays specified in a
collective bargaining Agreement or in ORS 279.334 (1)(a)(C)(ii) to (vii) and for all
time worked in excess of 10 hours a day or in excess of 40 hours in a week,
whichever is greater.
PAYMENT OF LABORERS AND MATERIALMEN~ CONTRIBUTIONS TO
INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENT FUND~ LIENS AND WITHHOLDING TAXES.
Agent shall:
Make payment promptly, as due, to all persons supplying labor or material
for the prosecution of the work under this Agreement.
Pay all contributions or amounts due the Industrial Accident Fund from
such Agent or subcontractor incurred in the performance of this
Agreement.
INSURANCE AGENT OF RECORD AGREEMENT
88
PAGE6
21.
22.
23,
24.
25.
26.
o
Not permit any lien or claim to be filed or prosecuted against the state,
county, school district, municipality, municipal corporation or subdivision
thereof, on account of any labor or material furnished.
Pay to the Department of Revenue all sums withheld from employees
pursuant to ORS 316.167.
PAYMENT FOR MEDICAL CARE.
Agent shall promptly, as due, make payment to any person, copartnership,
association or corporation, furnishing medical, surgical and hospital care or other
needed care and attention, incident to sickness or injury, to the employees of
such Agent, of all sums which Agent agrees to pay for such services and all
moneys and sums which the Agent collected or deducted from the wages of
employees pursuant to any law, contract or agreement for the purpose of
providing or paying for such service.
PAYMENT OF CLAIMS BY PUBLIC OFFICERS.
If Agent fails, neglects or refuses to make prompt payment of any claim for labor
or services furnished to Agent by any person in connection with this Agreement
as such claim becomes due, City may pay such claim to the person furnishing
the labor or services and charge the amount of the payment against funds due or
to become due to Agent.
RECYCLED PAPER REQUIRED.
To the maximum extent economically feasible, Agent shall use recycled paper in
performing under this Agreement.
FINAL AGREEMENT/BINDING EFFECT.
This document contains all of the terms and conditions of the parties' Agreement.
Any waiver or modification of the terms of this Agreement must be in writing.
INTEGRATION.
This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties and
supersedes all prior written or oral discussions or agreements regarding the
same subject.
SEVERABI LITY/SU RVIVAL.
If any of the provisions contained in this Agreement are held illegal, invalid or
unenforceable, the enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be
INSURANCE AGENT OF RECORD AGREEMENT
89
PAGE 7
27.
28.
impaired. Any provisions concerning the limitation of liability or indemnity shall
survive the termination of this Agreement for any cause.
FORCE MAJEURE.
Neither City nor Agent shall be held responsible for delay or default caused by
fire, dot, acts of God, war or similar events or occurrences where such event or
occurrence was beyond the reasonable control of City or Agent respectively.
Agent will, however, make all reasonable efforts to remove or eliminate such a
cause of delay or default and shall, upon cessation of the case, diligently pursue
performance of its obligations under this Agreement
AUTHORIZATION.
The persons executing this Agreement on behalf of the parties hereto represent
and warrant that the parties have all legal authority and authorization necessary
to enter into this Agreement, and that such persons have been duly authorized to
execute this Agreement on their behalf.
AGENT
Title:
Date: .
CITY OF WOODBURN
By:
Title: City Administrator
Date:
INSURANCE AGENT OF RECORD AGREEMENT
9O
PAGE8
WOODBURN
llD
April 20, 2005
TO:
FROM:
Mayor and City Council through City Administrator
Mary Tennant, City Recorder ~
SUBJECT: Acceptance of Bancroft Bond Applications
RECOMMENDATION:
By motion, and under the authority of ORS 223.210, Council accept the
Bancroft Bond application submitted by Bartolo's (1024 Orchard Lane) and
Sanchez's (1052 Orchard Lane) which were filed after the initial 10-day filing
period on the East Hardcastle LID.
BACKGROUND:
Under ORS 223.210 (Bancroft Bonding Act), affected property owners have 10
days after the date of the first publication of the final assessment ordinance to
file a Bancroft Bonding application thereby allowing them to pay for their share
of the assessment costs under an installment program over a 10-year period.
Applications received after the initial filing period require Council acceptance in
order to participate in the installment program.
DISCUSSION:
Bancroft bond applications were received from the following property owners of
record:
(1) Jorge, Maria, Ismael, & Isabel Bartolo
1024 Orchard Lane
(2} Rosalio Sanchez, Jose Sanchez, & Silvia Rojas
1052 Orchard Lane
Acceptance af these applications will allow the property owners to padicipate
in the installment program established under the final assessment ordinance for
this improvement project.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no financial impact on the City unless the property owner defaults on
assessment payments. If that were to occur, the City could initiate foreclosure
proceedings in order to recover the assessment balance plus interest and
related costs. Ta date, both property owners have made one or more
payments on their assessment account.
Agenda Item Review: City Administrator ~'~ City Attorney [~'4,,~ Finance~
91
APPLICATION UNDER BONDING ACT
To the Recorder of the City of Woodburn, Oregon:
In accordance with the provision of ORS 223.205 to 223.295 being the Bancroft Bonding Act of 1893
and Acts amendatory thereof and supplementary thereto, I (we), Jorge H Bartolo, Maria S. Bartolo,
Ismael C Bartolo, and Isabel L. Bartol~ hereby make application and agree to pay my proportion of
the cost off Improvement of East Hardcastle Avenue from Pacific Highway 99E to the east City
Boundary_ as the same has been determined and assessed by the Council of the City of Woodbum
by Ordinance No. 2352 and Docket of the City Liens of said City, in twenty (20) semi-annual
installments with interest thereon at the rate of 5.44% per annum on all unpaid assessments. Said
interest to be payable semi-annually, at the time each installment is paid as required by the provisions
of said Act aforesaid. And I (we) Jorge H Bartolo, Maria S. Bartolo, Ismael C. Bartolo, and Isabel L.
Bartolt~ hereby expressly waive all or any irregularity or defect jurisdictional or otherwise, in the
proceedings to improve said street or construct said infrastructure improvements and in the
apportionment and assessment of the cost thereof on the following property, to wit:
Tax Lot No. 051W08DC08100
Subdivision / Lot: Centennial Subdivision / Lot 6
Deed Reference: 15990121BS
Site Address: 1024 Orchard Lane
In witness whereof we have hereunto set our hand(s) and seal(s) this '~"~'~ day of
20 .
Done in the presence of:
(Seal)
(Seal)
('Seal)
(Seal)
92
APPLICATION UNDER BONDING ACT
To the Recoraer of the City of Woodburu, Oregon:
In accordance with the provision of ORS 223.205 to 223.295 being the Bancroft Bonding Act of 1893
and Acts amendatory thereof and supplementary thereto, I (we), Rosalio Sanchez, Jose Sanchez,
and Silvia Rojas hereby make application and agree to pay my proportion of the cost of:
Improvement of East Hardcastle Avenue from Pacific Highway 99E to the east City Boundary
as the same has been determined and assessed by the Council of the City of Woodbum by Ordinance
No. 2352 and Docket of the City Liens of said City, in twenty (20) semi-annual installments with
interest thereon at the rate of. 5.44%_ per annum on all unpaid assessments. Said interest to be
payable semi-annually, at the time each installment is paid as required by the provisions of said Act
aforesaid. And I (we) Rosalio Sanchez, Jose Sanchez, and Silva Rojas hereby expressly waive all
or any irregularity or defect jurisdictional or otherwise, in the proceedings to improve said street or
construct said infrastructure improvements and in the apportionment and assessment of the cost
thereof on the following property, to wit:
Tax Lot No.
Subdivision / Lot:
Deed Reference:
Site Address:
051W08DC07800
Centennial Subdivision / Lot 3
15650619WD
1052 Orchard Lane
In witness whereof we have hereunto set our hand(s) and seal(s) this ....
Done in the presence of:
dr/, ...dayor ~?
(Seal)
(Seal)
(Seal)
93
THIS PAGE WAS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
94
WOOD,URN
llE
April 25, 2005
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Woodburn Urban Renewal Agency
John C. Brown, City Administrator~
Reimbursement Agreement for Services, Materials and Projects
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council and Urban Renewal Agency approve,
and authorize, respectively, the City Administrator and the Chair of the Agency
to execute the attached reimbursement agreement between the City of
Woodburn and the Woodburn Urban Renewal Agency for fiscal years 2004-05
and 2005-06.
BACKGROUND:
Urban Renewal law requires tax receipts received by an urban renewal agency
must be used to retire debt. Indebtedness can be established by issuing bonds
or similar debt instruments, through loans from public or private agencies, or by
contractual arrangement.
DISCUSSION:
Total tax receipts of $605,000 have been received by the Woodburn Urban
Renewal Agency since November 2003. Approximately $344,000 is estimated to
be received in 2005-06. As indicated in the Background, these funds must be
used to retire indebtedness.
The City initiated two projects on behalf of itself and the Agency: the
Downtown Plaza and Front Street reconstruction. City funds were used in 2003-
04 and 2004-05 to complete Plaza design, to bid the project, and to initiate
construction. City funds are being used in 2004-05 to complete utility
undergrounding the Front Street project, Phase I. Approximately $325,000 in
urban renewal funding is needed to complete the plaza project in 2004-05
including funding in anticipated change orders. In 2005-06, urban renewal
Agenda Item Review:
City Administrato~ City Attorney
05
Financ ~?'7)
Honorable Mayor and City Council
April 25, 2005
Page 2
funding of $1,251,000 is needed to complete Phase I of the Front Street pro]ect,
and utility undergrounding for Phase II. The total cost of these projects is
included in the City's capital budgets for 2004-05 and 2005-06. In addition,
current year's budgeting, and anticipated budgeting for 2005-06 require the
Agency to support the cost of its annual audit, and specialized legal and
consulting services. Funding for these services has also been advanced in the
City's budgets for 2004~05 and 2005-06, in amounts not-to-exceed $15,000 and
$6,500 respectively.
Revenues necessary to reimburse the City will be provided from the balance on
hand, and from the proceeds of a private borrowing to be completed in the
near future.
The attached agreement facilitates the Agency's reimbursement of costs
advanced by the City for the fiscal years in question, and establishes the debt
necessary to satisfy urban renewal requirements. This agreement is based on a
model provided by the City's urban renewal consultant. It was reviewed and
deemed sufficient to establish the necessary debt and provide anticipated
reimbursements by the city's independent urban renewal counsel. Accordingly,
your approval of the attached agreement is respectfully recommended.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The attached agreement facilitates, consistent with the schedule provided in
Exhibit A to the Agreement, debt of the agency, and repayment to the City of a
not-to-exceed total for Fiscal Years 2004-05 and 2005-06 of $1,597,500.
AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES BETWEEN WOODBURN URBAN RENEWAL
AGENCY AND CITY OF WOODBURN
This Agreement for Services (Agreement) is entered into between the City of Woodburn
(City), an Oregon municipal corporation, and the Woodburn Urban Renewal Agency
(the Agency), the urban renewal agency of the City of Woodburn, created pursuant to
ORS 457.035 through ORS 457.460.
Recitals
Whereas, by Ordinance No. 2283 the City activated its urban renewal agency pursuant
to ORS 457.055, and designated the City Council of the City of Woodburn to exercise
the urban renewal powers pursuant to ORS 457.045 (3); and
Whereas, by Ordinance No. 2298 the City Council adopted the Woodburn Urban
Renewal Plan (Plan), Section 1100 of which states, in part:
"...the Agency may borrow money from, or lend money to a public agency in
conjunction with a joint undertaking of a project authorized by this plan."; and
Whereas, Section 600 of the Plan identifies as projects which may be undertaken
pursuant to the Plan in the urban renewal area: A) Public Improvements including
construction and repair of parks, streets, and sidewalks; and C) Plan Administration
including personnel and other administrative costs incurred in management of the
renewal plan; and
Whereas, the City and the Agency work in partnership to accomplish the provisions of
the Plan adopted by the City Council and put before the Agency for implementation, and
Whereas, the City and the Agency wish to clarify the relationship between the City and
the Agency with respect to services to be provided by the City to the Agency, and the
Agency's obligation to pay the City for those services, and
NOW THEREFORE, the City and the Agency agree as follows:
Terms of Agreement
In consideration for reimbursement for the costs of services and materials and projects
according to the terms of this Agreement, the City will provide the following services and
materials to the Agency according to the terms of this Agreement:
1. Personnel Services.
1.1
City staff to provide all staff services required to implement and
administer the Plan and any other Agency activities. Staff assigned
to perform functions in support of the Agency will continue to be
PAGE 1 - CITY/AGENCY REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT, 2004-06
97
1.2
1.3
employees of the City and will provide services to implement Plan
as directed by the Agency. The City will not charge the Agency for
these staff services pursuant to this Agreement. Nothing in this
Agreement, however, shall prevent the City from requiring
reimbursement from the Agency for these services in future written
agreements.
The City Administrator has final and exclusive authority over
decisions to hire, fire and discipline the City employees assigned to
perform functions in support of the Agency, under the City's
personnel rules and policies.
Except as specifically provided in other sections of this Agreement
or as set out in a future written agreement of the parties, charges to
the Agency for materials will be the same as any inter-departmental
City charge.
Insurance.
2.1
The City will procure and maintain property and liability insurance
covering the Agency's activities at such levels as the Agency
deems necessary and appropriate. The City will not charge the
Agency for insurance premiums pursuant to this Agreement.
Nothing in this Agreement, however, shall prevent the City from
requiring the Agency to pay for this coverage in future written
agreements.
Professional and Consu tin.q Services.
3.1
The City and the Agency will consult with one another regarding
selection of independent contractors providing professional and
consulting services, including bond counsel and the financial
advisor for debt issuance for the Agency, if any; general or
specialized urban renewal consulting, and audit services for the
Agency.
4.1
The Agency may obtain legal services from the City Attorney and/or
outside legal counsel as the Agency determines, in consultation
with the City, best meets the needs of the project or issue at hand.
The Agency shall not reimburse the City for legal services
requested of the City Attorney for the period of this Agreement.
Nothing in this Agreement, however, shall prevent the City from
requiring reimbursement from the Agency for these services in
future written agreements. The Agency shall be responsible for the
PAGE 2 - CITY/AGENCY REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT, 2004-06
98
cost of legal services provided to the Agency by outside legal
counsel.
4.2
If legal services are provided jointly to the City and the Agency, the
City and the Agency will agree on a cost allocation for such
services prior to such services being rendered.
Accountin.q Services.
5.1
The City shall provide all accounting services related to the
Agency's debt service fund and investment of funds pursuant to this
Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement, however, shall prevent the
City from requiring reimbursement from the Agency for these
services in future written agreements. The City will not charge the
Agency for these accounting services pursuant to this Agreement.
Financial Matters.
6.1
Except as specifically provided herein, the City agrees that it will
not make any charge against any Agency account without first
obtaining the approval of the Agency.
6.2
The Agency will cooperate with providing all necessary financial
information to the City for the City to include in its Comprehensive
Annual Financial Report (CAFR).
6.3
The Agency's financial records will be available for inspection by
City at all reasonable times.
Public Improvements.
7.1
The City will act as the lead agency for the purpose of constructing
projects in the urban renewal area, and will be responsible for
project design and engineering, obtaining any planning approvals
and permits, for forwarding payment of any standard fees, and for
construction management for construction projects.
7.2
Projects that will be constructed in the urban renewal area during
the term of this Agreement, consistent with those shown on Exhibit
A, are joint projects of the City and the Agency. The Agency and
the City shall share the costs of these projects according to the
reimbursement schedule in Exhibit A.
7.3
All public improvements constructed by the City and Agency during
the term of this Agreement shall be accepted, owned, and
maintained the City after construction is complete.
PAGE 3 - CITY/AGENCY REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT, 2004-06
99
Compensation. Agency shall pay to the City an amount not-to-exceed
$1,597,500 for the services and projects described in this Agreement
during the term of the Agreement. The parties have agreed to a schedule
for Agency's payment for such services and projects, which is attached
hereto and incorporated as Exhibit A. Exhibit A may be amended by
mutual agreement of the parties.
Term and Termination.
9.1
The term of this Agreement shall be effective retroactive to July 1,
2004 and shall continue through June 30, 2006, unless terminated
pursuant to this section.
9.2
Either party may terminate this Agreement at any time by giving the
other party written notice not less than ninety (90) days prior to the
proposed termination date.
DATED this ~ day of ,2005.
WOODBURN URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY
CITY OF WOODBURN, OREGON
Chair
City Administrator
PAGE 4 - CITY/AGENCY REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT, 2004-06
'100
EXHIBIT A
SCHEDULE OF SERVICES, MATERIALS, AND PROJECTS REIMBURSED
BY THE WOODURN URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY - 2004/05 and 2005106
Reimbursable
UR Consulting Services
Independent Legal Counsel
Audit Services
Downtown Plaza Project
Front Street Reconstruction Project
(Phase I)
Front Street Reconstruction Project
(Phase II)
Maximum Maximum Total
Reimbursement Reimbursement Maximum
2004/05 2005~06 Reimbursement
$5.000 $2,500 $7,500
$5,000 $2,500 $7,500
$5,000 $1,500 $6,500
$325,OO0
$611,000
$325,000
$611,000
$640,000
$640,000
TOTAL
$340,000 $1,257,500 $1,597,500
101
THIS PAGE WAS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
102
WOODBURN
13A
April 25, 2005
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Honorable Mayor and City Council through City Administrator
J?
Jim Mulder, Director of Community Development
Planning Commission's Approval of Partition 05-01 and Variance 05-
06
RECOMMENDATION:
No action is recommended. This item is placed before the City Council for
information purposes in compliance with the Woodburn Development
Ordinance. The City Council may call up this item for review if it desires.
BACKGROUND:
On April 14, 2005, the Planning Commission adopted a final order approving
Partition 05-01 and Variance 05-06 to partition an existing 0.67-acre property into
three parcels in the single-family residential (RS) zone and variance approval to
reduce the average lot depth requirement for proposed Parcel 3 from 100 feet
to 41 feet.
The subject property is addressed as 1515 (1505) West Lincoln Street. It is further
identified on Marion County Assessor Maps as Township 5 South, Range 1 West,
Section 7CB, Tax Lot 8600, Parcel 1 resulting from Partition Case File No. 03-04. No
wetlands are located on the subject site and it is located outside of the 500-year
floodplain. The property is a flag lot 0.67-acres in area. The applicant proposes
to divide the subject lot into 3 parcels. Proposed Parcel 1 is 6,000 square feet
(excluding the 24-foot wide access easement), proposed Parcel 2 is 6,000
square feet (excluding the 24-foot wide access easement) and proposed Parcel
3 is 12,002 square feet (excluding the 24-foot wide access easement). Parcels 1,
2 and 3 are flag lots to be accessed via a 24-foot wide private access
easement.
The subject property is zoned Single Family Residential (RS) and designated
Residential Less than 12 Units Per Acre on the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan
Map. The properties located to the south, east and west of the site are zoned RS
and designated Residential Less than 12 Units Per Acre on the Woodburn
Comprehensive Plan Map. A single-family dwelling is located on the property to
Agenda Item Review: City Administrat(~~--~ "' City Attorney ~/;%~ Finance~
103
Honorable Mayor and City Council
April 25, 2005
Page 2
the southeast, and single-family dwellings are currently under construction as
part of the Lincoln Estates Subdivision on the properties to the west. The parcel
to the southwest is currently vacant. The property to the north is zoned Medium
Density Residential (RM) and designated Residential Greater than 12 Units Per
Acre on the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan Map. The Twin Oaks Apartment
complex is located on the property to the north, and the property to the
northeast is the location of the Marion County Housing Authority's "Farmdale"
development. A 24-inch walnut (Juglan$ sp.) tree is located on proposed Parcel
2.
The Applicants and Property Owners are Ben and Zina Shevchenko
DISCUSSION:
None.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no financial impact associated with the recommended action.
104
Woot)su N
13B
April 25, 2005
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council through City Administrator
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Jim Mulder, Director of Community Development/,~'~
Planning Commission's Approval of Design Review 04-22, Variance
04-30, Variance 05-01 and Variance 05-07
RECOMMENDATION:
No action is recommended. This item is placed before the City Council for
information purposes in compliance with the Woodburn Development
Ordinance. The City Council may call up this item for review if it desires.
BACKGROUND:
On April 14, 2005, the Planning Commission adopted a final order approving
Design Review 04-22, Variance 04-30, Variance 05-01 and Variance 05-07 to
construct a 4,012 square foot office building at the northeast corner of Harvard
Drive and West Hayes Street, waive the requirement for a wall along the
northern and eastern site boundaries, reduce the minimum 26-foot 2-way
driveway access for a commercial use to a 20-foot one-way ingress and 16-foot
one-way egress, and reduce the required interior yard setback from 10 feet to 5
feet.
The subject property is currently vacant and can be identified specifically on
Marion County Assessor's Maps as Township 5 South, Range 2 West, Section 12C,
Tax Lot # 1203. The property is 0.38-acres in area and was created as a result
Major Partition Case File No. 94-01A (approved on June 10, 1991) allowing the
partition of an existing 12-acre site into 2 parcels and vacation of right-of-way to
facilitate development of the Wal-Mart Retail Center. No wetlands are located
on the subject site and it is located outside of the 500-year floodplain.
The subject property is zoned Commercial General (CG) and designated
Commercial on the Comprehensive Plan Map. Properties to the northwest and
west (across Harvard Drive) of the subject site are zoned CO and designated
Commercial on the Comprehensive Plan Map. Properties located to the south
(across West Hayes Street) and east and northeast are zoned Medium Density
Residential (RM) and designated Residential Greater Than 12 Units per Acre on
Agenda Item Review: City Administrator'"' City Attorney/J/'~'-~ Financ~
105
Honorable Mayor and City Council
April 2,5, 2005
Page 2
the Comprehensive Plan Map. The commercial property to the northwest is
vacant and the commercial property ta the west is developed as a Wal-Mart
Supercenter. The residential property to the south is currently developed as the
Country Meadows Retirement Village. The Barclay Square Apartments are
located on the residential property to the east and northeast.
The Applicant and Property Owner is Roger Midura, President of Kirian
Enterprises, LLC.
DISCUSSION:
None.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no financial impact associated with the recommended action.
106
MEMO DUM OPINION NO. 2005-O1
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Mayor and City Council
John C. Brown, City Administrator
Jim Mulder, Community Development Director
N. Robert Shields, City Attorney ~/iL_~
April 25, 2005
Procedural Issues in Periodic Review
BACKGROUND
The City Council is engaged in the task of finalizing the City's Periodic Review. This
involves amendments to the Woodbum Zoning Map and Woodbum Development
Ordinance (WDO), text and map amendments to the Woodbum Comprehensive Plan, and
a proposed Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) expansion.
Throughout the course of this process, I have answered many procedural questions in
different contexts. Some of these questions are often asked. I thought it would be helpful
to summarize all of this information for you in a legal opinion. This opinion is rendered in
a question and answer format.
PUBLIC HEARINGS WERE CONDUCTED AS IN MOST LAND USE MATTERS BEFORE
THE CITY COUNCIL~ YET THE PROCESS HAS BEEN REFERRED TO AS
S~LEGISLATIVE.' IS IT A LAND USE CASE? EXACTLY WHAT TYPE OF PROCEEDING
IS THIS?
The City Council is completing the state Periodic Review process and is involved
in a legislative land use proceeding. The strict notice and procedural requirements
for quasi-judicial (site specific) land use hearings do not apply to legislative
decisions such as this. However, the state statutes and administrative rules
regarding Periodic Review are applicable.
2. WHY WERE THE PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD?
The WDO requires public hearings before the Planning Commission and City
Council. Additionally, the state administrative rule requires at least one public
hearing.
City Council
John C. Brown
Jim Mulder
April 25, 2005 Page 2
WAS BALLOT MEASURE 56 NOTICE GIVEN? WHY?
Ballot Measure 56 (ORS 197.047) was passed by the voters in 1998 and requires
that individual notice be mailed and a public hearing be conducted when any
property is "rezoned." Since the current proposal involves changing the zoning
designations on a number of specific properties, Ballot Measure 56 notice was
legally required.
AT THE 1VIARCH 28, 2005 CITY COUNCIL HEARING, ORAL TESTIMONY WAS TAKEN
AND THE HEARING WAS CLOSED. THE COUNCIL THEN LEFT THE RECORD OPEN
FOR WRITTEN PUBLIC TESTIMONY UNTIL APRIL 20, 2005. CAN ADDITIONAL
PUBLIC TESTIMONY BE RECEIVED?
No additional public testimony will be received without City Council approval.
The Council met the public hearing requirements and provided a full and fair
opportunity for both oral and written testimony. The Council has the legal fight, as
it did, to close the public hearing and set a limit on the submission of written
materials from the public.
CAN THE CITY COUNCIL DISCUSS THE INVOLVED ISSUES WITH ITS STAFF, HAVE
ITS STAFF GENERATE ADDITIONAL MATERIALS, AND CONSIDER INPUT FROM
INTERESTED PUBLIC OFFICIALS (I.E., AN ODOT OFFICIAL) AFTER THE
OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC TESTIMONY IS CLOSED?
Yes. The City Council received public testimony when it conducted the public
hearing. However, the Council is acting in a legislative capacity and can consider
or have its staff generate additional materials. This could include considering input
from interested public officials invited to address the Council.
The typical proceeding before the City Council is site specific and quasi-judicial
("like a judge") and in this context, as in a court, numerous procedural rights of the
parties are applicable. In contrast, the Council here is acting like a legislature.
"Hearings" before legislative bodies do not resemble judicial proceedings. The
purpose is not to try a case, but to inform the legislative body. "Interested parties"
are often invited to appear before the legislature to make useful comments, but are
not to asserting their rights as in a trial. Even after hearing and deliberation, the
legislature is not bound by the principle of exclusiveness of the record. Legally, it
may look beyond the record and rely on the kinds of investigative and extra record
materials used by legislative committees. This may include information in its own
files and its own knowledge and expertise.
The April 20, 2005 deadline applied only to the submission of written testimony by
members of the public. It did not apply to the Council itself, to its staff, to
City Council
John C. Brown
Jim Mulder
April 25, 2005 Page 3
e
e
0
interested parties the Council invites, or to additional information that the Council
requests or solicits.
AT A FUTURE TIME, IF THE CITY COUNCIL CHOOSES, COULD THE COUNCIL HEAR
ADDITIONAL PUBLIC TESTIMONY? ALSO, COULD THE COUNCIL SET PARAMETERS
ON WHAT TESTIMONY IT WILL RECEIVE?
Yes. The City Council, at its discretion, could allow for the submission of
additional oral or written public testimony in the future. The Council could also set
parameters on the nature and scope of the future testimony, if any future testimony
is heard.
AFTER THE CITY COUNCIL COMPLETES ITS DELIBERATIONS AND CONSIDERS ALL
THE TESTIMONY, WHAT WILL HAPPEN?
Staff will prepare an ordinance for presentation to the City Council together with
the necessary supporting documents. This will be a significant effort. For instance,
in the City of North Plains, the ordinance and its supporting documents numbered
approximately 130 pages.
AFTER THE COUNCIL PASSES ITS ORDINANCE, WHAT DOES THE REMAINDER OF
THE PROCESS INVOLVE?
After the City Council acts, the Marion County Board of Commissioners must also
consider the UGB expansion proposal and conduct its own public hearing. After its
heating and deliberation, the Board then memorializes its position in an ordinance
and the proposed Periodic ReviewftJGB expansion proposal goes to the Land
Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC). LCDC is the state agency
that considers these proposals under its "acknowledgement" process. The final
LCDC decision is appealable to the Oregon Court of Appeals. The Land Use
Board of Appeals (LUBA), which usually hears City land use cases, generally has
no jurisdiction in Periodic Review matters.
MethodoloRy for Calculations - Urban Growth Boundary Expansion
City of Woodburn - Public Works Department
April 20O5
Public Works provided assistance to Community Development (Comm. Dev) in
preparation of estimated costs for infrastructure related to proposed expansion of
Urban Growth Boundary.
Comm. Dev determined 8 subareas for expansion. Public Works was provided
mapped limits for the subareas and proposed land use designation within each of
the areas.
Land use categories were as Residential, Commercial, and Industrial.
Combinations were devised by application of formulas, without describing the
location within a mapped area where any particular land use might occur.
4. Public Works was charged with estimating costs for water, storm sewer, and
sanitary sewer within the boundary of each of the 8 subareas.
The- Ph~Sibal size- (in acres); of each landuse fdt each- SUb~itea was Cali;uFat-e-d
using CAD.
Master Plan criteda for water consumption, sanitary sewer flow rates and storm
water runoff were used to determine values for each land use. Sizes of
conveyance facilities were calculated for all areas by uniformly applying derived
flow rates. Conceptual grid patterns for distribution pipes, sewer collection lines,
and storm water collection lines were devised. The conceptual patterns were
extrapolated and reduced to formulas for costs to serve on an acreage basis.
Generally, the delivery of service to each sub area was considered to occur at
one Point of Connection. This simplification did not consider market-driven
development factors that would likely produce need for a greater number of
connection points in the future, depending on the geographical extent and
location of demand.
Based on ClP cost records (maintained by Engineering staff) and System
Development Charges from Comm. Dev Planning staff, a cost per acre for each
land use type was dedved and are as follows;
Water Systems:
$5.1 K/AC
Sanitary Sewer:
$5.0K/AC
Storm Sewer:
$3.6K/AC
Residential = $9.0K/AC
Residential = $10.8K/AC
Residential = $7.8K/AC
Comm./Industrial =
Comm./Industrial =
Comm./Industrial =
8. Flow rates for these three infrastructure systems are as follows;
Water System
Residential = 1,315 gpd/AC (Avg.), 5,130 gpd/AC (Max.), 120,000 g/2hr.
Commercial/Industrial = 382 gpd/AC (Avg.), 1,490 gpdlAC (Max.), 600,000
g/2hr.
Sanitary Sewe[
Residential = 1,420 gpd/AC
Commercial/Industrial = 700 gpdlAC
Storm Sewer
All areas: 0.5 cubic feet per second (cfs) per acre This empirical value was
applied uniformly, regardless of projected land use, because little
difference was discemable between runoff factors in conditions of a
design storm.
DFsc_,~arge fr~tn suba-reas larger-than- 150 acres-were analyzed as Primary
Drainage ways, in accordance with definitions from the Storm Drainage
Master Plan (SDMP). Areas greater than 50, but less than 150 acres were
described as Secondary Drainage ways. The SDMP instructs that
conveyance systems for Primary Drainage ways accommodate runoff
from 100-year event. Secondary Drainage ways are designed for 50-year
events. The sizes of pipes were determined based upon their estimated
slope and approximate design runoff for the tributary subarea.
9. The estimates considered that planning has already been made for some major
infrastructure projects (mostly within the current Service Areas, and shown in a
five-year plan called Capital Improvement Program, or "CIP'). Calculations were
performed assuming that water, sanitary sewer, and storm drainage Capital
Improvement Projects shown in the budget for fiscal year 2004-20005 were
accomplished before any of these expansion projects were under taken.
10. Some infrastructure elements within the existing UGB would need upgrading to
serve individual expansion subareas. Some of these improvements were not
included in the CIP. VVhere additional improvements were necessary to existing
systems situated within the existing service limits, the cost of improvements was
estimated by application of historic construction cost records. These costs were
added to other cost elements related to provision of service within each subarea.
Included were water booster stations and sanitary sewer pump stations whose
locations and sizes are shown on work maps that were prepared in course of the
work.
Bert Gottsacker
8518 Parr Rd. NE
Gervais, Oreg 97026
Claimant of Measure 37 Claim
1. The Public Hearing Notice that was mailed to the people in the Affected Area was
in Error and not Correct.
I ask ORD. 999 to be applied to my property, that was in effect when I purchased my
property in 1960. Proof of Documents inclosed.
I want to follow the Measure 37 State Law.
I have some Questions for the Council Members, Who do I direct them to.
2. Is this Public Hearing a Legal Public Hearing?/
1. The people in the affected area received only a 5-Day Notice
2. My property was never posted.
3. I never saw any notices in the News Paper.
If this is not Legal, I think you should hold a new public hearing before a Decision.
3. At a Council Meeting the Council Members agreed that the Elected Officais
would make the Decisions on the Measure 37 Claims.
Did the Council change their position.
4. If No,
Then Why did your Community Development Director tell you what to do in regards
to my claim. Or was it ment to Influence the City Council.
Page 2.
I am asking the City Council before you make a Decision on my Claim to read in my
Property Diary on what your Staff did after I Filed Measure 37 Claim.
Document furnished, See pg. 4 & 5.
AFTER READING THE STAFF REPORT A COPY OF THIS PACKET WILL BE
GOING TO THE LEGISLATURE.
If anyone has any questions for me at this time or when I am at home I would be
happy to answer them for you.
I am writing this on Sunday, so I don't know what the Staff report says, so I can't
Comment on it, But if I made an error i will start over.
In dealing with our city the last 16 months We have a CLICK in City Hall running
the City. If you were to ask for an opinion from anyone it would be to the clicks
liking. This has to be stopped and I have some suggestions for the asking. How
many ordinances or resolutions are being approved so they keep their control.
Think about it. It is just like using the Emergency Clause when there is no need for
it.
BERT 503-981-5000
Page # 1.
A history of my 5,000. Sq. Ft. Building located at 514 N. Pacific Hwy Woodburn, Oregon, which
I purchased on Sept 10, 1960 and zoned under Marion County zone code as Commercial CR. Or
CG. It was never vacant more than 2 weeks between tenants when it was under marion county
zone code.
It was this way for 41 years, until June 11, 2001 when Woodburn created an enclave adjacent to
the city of Woodburn, and they then annexed us into the city, With Opposition, so they
Grandfathered us in on the zone uses.
On July 1, 2002 Woodburn Land Use Law, became a Money Making Tool For The City. When
they adopted the Woodbum Development Ordinance ( WDO ) they took away our Grandfather
Clause for the owners, who was forced into the city.
When the adopted Woodbum Development Ordinanc on July 1, 2002, they took away 24
Permitted Uses and made them Conditional Uses in the C G zone, Which Means: There must be
a Public Hearing. Property Owners within 250 ft. must be notified, The City has up to 120 days
to make a final decision, The Fee now is $1,750.00 and if the use is denied the Appliciant gets
nothing back. The Planning Commission cost on this is $ 50.00 to a Title Company for a
property report of the property owners within the 250 fi,. known as the affected area.
Two Examples of a Conditional Use;
1. Selling tires is a permitted use in the CG zone, but when you put them on the car it is a
Conditional Use.
2. Selling Auto Parts is a permitted use, but if you are going to put any of them on the car like a
light bulb, it becomes a Conditional Use.
See What The Business People Have To Deal With And Why We Don,t Have More Small
Businesses ,To Give Jobs To People.
My building has been vacant since January 1, 2004. I have 7 to 10 people a week who call me
and look at the building and the interested ones I send to the planning department, and they never
come back to me. After 3 ~A months I started to do some checking to see why these people do
not come back to me.
It is all because of the Conditional Uses, The Cost, No Refund If Denied, and, The Length Of
Time It Takes To Get A Council Derision.
I am going to keep a Diary on my building and what takes plaae with the City of W°°dburn until
my building is rented. I plan to be able to document what is important.
Page # 2.
On April 21, 2004 Shane Beggs owner of Beggs Tire Factory, Keizer, Oregon wante to rent my
building for a second fire factory business in Woodburn. He would employ 4 people. He was
accepting the building the way it was. He was pressed for time as his yellow page advertising
had to be in in two weeks.
Shane went to Woodburns Building Officzl, Steve Krieg and Krieg required 2 items, a 70'
Firewall Installed and 25% of the total cost of the firewall into ADA improvements, which Beggs
agreed to both of them. Beggs then went to the Fire Marshall and he agreed to accept the
building as it was; as long as Beggs abided by the inventory restrictions, Beggs agreed to this.
See docunment # 1.
Beggs needed to know within 2 weeks because of his 'yellow page advertising and he couldn't
wait 120 days for a conditional use approval. The Public Hearing is what requires much of the
time on conditional uses.
Beggs Business is the same as Les Schwab fire Center and Benavidez Tires, Inc. They are all
within 5 blocks of my building and all the buildings are in the CG Zone.
Beings there was two like businesses in the CG Zone he felt a presidence had been set, so Beggs
ask the Community Development Director, James Mulder to waive the public hearing on his like
business, Mulder said no he didn't have the authority. See doonnent # 2.
Shane Beggs came to me and told me he couldn't take the building because of the time involved
in a public hearing and Moulder didn't have the authority to do anything.
I told Beggs that I didn't know the Community Development Director, James Mulder, but I
would go and talk to him, I felt this was a good business and it would be giving people jobs.
I went in and gave Mulder my reasoning and ask him if he would give Begga a Waiver on the
Public Hearing and he said, and I Quote. "No there will be a public heating Did you hear what I
said, There will be a public heating, Period", end of quote. I was not impressed with
Woodburns Community Dictor. Shane Beggs did not rent my building because of this.
On May 24, 2004 I wrote to the Planning Commission Chairman and Commissioners and sent a
copy of it to the Mayor and Council Members. I told them the harm that was done when they
took the 24 permitted uses and made them conditional uses in the CG zone. When I wrote that
letter the Fee was $1,100.00, TODAY April 1, 2005 the Fee is $1,750.00 for conditional uses.
This is what costs the city $50.00 to a Title Co. I suggested that they put the 24 uses back into
the permitted uses. Nothing has ever been done as of today 4-14-05. See document # 3, letter
to commission and council.
Page#3.
On July 26, 2004 1 received a letter from the Mayor stating that the Planning Commission had
discussed my letter with the staff and there was going to be a review of the zoning regulation with
the planning commission in the near future. See document # 4, letter from Mayor.
Not heating from the City Administrator, Mr. Brown ,on the review of the zoning regulation. It
being over 30 days now I went to the planning dept. to find out when the review was going to
take place. I talked to two of the staff members and they said there wasn't going to be a review,
and if there was they didn't know anything about it.
So, I did my own review of the CG zone and the Conditional Uses. On September 14, 2004 I
sent a 12-page letter to all the Council Members and all the Planning Commission Members to
theft Residences. I felt our zoning laws were keeping bussiness and jobs out of Woodbum,
which we need and it is all because Woodburn Is Using Our Land Use Laws, As A Money
Making Tool. I told them how it could be corrected.. I never received 1- response from any of
them. See document # 5, -12 page letter on recommendations.
My building is still vacant and it is all because of Woodburns Zoning Laws and there is nothing I
can do about it. This is why MEASURE 37 PASSED.
I have lost over $16,400.00 in rent as ofthis date Sept. 1,2004. It is just not me, look at how
many other people are in the same situation and how many jobs have been kept out of Woodburn.
I had heard about Oregonians In Action and the petition to give back a persons property rights,
This is now Measure 37. I became active to get it passed, and we were successful. And I think
the rest speaks for itself.
In October of 2004 David Fontini, owner of Canby Muffler applied for a business license to be in
my building he also was denied a business license because it was a conditional use.
On November 2, 2004 at 9:30 AM I filed my Measure 37 claim against woodburn, asking for the
uses I had when I purchased the property in 1960. I didn't want any money I just wanted my
uses back.
Unbeknown to me, later that day Nov. 2, 2004 David Fontini, Canby Muffler made an application
for a conditional use permit, to be used in my building at 514 N. Pacific Hwy. 99E Woodbum,
Oregon 97071.
Page # 4.
David called me and told me he had paid $1,750.00 for a conditional use permit for my building
and I told him I had filed a measure 37 claim at 9:30 AM. But I told him that was O.K. to
continue and I would also continue on my claim in case I need it in later years.
I made it plain to him that he would have to use it the way it is, as I had heard all kinds of things
about the building Dept. A site review and ODOT. He told me he would accept it as it was.
David Fontini was also told by the city staffthat if he accepted the building the way it was and
nothing had to be done to it, The Building Dept. ODOT, or a Site Review would not be involved.
{Remember This As You Continue On }
Jason Richling, Assodate Planner for Woodbum, called me and as owner of the property I had to
sign some papers for David.
I went to city hall and made it plain to Jason that I didn't want the Building Dept., ODOT., or a
Site Review Committe to do anything with my property. He assured me they wouldn't be
involved, it was just a formality. Jason ask me if I was coming to the facilities meeting and I
told him I would if I was suppose to be there. He said, O, No, it will only take a couple of
minutes, it's just a formality.
I had to go to City Hall on another matter that same morning as the meeting, it was about 11:30
and Jason and Mulder was behind the counter and Mulder said, we just got out of a meeting and I
want you to know the planning dept. has no problems with your building for the Muffler Co.
Mulder told me this 3 times one right at, er the other and the last time he said, I just want you to
know it wasn't the planning dept. it was the building dept. I didn't know what they were talking
about. I ask them what they were talking about and Mulder said, don't you know what the
building dept. said about your building ? I said No. Mulder told jJason to make me a copy of
the report. While Jason was making me a copy, Steve Krieg came over to where Mulder and I
I want to call your attention to the fact, that this Muffler Shop was basically the same as the Tire
Co., Except the Muffler CO. would do welding.
Jason gave me a copy of Steve Krieg, building dept. report, 3 pages, 14 items, See document # 6
And document # 7 My hand written reply.
Remenber, the Tire Co. Only had to do two things, See document # 1, again.
Take note of this: The Tire Co. Was before I filed Measure 37 claim and the Muffler Co. Was
after I filed Measure 37.
Page # 5.
I glanced at the 3-pages and I didn't read them. I said to them how damn dumb do you think I
am, you are doing this because I filed a Measure 37 Claim on November 2, 2004. Krieg said, I
did not, I wouldn't think of doing somthing like that. I said you damn Liar, I am familiar with
Measure 37 and I know that Building Codes And Fire Codes are Protected.. Krieg again said I
wouldn't think of doing somthing like that.
Mulder was still standing there and I said to Krieg, then tell me this, you told Beggs that he
needed to build a 70' high fire wall and 25% of the cost for ADA improvements. Krieg denied
that he knew Beggs, that he had ever met with Beggs. He said the only man he talked to about
my building was a man with a fire truck fi.om Dallas. I said, I know the big fat guy you are
talking about. Kreig came about unglued and said, I didn't call him a big fat guy. I said, I know
you didn't, I did, I know who you are talking about and he is not Beggs. I have a letter at home
that will prove it. Mulder spoke up and said to Krieg, you didn't tell me about that. This was
proof to me right here that it was all set up between Mulder and Krieg after I filed Measure 37.
James Mulder is Steve Krieg boss.
I went right home and got Beggs letter, Document # 1. And called Mulder, he had put his phone
on the recording, so I read it to his recorder.
When I got home fi.om city hall I also had a phone message to call a woman at ODOT. It was
about an access permit for my two driveways. The lady ask me if she could put me on a phone
speaker, as there was other people there who knew more about it than she did. We discussed the
access permit for a while and then a Male voice came over the phone and said, Bert, does
Woodbum require access permits, because ODOT does not, the only thing is, if a city does, then
ODOT would back them up. I told him I didn't know, but I would be finding out after I got off
the phone to them. I ask them about Measure 37, because I know transportation comes under
that. They said they were told not to comment on Measure 37.
I went directly to city hall and my first words to Jason was, Jason does Woodburn require access
permits on Hwy 99E. Jason never answered me, he got all excited and jumped all around and
said the use that David applied for didn't require access permits and said he would call ODOT. as
I was leaving he ask me if I knew that David had withdrawn his application. I said no.
when I got home I got a call fi.om the woman at ODOT. She said she had got a call fi.om Jacon
from the city of Woodburn and he said that Fontini had withdrawn his application and she wanted
to know if that was correct. I told her that Jacon had told me that also, but I hadn't heard
anything from Fontini. She said beings that jJacon had called her everthing would stop. Here
again I know it was all done because, I filed Measure 37 claim.
Later that day Fontini called and said he had to withdraw his application because of Kriegs report.
As of this date April 15, 2005 1 have lost $ 33,400.00 bec4~___~_}~ oftbe city ofwoodbum, Mulder
and Krieg.
#1
SHANE BEGGS TIRE FACTORY
3450 RIVER ROAD
KEIZER ,OR. 97301
503-463-g473
Delbert Gottsackcr
8518 Parr Rd. N. E.
Gervais, OR. 97026-7749
April 21, 2004
Dear Mr. Gottsacker:
I am able to rent your building, and would like to if I can do'so quickly.
My yellow page ad is closing quickly and I need to have an answer from the City of Woodburn. I don't
have the time to go through the Conditional Use.
I spoke with Steve Krieg, the building official of Woodbum, he told me the building would need a 70'
firewall installed... I would agree to this.
Mr. Krieg also mentioned I would nord to put 25% of the total cost of the firewall into A D A
improvements ... I would agree to this also.
The Fire Marshhall of Woodburn told me he could live with the building as is, as long as I abided by the
inventory restrictions. 500' square fl. of tires separated by 50' or a firewall... I would agree to that.
The Fire Marshall also said I would need to have a' man' door in the back at the end of one year. He also
said I would need to make the north wall a firewall if the neighbor to the north ~er built closer than 20'
towards me. I would be willing to do that.
Best of Luck,
Th_nnk.~ for your e~orts.
SincerelY, .~_3/~/ ·
CSB/GB
_-XISTING STRUCTURES
//2
hal 2 inches (51 mm l thick are permitted on buildings of Type 5
construction. Walkways and railings located over or supported
by combustible roolg in buildings of Type 3 and 4 construction
are permitted to be of wood not less than nominal 2 inches (51
mm) thick.
3404.4 Dimensions. Stairs shall be at least 22 inches (559 mm)
wide with risers not more than, and treads not less than, g
inches (203 mm) and landings at the foot of stairs not less than
40 inches ¢ I 016 mm) wide by 36 inches (914 mm) long, located
not more than 8 inches (203 mm) below the door.
3404.5 Opening protectives. Doors and windows along the
fire escape shall be protected with V.~-hour opening protectives.
[EB] SECTION 3405
GLASS REPLACEMENT
3405.1 Conformance. The installation or replacement of glass
shall be as required for new installations.
[EB] SECTION 3406
CHANGE OF OCCUPANCY
3406.1 Conformance. No change shall be made in the u~ oroc-
cupancy of any building that would place the building in a differ-
ent division of the same group of occupancy or in a different
group of occupancies, unless such building is made to comply
wi~h ~l~e requirements of this code for such division or group of
occupancy. Subject to the approval of the building official, the
use or occupancy of existing buildings shall be permitted to be
changed and the building is allowed to be occupied tbr purposes
in other groups without conforming to all the requirements of
this code for those groups, provided the new or proposed use is
less hazardous, based on life and fire risk, than the existing use.
Unless additions or alterations are ~nade to the building or
cility, change iu use or occupancy alone shall not require com-
pliance with the provisions of Chapter II, Accessibility. In
addition, changes in occupancy resulting in multi-family
dwellings need not comply with Division Ill, Covered
Multi-family Dwellings (see Section 1 I 13. I. 1 ).
> 3406.3 Stairways. Existing stairways in an existing structure
shall noi be required to comply with the requirements of a new
stairway as outlined in Section 1009 where the existing space
and construction will not allow a reduction in pitch or slope.
[EB] SECTION 3407
HISTORIC BUILDINGS
3407.1 Historic buildings. Repairs, alterations and additions
necessary for the preservation, restoration, rehabilitation or
continued use of a building or structure may be made without
conl'ormance to all the requirements of this code when autho-
rized by the building official, provided:
I. The building or structure has been designated by official -
action o[the legally constituted authority of this jurisdic-
tion tis having special historical or architectural signifi-
cance.
2. Any unsafe conditions as described in this code are cor-
rected.
3. The restored building or structure will be no more haz-
ardous based on life safety, fire safety and sanitation than
the existing building.
4. The building official seeks the advice of the State of Ore-
gon historic preservation officer.
In case of appeals related to historic buildings, the local ap-
peals board or the appropriate state appeals board shall seek the
advice of the State of Oregon historic preservation officer.
iHistoric Preservation Officer, Oregon Parks and Recreation
Department, 725 Summer Street NE, Suite C, Salem OR
9730 I. Telephone (503) 986-067 I.
[EB] SECTION 3408
MOVED BUILDINGS
3408.1 Conformance. Buildings or structures moved into or
within the jurisdiction shall comply with ORS 455.410.
ORS 455.410 is not part of this code but is reproduced here
for the reader's convenience:
455.410 Relocated buildings, substantial compliance re-
quired; permits.
( i ) Existing buildings or structures which are removed from
their foundation and relocated to another site within this
state shall be in substantial compliance as defined in subsec-
tions (2) and (3) of this section.
(2) "Substantial compliance" means compliance with local
construction codes in effect as of the original permit date of
the building or structure, or where there was no construction,
with basic health and safety standards, as described in the
closest dated Uniform Housing Code, as published by the In-
ternational Conference of Building Officials as of the date of
construction. Only the insulation, overhead and underneath
the structure, shall be upgraded to the current insulation re-
quirements of the state building code, or to the maximum ex-
tent possible subject to the design of the structure. Nothing in
this statute shall be construed to mean that all heating, plumb-
ing and electrical systems shall be replaced with systems
meeting current standards for new construction, except that
any life-threatening deficiencies in those systems shall be re-
paired, notwithstanding that the cost of rehabilitation may ex-
ceed 50 percent of the value of the structure before
rehabilitation.
(3) All foundation and basement construction on the struc-
ture and any remodeling at the new location shall be con-
strutted subject to all applicable local current buiding and
safety codes, or where none exist, with the applicable stan-
dards as described in the Uniform Housing Code described
in subsection (2) of this section.
(4) All moved houses shall be provided with either bat-
tery-operated or hard-wired smoke detection devices located
in accordance with the provisions of the state building code.
(5) Nothing in this section is intended to permit any person to
move a structure unless the person first consults the appro-
priate building inspection authority and obtains all required
permits.
,<
#3
Bert Gottsacker
8518 PARR RD NE
Gervais, OR 97026
PH(503)981-5000
Claudio Lima May 25, 2004
woodburn Planning Commission Chairman
270 Montgomery Street
Woodburn, OR 97071
Dear Mr. Lima and Planning Commission Members:
I was a member of Woodburn first citizens advisory committe
from the time it was formed until 1980. We worked on 3- zone
code updates. All uses are suppose to have zones that they can
operate in. It is cost saving for the City as well as a person
needing a zone for their intended use-
When you updated your zone code in 2002 you put the CR zone into
the CG zone, which is the least restrictive, no problem, but you
took 24 uses out of the CG zone and made them Conditional Uses in
a CG zone, Which is very costly and time consumeing "2 ½ Months"
to get. These uses do not have their own zone anymore. If a person
went into your planning Dept and ask what zone they need for a Gas
Station, they would be told a CG zone, but it is a Conditional use
in the CG zone, which would take about 2½ months to get and the
filing fee would be over $1,100.00.
Your CG zones are on boyh sides of Hwy 99E and at one time there
was 7 gas stations on Hwy 99E I think all 24 conditional uses
should be put back in there CG zone where they belong.
I am going to inclose a copy of the 24 conditional uses, so you
can look them over to see if you think any of them would hurt Hwy.99E
as an outright use like the rest of the uses.
Because of this Conditional use in the CG zone, I know of one Business
and four jobs that Woodburn lost.
I know the Planning Commission would have to recommend this to the
City Council for their action, which will be time consuming. I
think who did this didn't realize what they were doing and it was
an error, but a very serious error in Businesses and Jobs lost, and
Woodburn sure don't need that.
The Planning Commission and City Council could take fast action on
this by instructing the Community Development Director that if any
requests for Conditional use approval come in on these 24 uses,
where PRECEDENTS have been set,(the same Businesses are already
in the CG zone,) He is to Waive the Public Hearing and Filing Fee
and approve the zone immediately.
I am sending a copy of this letter to the Mayor and Council so
they know what has taken place and it's bad effects.
Sincerely, /J
ODgURN
Incorporated t889
July 26, 2004
Irk. Delbert Gottsacker
8518 Parr Rd. NE
Gervais, OR, 97026
Dear Mr. Gottsacker:
This responds to your July 17, 2004 letter requesting information regarding the City's citizen's
advisory committee for land use matters.
The Planning Commission is designated to act as the City's citizen's advisory committee. Attached is
a copy of the City's periodic review work plan, approved by the Depax-l~ent of Land Conservation
and Development, which designates the Planning Commission in the citizen's involvement role.
The Planning Commission and the City Council are aware of your interest in the City's zoning. The
Commission discussed your letter with planning staff at their meeting of Staff advised the
Commission that a review of the zoning regulations will be conducted with the Commission and the
Council in the near future. The City Council and I received the same response concerning our
inquiry regarding your letter to us. I believe you were similarly advised by staff of the zoning
ordinance review process. The review provides both bodies an opportunity to address provisions of
the zoning ordinance for which revisions may be desirable. You'll have oppornmity at that time to
appear in person to speak about the ordinance, or to submit written comments beforehand. I have
asked the City Administrator to insure you receive adequate advance notice of these meetings.
With respect to questions you may seek to answer in the meanwhile, your separate points of view
notwithstanding, the Community Development Director is available to assist you. Any unresolved
concerns you may have after working with Mr. Mulder can be directed to the City Administrator.
Mr. Mulder can be reached at (503) 980-5246, and Mr. Brown can be reached at (503) 982-5228.
Thank you for your most recent letter. We will look forward to your participation in the zoning
ordinance update process.
Mayor ~/
Office of the Mayor
270 Monlgomer~' Street ' Woodl,urn, Oregon 9707'1
DelBert Gottsacker
8518 Parr Rd. NE
Gervais,OR 97026
PH: (503)981-5000
Page#l
Sept. 14, 04
Woodburn Mayor
Council Members
Planning Commission Members
Mailed to Home Addresses
Woodburn, Oregon 97071
Dear Mayor, Council Members and Planning Members:
Thank you for your invite to a review of Woodburns Zoning Regulation
that James Mulder, your Community Development Director said you
would have in the near future.
I waited 30 days and on Aug. 26,04 I went to the planning dept.
to see if a date had been set up for a review of Woodburns zoning
ordinance and regulations. There was 'two staff members there and
they said there wasn't going to be a review of the zoning ordinance
and regulations.
I told them that was strange, that I had received an invite from
the Mayor to be part of the review. They both said, if there is going
to be a review they didn't know anything about it. If a director
hasn't told his staff within 30 days that a review was coming up in
the near future, it was nothing more than a Stal~ and I will treat
it that way.
I started to review some of the things I felt important. I find
some things that may need changed at the State level. If I find
at the end of my revi~ that the State should be involved on the State
levil I will send a copy of this letter to the Governor and Lane
Shetterly, Director of LCDC, I'm sure they would appreciate it.
If you find me wrong on anything, please correct me.
some State Laws change% that I am not aware of.
There may be
i am sending this to all you personally at home, because I feel there
are some things that should be dicussed between the Council Mwmbers
and Planning Comm. Members. I'm sure you would be concerned about
the open meeting ~wbut I would think you could have a Council and
Plannin9 Commission gathering with no agenda.
Pg. 1.
#5
DelBert Gottsacker
Woodburn Mayor, Council and Planning Member~:
Page # 2
Sept. 14, 04
Since there may not be a review,~here is no reason to send a copy
to John Brown or Jim Mulder, unless you want them to have a copy,
you can always give them one.
I am going to give you my Recommendation and at the end, I will give
you other alternatives
# 1. Recommendation
RePeal: In it's entirety.
Woodburn Development Ordinace- WDO
Re-adopt: In it's entirety.
Woodburn Zoning Ordinance (Orinance 1807)
Woodburn Access Management (Ord. 2186)
Woodburn Subdivision (Ord. 2076)
Landscaping Policies and Standards
Re-Instate the following Chapters in Woodburn Zoning Ordinance
Solar Access Recordation, Chapter 17
Conservation and Renewal Energy Housing Chapter 20
Adult Entertainment-Chapter 38
Mandatory Parkland Dedication or Cash in Lieu of, Chapter 39
Ail Land in all zones are to revert back to the zone it had Prior
to Woodburn Development Ordinance being adopted. After re-adopted
no changes are to be made to this Woodburn Zoning Ordinance, until
LCDC Certifies that Woodburns CCI Committe meets all the requirements
of #1 of Goal 1: Citizens Involvement.
I don't believe any town should be permitted to use any other towns
plan as a comparable plan that is more than 15% difference in
population between the two towns. In the very beginning of Woodburns
Planning, the planners used Salems plan with the encouragement of
Marion County Planning Dept. Woodburns CCI committe was very seldom
in agreement with what the City planner was reccommending, which
Came from Salems plan.
DelBert Gottsacker
#5
Page # 3
Woodburn Mayor, Council and Planning Members:
Sept. 14,04
Salems Population is 144,000. Woodburns is 22,000. Salem is 7 times
larger than Woodburn. Salem can run 1- Business out of town, compared
to I for Woodburn. If Woodburn is doing everthing Salem does, it is
costing Woodburn'~-times more than it has to. John Brown, Woodburns
City Administrator said on May 19,04 that Woodburns Planning Fees
were going to increase 149.3%. Think about it,~why are they going
up that much.
Woodburns CCI committe always seemed to have disagreements on our
planning directors ideas. I think the reason for it was that Woodburns
Planner was always trying to do what Marion County wanted them to do,
because it was the same as Salems plan, and much easier for Marion
County.
I feel Woodburns Planning Commission Members knew this when they
hired Steve Goeckritz. After Steve had been here a couple of weeks
I went into meet him. He stressed that the plan we would have, ~'i~ .....
would be Woodburns Plan. He said Woodburn pays his wages and
it will be their plan. I ask him what would happen if Marion County
didn't like it. He said,.like I told you, Woodburn pays my wages
and it will be their plan. I feel Steve kept his word.
I have heard so many bad remarks about the planning now. I went into
see Jim Mueler about the Conditional uses, and through the conversation
I made the remark that it looks t~ me like you are using Salems Plan
as a comparable. He sai~, yes I'll admit it, and I have never tried'-
to hide it, in fact I am proud of it. ~ike I said earlier, comparable
plans should be 15% or less in their population between them.
I went through LCDC Goals & Guidelines and this is what I found.
Goal#1 Citizens Involvement and number 4
Technical Information states that technical information is to be
available in an understandable form. There is nothing that is more
technical than the information that is suppose to be on a Notice
Of Public Hearing. I am referring to thr Notice of Public Hearing
on File~.No: Zoning Text Amendent 01-01 and Zone Change 01-06 (This
is when WDO was Adopted.
I think they did a good job listing all the technicol information,
except one, which I will adress later, it is listed, but not in an
understandable form , so citizens can make a wise decision. A bunch
of names, letters and numbers don't tell citizens a thing, unless
it is explained to them and to do that you have to tell citizens
the good it will do and the bad it will do, in everday language.
These are the things that the Citizens should know before the public
hearing and it should be on the Notice of Public Hearing.
DelBert Gottsacker
Woodburn Mayor, Council and Planning Members:
#5
Page #4
Sept. 14, 04
e
0
Se
e
No mention was made that some uses would not have a designated
zone anymore.
No mention was made that in the CG zone, that the Conditional
uses would go from the 4 uses to 24 uses.
There was no mention that Conditional Uses require a public
hearing.
There was no mention that the city could take up to 4 months
to make a decision on conditional uses.
There was no mention that the cost $1,000.00 and up.
No mention was made that some Business would be require to have
a conditional use approval before they could operate their
busines permanently. EXAMPLE = If you sold tires, you would
have to have a conditional use approval, before you could put
them on the cars.
Nothing was said about Section 3.110 being eliminated, but a
staff member told me it was repealed when you adopted WDO.
I never saw anyplace in the public notice that if: the change in use,
r--equires more Parking, it warrants a Design Review. I Think our
City has went overboard on this. Design review are fine for new
Developments, but they have no place in existing buildings & property.
When the property was developed it met the parking requirements.
The tenant is the one that will know if there is enough parking for
their business. I don't think anyone that works for the city rha~
can tell you what a business will need. It looks to me like someone
is trying to create work. Parking is between the tenant and landlord
A tenant don't want a business location with not enough parking.
Your change in use law is forcing landlords to keep tenants in their
rental property, who normally they wouldn't keep, because of ~ou~
change in use law. I use to have all sorts of things in my rental
agreements,that I would evict Busenesses and People for. Since I
found out about your new law of 2 years ago, I have removed everything
except that they can't Manufacture Drugs. If there is health
problems or anything like that the city can take care of it.
I want to tell again~what happened ~.~ the other day on my property,
before we go to Economic Development.
My building still hasn't rented yet because of the city, that is~
I have lost $16,400.00 A man wanted to rent my building for his
wifes sewing business. He only needed ½of the building, so he ask
me if he could sublease the other ½ to a hispanic man with a wife
and 2 children. He was going to polish cars. He was going to wash
them at the carwash and polish them in my building. He went to city
hall to get his business license, and they would.give,to him.
DelBert Gottsacker
Page # 5
#5
Woodburn Mayor, Council and Planning Members:
Sept. 14, 04
Naomi Zwerdling told him · ' . it was a conditional use and he
would need a conditional use approval. She said it would take
about 3 months and $1,700.00 fee to get the approval. The man couldn't
afford the time or amount~so he told the man he couldn't take the
other ~
3- That is purty good $1,700.00 to polish cars.~.rThe man that
wanted to rent the building went to see Naomi to serif she could put
him in some othe~ catagory where he wouldn't need a public hearing.
She said no. I don't think it is just me, I think they are treating
everyone~atike. If any of you know differntly, please come forward.
Goal 9- Economic Development.
Here again I think'ithe Planning Dept. is ignoreing the Law, and I
don't see how it could have been any plainer.
Under Comprehensive Plans for Urban Areas Shall:
#3 Provide for at leaste an adequate supply of sites of SUITABLE
SITES, TYPES AND LOCATIONS of Industrial and COMMERCIAL USES. When
you made many of these~onditional uses, you took them out of use
for many people. What you charg~efor approval is a lot of money
for some people who are trying to get started in business.
The CR zone never should have been eliminated, If your intentions
was to make money, I think it stinks. You are sending Businesses
away from Woodburn, you are sending Jobs away from Woodburn, you
have Builders who won't do work in woodbur~ if it requires anything
at City Hall. If conditional uses didn't require Public Hearings
you could probably get by with it, if you returned part of their
mone~ if they got turned down. Small business can not waite up to
4 months. If all these uses are so bad, how many has been turned
down in the last two years. This will tell you if you can make some
changes. If you have had a lot, don't change anything. If you
haven't had many, then eliminate them as Conditional Uses.
Woodburn Development Ordinance has numerous conditional uses which
were never conditional uses before, There has to be a reason, WHY?
Citizens are entitled to know all the reasons that make these
uses conditional. The applicant should have the opportunity to
eliminate the uses that makes the other uses conditional. If they
eliminated those uses from the others it could eliminate the need
for a public hearing.
Pg. 5
#5
DelBert Gottsacker
Page # 6
Woodburn Mayor, Council and Planning Members:
Sept. 14,04
Planning and Zoning is a city affair, all citizens are suppose to
benifit from it and it's costs should come out of the taxes the city
collects. This is for everthing that is existing.
The costs of new developments should be in the fees they charge them.
They can get financeing on these costs along with ~he~est
I could not see why it could take up to 4 months and now $1,700.00
on a conditional use, So I ordered a Property Report on one of my
commercial properties, from the title co. It cost me $50.00 and I
had the report in seven days. Since Mueler said it was not to make
money, Then the price can be reduced,'.instead of raisin~~ it to $1,700.
I think we should be thinking about Measure 37, if it passes. This
is the law where the city becomes liable if their planning lowers
someones property value.
Property value is determined by it's use and location. You took
uses away from property when you made the uses conditional. There
is only one way you can give that value back to the property, and
that is if you give back to them the uses they had before you
approved Woodburn Development Ordinance. That is why I said/Repeal
Woodburn Development Ordinance.
I have some suggestions if you are not interested in repealing
Woodburn Development Ord. but you are concerned about new businesses
in woodburn, employment for the people and their families and putting
food on their tables.
Repeal the section of Woodburn Development Ord. that deals with
existing property that is already developed.
You are spending planning money on what was done when it was built.
If there isn't enough parking now, thats between the landlord and
tenant. If there isn't enough parking the tenant will move. If
there is going to be a fire hazard or a accident hazard, the insurance
company will take care of that. When you get involved in these"
things you are wasteing the tax payers money, because the insurance
company is doing the same as you, because their premiums are based
on hazards. This is why the planning dept. costs are going up,
they are involveing themselves in area they don't belong. They are
spending money they won't recover.
There is no reason why existing developed property should have to
go before a design board. This was all done when the property was
developed. If it was right the~ it is right now. Accept It.
Pg.6
DelBert Gottsacker Page # 7
Woodburn Mayor, Council and Planning Members:
Sept. 14, 04
Council members and Planning Commission members time is all donated
and I don't believe they should have to set through public hearing~
when it could all be done through the Mail or by personal contact
of the applicant much faster and at a less cost. I am speacking in
regards to Commercial and Industrial Uses. The suggestion I am
going to be making is fOr Commercial and Industrial uses only. CG Zone
Suggestion ~ 1.
Leave everthing the way it is now, but put Section 3.110 back into
force, the way it was before WDO was adopted.
This is Section 3.110
Conditional uses are not nonconforming uses. Any use which is ~
permitted as a conditional use asprovidedin this ordinance shall
be deemed a nonconforming use, but shall, without further action,
be deemed a conforming use~qualified with such conditiond as the
plannin~ commission has required. Which should be listed in the
zone book, so people know what they are when they come into the office.
The following suggestions are ~ ~- for all the property on Hwy 99E
and 500 ft deep. On the West side from Belle Passie road North to
Woodburn Industrical Park zoneing. On the East Side From Belle
Passie road North to MacLaren School for youths.
The 20 conditional uses that they added to the conditional uses in
the CG Zone, when they adopted WDO in2002. All these uses would
be renamed to a name that didn't require a public hearing, but
would require people within the 250 ft affected area to be notified.
( a name could maybe be: QUESTIONAL USES.)
At this point the Applicant would have choices, and would be
charged accordingly, when presenting the application.
I mentioned before that I ordered a property report from the title
co. on a commercial property of mine on Hwy 99E in Woodburn. I
received the report in less than 7~days, which included a weekend,
and the cost was $50.00 which included a map of my property, maps
of all the properties in the 250 ft. affected area. There was
12 property owners, which they sent me 12 adressed stickers for
those property owners, for envelopes. A signed letter to certify
that these are the ownerships in the 250 ft affected area.
The Title Co. does most of the work and their fee is only $50.00
Pg.7
DelBert Gottsacker
Woodburn Mayor, Council and Planning Members:
Page # 8
Sept. 14, 04
#5
There has to be 3 types of forms made up.
Ail the applicants have to fill out this form, and it would state
what the fee would be, and payable when turning in the form.
This form would tell which choice ~they have made.
This form would ask the following questions. This is the Cities Form
B.
C.
D.
Ee
Name of Applicant( Owner of Business)
Address of Location.
Owner of the property.
Type of Delivery.
By Mail .... Or--- By Personal delivery
Zone and Use( listed under new name)
Explanation of the business and what it would be doing.
Many blank lines would be neededf~or~:~i$.
This would be filled out by the Applicant and the next form
would be filled out from this information and by a city staff.
G. This is the fee that is being charged this Applicant $
This form is going to be Mailed to the owners within the 250 ft.
affected area. It is the form below.
This form is to be filled out, typed and mailed by the Planning Dept.
They have 7 days to fill this form out, and be ready to make copies
when the property report comes in and they know how many copies
they need, and get them in the Mail. All they would need to do is.
Make copies, put them in envelopes, put the address stickers on
them and put them in the Mail. This all should be able to be dons
on the day the report comes in.
This is the form to be Mailed Out
A. Name of Applicant and Business
B. Location of Business
C. Type of Business, to be well described,.leave plenty of lines
Sign under your opinion
IN FAVOR ~PPOSED NO OPINION
Signature
Comments
DelBert Gottsacker
Page # 9
#5
Sept. 14, 04
Woodburn Mayor, Council and Planning Members:
This is still with the last form.
Must be returned within 7 days. Those not returned or returned
no opinion will be considered in Favor.
The cost of preperation of this form and the mailing costs would
would have to be part of the fee charged on the first form.
This is the other choice.
This form is a petition type to be taken around by the Applicant
or their Attorney, and to be returned within 7 days or less,
which would be very possible.
ae
Name of Applicant
Location of Business
Type of Business and everthing it would be doing.
IN FAVOR QPPOSED NO OPIN~QN
Signature
This is a nice way to go, it gives the property owner a chance
to meet the people and ask questions.
This would be filled out by planning staff and the cost of thi~
would have to be on the first form. The cost of this one would
be less than the first because of no postage and the applicant
does most of the work.
Decision is by the property owners, based on the majority of the
property owners in the affected area. If there is a tie, the tie
is broken by the Community Development Director. The Director is
to render a decision within 3 working days, after all the forms are
returned or the time is up. Extra time is given so he can call in
the applicants if he wants more information.
If after the decision of th~ director, and it has been denied, the
applicant can a~l~e~lit to the Council.
Pa. 9
DelBert Gottsacker
Page # 10
#5
Woodburn Mayor, Council and Planning Members:
Sept. 14,04
The Applicant can appeal it to the Council, and the decision
would be based on the facts presented to the council by the applicant
or their Attorney, and the decision would be final.
If the applicant wanted to a~eal it, it is to be heard at the next
Council meeting, if at all possible.
There would be an additional charge for an appeal and it would have
to be paid when the Appeal form is signed.
You will notice that I have tried to speed everthing up to help the
applicant and I think it would help the cities reputation.
There would be no reason for an appeal to the Planning Commission
because the Director has already denied it, and the Planning Commission
usually base their decision on the ~recommendation of the Planning
department.
I know you can charge more than cost, but you must be good ~com~Qn
sence when the fees are set. Don't go by some other towns fees,
charge what you think they should be, then in the event of a deniel
return all of the monies, except the actual cost. If the city would
do this they would have many more people taking a chance, but the~y
it is now, people just think you are out for the buck, and I think
they are right. Believe me, people do not trust our Town anymore.
If other towns can do it~so can we, if we use good common sence when
we set things up.
You would need~advise from!the Cit¥~Attorney on all of this. I think
the main thing would be i~ can it be done this way and would it be
legal. If not,what changes would have to be made to make it legal.
I hope woodburn hasn't hurt other people in the CG zone like they
have hurt me. Their conditional uses has cost me so far $16,400.00.
The way their zoning is now, I don't think I will be able to rent
my building, and there is nothing I can do about it until they
make some changes in their CG zone.
If your Community Development Director is to busy to get this
resolved, I HOPE-he finds time before he schedules a Public Hearing
on extending the Growth Boundry and the Transportation Plan.
I think you people and the City Attorney could resolve this real
fast yourselves. I have did all I can do for you, now it is up
to you, and if you don't want to do anything about it, there is
nothing I can do.
Pg. 10
DelBert Gottsacker
Page # 11
Woodburn Mayor, Council and Planning Members:
Sept. 14, 04
If you have any questions on my suggestion, please give me a call
or come and see me. My phone and address is on the first page.
You can see by what I have suggested, that it would not take
much of the Directors or Senior planners time. If you would
like to figure out what the city would have into it, figure
the Directors time at $39.38 per hour and figure the Senior planners
time between $23.79 an Hour and $28.23 an hour. Add $50.00 for
the Title Co. and add the Stamps. Most of the time will be spent
by thw applicant. I think it will surprise you the little amount
that will be spent.
I plan on getting a Reference Judges opinion on how I can recover
from the City of Woodburn and their Community DeveLopment Director
the amount of money I will have lost be cause of them. I would
hope they have good insurance.
Sincerely,
Delbert Gottsacker
Pg 11
514 N. Pacific HWyo
Fontini Muffler
December 29, 2004
#6
OSSC = State of Oregon Structural Specialty Code, 2004 edition
OMSC = State of Oregon Mechanical Specialty Code, 2004 edition
OFC = State of Oregon Fire Code, 2004 edition
Existing Building
Previously used as a carpet sales and warehouse- M occupancy
Assume the existing building is V-B Construction unless infommtion is provided to
show o~S~.
It appears two buildings aro locatod on the same Property.
property linm m~l ~my other tmitdit~ on this sue rout sA g floor
each building.
Need tm accurate floor plan showing the proposed uses of the various areas of the
buildings.
Muffler Shop
S-I Occupancy (maybe an F-1 or H occupancy depending on the materials stored and in
uso) -
description of ~ operations proposed for tkis building indmFmg me mmomas m m~
stored and i~ usmL
Occupancy Separations (SeclJo~ 302.2 and 302.3-2, OSSC)
S-1 (F-l) and B occupancy (office) requires a 3-hour fire-rated separation ortho minor
accessory usc (office) cannot exceed 10% of the floor area of the building
Not enough information provided to verify compliance.
Building Construction
Must be construe-cd in a~ordanco with the OSSC and the OFC. (Section 406.6.1, OSSC
and Section 2211, OUFC)
Not enough information provided to verify compliance. Assumed V-B constru~on for
this analysis.
Allowable area (Table 503, OSSC)
S-l, V-B = 9,000 square feet basic allowable
F-l, V-B = 8,500 sq-me feet basic allowable
Actual bufldlng area = 3,600 square feet (maybe more due to accuracy of the site plan)
Second building area = 960 square feet (maybe more due to accuracy of the site plan)
Exte~orWnllRequiremen~S=l and F-l(Tab~602, OSSC)
Written By Steve Krieg
Woodburn Building Inspector
514 lq. Pacific Hwy.
Fontini Muffler
Decembe~ 29, 2004
Page 2 of 3
//6
< 5' to property tine = 2-hour fire-resistive construction
>=- 5' < 10' to properly line = 1-hour-fire resistive c, onstm~on
prope~y line for exterior wall, opening prowc~n, aha paral~ co~ruc~n
requir~m~nt~
Opening Protection (Seetion 7~ ~d ~ 7~.~ 0~
U~rot~t~ ~d ~t~ o~in~ m~ ~mply ~ ~fi~ 7~.g ~ T~ 7~.g,
oss~
~in~ 10' or m~ ~m ~e ~ ~o ~o ~ow~ to ~ ~mt~ ~ ~ limit
to ~e amo~t of ~ia~. ~ 7~.8, Frog g ~O
Not e~ ~ ~~ ~
........ ~ ..... ~ ~ ~ a ~ sme
requirement~
Parapets (Section 704.11, OSSC)
Parapets must b~ constructed if required by Section 704.1 l, OSSC.
Parapets are not required on exterior walls 10' or more from the properly linc. (Section
704.11, Exception 1, OSSC) .
buHdin~ to se~ if one b~g with an assumea proper~ Hne or v~o wum~.. ~o same
prop~y li~e for exterior ~
Interior Ceiling and Wall Finbh (Table 803.5, 06SC)
S-1 = Class B in exit access corridors and Class C in rooms or aroa~
F-1 = Class C
Not enough information pro~ied to ~ complianee.
Sprinkler System (Seetion 903.2.8.1, OSSC)
Required in S-I if over 12,000 scpmre fe~ in 1-story buildings.
Required in S-1 if over 10,000 square feet in 2-story buildings.
Required in F-! if over 12,000 square feet in 1-sotry buildings.
Assume the building is compliant without a spri~lder system.
Disabled Access (Chapter 11, OSSC)
Must comply with Chapter 11, OSSC.
Not enough informalion prowled to verify complianc~
Written By Steve Krieg
Woodburn Building Inspector
SK I~Wo~q'm-applicali°ns~t~~airC-sarag~ 514 N Pacific
514 hi. Pacific Hwy.
Fontini M~fffler
December 29, 2004
pro-application
Page 3 of 3
#6
Ventilation
A repair garage must be ventilated in acco~ with OMSC. (Section 406.6.3, OSSC)
A continuous supply of outdoor air at the rate of 1.5 cfm per squar~ foot is required.
(Section 403.3, Footnote e, OMSC) . .
Supply air is not required to be continuous ff a carbon monoxide deteeUon system is
inst_aUed that is tied into the mechanical system- (Section 404.1, OMSC) .
The outdoor air cannot be recirculated within the space, it must be exhmmted to exterior.
(Section 4032.1, #3, OMSC)
Positive pressure is required in adjacent and accessory use areas (office). (Section 404_3,
OMSC)
Not enough infarmati~n provided to verify complianc&
Fire Flow with V-B eonstrnetion (Appendix Chapter B nnd C, OFC)
0 - 3,600 square feet = 1,500 gpm fire flow.
3,601 - 4,800 square feet = 1,750 gpm fire flow.
1,750 gpm fire flow = 1 fire hydrant required within 250 feet from any portion of the
builtling.
4,801 - 6,200 square feet = 2,000 gpm fire flow.
2,000 gpm fire flow - 2 hydrants with one hydrant within 225 feet from any portion of
the build_lng.
Not e~o,gk information pro~q4ed to verify compliance,
Written By Steve Krieg
Woodburn Building InsPector
SK H~W~-applicafionsq~epair C~uage 514 lq Pacific Hwy
#7
#7
oO T1_~
/
#7
MARION COUNTY, OREGON
'n
Buiid g Department
Bldg. Permit No .......................... 8~9~ __ Date.._~_~n_e___a-_~-I .... ~ ~:~ ..........
To e~ect an office building ...........................
At .......... .72!:__~ ?__~_~?-~__}?r~-: ......................................
Delbert Gottsa_~:er
Owner
B~l~er ............................................................................................
County City
...... k:~rdn~ .............................................
W. K. GRABER
BUILDING ADMINISTRATOR
364-4401 - Ex 55
RECORD OF INSPECTIONS
//7
Plbg. Ground Work .....................................................................
Rough Plumbing ............................................................................
Heating ..........................................................................................
Lafh Insp .......................................................................................
Septic Tank & Drain Field ............................... ~ .............................
F,nai .................. ~--~ ......... /- ..................... '~ .....................
This pemdt must be conspicuollsly posted on the prmises un-
til completion°
No right is gronted or implied to violate
deed or lot
#?
[1 II ~ II1'11 II III II
#?
tt7
#7
][ I[[I [ I [
//7
//'7
#7
City of Woowbum
Woodburn, Oregon
Dec. 8, 2004
7-A
Occupants of 514 N. Pacific Hwy. Building since it was built.
1945 to 1949
Burrights Automotive Repair.
Cars, Tracks, and Semi-Tracks
1950 to 1963
Buttecreek Pickle Co.
Pickles & Relishes, Wholesale & Retail
Rolancis Food Products
Pickles,Relishes, Sauerkraut, Manufacturing & Distmbifion, Wholesale & Retail.
Portland Canning Co.
Pickles, Sauerkraut, Relishes,Manufacturing and Receiving Cherries, Cane Berries and
Strawberries, Wholesale & Retail
Woodbum Emerpfises, Inc;
Pickles, Cucumbers 100 Tons. Sauerkraut, Cabbage 80 Tons, Manufacture, Pack,ageing &
Distribution, Wholesale & Retail and Bulk Sales
1964 to 1979
Blem Co.
Manufacturing of Prehung Doors & Windows
Builders, Lumber Yards, Wholesale & Retail
1979 to 1981
Dans Window Co.
Sales & Distribution
Dares GlassCo
Cars and Misc..
Installation, Retail & Wholesale
1981 to end of 2002
Carpet Warehouse
Carpels, Retail, Wholesale and Installation
Furniture, Retail
Page# 1.
2003 to 2004- 1yr.
Lees Tile and Carpet== Did same as carpet warehouse
//7
To become part of page with the occupancy and use of the 514 building, from the time it was
built until now, Jan. 1, 2005.
Chris Burright and Gene Marks, partners, used 2 home made wood stoves, made out of 50 gallon
metal barrels to heat the building.
All the pickle & kraut co.s used an oil fired steam boiler in the warehouse and working area and
an oil furnace in the office and packing area. There was portable electric and kerosene heaters
for work areas that had no heat and was moved around in the winter months. When the delivery
tracks were filled with merchandise, they were parked inside the building at nights. There was
room for two trucks.
Blem Co heating was the oil furnace in the office, a wood stove in the work and warehouse area
with heat lamps over the saws and work area, and if it was extreamely cold, also portable heaters.
All the extra construction to the building was done by Blem Co. In 1964 & 1965 under the
direction of the Marion County Building Dept.. I tried to get copies of plans & permits and they
do not have anything older that 1970. Blems used a propane and they built on a lean-to on the
back of the building to store any hazardous material they may have and also to keep their lift
truck in at nights. Occasionally during the winter months, ifthefg flat bed truck was loaded,
they would park it in the front part of the building. They were very good for keeping their saw
dust swept up and stored outside in the back yard.. Not:e above ( Propane l±ft t:ruck )
Carpet warehouse was a 22 year tenant, they were very particular about smoking in the storage
area. My insurance rates were higher for carpet warehouse than it was for Blem Co. The
insurance Co. Said carpets are more hazardous than sawdust. Doug used a propane lift track,
which was very convenient with the service station and propane next door, and he also parked his
lift track in the back room at nights, along with any other supplies that may be hazardous. When
the service station closed, doug got a different lift truck with batteries.
Doug used the oil furnace in the display area, until it gave out, which was about 3 years befor he
moved, but the furnace was 40 to 50 years old. We replaced it with a new gas furnace. In the
warehouse area he first had a wood stove and then he went to a pellet stove, which he
occasionally left on through the night, if it was real cold.
Doug had no need for heat lamps, but he did use the electric heaters, and he also parked his
delivery track inside the building whenever he had carpets in it.
Measure 37 Claim
Form
City of Woodbum
Community Development Department
270 Montgomery Stree_t :_W _o~bu.m~kO~r..e~o.n,.,9,7071
Phone: 503:982-5246. tax:
AND CONTACT INFOFLM_a. TION OF CL~!MANT/PROPERTY OWNER:
ame of Claimant:
Mai#rig Address:
NAME AND CONTACT INFORMATION OF PERSON SUBMrnlNG CLAIM (AGENT):
Address:
City:. ~State: ~P:
Must attach a mitten nota~zed statement signed by the owner(s) or a Power of Attorney giving authority to
PROPERTY F __1;~_O~___ WHICH C~ ~_~M DERIVES:
ro~wn~hip. Range. Section And ~¢s Tax ~fot ~. ~ - ~
Sitelcmhge:' ' '" ' .... /
I ATI1EST THAT I HAVE RLLED OUT THIS FORM COMPLETELY AND THIS CLAIM IS TRUE AND CORRECT. (S/gnalures of a//
pcrtl~/ / _// .~ 2~_/Rreparinl~ ~_/ _ form InCluding those claiming ownership in the properly over ~,~h this claim is being made.)
Signature Date
Print Name
I I
Signature Date
Print Name
/ I
Signature Date
Print Name
Woodburn Mayor and Council Members
270 Montgomery Street
Woodburn, OR 97071
Woodbum Mayor and City Council:
I am filing a claim pursuant to Measure 37.
My property is 500, 510 and 514 N Pacific Hwy.
Woodburn, Oregon 97071
FR Lots 5,6,7,8 and lot 9 BLK 1 Wynn's add. Woodburn, Oregon.
I purchased my property September 10, 1960 in Marion County. And on November 13, 1970
they adopted the Marion County, Uniform Zone Code. I was zoned Commercial Retail, CR~. ~n
I rented my building under there regulations. None of my buildings was ever vacant more than
30 days between renters.
My property was in an enclave, adjacent to the city of woodburn. The Woodbum City Council
annexed us into the city June 11, 2001, with opposition. The Mayor and City Council all agreed
to Grandfather all the commercial properties into the cities Commercial General Zone, CG.
On July 1, 2002 the city council enacted the Woodbum Development Ordinance and has
enforced it every since. Thisis the zoning that has done damage to my property.
On January 1, 2004 my 4200 sq. fi.building became vacant nd it is still vacant, this December 2,
2004. I have had many, many people who wanted to rent it~ I sent them all to the planning
dept. and all the uses were Conditional Uses in the Woodburn Development Ordinance. For a
conditional use application approval it costs $1,400.00 and then it increased to$1,725.00 and up
to 120 days to get an approval or denial and no money refunded if denied. There was no one
who would try to get a conditional use under these conditions. They all felt that you were taking
advantage of them.
Many of the potential renters wanted to know why the building hadn't rented. I gave them all
the same answer, because of the zoning and after them going to the planning department, they
allcame back and agreed with me.
An Investment Broker, Commercial Service Division, Pmdental Real Estate, wanted to research
my zoning and get comparable property sales and he would tell me what I should list it for, I said
O.K...
He gave me the figure of $ 235,000.00 and he wanted to list it. I told him I wouldn't think of it
until after the election.
On October 28, 2004 a Mr. And Mrs. Kim called me to see my building on Hwy. 99E. After
they looked at it they told me they didn't want to rent it they wanted to buy it. They offered me
$400,000.00 Cash, If Measured 37 Passed. When Measure 37 passed, that established the value
of my building, Without the zoning that did me the damage. When Mr. Crosby gave me the
Value of $ 235,000.00 with the zoning that is doing the damage. This gives me the value I need
for my claim.
Value Without The Damaging zoning.
$ 400,000.00
Value With The Damaging Zoning ............................. $ 235,000.00
Claim Amount .......
$165,000,00
In lieu of payment I will accept waivers of any and all regulatory restrictions that prevents me
from using my property as I could have when I purchased it in 1960.
Time is of the essence, my building has been vacant one year, and without relief, it will continue
to be vacant and devalued.
Measure 37 Claimant.
Deibert Gottsacker
8518 Parr Rd. NE
Gervais, Oregon 97025
Phone:503-981-5000
December
~mtme:2, 2004
Claimant~
Enclosures:
copy of warranty deed
copy of title insuranec
certified list property owners, 250 feet radius
If you need any additional information please call; 503-981-5000
January 6,2005
WOODBURN
Incorporated 1889
Via Regular Mail
Deibert Gottsacker
8518 Parr Road NE
Gervais, OR 97026
Re: Case File No. M37 04-01' Measure 37 claim for property located at 500, 510, and
514 No,'th Pacific Highway
Dear Mr. Gottsacker:
The Woodbum City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2378 to authorize processing of
Measure 37 claims. Section 2 of this ordinance provides:
Section 2. Accrual of Claims. Except in cases where the enactment of a
new land use regulation by the City is shown by Claimant to restdct the use
of private real property and have the effect of reducing the fair market value
of the property, no enforcement of a land use regulation under Measure 37
shall be deemed to have occurred and no claim under Measure 37 shall
have accrued until the City is provided necessary information under the
Ordinance to evaluate and decide the Measure 37 claim presented by
Claimant on a rational basis.
Please provide as soon as possible the following items and information so that your claim
can be evaluated by the City:
1. A title report issued by a title company no more than 30 days prior to submittal of
ti~e ciaim must be submitted. This is necessary to identify any persons with a
recorded interest in the property and to determine chain of title.
2. The specific land use regulation that allegedly restricts the use of your property and
causes a reduction in fair market value of your property must be provided.
3. A specific remedy to the claim must be specified. You ask for either a waiver of the
City's regulations or compensation, but you do not specify what regulation should be
modified or removed and you have not supported any compensation claim with an
appraisal by an appraiser licensed by the State of Oregon. If you seek
compensation, the amount of the claim must be supported by an appraisal by an
Community Development Department
270 l¥1ontgomerv Street ° W'oodburn, Oregon 9707'1
Ph. 503-q$2-~2~6 " Fax
appraiser licensed by the State of Oregon establishing the reduction in the fair
market value of the property as of the date of the claim.
4. Copies of any leases or CC&R's that impose restrictions on the property or may
affect its valuation must be provided.
5. The particular use that is proposed for the property must be specified and proof that
the requested use was allowed when the property was acquired must be submitted.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at (503) 982-5246.
Sincerely,
J~l;/Mulder
C,0~mmunity Development Director
cc:
John Brown, City Administrator
Bob Shields, City Attorney
James Mulder
Community Development Director
City Of Woodburn
279 Montgomery Street
Woodbum, Oregon 97071
January 10,2005
Dear Mr. Mulder:
Thank you for your letter of January 6, 2005. Everthing you have asked for, I have given to you
between the date I filed the claim and now, with the exception of the age of the Title Policy,
which would not show the contract purchase now. I paid the property off June 7, 1965, look at
the date on the Deed.
I am going to answer the numbers in your letter.
#1. Title Policy dated September 15, 1960
Woodburn Development Ordinance-July 1, 2002.
A Conditional Uses.
B. Change in occupancy in existing buildings.
C. No percentage of a refund of deposit if conditional use is denied.
#3.
A. On my letter to John Brown on 12/13/04, which I thought was part of my claim folder when
it went to him. I stated on Page 2 -(2, Zone code used when I purchased the property,
Woodbum ORD. 999, I did Fail to put down Commercial-3- Which
a my property was. I felt this was my remedy, if it wasn't, then it is now.
B. I agreed to: in lieu of payment I will accept waivers of any and all regulatory restrictions
that prevents me from using my property as I could have, when I purchased it in 1960.
C. On #2 1 specified what regulation restricted my use, and I assumed that you would
understand that Woodburn Development Ordinance. Would have to he removed. I want to
stress again, this is the Regulation that needs to be Modified or Removed, #3 of your letter of
1/6/05.
I don't feel there is a need for an appraisal at this time, unless the city wants to go to court at this
time. I will order the appraisal aRer I file for a jury trial. It will then he up to date for the Jury
on it' s value. As you know I didn't ask for compensation, I agreed to a waiver.
~4 I do not lease my properties, I rent them month to month.
#5 There is not one particular use that I have proposed for. I would like all the uses I would
have had when I purchased the property. It is my intention to follow the new law Measure 37.
The four uses that was turned down or refused occupancy permits for my building were.
Tile Factory Store, # 82-C-2.
Car and Track Detailing, #4-C-3
Sales and Installation of Mufflers #34-&55 -C3
Auto Parts and Installation # 4-C-3
These are all listed in ORD. 999 -C-3
I can't believe the city would not have the zone book ORD 999 with the C-I, C-2, & C-3, but if
they don't I will get them the pages.
I feel you are going to be concerned about the old Title Policy and ifI am trustworthy and you
can trust my word.
There are three of the council members that I have known over 15 or 20 years, ask them or I can
give you names of some of the old city employees that you can ask..
Sincerely,
Delbert Gottsacker
8518 Parr Rd NE
Gervais, OR 97071
Phone 503-981-5000
Mayor Figley and Council Members
City Administrator, John Brown
City Attorney, Bob Shields
James Mulder January 24, 2005
Community Development Director
270 Montgomery Sa'eet Re: Measure 37 Claim, Case File No.M 37 0401
Woodbum, Oregon 97071
Find enclosed all the items and information you requested in your letter of January 6,2005.
1. A preliminary title report from Fidelity National Title Co. Of Oregon, on property at 500-
510-514 N. Pacific Highway, Woodburn, Or 97071. Effective December 30, 2004
Policy No. :00-504437-22 Dated January 20, 2005.
2. Special land use regulations that restricts the use of my property
Woodburn Development Ordinance, July 1, 2002
A. Conditional Uses.
B. Change in Occupancy
C. Design Review.
3. A specific remedy to the claim must be specified.
A. A waiver of the cities land use regulations and allow me to use the property for the uses
permitted at the time I purchased the property, which would be Ordinance 999 -(2-3, which also
includes C-2 and C-1.
B. There will be no appraisal, I am not asking for compensation. I thought I made it plain on
my letter that was attached to the City form. It is on page 2, just above my signature, which
states: In lieu of payment I will accept waivers of any and all regulary restrictions that prevents
me from using my prolnaxy as I could have when I purchased it on contract in 1960.
4. Copies of any leases or CC&R's that impose restrictions.
A. There are no leases on the property and one Restriction on the title report
5. Particular use that is proposed for the property must be specified and proof that the
A Use and page number of Ordinance 999
1. Sales and installation ofmuffl~RD. ,99'?-(page) ord. 25= # 4 & # 55
2. Tire store w/installation "ORD. ,999---(page) ord-22==4/85
3. Car & truck detailing--ord.20 #11, ord.22 070, ord. 23//4
4. Auto parts and installation--ord.22 #11
5. Antque shop--ord.20 # 8
6. Vehicle towing---: ord. 22 #70
7. Pawn shop--ord. 21 # 65
8. Ambulance servl'C~--ord. 23 # 2
9. Upholstery shop--ord.25 # 51
10. Veterinary clinic--old 25 # 52
11. And all other uses in Ordinance 999, C-3, C-2, C- 1.
B. Proof of uses allowed, when property was acquired.
1. Copy of Ordinace 999, pages 17 through 25, C-l, C-2, & C-3.
Sincerely,
Delbert Gottsaeker, claimant
Enclosures:
preliminary title report
copy of ordinance 999 pages 17 throu~ 25.
C3 B~JSI!~SS DISTRICT
Section 12.01.
(a) USE. Within-any C3 Business District no bn~lding,~structure,
or premises shall be' used, or ~r~ged or designed to be used, ~rected,
structurally .~.l~.ered, or enl.~ged, except for one or more of the following
1/sos:
1. /my use permitted'in ~m "R" d~strict, ~n a C1 ~eighborhood
Business District, ~md in a C2 district, ex~:~-!%~nE ch~ches
~n¢l public or ~-~ochin.1. sohools, hosPJ+--~d'% ~ ~ s0~.tori~ns;
2. f~bulance service;
3. Auction house or market, provided no livestock is h~mdled.
Lutomobile service st~.tions, sales ~ea, smd repair shops;
5. Automobile trailer camp;
6. A~uug, tent, automobile top, or seat cover shop;
7. Beer and liquor wholesole ¢~stributing, soft drird~s, and
other beverages;
8. Blacksmith shop, when totally enclosed;
9. Bookbinding;
moo
12.
Bottlers;
Building cleaning establishment;
Building materials; retell lumber yard;
13. B,~ilding wrecking;
17.
18.
C ~rpont er;
Cabinet shop if conducted wholly writhin a building;
C~rniv~/k, store, ge or winter quipsters, except livestock;
Ch-~in manufacturers and distributors;
Crew, cry, bu~ter~king emd milk processing;
19. Cold storage w~ehouse;
20.
21.
22.
Cream. torium;
Exterminating service;
Foanu ~.ncbJ_nery, s~.les and ser%~ce;
23.
Feed ~d seed store;
Fish processing pln~t ~d crab pots;
w~.~ =~nnessinm for cold storage only.
25.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
3~.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
~o.
~3.
~5.
~7.
~9.
50.
51.
52.
53.
5~.
55.
Fuel dealers, wood, sawdus%, amd oil;
Gasoline and oil distributors;
Greenhouse, display or s~.lcs ~rea outside'of b~,5.1ding;
Ice cre~a, v~olosslo ~"nufactur~'g;
Junk shop, v~en e~ll merchondiso is kept inside of ~o b%,~lding;
Kennel;
Laboratory, seed and soil testing;
Laundry;
Lumber y~d, ret.~l;
~ ~.chine shop;
Meat, whole~~l° dealer;
M~I k plont;
Monument~l works, ~sales ~nd display arose outside of building;
Motor freight depots ~nd truck parks;
Plumbing shop;
Poultry dealer, who~lesa!_~e;~ .. -
?~staur&nt equipment and supplics;
~wmill equipment;
Seed ~m~ feed store, w~holes~le ~nd reran!;
Seed testing L~boratory;
Stere fi~ure sales;
Storage w~roho~use;
Tobacco processor or
Trade school;
Tr~ 1 er c~mp or c~bins;
Truck repair shop or depot, truck rent.mis;
Upholstering shop;
Veterinary hospital, dog and cat kennel incident thereto;
W~rehouse;
Weatherstripping ~ insulooting;
Welding shop.
Section 12.02. HEIGHT. No ~1 ding or st~acture here~ftcr erected
Dr e~arged in a C3 Business District sh~]l exceed six stories or seventy
.feet ir. height.
Section 12.03. FRONT YfdtD% ~1~cre ~d_l the fronte, ge in the block is
~ocated in a C3 Business District, unless herein otherwise specified, no
?rent .v~d sh~11 be required, except that dwellings' sh-~ll set back the s-~me
~st~.nce ~.s is required in (~_u Ri district; provided, however, w~aen by any
:ther section of this ordin-~nce, Or by n~y other ordin~nce, ~"o set back or
?r0nt yo~rd is required, or ~. set back line or front yard of greater depth
is reeuired, than specified in t.his section, then such greater set back
_ine ~r front yard depth shell apply.
Section 12.0~. SIDE YfdiD. No side yard s~11 be required in a C3
t~strict, but if one is provided it shsd! be at le~.st five feet wide; pro-
~ided, however, where thc side of a lot in n- 03 district ~.buts upon the side
of n. lot in any "R" district, then there shall be a side y~.rd the same as
~ required in such ~_butting "R" district.
Section 12.05. RFJd~ YfdiD. In :% C3 district no re-~r yard is required,
:ut if one is provided it sho. ll be nob less tbm~ five feet in depth exclusive
:f ~uny ~lley area and sh..~ll be cont~_ned by a ~-~ll, fence, or com~%ct ever-
~een hedge not less th~ six feet in height, provided that dwellings
~avc ~ rear yard ~.s required in an R2 district.
Section 12.06, LOT_ ~'J~i. B~,~ldgngs hereafter erected or ~.ltered
used vA%olly or partly for dw211ing purposes iD_ a C3 Business District
C2 ~USINESS DISTRICT
Section ll.O1. USE. (a) Within any C2 Business District no
.dlding, structure, or premisss sh~]l'be used~ arr?~ged~ or designed to
used~ erected, st~act,_~a~y alta-red, or china'ged, ~_~oop%, for one or more
the following uses:
1, lmy use permitted in any residential district, or in a C1
Neighborhood Business District, except public or parochirl
schools, hospitals, or sanatori,-ms;
2. ;~bstracting, title insurance, and trust office;
3. Advertising agency, including b~]] distributing;
4. Advertising sign, structure, or billboard;
kircr~t de~/ler 0~d distributor~
l~nuse~nt enterprise, including a b'}ll-}~n_rd he/l, pool
c~droom, bowling alle~ being or wrestling arena, ice arena~
s!~ting rink, dancehall, shooting g~3_lery, and the~tr% when
the same are conducted .wholly ~.~thin a completely closed ~]ding;
7. Aquarium and aquarium supply store;
8. ;~t, cunio~ or ~_ntique shop;
9. i~pliance store for household goods;
10.
12.
13.
15.
16.
17.
Auditorium;
Automob~e, tr~.~or, an6 truc~ soies, ~parts, a6JJ~orYJs~ ~ ....
repair service, pro~rided th~-£ such area is paved with a concrete
or asphaltic h~-rd surface and that any repe~r of au~omobiles,
trollers, or trucks shall be conducted and confined wholly
within a ~lding;
Automobile rental service p~ovided that the some is conducted
wholly inside of a b,,~!ding or on a paved lot;
Automobile storage, provided that such storage area is p~.ved
with a concrete or aspho~tic ho~d surface or is carried on
within an enclosed ~,~ing;
~kery;
Bar or tavern;
~r fixture and supply company;
Bicycle sales and repair shop, provided that ~11
repairs ?.re made within an enclosed budlding;
18. BS11 bo-~ds;
19. Boat salesroom, Provided tk%t tho same is witb/n enclosed
building.
3e
?~
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
86. -
8?°
t. 22
Reo~l esto. te office;
Res~nrar~s, d_~j ~r~-~n ~ng
Seconded ~ore;
~g ~c~e so~es ~ so, ce;
Sh~e~g ~d Cutle~ sedco;
Sh~ re~ ~hop;
Si~ p~t~g shop, pro~d~ the ~e is ~o~y
c~pl~ely en~osed ~,~ 1 ~ng;
Spo~g go~s store;
81. T~or shop;
82. T~de~ shop;
Tele~a~ office;
~cket agency;
85. ~re s~ce, pro~d~ re~~ so, ce is cond~t~ ~o~y
~t~ a b~ld~ng;
T~ls ~ ~_c~uo~, for ~e or rento& b~ess;
To~i~ co~;
89. ~ade or co~rci~ sch~l, ~ not objectionable or ~j~ous
due to noise, ~or, ~bro. tion, or
U~olster~g shop,
91. V~iety store;
92. Ve~L~ n~c~e o. gency;
93. ~g~tc~g;
Weig~ ~c~e;
(b) ~en f~ ~p~oved ~der tho ~sions of Section 19.el,
et seq. the fo~o~g ~esses ~11 ~ tr~ted ~s ~ss~e
v~i~tio~;
1. ~or c~;
2. V~or~o~ hospit~
-~8. Insurp~ce office;
~9. Interior decorating store;
50. Jewelry stora;
51o Locksmith or fix-it shop;
Magazd_ne distributing agency;
53. l, hsseur, bath or be. thing house;
%.
55.
56.
57.
He~t;
~numental retail sales office, .provi-~ng that no stone
cutting or polishing is done on tho premises.
~otorcycle s~JLos and service, pro~ded that ~1~ red, irs are
made ~ithin an enclosed bu~l ding;
~sic conservr~tory for music inst_~action;
58. ~.~usi~l instrument shop;
59. M~;W~l~-:~r publishing;
60. Newsst~md;
6.1.. Of fine oq, d-l~-u-'nt, sp.].~,s, and sea,rice;
62. Optical supply house;
63.
~,.
Park or playground;
Pp_rking lot, ~-ovided the s~ne is ~.ved with o. concrete or
asph.~ltic hp~d surfaco oz- wh~].]y ~mel_o.qcM wSth~n -~- b,~i]_ding;
65.
66.
67.
Pawnshop;
Pet shop;
Photography~md portrait studio;
68. Pony riding ring, but no stable;
publishing establis,hment;
70.
Public gp~rage, including repairing and ~ainting, if ell opera-
tions are conducted entirely witlain a completely enclosed
b-~]ding. ~.~ere a public g~rage is located on ~. lot ~b. ich does
not abut upon ~ alley and is within fifty feet of o. lot in any
residential district, the garage wall, which parollols the
nearest line of such district., shnl 1 have no openings other
th,~n stationary ~_ndows;
Public services, telephone exch2nge, radio broadcasting
station, etc.;
21. Bus depot for ~.ssengor sor~co;
22. C~er~ supply ~d service shop;
23. C~~, c~cus, ~ ~e~ ~te~rise of a s~m~l~ t~,
tr~siont ~ cho~a~er;
C~te~ng est~b~s~ent;
Cig~ store;
27. Cold storage lockers;
28. Co~ection, cr~t re~g, ~d ~dj~tm~t ~g~;
29. Contractor's office, pro~d~ that no c,n~ruction eq~i~ent
be ~ored there~;
30. De~m~t ~ore;
~ve-~ se~ce b~ess, where se~ce is re~er~ to ~rsons
~ automobiles, such s~s refres~aent sta~s, resta~s, food
stores, ~ s~ se~ces;
32. ~go~s store;
33. ~plo~nt ngency;
~ess compo~uy, office,~nd depot;
35. Fish m~ket l~t~ to ret~-~ tr,.de, ~o~ded thct no render~
or process~g is c~ied on ~n the pre~ses;
36. Flor~ shop, ~ee~o~e, ~ n~so~;
37. Fort~e te~g;
~er~ h~;
39. F~t~e store l~t~ to r~) trade;
~ or leat~r Eo~s store;
G~t shop~
~ co, se;
G~th shop;
H~o sto~ ~d to r~t~l
He~ing ~ds, s~es, ~d sor~cos;
Ice ~e~ ~ct~g plo~t whore produ~s ~o sold on
limited'.
C1 ~I~BO~OOD BUSINESS DISTRICT
Section 10.Oto (a) USE. T'.~ithin ~y C1 Ncl~:.,....AoOd Business
st~:,,~o, or pre,raises sh~ll'be ',:.~ed~ or o~ranged, or
District no ~]ding, ........
j.~±~od to be used, ~.ect~i, structurally ~ltered, o~ enlarged, except for
o:~.e or more of the folio~,,ing uses, ~and then only subject to' the conditions
~d restrictions continued in pomagraph (b) of this section, to-wit:
!. 7a~y use p~rmitted in ~a Pg Residonti0-1 District;
~'my residential use which is permitted on the lot or premises
~mmediately abutting the lot or pre,..~ise in a C1 Neighborhood
Business District vixen development conforms to the .~pplicable
abutting residential district;
3. Automobile serx~ce station; see Service St~tion;
Bakery, reteil;
Bsznk; fin~a~ce and lo,au; s~ety deposit vaults;
6. B~rbcr shoo or beauty po~lor;
Book or station~ry stero;
Clothes cleaning agency or ~uressing establishment~ but no
clothes sb~ll be clc~ued in this district;
9. Confectioner~y or cmnd. y store;
10. Delicatessen store~
11. Drug store;
12. Drygoods, notions, or variety store;
.!3,, Florist;
Grocery, fruit, or vegetable store;
La~u~dry ~gency; self service lootmdry;
16.
17.
Heat ~.rket, provided no lard is rcndered~
(Medi~ or den~.al.) clinic, fo~' p~-a~.t~ .*don, ;rs of ~ of the
heo~ing arts;
18.
19.
20.
Office, business or professional;
Radio, television, phonograph, e~d record stores ~ re_~ir
shops;
Restaurant, tearoom, ce~e, or-coffee shop, where no d~mucing
or entertainment is pormitted~ ex~ept~.ng drive-in resta, ur-ants
w~ich are not permitted in thms distrmct;
21.
Service ste. tion, providea ~na.t aa:~- ~uoc aha ~re
~%nd store, ge of merch~ndise e. nd sup?lies ~re conducted wholly
within ~ b~l ding, a~nd that nny lubr±cation or wa. shlng not
conducted w~-thin a building be screened from any adjoining
residenti~fk district by the erection of a masor.~Y wnll,
orrm_ment~, fence, or co~_.pe.c.t evergreen hedge not less than
two feet or more than six feet in height;
22. Shoe rep~/r shop;
T~uilor, d~essm~ker;
Other uses s~.dlo~ to those above enumerated ~n¢l not
n~r, ed and i~u¢iuded c.s allowed uses in any less restricted
(b) RESTRICTIONS, COi.~qDITIO:'~S. The above listed_.storos, shops, or
businesses shall be r~_tc.i], est~::~.!-"_s[~:ents se].l_f_=_~, n-?? ~rch~nd_5. sc
sh,~l cont~ain no livir~g ?:.?.~..ters, ~.u¢. she.]] be. por~.:.t'ted col? ~under the
~g conditions:
1. Such stores, sheens, or businesses sha_11 bc coo. ducted wholly
within an enclosed building.
products produced or goods, wares, mu.i ~.~_orcha~dise handled
sh~ll bo sold ~:~ rotc. il on the pro~se£;
The gross fleer area of the first fioo?' ,-f ~a~.y store, shop,
or business b~~ilding shod_l not ~xcoed 2,509 s~um'o feet.
Such use~, operations, or products shall not be objectionable
on account of odor, dust, smoke, noise, vibre, tion, ~or other
simil~_r co. use.
dccessoryuses customarily incident to ~n.v of'the above uses
may be permitted ~en located on the sa~e lot, including a
storage gate.ge for the exclusive use of the o~ers-of the
stores ~r businesses.
Public automobile pe~kingarea for the exclusive use of the
p~£rons or clients of the stores, shops, or businesses in the
neighborhood business district or any business district shall
be permitted when located and developed as provided and
by Section 22.10 hereof.
Section 10o02. HEIGHT. No b,~Slding or structure shall be
erected or enl~rged in ~ C1 Neighborhood Bu~ness District to exceed one
story or 20 feet in height.
Section 10.03. RE~ YYJtD. In a C1 district there shall be a rear
y~rd on every lot, which rear y~rd sh~l bm. ye ~ minimum depth of twenty-
four feet. Accessory buildings may be loc~t~i in the re~-~ y~.rd, prowided
such ~,~ldings occu?y not more than twenty-five per ce~t of the re-~r yard
area and come not ne~rer than five feet to--~uy lot line. The rear yard
sh~ll bo enclosed with an orn~mental fence, w~31~, or compact evergreen
not less t;~ four foot nor more than six feet in height.
Section lO.O~. SIDE YY.~JXS. ~here the side ~f a lot in a c1
,,~u~,~h~o~: ~,~siuess District abuts upon the side of ~y residential