Loading...
Ord 2224 - Annex 98-02, Comp Pla COUNCIL BILL NO. 1919 ORDINANCE NO. 2224 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING ANNEXATION 98-02; COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT 98-01; ZONE MAP AMENDMENT 98-03; FINDING OF CONFORMANCE 92-01 AND 92-02; SITE PLAN REVIEW 98-05; SIGN VARIANCES 98-04,98-05, AND 98-06; FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A FACTORY OUTLET CENTER; A'ITACHING CERTAIN CONDffiONS THERETO; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map have established certain land uses within the City of Woodburn' s Urban Growth Boundary; and WHEREAS, the Woodburn City Council has reviewed the record in Annexation Case 98-02, Comprehensive Plan Map 98-01, Zone Map Amendment 98-03, Finding of Conformance 92-01 and 92-02, Site Plan Review 98-05, and Variances 98-04, 98-05 and 98-06 and considered all public testimony previously presented; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF WOODBURN ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The land use applications before the City Council are as follows: A. A request for annexation to the City of Woodburn of .38 acres (a part of Tax Lot 300) within the Woodburn Urban Growth Boundary. B. A Comprehensive Plan Amendment from "High Density Residential" to "Commercial" on .38 acres (a part of Tax Lot 300). C. A Zoning Map Amendment in conformance with the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan Map designation of "Commercial" from "IO" to "CR" on Tax Lots 702 and 800 (consisting of 4.4 acres and .18 acres) and from "UTF" to "CR" on a part of Tax Lot 300 (consisting of .38 acres). D. A request for approval of a modified Site Plan Review for a factory outlet center containing 243,245 square feet on Tax Lots 200, a part of Tax Lots 300,702 and 800 (consisting of a total of31. 78 acres). E. A determination that Conditions of Approval III (B)(I) - (3) of Ordinance No. 2097 are satisfied. Page 1 - Council Bill No. 1919 Ordinance No. 2224 ..._.._-~.~- ~._-,.~"._-_.~-~.._~..._.._^." " F. Variances to the size and height of signs under the Woodburn Zoning Ordinance. Section 2. The applicant is Craig Realty Group - Woodburn, LLC and the property owners are Craig Realty Group - Woodburn, LLC and Terry T. Hepner. Section 3. That the property subject to annexation is the .38 acre portion of Tax Lot 300 as described in Attachment "A." Section 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions contained in Attachment "B," the subject property described in Section 3 is annexed to the City of Woodburn. Section 5. That the Zoning Map Amendment in conformance with the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan Map designation of "Commercial" on 4.58 acres from "IO" to "CR" on Tax Lots 702 and 800 is approved based upon the findings and conclusions contained in Attachment "B". Section 6. That the Comprehensive Plan Map amendment from "High Density Residential" to "Commercial" and a Zoning Map Amendment from "UTF" to "CR" in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan Map designation on the .38 acre portion of Tax Lot 300 is approved based upon the findings and conclusions contained in Attachment "B." Section 7. That Conditions of Approval III (B) (1) - (3) of the land use decision made when the City Council adopted Ordinance 2097 on November 27, 1992 are hereby satisfied. Based upon the findings and conclusions contained in Attachment "B." Section 8. That a modification to the approved site plan on Tax Lot 200, a part of Tax Lots 300, 702 and 800 to allow a 243,245 square foot factory outlet center is approved based upon the findings and conclusions contained in Attachment "B." Section 9. That Sign Variance 98-04 is granted to permit a 300 square foot, free-standing sign based upon the findings and conclusions contained in Attachment "B." Section 10. That Sign Variance 98-05 is granted to permit a maximum sign height of 45 feet based upon the findings and conclusions contained in Attachment "B." Section 11. That Sign Variance 98-06 is granted to allow one wall sign for each business facing 1-5 with an area of 1.5 square feet per foot of frontage on a street or parking lot where one square foot of frontage is allowed based upon the findings and conclusions contained in Attachment "B." Section 12. That the land use approvals herein are subject to the Conditions of Approval contained in Attachment "B" that the City Council finds reasonable. Page 2 - Council Bill No. 1919 Ordinance No. 2224 -- '-_._.,~._------_.~~---- Section 13. This ordinance being necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety, an emergency is declared to exist and this ordinance shall take effect immediately upon passage by the Coun~il ~d~val by the Mayor. Approved as to form:ryJ~~ cg-IV'- 9 g City Attorney Date Passed by the Council Submitted to the Mayor Approved by the Mayor Filed in the Office of the Recorder ATTEST: ~---,-;:____ ~:J Mary e t, City Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon APPROVED: . ,-''; ~..-<:./~.d NANCY A. August 10, 1998 August 10, 1998 August 10, 1998 August 10, 1998 i / Page 3 - Council Bill No. 1919 Ordinance No. 2224 "W"'-"""- .'^w........__...._.__.."................... ,"';-X"'='T ."u~-"U-,qOU '-0'0 ~.UOl05 f-ZZ5 i I t! 1- i;iil~l. Ilillllai I w... ~........ ...... II ~...~g51 /7 ~ ~W-l_ _ ~ /..,;; /~ / 'i.\~ " ~~ -- 'j ~i ~ ~- fIi ^'" ~~ Q:;(j - I~ t~ IJ ............ ,! ...~ -. ~~ ti I -2 !] I~ . I I i I i I I: .. I I , , o Ii o ........!i~ ,... i 2pd l! ~m if! t ~ , , \w i ! ~ ::! ~ ~''L--''::'" - ~ -- '" .", ' 9 ..Ill". . ~, r ~:!I. ~ Eli -- '\1\ ........l j I hi e5t ~ · -, 4' . " . ~~ ~~.;' --'V" I ~ ~~/ . { ; . ATTACHME T ~ Page..J.- f ~ z o i=- < z C!J - (I) ~ o ! ~ N PACIFIC ATTACHMENT A Page ~ of 62 840S S.w. Nimbus AYeaue ecavCTUln. OR 97008-1120 '------' LEGAL DESCRIPTION A 20 FOOT WIDE STRIP OF LAND, SAID STRIP BEING DESCRIBED AS A 20' ROAD ON SURVEY NUMBER 8479 OF THE MARION COUNTY SURVEY RECORDS, SAID STRJP BEING A PORTION OF THAT TRACT DESCRIBED IN VOLUME 546, ON PAGE 264 OF THE MARION COUNTY DEED RECORDS LOCATED IN THE WILUAM DURST OONATION LAND CLAIM NUMBER 60 IN THE NORTHWEST ONE QUARTER OF SECTION 12. TOWNSHIP S SOUTH, RANGE 2 WEST IN THE WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN IN THE CITY OF WOODBURN, MARION COUNTY, OREGON, SAID STRIP BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A 3/4" IRON PIPE, SAID PIPE HAVING BEEN SET IN SURVEY NUMBER 7218 OF THE MARlON COUNTY SURVEY RECORDS, SAID PIPE BEING ON THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF ARNEY ROAD AND ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THAT TRACT DESCRIBED IN VOLUME 340, PAGE 306 OF THE MARION COUNTY DEEP RECORDS; THENCE SOUTH 09.23'29" WEST, ALONG THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF ARNEY ROAD, A DISTANCE OF 20.23 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89020'53" ----' WEST, PARALLEL WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF THAT TRACT DESCRIBED IN VOLUME 340, ON PAGE 306. OF THE MARION COUNTY DEED RECORDS A DIST ~CE OF 832.05 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THAT TRACT DESCru&ED IN VOLUME S46, ON PAGE 264 OF Tfi-E MMION COUNTY OEED RECORDS; THENCE NORTH 00.32'59" EAST. A DISTANCE OF 20.00 FEET TO AN ANGLE IRON. SAID MONUMENT HAVING BEEN SET IN SURVEY NUMBER 7218 OF THE MARION COUNTY SURVEY RECORDS AT AN ANGLE POINT ON THE SOtrrH BOUNDARY OF THAT TRACT DESCRIBED IN VOLUME 340. ON PAGE 306; THENCE SOUTH 89020'53" EAST. ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF mAT TRACT DESCRIBED IN VOLUME 340, ON PAGE 264 OF TIm MARION COUNTY DEED RECORDS, A DISTANCE OF 835.16 FEET. CONTAINING 0.38 ACRES MORE OR LESS. ReCIl8TI!AID PROFESSIONAL L.ANP SURVEY(jR ./ wlli~~lf'F=IER RENflWAL: 1Z/"'1/~7 (503) 626-0455 Pu (503) 526-0775 Planning. Engineering. Surveying. Landscape Arc;;hiteCluro. Environmental Service, $ .~....+... n.."'_'_""'_""'_'__"'_' .__...__.__ ,,,......__.__._ -..-< ATTACHMENT 8 page...1-. of 5.3 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF WOODBURN In the Matter of a Request to Approve an Annexation consisting of .38 acres within the Woodburn Urban Growth Boundary, to Approve a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment from "High Density Residential" to "Commercial" on .38 acres, to Approve a Zoning Map Amendment in Conformance with the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan Map Designation of "Commercial" from "10" to OCR" on 4.58 acres and from "UTF" to OCR" on .38 acres, to Approve a Site Plan Review for a Factory Outlet Center containing 243,245 square feet on 31.78 acres, to determine that conditions of I1I(B)(I)- (3) of Ordinance No. 2090 are satisfied and to Approve Three (3) Sign Variances. I. APPLICATION INFORMATION. A. Descriotion of Al'olication. This application includes six (6) requests: ) FINDINGS OF FACT AND ) CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ) ) CITY OF WOODBURN FILE NOS. ) ANNEXATION 98-02, ) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP ) AMENDMENT 98-01, ZONE MAP ) AMENDMENT 98-03, FINDING OF ) CONFORMANCE 92-01 AND 92-02, ) SITE PLAN REVIEW 98-05 AND ) VARIANCES 98-04, 98-05 AND 98-06 ) ) ) ) ) (1) A wning map amendment in conformance with the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan map designation of "Commercial" on 4.58 acres from "ID" to OCR" on tax lots 702 and 800; (2) A request for annexation to the city of .38 acres of tax lot 300; (3) A Comprehensive Plan map amendment from "High Density Residential" to "Commercial" and a wning map amendment from "UTF" to "CR" in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan map designation on .38 acres of tax lot 300; (4) A modification to the approved site plan on tax lots 200, a part of 300, 702 and 800 to allow a 243,245 square feet factory outlet center; and PDXIA-137106.1 2708()..(K)()1 ._~ ..-- ,..~~-_.~_..' ,~_. '.or-.~'-'"'-~"'-'- .-_.."-'-~-'---"-'"- ATTACHMENT 13 Page~ of :5 '3 (5) A determination that certain conditions of approval in the 1992 decision have been or can be satisfied so that the City can determine that the 1992 comprehensive plan and zoning map amendments are effective. (6) Variances to size and height of signs. B. DescriDtion of Annlication. This application requests eight (8) approvals from the City of Woodburn in order to develop a modified factory outlet center called the "Woodburn Company Stores." This proposed 243,245 square feet factory outlet center is a retail development on a site approved in 1992 for a 250,000 retail outlet center. This application requests approval on four (4) tax lots: Tax Lot 200, a part of Tax Lot 300, 702 and 800. The purpose of this application is two-fold: 1. To allow a revised design that is more attractive and is more in keeping with recent factory outlet center development than the 1992 approval, although the 1992 approval, with certain modifications, can still be built. 2. To encourage more of a pedestrian-friendly factory outlet center design with buildings clustered around pedestrian walks rather than separated by parking as approved in the 1992 decision. The City Council approved a 250,000 square foot factory outlet center in 1992 after coordinating the application with Marion County, the Oregon Department of Transportation ("ODOT") and the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development ("DLCD"). No party to that decision appealed the City Council's approval to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals ("LUBA"). The 1992 decision approved a factory outlet center on Tax Lot 200. The City has taken two actions required by a 1992 decision. First, the City adopted a Transportation System Plan ("TSP") in 1996 after coordinating with Marion County, ODOT and DLCD. No party appealed the TSP adoption. Secondly, the City "upzoned" a significant amount of acreage to accommodate additional residential density as required by the 1992 decision, which changed the residential designation of Tax Lot 200. This application is subject to the Statewide Planning Goals ("Goals") only because of the annexation request and comprehensive plan map amendment required for a small portion of Tax Lot 300, consisting of .38 acres. The only affected portion of Tax Lot 300 is the "pole" portion providing access to the remainder of Tax Lot 300 which is not part of this application. Because the 1992 decision may still be relied upon, the City can find that the Statewide Planning Goals are applicable only in a de minimis way in that they affect only the .38 acres of Tax Lot 300. This portion of the application in and of itself does not generate any additional adverse impacts beyond those identified and mitigated in the 1992 decision. PDX1A-137106.1 2708~1 ATTACHMENT n Page.....:L- of '" '3 C. Site Descriotion. This site is located northwest of the intersection of State Highway 214 and Interstate Highway 5. This application affects four (4) lots of record: Tax Lots 200, 300, 702 and 800. The only portion of tax lot 300 subject to this application is the twenty (20) foot wide strip running west from Arney Road to the remainder of tax lot 300. The strip contains .38 areas. The remainder of tax lot 300 is not part of this application. The owner of tax lot 300 has entered into an agreement with the applicant to sell this part of tax lot 300. The owner of tax lot 300 has consented to this application. This part of tax lot 300 is subject to a comprehensive plan and zoning map amendment and annexation request. Tax lots 702 and 800 are subject to the zoning map amendment in conformance with the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan ("Plan") map. All of the lots are subject to the site plan application. The site is flat and has a total elevation change of about ten (10) feet. Vegetation consists of native field grass and a few insignificant trees. Several drainage swales exist on the property. The applicant has sought from and had approved the required permits by the Oregon Division of Stale Lands ("DSL") and the United States Corps of Army Engineers ("Corps") to fill jurisdictional wetlands and to mitigate that fill by providing new wetlands off site. Drainage on the site will be accomplished consistent with the drainage plan submitted to the City and with conditions of approval. The result of the grading and drainage plans will be that outfall from the site's storm drainage system will be at historical points on the northwest comer of the property and drainage will be maintained at historic rates. D. Adjacent and On-Site Land Use, Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Desilmations and Utilities. 1. On-Site Comprehensive Plan Ma.p Desiinations. Tax lots 702 and 800 are designated "Commercial" on the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan ("Plan") map. Tax map 200 is designated "High Density Residential" on the Plan map.! The part of tax lot 300 that is subject to this application is designated "High Density ! - The 1992 decision approved the change of the Plan map designation on tax lot 200 to "Commercial" but the designation will not become effective until the City deems the conditions of approval satisfied. No party appealed the 1992 approval by the Woodburn City Council. PDXIA-137106.1 27080-0001 ATTACHMENTB page..L of Residential" on the Plan map. These parcels are within the City of Woodburn city limits and within the Woodburn Urban Growth Boundary ("UGB").2 2. On-Site Zonine: Man Desil!nations. Tax lot 702 contains 4.40 acres and is roned "lD." Tax lot 800 contains 0.18 acres and is roned "lD." These two (2) lots are the subject of a roning map amendment from "lD" to "CR." The portion of tax lot 300 that is subject to this application contains .38 acres and is roned "UTF." Tax lot 200 contains approximately 26.28 acres and is roned "RM." When the 1992 comprehensive plan map and zoning map decision is deemed final and becomes effective, tax lot 2oo's comprehensive plan map designation will be "Commercial" and it will be roned "CR". Tax lot 200 is located on either side of Arney Road. 3. T .and Use on Adiacent Pronerties. Land use to the north is in Marion County's ("County") Exclusive Farm Use ("EFU") roning district. Land to the west within the City is designated "Residential" and is roned for and developed as residential. Land to the west in the County is in the Urban Transition Farm ("UTF") roning district. Land to the south is in the City's OCR" and "lD" roning districts and is developed with commercial uses. 4. On-Site Land Use. The tax lots subject to this application are vacant. 5. Utilities. Public utilities (water, sanitary sewer and storm drainage) are available at the site's periphery. There will be no difficulty in connecting these existing services with the site's water, sanitary sewer and storm disposal systems. The applicant will be responsible for all on site public facility improvements. The City found in 1992 that it had sufficient water, sanitary sewer and storm drainage capacity to serve the site. This slightly smaller factory outlet center will impose no additional impacts on the City's utility system. In fact, the City Council found in 1992 that "the City has the capability to handle the water, sewer and storm drainage of the planned use." 2 _ A fourth parcel owned by Craig Realty Group-Woodburn, LLC, tax lot 101, is outside of the city limits but within the UGB. This lot contains 8.00 acres and is roned County Urban Transition Farm ("UTF"). Tax lot 101 is adjacent to tax lot 200 but is not subject to this application. PDX1A-137106.1 27080-0001 >.. --~..~- . ._.,.-.T'-~ .---~-.,,- -.._-" ~ ATTACHMENT 8 Page~ of 5.3 E. 1992 Decision. The Woodburn City Council adopted Ordinance 2097 on November 24, 1992. The ordinance approved City of Woodburn file Nos. Annexation 92-01, Zone Map Amendment 92-02, Comprehensive Plan Amendment 92-01 and Site Plan Review 92-09. Site Plan Review 92-09 approved a factory outlet containing approximately 250,000 square feet. The 1992 decision annexed tax lot 200 into the City and amended the comprehensive plan map and wning map amendments from "High Density Residential" to "Commercial" and "County Urban Transition Farm" to "Commercial Retail" ("CR"). The 1992 ordinance imposed a number of conditions of approval. With respect to the comprehensive plan and wning map amendments, the City Council required that three (3) conditions be satisfied prior to "final approval" of these amendments: 1. Condition of approval III(B)(I) required that the applicant assist the City in amending its 1985 Transportation System Plan for the State Highway 214/1-5 Interchange/Parr Road area so that it would comply with OAR 66O-12-060(1)(b). The condition of approval prohibited development of the property until the Transportation System Plan complies with OAR 660-12-060(1)(b). 2. Condition of approval III(B)(2) required the applicant to pay its fair share of certain improvements to the transportation system. 3. Condition of approval III(B)(3) required that the plan map amendment be limited "to consist only of the Factory Outlet Center as described by applicant. " On June 11, 1996, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2170 amending the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan to incorporate the Woodburn Transportation System Plan. Among the findings adopted by the City Council is finding (K)(2) which addresses OAR 660- 12-060(1). Finding (K)(2) states: "The City Council finds that the Transportation System Plan adopted herein complies with OAR 660-12-06O(1)(b) for the affected transportation facilities, including but not limited to the Highway 214/1-5 Interchange/Parr Road area." The ordinance also notes that the Oregon Department of Transportation ("ODOT"), Marion County and the Department of Land Conservation and Development ("DLCD") had notice of the ordinance, commented on it and that the City reviewed, considered and incorporated some of the agency's and county's suggestions. F. Relocation of Arnev Road. Arney Road is the sole access to this site. No road access beyond the western boundary of Tax Lots 200, 702 and the "pole" portion of Tax Lot 300 is proposed. The site plan does propose a new public road extending west from Arney Road to the main portion of Tax Lot PDXIA-137106.1 2708().(l(l()1 -- '._'-'''.~''-''--'''+'-'-----'---r---'-'-''-_._-''~-''~-'-'' ATTACHMENT 7') Page...E..- of ,,-3 300. However, the only connection proposed at this time to the west of the new public road is a private driveway to provide access to the remainder of Tax Lot 300. Arney Road is presently located in the middle of Tax Lot 200. This application anticipates that Arney Road will be vacated and realigned closer to 1-5. Condition of approval III(C)(b)(4) of the 1992 decision provides: "The existing Arney Road shown on the north property line of the development shall remain a public street, from the relocated portion of Arney Road to the west end of this development. This shall be improved with a 34-foot street section, curbed curb, five foot sidewalk on the south side except for that portion being relocated, this shall add five foot sidewalks on both sides. An additional ten foot street dedication shall be required on the south side of the existing Arney Road right-of-way which is not to be vacated along the north line for a total right-of-way of 50 feet. The rededication portion in connection with this, however, shall be 60 feet. " The applicant and the County have subsequently determined that the UGB is located on the north side of Arney Road. This condition of approval requires that the applicant agree to improve existing Arney Road. That portion of Arney Road that is subject to this condition is within the UGH. The applicant is preparing and will submit a separate application to vacate the existing Arney Road right-of-way. The vacation application is subject to the process and approval criteria in ORS Chapter 271. G. Procedural Matters. a. Descriotion of Aoolication Review Process. This application requests five (5) approvals as noted in Part II (I), above. The Woodburn Zoning Ordinance ("WZO") expressly provides for concurrent comprehensive plan map and zoning map amendments. WZO section 16.040, "Concurrent Zone Change Request," provides: "Plan changes can be reviewed concurrently with Zone change requests, except that separate filing fees shall be required." As noted elsewhere in this application, the applicant has applied the relevant zoning map and comprehensive plan map approval criteria. The applicant has paid separate filing fees. The City gave appropriate notices of the Planning Commission and City Council public hearings. Two (2) Planning Commission hearings were noticed for June 11 and June 25, 1998. The notice provided by the City stated that the hearings are quasi-judicial evidentiary PDXIA-137106.1 27080-(0)1 ~' "--'-~--"~-'''-''~'--~"-~'-'---''''-----"'''''--'-'''.~~',-- -".._"'~_. ATTACHMENT'B Page...2.- of '1-'l hearings allowing submittal of argument and evidence. The June 11, 1998 public hearing was the initial evidentiary hearing. Consistent with WZO section 16.060, the City provided notice of this application to all property owners within 250 feet of Tax Lots 200, 300, 702 and 800. Consistent with WZO section 16.030, the property owner of Tax Lot 300 has initiated the Plan map amendment. Consistent with WZO section 15.030(a), the property owners of Tax Lots 300, 702 and 800 have initiated the respective zoning map amendments consistent with the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan. The City Council adopts Plan map and zoning map amendments by ordinance. WZO sections 15.010 and 16.010. The Planning Commission recommended actions on the Plan map and zoning map amendments to the City Council. WZO sections 15.035 and 16.010. The City Council held a public hearing on the Plan map and zoning map amendments. WZO sections 15.040 and 16.010. b. Procedural Status of Annlication. The Woodburn Planning Commission opened the initial evidentiary hearing on these applications at its public hearing on June 11, 1998. The Planning Commission members revealed various ex parte contacts but no party requested an opportunity to rebut the substance of those contacts. The Planning Commission heard argument and evidence from various parties and continued the hearing consistent with the public hearing notice until June 25, 1998. The Planning Commission opened the public hearing on June 25, 1998 and considered evidence on all applications. The Planning Commission concluded the public hearing and continued the matter until its July 9, 1998 meeting for a tentative decision. At that time, the Planning Commission tentatively voted to approve each of the applications subject to conditions of approval and to recommend that the City Council approve the annexation application, the Comprehensive Plan Map amendment application, and the zoning map amendment applications. No party raised any procedural objections to the conduct of the Planning Commission hearings nor requested that the record remain open or the public hearing be continued. The Planning Commission adopted written orders with conditions of approval approving all applications at its meeting on July 23, 1998. The applicant requested that the City Council call up pursuant to its authority under the Woodburn Zoning Ordinance the site plan and variance decision. The City Council opened the public hearing on July 13, 1998 but continued it to the date certain of July 27, 1998 without taking any evidence or argument. No party objected to the continuance. In fact, the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development in a PDXIA-137106.1 2708Q...0()()1 ....--: . -"..'-' ."_.- .~_.- ._-.-..._._...,..'-_.--~-- -~.._.._-"_.,._.._--~._~._._- ATTACHMENTB page...d- of J "i July 10, 1998 letter requested a two-week continuance. The City Council finds that the continuation of the hearing from July 13 to July 27 was sufficient to allow DLCD the two weeks it requested. The City Council opened the public hearing on July 27, 1998. The City Recorder read the statements required by ORS 197.763(5) for the conduct of a quasi-judicial hearing. The City Council members revealed ex parte contacts. No party objected to any ex parte contact or requested an opportunity to rebut the substance of an ex parte contact. Prior to the City Council's closure of the public hearing, no party requested that the City Council hearing be continued or that the record remain open. The City Council adopted a tentative decision approving the application and directed the applicant to prepare findings for review by City staff and adoption by the City Council at its August 10, 1998 meeting. II. REQUEST TO ANNEX .38 ACRES OF TAX WT 300 WITHIN THE URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY. A. Descriotion of Annexation Aoolication. Tax lot 300 is a "flag" lot and is outside of the City of Woodburn boundaries but within the UGB. The "pole" portion of tax lot 300 separates tax lots 702 and 800 from tax lot 200. Pursuant to Statewide Planning Goal 14, "Urbanization," tax lot 300 is urbanizable and is available for annexation. The applicant has a contract to purchase the flag pole portion of tax lot 300 containing .38 acres. The owner of tax lot 300 has consented to the annexation application. This section addresses the applicable approval criteria for an annexation. ORS 197.175(1) requires that cities exercise their planning and zoning responsibilities in accordance with the Statewide Planning Goals when annexing unincorporated territory. B. Aoolicable Statewide PlanniDl! Goals. 1. Statewide Plannini! Goal 2. "Land Use Plannini!." FINDING: This Goal requires that the City coordinate the annexation application with affected governmental units during amendments to its plan. To the extent that this annexation request constitutes an amendment to the city's Comprehensive Plan, the city will make this land use decision by coordinating with Marion County, the Oregon Department of Transportation, and the Department of Land Conservation and Development, as well as other affected governmental entities. PDXIA-131106.1 27080-0001 ATTACHMENT -a Page...2- of '5:") 2. Statewide Planninl: Goal 9. "Economic Develo-pment." FINDING: Statewide Planning Goal 9 requires the City "to provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens. " The City can find that this Goal is satisfied because annexation of this portion of tax lot 300 will enable the applicant to construct a better designed factory outlet center. The 1992 City approval of the factory outlet center is still valid, and the applicant may construct under that approval. Nevertheless, this small annexation will allow the applicant to construct a better designed factory outlet center. The factory outlet center will enhance the economy of the City of Woodburn. Further, this area is within a commercial area identified in the City's Plan. The Plan calls for this area to serve a "regional retail orientation." ~ part II(C), below.) The City's 1992 decision addressed Goal 9 in the annexation application of Tax Lot 200. The City Council's 1992 findings at page 9 are also applicable to this annexation application: "This project provides an opportunity for the City of Woodburn to add millions of dollars of value to its tax base and to add over 600 management, service and support jobs, many of which have salaries greater than the average for Marion County. These jobs, in turn, pump money into all aspects of the local economy and diversity it as well, providing jobs in sectors that are presently less well-representation [sic] in Woodburn. Contact with various economic development agencies indicates that the project is considered to have a positive economic impact. " 3. Statewide Planninl! Goal 10. "Housinl!. " FINDING: The City can find that this Goal is satisfied. The loss of .38 acres of residentially wned land will have no impact on the City's ability to provide for the housing needs of its citizens. Moreover, because this .38 acres represents access to the remainder of tax lot 300, it provides no opportunity for housing. PDXIA-137106.1 27080-0001 ,___...___ ,._.__."..~_.,_,__.,____"._~c___...__.~. ATTACHMENTD Page..J!2- of !) " 4. Statewide Planning Goal 12. "Tran&POrtation. " FINDING: This Goal requires the City to provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system. The addition of this .38 acres to the City will have no impact on state or city transportation facilities since the city's 1992 decision already authorizes construction of a factory outlet center or more square footage than this application proposes. Furthermore, the applicant has submitted a traffic analysis report prepared by Kittelson and Associates that demonstrates that this application will not overburden affected transportation facilities. 5. Statewide Planninl! Goal 14. "Urbanization. " FINDING: This Goal provides for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use. The portion of tax lot 300 to be annexed is "urbanizable" and not "rural" since it is within the Urban Growth Boundary. Urbanizable lands are defined as lands within the UGB which are determined to be necessary and suitable for future urban uses, can be served by urban services and facilities and are needed for the expansion of an urban area. This .38 acre annexation is an appropriate parcel to be included within the City since it allows construction of this factory outlet center. As noted above, the City's 1992 decision approved the factory outlet center. This annexation simply allows construction of an improved factory outlet center. 6. Statewide Planning Goals 1. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 13 and 15-19. FINDING: These Goals are inapplicable, either because the Goal's physical characteristics are not present on this site (Goals 4, 5 and 15-19), because the annexation of .38 acres of a narrow strip of land used as a driveway means that resource land (Goals 3 and 4) is unaffected, or the substance of the Goal is unaffected (Goal 6, "Air, Water and Land Quality"; Goal 7, "Disasters and Hazards"; Goal 8, "Recreation"; and Goal 13, "Energy Conservation"). 7. Conclusion. The City Council finds that this application satisfies applicable Goals. C. Applicable Citv of Woodburn Comorehensive Plan Policies. This annexation site is within a commercial area identified in the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan ("Plan") as near the 1-5 interchange. The Comprehensive Plan states about this commercial area: PDX1A-137106.1 27080-0001 . ^_._"'......~,.-'"T"".. ATTACHMENT 0 Page.LL- of S 3 "This area serves as an interstate service center. It is a freeway oriented service center. This area also has a more regional retail orientation than the rest of Woodburn." ~ Plan at page 14.) 1. Commercial Land Develonment Policies. FINDING: a. Plan Policy B-1 requires that the City have sufficient land to accommodate the retail needs of the city and its surrounding market area. The Plan identifies four (4) major commercial areas, including this area. This application satisfies this Plan policy because it provides for a retail center in a designated commercial area. b. Plan Policy B-2 provides that lands for high-traffic generating uses, such as shopping centers, "should" be located on well-improved arterials. The proposed factory outlet center is located on a Service Collector (Arney Road) with direct access to an Arterial (state Highway 214). The City Council finds that this Plan policy is not a mandatory approval criterion since it uses the word "should." This policy is merely a guideline. The City Council also finds that this guideline is satisfied because, as explained below, the 1996 Transportation System Plan ("TSP") provides for the necessary transportation improvements to serve this site. 2. Annexation Policies. FINDING: a. Plan Policy D-l requires that "the City should ensure that there is a five (5) year supply of vacant land within the City. Services should be provided to that land during that five (5) year period. " The City's 1992 decision approving the factory outlet center included an annexation approval. The City Council finds that having made that decision, it determined that the additional commercial land was necessary to meet the five (5) year supply requirement. This .38 acres simply adds to the factory outlet center and the City Council finds that this annexation application meets this requirement by ensuring that the site will be available for commercial development. b. Plan Policy 0-2 requires that, prior to site plan approval for land annexed west of Interstate 5, a detailed transportation impact study coordinated with the Oregon Department of Transportation will be provided. The applicant has submitted a transportation impact study. Coordination does not require that the City agree with ODOT or its evidence. Wau~h v. Coos County, 26 Or LUBA 300 (1993). All the City must do is consider and accommodate ODOT's comments. PDXIA-137106.1 27080-0001 .......~ , ..-..-.- ..--.'..--.-, -~"-~_...,-_._-- ...,--,---,~-".._......,.._..- ATTACHMENT 3 page..l2.-.. of .,">; This policy also requires that any necessary improvements to 1-5 or State Highways 214 and 219 be provided for prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. This policy does not require that the improvements be installed or constructed prior to the issuance of building permits. The City can find that it has provided for necessary improvements to 1-5 and Highway 214 through its Transportation System Plan ("TSP"). <S<< below.) The TSP expressly found that the highway improvements called for on 1-5 and Highway 214 are sufficient to serve this factory outlet center. <S<< 1992 Decision, finding (K)(2) at page 7.) 3. Growth and Urbanization Policies. FINDING: a_ Plan Policy M-4 provides that the urban growth area has been identified by the City as urbanizable and is considered to be available, over time, for urban development. This application meets this policy because it provides for urban development of a portion of tax lot 300 that is within the UGB and is available for urbanization. b. Plan Policy M-6 requires that an annexation request be forwarded to Marion County for comment and recommendation. The City has coordinated this application with the County. The County submitted a letter stating that it has no objections to the application. c. Plan Policy M-7 requires that a11land use actions (an annexation is a land use decision) within the urban growth area and outside of the city limits shall be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and the County's land use regulations. The City Council finds that this policy is satisfied because the request is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Once annexed, the County's land use regulations are inapplicable. d. Plan Policy M-11 establishes five (5) factors for conversion of land within the urban growth area to urban uses: "a. Orderly, economic provision for public facilities and services; "b. Availability of sufficient land for the various uses to ensure choices in the marketplace; "c. LCDC Goals; "d. Encouragement of in-filling development within developed areas before conversion of urbanizable areas; and "e. Applicable provisions of the Marion County and City comprehensive plans. " PDXIA-137106.1 27080-0001 ATTACHMENT '8 Page~ of o5? The City Council finds that these five (5) factors are satisfied. The annexation of this .38 acre area is consistent with the City's desire to see this area developed for a factory outlet center. Because the center is able to be served by public facilities and services, this .38 acre annexation will also be served by those same services. The City Council found in 1992 that all necessary utilities were available. ~ 1992 Decision page 9.) The City Council also finds that this annexation will provide for the availability of sufficient land for various land uses. The application has already demonstrated that applicable Statewide Planning Goals are satisfied. Further, this annexation encourages in-filling within an area to be developed before conversion of larger urbanizable areas. Finally, the City Council finds that applicable provisions of the City's Comprehensive Plan are satisfied. ~ above.) D. ADDlicable WZO Provisions. No WZO provisions apply to an annexation request. E. Conclusion. The City Council finds that the applicable criteria for this annexation application are satisfied. m. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT FROM "HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL" TO "COMMERCIAL" ON A PORTION OF TAX LOT 300. A. Introduction. This part of tax lot 300 property is currently designated "High Density Residential" on the Plan map and contains .38 acres. Tax lot 300 is a "flag lot" and this .38 acre portion of the tax lot is the "flagpole" that provides access to the remainder of tax lot 300. The Plan map amendment will not affect the City's residential inventory since the strip is incapable of use for residential development since it is a driveway. B. Applicable Statewide Planning Goals and Woodburn Comprehensive Plan Policies. A Plan map amendment is subject to compliance with applicable Statewide Planning Goals and policies of the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan. The City Council hereby incorporates and adopts by reference the findings concerning the applicable Goals and Plan policies contained in City Ordinance No. 2097 and the findings contained in parts II(B) and (C), above. This Plan map amendment simply allows a shift in the site plan footprint for this factory outlet center. No additional square footage in the factory outlet center will be allowed by this Plan map amendment; in fact, this decision approves a smaller factory outlet center. Therefore, this Plan map amendment in and of itself does not have any impacts on land use PDXIA-137106.1 2708O-<XXJ1 ATTAC;"ENT 8 Page . of 53 compatibility, utilities or traffic generation that have not already been considered and mitigated by the City in Ordinance No. 2097. C. TraosDortation Planninl! Rule. 1. OAR 660-12-0600)-(3), OAR 660-12-060(1) applies to amendments to comprehensive plans. This section provides: " 1. Amendments to functional plans, acknowledged comprehensive plans, and land use regulations which significantly affect a transportation facility shall assure that allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and level of service of the facility. This shall be accomplished by either: (a) limiting allowed land uses to be consistent with the planned function, capacity and level of service of the transportation facility; (b) amending the TSP to provide transportation facilities adequate to support the proposed land uses consistent with the requirements of this division; or (c) altering land use designations, densities, or design requirement s to reduce demand for automobile travel and meet travel needs through other modes. " This Plan map amendment involves .38 acres of Tax Lot 300. Although this Plan map amendment enables the applicant to develop a modified factory outlet center, this amendment in and of itself does not significantly affect either an ODOT or City transportation facility. As noted above, the City's 1992 decision approved a 250,000 square foot factory outlet center. This decision approves a 243,000 square foot factory outlet center. The City Council finds that this Plan map amendment does not significantly affect a transportation facility. However, even if the City Council were to determine that this application might significantly affect a transportation facility, the City Council finds that the 1996 Transportation System Plan ("TSP")has mitigated the significant affect by meeting the requirements of OAR 660-12-060(lb) which provides: "amending the TSP to provide transportation facilities adequate to support the proposed land uses consistent with the requirements of this division. " Prior to the City Council's adoption of a final decision in the 1992 application, ODOT submitted a letter by John P. deTar dated October 6, 1992. ODOT requested that three (3) conditions of approval be imposed: 1. Resolve Transportation Planning Rule issues, including plan amendments and identification of means to finance road improvements. PDXIA-137106.1 27080-0001 --. .--...--..---.,.... '"'-- ...--.''T'-"-.'..-------...----..-.-..---....- . ATTACHMENT 13 Page 15 of ,'> " 2. Make near term improvements to the surrounding transportation system. 3. Require that the plan amendment be limited to approve only the factory outlet center as described in the 1992 application and require a new plan amendment "if other types of commercial land use [sic] are to be allowed. " The Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development ("DLCD") submitted a similar letter to the City Council on September 9, 1992 requesting that additional transportation studies be completed. In response to these comments, the City Council imposed condition of approval III(B)(I) on the 1992 decision. ~ 1992 Decision at page 39.) This condition of approval provides as follows: " Applicant must assist the City in amending its 1985 Transportation Plan for the Highway 214/1-5 parr road area, prior to development, to bring it into compliance with OAR 660-12-060(1)(b) regarding adequate transportation facilities to support proposed land uses. No development of the property or amendment of the land use designations will be permitted until the Transportation Plan for the "affected transportation facilities" complies with OAR 660-12-060(1)(b)." The City Council also imposed condition of approval III(B)(2) ~ 1992 Decision at page 39) requiring the applicant to participate by paying its "fair share" of certain transportation improvements in the near term. Finally, the City Council imposed condition of approval III(B)(3) requiring that the Comprehensive Plan map amendment "should be limited to consist only of the factory outlet center as described by Applicant. " In response to condition of approval III(B)(I), the City initiated an amendment of its TSP culminating with the adoption of an amended TSP on June 6, 1996. As required by both Statewide Planning Goal 2 and OAR 660-12-060(3), the City coordinated the TSP with affected state agencies, including DLCD and ODOT. One "whereas clause" adopted by the City Council in the TSP found: "whereas, the City Council opened a public hearing on October 9, 1995 and carefully considered the written and oral testimony of ODOT, Marion County, private developers, interested citizens, and city staff." Another whereas clause states "in response to the DLCD review, the City declares that it is the policy of the City of Woodburn to comprehensively evaluate and amend the TSP, as needed, pursuant to OAR 660-12-030(3)(a) to ensure that the results of the City's periodic review of the comprehensive plan and land use regulations and interchange refinement planning are incorporated in the TSP." Finally, another whereas clause states: "the City Council finds that the transportation system plan adopted herein complies with OAR 660-12- PDXIA-137106.1 2708()..(XX)1 '-'~'''''-'-----'--''''''''--''-'-'''"-'''--~~''-~~------'' ATTACHMENT 8 10 ~~ page..L- of -- 06O(1)(b) for the affected transportation facilities, including but not limited to the Highway 214/1-5 interchange/Parr Road area." Incorporated into the staff report containing the findings and conclusions for the adoption of the TSP are several findings relevant to condition of approval III(B)(I). The City Council adopted findings regarding OAR 660-12-025(1). This section provides "except as provided in Section (3) in this rule, adoption of a TSP shall constitute the land use decision regarding the need for transportation facilities, services and major improvements and their function, mode and general location. " Significantly, this section means that once adopted, the TSP is the City's final land use decision on the need for transportation improvements and how those transportation improvements satisfy identified transportation needs. An unappea1ed TSP may not be attacked later. Thus, the City's findings in the TSP are conclusive and support this application. Further, the City found that the TSP satisfied OAR 660-12-030. The City found: "the TSP identifies the City's transportation needs including those of the transportation disadvantaged, and support of industrial and commercial development. These needs were based on a twenty year forecast in population and employment within the acknowledged comprehensive plan. The TSP includes measures encouraging reduced reliance on the automobile. " The City also adopted findings regarding OAR 660-12-060(1). The City adopted a finding regarding this section that expressly applies to this development. The City found "that the Transportation System Plan adopted here complies with OAR 66O-12-060(1)(b) for the affected transportation facilities, including but not limited to the Highway 214/1-5 interchange/Parr Road area. " Thus, the City Council finds that, as requested by both OOOT and OLCO, the City adopted a TSP satisfying OAR 66O-12-06O(1)(b). The amended TSP expressly found that the TSP satisfied the transportation needs at the interchanges affected by this application. Even though this application represents an amendment to the 1992 approved factory outlet, the City Council finds that the changed building configuration will not cause additional impacts to the transportation network because this application actually requests a reduction of square footage, thus reducing vehicle trips. However slight the reduction may be, this application nevertheless results in a reduction of vehicle trips generated by this site. This fact, combined with the unappea1ed and unchallenged 1996 TSP adoption, means that the City has not only complied with condition of approval III(B)(1) from the 1992 decision, but that the TSP also satisfies OAR 660-12-060(1)(b) as it applies to this application. OAR 660-12-060(3) also requires coordination with affected transportation providers. Arney Road is a City and County transportation facility and 1-5 and State Highways 214 and 219 are OOOT facilities. The City has notified OOOT of this application and several meetings have been held with that agency, and the City has tried to accommodate as much as possible OOOT's concerns. PDXIA-137106.1 27080-0001 . ',-, ,..,-,,_. '~~--'~~--'._-~-~---'--"'_._- --,,--_..,._~_.~-,-_.- ATTACHMENT 8 Page.1:L- of :,,/- The City also coordinated with Marion County. The County said it did not object to the application. 2. OAR 660-12-045. OAR 660.12.055(3) requires local governments to amend their Comprehensive Plans and land use regulations by May 8, 1995 to implement certain sections of the Transportation Planning Rule. The failure to do so requires the City to directly apply OAR 660.12.045(3), (4)(a)-(f) and (5)(d) to the land use decision. a. OAR 660-12-045(3). This section requires provisions that encourage bicycle use. Subsection (a) requires bicycle parking facilities as part of a new commercial development. This application provides 63 bicycle spaces consistent with the requirements of the WZO. Subsection (b) provides for facilities which accommodate safe and convenient pedestrian and bicycle access from within new commercial areas to adjacent residential areas and transit stops and neighborhood activity centers within one-half mile of the development. This application satisfies this requirement. The conditions of approval require sidewalk and bike path access along Arney Road to this site. The City Council finds there is no adjacent residential area near this commercial site. The City Council defines "adjacent" as meaning next to. The only residential area near this site is more than a quarter mile away. Further, no transit stop is adjacent to this site. Finally, no neighborhood activity center is within one-half mile of the development. Subsection (c) requires that road improvements include facilities accommodating convenient pedestrian and bicycle travel. Neither Arney Road nor Sprague Lane is an arterial or major collector. Both streets will have sidewalks and accommodate bicycle travel. Subsection (e) requires internal pedestrian circulation within new commercial developments. The site plan meets this requirement by providing for compact buildings, construction of access ways and walkways and a series of sidewalks connecting throughout the site. b. OAR 660-12-045(4)(a)-((). Subsection (a) is inapplicable to this application. Subsection (b) requires that new retail buildings added near major transit stops provide for convenient pedestrian access to transit. The evidence in the record demonstrates that no transit stop is adjacent to this site. Subsection (c) is inapplicable to this application. PDXIA-1371116.1 27080-0001 '_. ..- ......._..._"_..-.-,..,-~.,._.~-..".--,._-"'_.,_._."~.~.._--'-'---'"~. ATTACHMENT 8 Page.ll2- of 5:3 Subsection (d) requires that designated employee parking areas include preferential parking for car pools and van pools. The City Council will require that the applicant amend its site plan to provide for such preferential parking. Subsection (e) is inapplicable to this application. Subsection (f) requires that road systems be provided that can serve transit. Arney Road is designated as a service collector and its width and lane cross sections are adequate to serve transit. c. OAR 660-l2-045(5)(d). This section requires that retail development provide either a transit stop on site or a connection to a transit stop along a transit trunk route when the transit operator requires such an improvement. The City of Woodburn is the transit operator and has not required such an improvement. d. OAR 660-12-060(3). This section requires the City to coordinate this application with affected transportation providers including ODOT and Marion County. The City has provided notice of the applications to ODOT and Marion County, has given those agencies an opportunity to comment and has considered their comments. Marion County commented that it had no objection to this application. ODOT responded with several letters which the City Council considered. For the reasons contained in these findings, the City Council adopts ODOT's recommendations with certain modifications. D. Woodburn Zooin!! Ordinance Section 16.050. The Woodburn Zoning Ordinance ("WZO") contains criteria for a comprehensive plan amendment. WZO section 16.050 provides as follows: "Before a Plan Amendment can be made, the Common Council must find that the proposal meets the following criteria: "(a) The proposal complies with all applicable Statewide Goals and Guidelines. "(b) The proposal complies with the remaining Goals and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan. "(c) There is a clearly demonstrated public need for the proposed amendment. "(d) The proposal best satisfies the public need. " PDXIA-137106.1 2708ll-0001 _.~- ..~...__-._.- - ~.- ,..-. ..~_.- _..~~_...._"....._-,_.__...__...._._~.~ ATTACHMENT 8 Page.fl...- of S""3 WZO section 16.080 provides that: "The following specific questions shall be given consideration in evaluating requests regarding plan and wning amendments and are as follows: "(a) To support an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, the applicant shall: "( 1) Prove that the original plan was in error; "(2) Show thafthe community has changed since the original plan was adopted; or "(3) Show that there has been a change in the planning and growth policy of the City. " FINDING: The City can find that WZO Section 16.050(a)-(d) are satisfied. First, the City Council has already found the applicable Statewide Planning Goals are satisfied. ~ Part II, above.) The City Council expressly incorporates those findings herein. The City Council finds that the proposal complies with the remaining goals and policies of the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan. ~ Part II, above.) The City Council hereby incorporates those findings herein. The City Council finds that there is a clearly demonstrated public need for the proposed amendment. The 1992 decision contains extensive findings by the City Council on public need. These findings are found in the 1992 Decision at pages 25-28. The applicant incorporates those findings herein. The City Council also finds that this Comprehensive Plan map amendment from "Residential" to "Commercial" on the .38 acres of Tax Lot 300 furthers this public need. The applicant will testify that while the approved factory outlet center can be developed, the proposal in this application provides for a better designed factory outlet center. This .38 acre strip is necessary in order to accomplish that redesigned plan. To the extent that the City believes an identified public need has been clearly demonstrated, this application satisfies that demonstrated public need by providing for a better designed factory outlet center. Finally, the City Council finds that this proposal can best satisfy this public need. The City Council also finds that the applicant has satisfied the required burden of proof in WZO section 16.080(a). The City found in 1992 that WZO section 16.080(a)(I)-(3) was satisfied. ~ 1992 Decision at pages 29-31). This Plan map amendment is an enhancement PDXIA-137106.1 27080-0001 , ',.__'__' '<'.~_"""""""'" .... ^.~._... ..... .___ ._...._ ..,.,,~..__,H. .....,__... "'..u__...~_.~~...'_~~'_'~_..'__' ATTACHMENT 8 Page;lO of ') ~ of that application. The applicant expressly incorporates those findings herein as evidence satisfying these criteria. E. Conclusion. The City Council finds that the applicable criteria for this Plan map amendment are satisfied. IV. ZONING MAP AMENDMENT IN CONFORMANCE wlm mE "COMMERCIAL" PLAN MAP DESIGNATION FROM "m" TO OCR" ON TAX WTS 702 AND 800 AND FROM "UTF" TO OCR" ON A PART OF TAX WT 300. A. Introduction. The OCR" zoning district implements the "Commercial" Plan map designation. The City Council hereby incorporates the findings for the zoning map amendment contained in Ordinance No. 2097 to demonstrate compliance with the applicable criteria for these zoning map amendments. ~ 1992 Decision page 31.) The Comprehensive Plan "Commercial" Plan map designation is implemented by both the "ID" and OCR" zoning districts. Therefore, an amendment from "10" and "UTF" to OCR" on tax lots 300, 702 and 800 is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, provided that the applicable criteria, including Woodburn Comprehensive Plan policies, are satisfied. The City Council finds that the "ID" zoning district is not appropriate for this site. First, the City Council finds that the ID zoning district is not appropriate for a regional commercial area, such as this site. Secondly, the City Council finds that because it has already approved the "CR" zoning district to accommodate a factory outlet center, this property should be zoned "CR" as well. The OCR" designation is appropriate for this site for two reasons. First, the "CR" zoning district is one of five (5) commercial zoning districts that implement the Plan's "Commercial" designation. Secondly, the City Council has already approved the "CR" zoning district on tax lot 200 to accommodate the factory outlet center. ~ 1992 Decision at page 31.) B. ADDlicable Woodburn ComDreheusive Plan Policies. A zoning map amendment that is consistent with the acknowledged comprehensive plan need only comply with applicable Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. ORS 197.175(2)(d). In this case, because the comprehensive plan map amendment for a part of Tax Lot 300 is not yet acknowledged, the zoning map amendment must also comply with applicable Statewide Planning Goals. The City Council expressly incorporates the findings relevant to the Statewide Planning Goals from part II of this application, above, for these zoning map amendments. PDXIA-1371116.1 27080-0001 ,.__.~ _._..,.___..._..k.__.._..__~_,.___,,_,,_..,.~_~____ . ATTACHMENT f5 Page~ of 53 1. Plan Poli<<y B-1. This Commercial Land Development policy provides: "The City should at all times have sufficient land to accommodate the retail needs of the city and the surrounding market area. The City presently has four major commercial areas: 99E, 1-5 interchange, the downtown area, and the 214/211/99E four-comers intersection area. No new areas should be established. " FINDING: This application satisfies this policy because it accommodates a retail need identified in the 1992 City Council decision. This application is within one of the four identified commercial areas in the city. This application does not establish a new commercial area. 2. Plan Poli<<y B-2. This Commercial Land Development policy provides: "Lands for high traffic generating uses (shopping centers, malls, restaurants, etc.) should be located on well-improved arterials. The uses should provide the necessary traffic control devices to ameliorate their impact on the arterial streets. " FINDING: The City Council finds that this policy is advisory and not mandatory because it uses the word "should" rather than "shall." Arney Road is identified in the TSP as a "Service Collector." ~ TSP at page 87, Figure 29.) Arney Road leads directly to State Highway 214 and Interstate 5, both identified as "Major Arterials" in the TSP street functional classification plan. ~ TSP at page 87, Figure 29.) Further, the TSP identifies "Service Collector" streets as streets which "provide significant linkages with arterials and tend to accommodate a higher volume of traffic." ~ TSP at page 85.) The City Council found in 1992 that "the site is situated in the area of well improved arterials and very close to 1-5. Arney Road will be improved to better suit the development. It is anticipated in the future Highway 214 will be further developed. The applicant's proposal includes an offer of participation in necessary traffic control devices to ameliorate traffic impact from the development on Highway 214 intersections. " The City Council finds that this policy is satisfied. PDXIA-137106.1 27080-0001 ~""'".'-" .~.."..._.~._~.__._."_._------- ATTACHMENT B pagedL of 53 3. Plan Policy B-3. This Commercial Land Development policy provides: "Strip zoning should be discouraged as a most unproductive form of commercial land development. Strip zoning is characterized by the use of small parcels of less than one acre, with lot depths of less than 150 feet and parcels containing multiple driveway access points. Whenever possible, the city should encourage or require commercial developments which are designed to allow pedestrians to shop without relying on the private automobile to go from shop to shop. Therefore, acreage size lots should be encouraged to develop 'mall type' developments that allow a one stop and shop opportunity. Commercial developments or commercial development patterns which require the use of the private automobile shall be discouraged. " FINDING: The City Council found this policy satisfied in 1992. ~ 1992 Decision at page 15.) The City Council finds that the application does not encourage or constitute strip zoning because it does not meet the policy's description of strip zoning. Further, the application provides for development of a "mall type" development consistent with this plan policy's recommendation. No other commercial land development policies are applicable to this application. 4. Plan Policy H-2. This Public Services policy provides: "The level of key facilities that can be provided should be considered as a principal factor in planning for various densities and types of urban land uses. " FINDING: The City Council approved a 250,000 square foot factory outlet center in 1992. The City found at that time that it had adequate public services to serve the factory outlet center. ~ 1992 Decision at page 16.) The City Council finds that the application will be served by adequate public facilities. 5. Plan Policies K-l through K-7. This Transportation policy provides: PDXIA-137106.1 27080-0001 .--. ," -_._--~_.._-, ~-..__.- -_. "-T-" ~.- ATTACHMENT l3 Page~ of _':l~ " Access to a development site shall be consistent with an adopted access management plan for specific streets. " The City's" Access Management Ordinance" establishes access management policies for service collector roads. A service collector road is a "Class III" facility. Driveway spacing requires that driveways be no closer than 50 feet. Section 7(a) of the ordinance requires that cross access drives and pedestrian access be provided between adjacent commercial properties. Section 7(B) authorizes the Community Development Director to designate such corridors on properties adjacent to roadways. No such designation has been made as of the date of this application with respect to this property. The City can find that given the size of this development, it is capable of satisfying the applicable portions of the access management ordinance. 6. The City Council incorporates the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan Findings from part II of this decision, above, herein. 7. Conclusion. The City Council finds that the zoning map amendment from "ID" and "UTF" to OCR" is consistent with the acknowledged Comprehensive Plan and demonstrates a need for the use proposed. C. Transoortation Planninl! Rule. OAR 660-12-060(1) and 660-12-045(3)-(5) apply to this amendment to the City's land use regulations. "Land use regulation" is defmed in ORS 197.015(11) to include maps. The City's zoning map is a land use regulation. WZO section 4.010, "Districts: Official Map," makes the City's zoning map part of the zoning ordinance. Therefore, this section of the Transportation Planning Rule may be applicable to this application. The City Council expressly incorporates herein the findings for the Transportation Planning Rule contained in part II, above, herein. D. Apolicable WZO Provisions. 1. WZO section l5.030(a). FINDING: This WZO section authorizes property owners to initiate a zoning map amendment by submitted a "complete zone change petition." The petition is to contain three (3) parts: a. WZO section 15.030(a). Part 1. PDXIA-137\06.\ 2708l1-OOO( ATTACH~ENT Page .;i of Pi S"~~ Part 1 of this section requires a description of the present zone, the proposed zone, the street address or the location of the property, a legal de~ription of the properties sought to be changed, the names and addresses of the property owners and the signatures of the owners of at least fifty (50) percent of the area sought to be changed. The present zones are Interchange District ("ID") and County Urban Transition Farm ("UTF"). The proposed zoning district is Commercial Retail ("CR"). The location of the property is northwest of the intersection of State Highway 214 and Interstate Highway-5. The property owners are Craig Realty Group-Woodburn, LLC (tax lot 8(0), Terry Hepner (tax lot 702) and Ben Sprague (tax lot 3(0). The property is located west of Arney Road and north of Oregon Highway 214. The property owners' signatures are shown on the zoning map application form. b. WZO section 15,030(a). Part 2. Part 2 of this section requires a "plot plan" of the notification area. The notification area is 250 feet from the boundaries of the property subject to the zoning map amendment. WZO 7.030(a)(2)(B). c. WZO section 15.030(a). Parts 3 and 4. Parts 3 and 4 of this section require a certified list of property owners within the notification area including their mailing addresses and the description of their property as it appears on the most recent Marion County assessment and tax roles. The City Council finds that the applicant has satisfied the submittal requirements for a zoning map amendment. 2. WZO sections 15.055 and 15.050, "Site Plan Required" and "Site Plan Comoosition. " FINDING: WZO section 15.055 provides that a site plan may be required by the Planning Commission. Because this application includes a request for a site plan modification pursuant to WZO Chapter 11, a modified site plan review application is included in this request. WZO section 15.060 requires that the site plan contain certain information. The site plan submitted to the City includes the following: . The location of existing and proposed buildings, structures and access points: Sheets C2.10 and C.220 show the proposed buildings and access points. PDX1A-137106.1 27080-0001 i3 ATTACl-tMENT Page 03:2... of ~ 'I . Topography, existing and proposed: Sheet C1.IO shows existing and proposed topography. . Mechanical roof facilities: The applicant will screen the mechanical roof facilities by parapets so that they are not visible from the ground of adjacent properties. . Architectural perspective, layout and all elevations: Sheets A-I throue:h A-I0 show this information. The City can find that the applicant has satisfied these requirements. 3. WZO section 15.090. "Notification Area." FINDING: This section requires a notification area of 250' from the boundaries of the area proposed for a zoning map amendment. The application includes a list of property owners for this area. 4. WZO section 16.080(b). "Burden of Proof". This section applies to amendments to the zoning map. This section provides: "For a zone change, the applicant shall: "(1) Show there is a need for the use proposed; "(2) Show that the particular piece of property in question will best meet that need. " 5. WZO section 16.080(b). a. WZO section 16.080(b)(l). "Show There is a Need for the Use Proposed." FINDING: The City Council finds that there is a need for the use proposed. The proposed use is a factory outlet retail center. The "ID" zoning district does not authorize this use. ~ WZO 32.020 and 32.030.) The "CR" zoning district authorizes a number of retail uses that include the uses in a factory outlet center. ~ WZO section 29.010(b)-(h).) The City Council found in the 1992 ordinance that "there is a lack of properly sized, serviced, located and appropriately zoned parcels in Woodburn suitable for the type of PDXIA-I37106.1 2708C>OOOl ___ _.,.^.....__,...._m~'_____..__._"_~__".. , ATTACHMENT Page ~ of 8 S-~ concentrated multi-type commercial development which the city's comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance reveal a preference." ~ 1992 Decision at page 25.) The City Council relied upon testimony that there was a need for development of a factory outlet center at this location. ~ 1992 Decision at page 26.) The City Council's 1992 decision expressly addressed the criteria in WZO l6.080(d)(1) and (2). It found: "There are not enough adequately sized, properly located parcels, to accommodate a facility of this type. This particular piece of property is ideal to meet that need. Applicant has amply demonstrated these findings are well supported by the facts of this particular case." ~ 1992 Decision at page 31.) The City Council relies on and adopts this finding from the 1992 decision to find that this criterion is satisfied. b. WZO section l6.080(b)(2)' "Show that the particular piece of property in question will best meet that need. " FINDING: The City Council finds, based on the findings above for WZO l6.080(b)(1), that this property will best meet the identified need of providing for a factory outlet center. The site is appropriately located for this use and has already been approved by the City for a site plan allowing a factory outlet center. The City Council finds that the its prior actions and the findings in the 1992 decision demonstrate that this property will best meet the identified need. Furthermore, City Council finds that this zoning map amendment move the Factory Outlet Center 4501 closer to the I-51State Highway 219 interchange. This improves access to the center. E. Compliance with the Commercial Retail ("CRn) Zoning District Reauirements. FINDING: 1. WZO section 29.010. "Use." The factory outlet center will include only uses permitted in the CR zoning district. 2. WZO section 29.040. "Heie:ht. " This section provides for a 45 foot maximum height in the CR zoning district. Sheet A-8 shows that the proposed maximum height for structures is 45 feet. 3. WZO section 29.050. "Side and Rear Yards. " This section provides that no side or rear yard is required but, if one is provided, it may be no less than five (5) feet in depth and, where the CR zoning district lot abuts or is PDXIA-137106.1 27080-0001 _. ....+,.,_._+_._._,__h.._._'_____+---.,-.-~-....,.-~-'--..__.... ATTACHMENT -0 Page 22.. of S-~ adjacent to a residential use or zoning district, the side or rear yard shall not be less than five (5) feet. The south property line is adjacent to a property in the Interchange Zoning ("ID") District. The south property line is separated from the adjacent commercial property by a proposed 60 foot wide public right-of-way. The west property line is adjacent to a district within the city's Urban Growth Boundary that is zoned "UTF." The proposed buildings are more than five (5) feet from the west property line. This rear and side yard setbacks meet this requirement. 4. WZO section 29.060. "Front Yard. " This section requires that a landscaped yard five (5) feet in depth be provided adjacent to a street. This site is adjacent to two (2) proposed public streets. Sheet L1.1O shows that a five (5) foot wide landscaping strip is provided in all cases adjacent to the proposed public streets. 5. WZO section 29.065. "Solar Access." This section prohibits shadows on the south wall of any solar access area between the hours of 9 a.m. and 3 p.m. on December 21. The City Council finds that this section is satisfied. 6. WZO section 29.070. "Lot Area and Width. " This section requires that the RM district lot area and width requirements be satisfied. WZO section 26.080 establishes the lot area and width requirements in the RM district. The minimum lot area requirement is 6,000 square feet. This application meets this requirement. The minimum lot width requirement is 60 feet at the building line. This application meets this requirement. 7. WZO section 29.080, "Conditions Imposed Where Zone Change to CR District Abuts a Residential District." This section authorizes the City Council to impose certain conditions to preserve "neighborhood qualities." No "Neighborhood Qualities" are present that require preservation. 8. WZO section 29.090. "Site Plan Review Reouired.. This section requires site plan review for all buildings in the CR zoning district. This application includes a request for site plan approval and an analysis of the requirements of WZO Chapter 11. (~Part V, below.) F. Conclusion. PDXIA-131l06.1 2708~1 ....._.. _,_ ......._..+. M,_'__ _.___ _..__~._'___.." _,_+__,+_,"."+___~~--'+-"--"'-~ ATTACHMENT Page ZfL of -0 5~ The City Council finds that this application satisfies the applicable criteria for a zoning map amendment consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. V. SITE PLAN REVmW APPROVAL FOR TAX LOTS 200, A PART OF 300,702 AND 800. A. The 1992 Site Plan Annroval is Still Valid. Condition of Approval III(C) of the 1992 ordinance provides: "The Applicant's site plan application cannot receive final approval until such time as the Transportation Planning Rule requirements are met for the interchange area study. When the comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance amendments receive final approval, these conditions shall be met: * * *" ~ 1992 Decision at page 40.) The City Council finds that the 1992 site plan review approval is not yet effective because the comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance amendments required have not yet been deemed final. Thus, the six (6) month period to initiate construction required in WZO section 11. 085 has not yet begun to run. The City Council finds that, upon the final decision that the 1992 conditions of approval have been satisfied, that the site plan approval becomes effective. B. WZO Chanter 11. "Site Plan Review.. WZO Chapter 11, "Site Plan Review" applies to this application. Site Plan review applies to all new structures pursuant to WZO section 11.010. 1. WZO section 11.010. "Site Plan Review ReQuired. " FINDING: This application includes a request for site plan review modification. The City Council approved a site plan for a portion of this site in 1992. This application modifies that site plan approval by reconfiguring the proposed structures and adding tax lots 702, 800 and a part of tax lot 300. 2. WZO section 11.020. "Site Plan Composition." FINDING: WZO section l1.020(a) requires a site plan drawn to scale showing the proposed structures and other improvements along with other types of information. The site plan application includes twenty (20) sheets containing this information. The site plan contains all of the information required by this section. PDXIA-137\06.\ 2708~1 ATTACHMENT 73 Page~ of ')? WZO section l1.020(b) requires a landscaping plan, which has been submitted. Condition of Appproval No. 7(F) requires additional discussion and staff approval prior to issuance of occupancy permit. WZO section l1.020(c) requires architectural drawings including elevations. Sheets A-I throue:h A-10 show this information. WZO section 11. 020( d) requires an explanation of exterior materials, colors and textures. WZO section l1.020(e) requires a sign plan. The applicant has submitted three (3) variances to the WZO requirements for signs to the City on May 5, 1998. The variances contain the information required by this section. WZO section l1.020(f) requires shadow patterns of proposed structures. These patterns are shown on separate sheets. 3. WZO section 11.070. .Criteria for Evaluatin~ a Site Plan.. FINDING: WZO section ll.070(a) requires that placement of structures on the property .shall minimize adverse impact on adjacent uses.. This adjacent uses include, from south to north, an auto sales business, a farm use and vacant property. The structures on this site are placed so as to face away from the surrounding uses and towards the parking lot on the east. Potential adverse impacts on adjacent uses include noise and light from the factory outlet center. The distance from the western boundary of this site to the residential development on the west side of tax lot 300 is about 700 feet. In addition to vegetation on tax lot 300, the distance will mitigate potential light and noise. Further, the required landscaping and fence along the west side of this property will mitigate light and noise impacts. Finally, when tax lot 300 develops, buildings will also minimize potential impacts to the residential area.. The commercial uses to the south will not be adversely impacts by this application. Residential uses in Marion County's Exclusive Farm Use zoning district to the north are not affected by this application. Tax Lot 100 which is not part of this application separates the northern part of this site from those residential uses. The parking lot along the north part of tax lot 200 on the east side of relocated Arney Road will not have a significant impact on those residences for two reasons. First, Arney Road will act as a buffer. Secondly, those residences are set back a significant distance from the parking lot. WZO section l1.070(b) requires that landscaping be used to minimize impact on adjacent uses. The applicant has proposed landscaping around the perimeter of the entire site PDXIA-I37106.1 27_. .--. ._~ ,-,,-_,-,-'._.." .---_.._~~_. ---..-.." .-....-, ..._-_....~----~---- ATTACHMENT 0 Page~ of ~ ~ that will minimize light and noise impacts. The site plan provides the required fifteen (15) percent of total landscaping and ten (10) percent of the interior parking lot. Fifteen (15) percent of this site is 3.47 acres. The applicant proposes a total of 3.56 acres of landscaping. Ten (10) percent of the 11.0 acre parking are is 1.0 acre. The applicant has proposed 1.1 acres of interior parking area landscaping. WZO section ll.070(c) requires that landscaping be used so as to maximize its aesthetic value. The applicant's proposed landscaping plan maximizes the aesthetic value by concentrating it on the perimeter of the site where it is also visible to and buffers adjacent properties. WZO section 11.070(d) requires that access to public streets minimize impact on traffic patterns and that direct driveway access no be allowed to arterial streets and that access be shared with adjacent uses of a similar nature where possible. This application proposes access to a relocated Arney Road and a new public road to serve tax lot 300. The access plan minimizes impact on traffic patterns by providing for driveway locations meeting the city's requirements. Arney,Road is a Service Collector road and not an Arterial road. No adjacent uses of a similar nature are proposed, so no shared access is required. WZO section l1.070(e) requires that drainage facilities minimize impact on the City's or other public agencies' drainage facilities. The applicant's engineer will work with the City to see that this section is satisfied. The applicant's proposed grading and drainage plans show that on site drainage will be collected and then discharged at historical outfall points on the northwest corner of the site. The applicant will insure that volume and velocity of on site drainage will be maintained at historic rates through on site detention. WZO section l1.070(f) requires that the site plan design encourage energy conservation through structural siding and accommodation of pedestrian and vehicle traffic. The proposal meets this standard because of its design and because the public roads will accommodate pedestrian and bicycle traffic to the site. WZO section l1.070(g) requires that the proposed site development meet the requirements of the WZO. This application describes how the site development requirements of the WZO are satisfied. WZO section 11.070(h) requires that the location, design, color and materials of the structures and signs be compatible with the proposed development and appropriate to the character of the immediate neighborhood. The proposed structure's design, color and materials are pleasing and compatible with the proposed development. The proposed development consists of a unified architectural theme. The character of the immediate neighborhood consists of some scattered rural uses and the adjacent commercial development. PDXIA~137106.1 27080-0001 ~._,_._~. .._~._._..,..,-~------"--------,-,~~-",~"._--,-,.._>'''''_.... ATTACHMENT 23 page.:li.- of .,.3 The proposed development is compatible with these uses because of its siting, colors, materials and design. C. WZO Chapter 10, "Off Street Parking, Loading and Driveway Reauirements. n 1. WZO section 10.010, "New and Existing Facilities to Provide Parking and Loadinl1.. FINDING: This application provides the required off-street parking and loading facilities. 2. WZO section 10.030. "Location." FINDING: This application meets this requirement by providing the required amount of on-street parking on the same lot with the main building. The applicant proposes to separate its lot with a relocated Arney Road. Pursuant to ORS 92.01O(7)(d), the grant by a person to a city for a city street does not separate a single unit of land unless that unit of land is further subdivided or partitioned. 3. WZO section 10.050. "Off Street Automobile Parkinl1 ReQuirements. " FINDING: The applicant's engineer has calculated the required parking as shown on sheet C2.20. The applicant has calculated that WZO section 1O.050(w) requires one (1) off street parking space for every 200 square feet of gross floor area and one (1) off street parking space for every two (2) employees. The applicant has provided 1,216 parking spaces for 243,245 square feet of retail space. The applicant has also estimated that 121.5 off street parking spaces are required to accommodate the total number of full time employees. The applicant has proposed a total of 1,355 off street parking spaces. The proposed uses include retail stores and restaurants. WZO section 10.050(aa) requires one (1) off street parking space for each 200 square feet of gross floor area for restaurants. 4. WZO section 10.060. "Off-street Loading Requirements. " FINDING: WZO section 1O.060(a) and (b) list the off-street loading requirements. Section (b) requires for commercial uses one (1) off-street loading space up to 2,000 square feet of gross floor area and one (1) off-street loading space for each additional 40,000 square feet. A total of seven (7) off-street loading spaces are required by this section. PDXIA-137106.\ 2708~\ .- -- --'r-'--'--- ATTACHMENT b page...:id. of 5" ~ If the applicant proposes a total of 52,085 square feet in three (3) off-street loading areas. The dimension of each off-street loading area is 100 feet by 112 feet. Each loading area can accommodate at least five (5) off-street loading areas pursuant to the WZO. This section is satisfied. 5. WZO section 10.070, "Parking and Loading Area Development Reouirements. " FINDING: Subsection (a) requires that the required yard areas adjacent to a street not be used for parking or loading areas. The application meets this requirement. Subsection (b) requires that all driveways, parking and loading areas be paved. The applicant meets this requirement. Subsection (c) requires that bumper guards or wheel barriers be installed. The application meets this requirements. Subsection (d) requires that the off street parking spaces meet certain dimensional requirements. The off street parking spaces meet these requirements. Subsection (e) require that parking and loading areas be served with separate driveways or with adequate turnarounds that are always available and usable and that all entrances and exists onto a public right of way have the approval of the planning director or the city engineer. The City can find that this standard is satisfied. Subsection (f) applies only to parking or loading areas within a "R" zoning district. Subsection (g) requires that lighting be used to illuminate a parking or loading area and that it be directed entirely away from any residential use or moving vehicles on public-right-of- way. The applicant will meet this requirement. Subsection (h) requires that landscaped yard meet the requirements of WZO section 29.060. This section requires a landscaped yard five feet in depth adjacent to a street. The application meets this requirements. 6. WZO section 10.080. "Driveway Standards." FINDING: Subsection (a) requires that, for property frontage over 75 to 100 feet, one (1) driveway 24 feet wide be provided. This application proposes seven (7) driveways that are atfleast 24 feet wide. PDXIA~137106.1 7708(}"()ool .'.__m ',._'. .._~...~" - ------..~" . ._.~. "...--. ~'--'-'-'-' ----~_.------~-~--_._-~._~---~~ ATTACHMENT 8 Page~ of .'5') Subsection (d) requires that driveways be separated by 22 feet of straight curb. This application meets this requirement. Subsection (g) requires that driveways not be closer than 50 feet from the comer of an intersection. This application meets this requirement. D. WZO Section 8.190. nClear Vision". FINDING: This section requires that a clear vision site triangle be provided with a minimum of 30 feet along each street. Additionally, driveway approaches must be designed and located to provide an exiting vehicle with an unobstructed view. The City Council finds that this criteria is satisfied. The site plan shows that there is an unobstructed clear vision sight triangle at the intersection of Sprague Lane and Arney Road. The clear vision triangle for the main parking access driveway is not obstructed by landscaping. The minor parking access on Arney Road may be obstructed by landscaping. The Planning Department should review the design and planning and revise it to assure appropriate clear vision triangles. The applicant shall provide the landscaping plan to demonstrate that WZO section 8.190, "clear vision", is satisfied. E. Landscaoinl!. Sheets L1.1O and L1.20 show proposed landscaping. Other than the sections addressing landscaping that have already been discussed, WZO contains no separate landscaping requirements. F. Conclusion. The applicable approval criteria for site plan review are satisfied. VI. SATISFACTION OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF 1992 DECISION. A. Introduction. This application includes a request that the City Council determine that conditions of approval IlI(B)(l) - (3) are complete. This condition of approval states: "The City Council finds that prior to final approval of the Comprehensive Plan and Zone Map Amendment from multi-family residential to commercial, the following conditions must be met: * * *" PDXtA-137106.1 17080-0001 ATTACHMENT '8 Page~ of :53 B. Conditions of Aonroval. 1. Condition of Approval III(B)(l). FINDING: This condition of approval requires that the applicant assist the City in amending its 1985 transportation plan for the Highway 214/1-5 interchange/Parr Road area to bring it into compliance with OAR 660-l2-060(1)(d). The City Council finds as noted in Part II, above, that the applicant has done so. The City adopted an amended transportation system plan in 1996. No party appealed that City decision, so the Transportation System Plan is fmal and now in effect. As noted in Part II, above, the findings for the transportation system plan expressly acknowledge that it complies with OAR.660-l2-060(1)(b) for this interchange area. In recognition of the participation level of applicant in this process, and the need for the creation and administration of an LID to construct the identified improvements to the transportation system, the applicant as a portion of the continuing assistance to the City in its transportation planning, shall fund initial creation of the LID. Condition of Approval No.8, sets forth the applicants obligations necessary to complete compliance with its required assistance to the City, and therefore, this condition of approval is satisfied. 2. Condition of AODroval III(B)(2). FINDING: This condition requires that the applicant be required to "participate by paying its fair share" of three transportation improvements. The applicant has agreed to pay its fair share of such transportation improvements consistent with the "rough proportionality" test under Dolan v. City of Tigard. The City Council finds that this condition is capable of being satisfied through the City's formal LID process in which the applicant will pay for the entire project costs and then get reimbursed as the benefitted properties pay their fair share cost to the City. The applicant will abide by the decision of the City Council as to transportation improvement cost sharing in the event the LID is not approved. 3. Condition of ApJ'roval III(B)(3). FINDING: This condition requires that: "the Comprehensive Plan amendment should be limited to consist only of the factory outlet center as described by Applicant. " PDXIA.137106.1 27080-0001 - ,--",",~",_.,.._--,......,<-_...._._~.,._-,..._--,.,.,-"--'~'-~-''''--'''- ATTACHMENT 8 Page.3..S:.. of S- '3 The City Council finds, based on the October 6, 1992 letter from ODOT, that the concern with the factory outlet center as approved in 1992 was with the ~ and sauare foota~e, not with the footprint. The City Council interprets this condition as not limiting the footprint or size of the center but rather than it required the same type of center. In this application, the applicant has proposed to slightly reduce the square footage proposed. However, the concept of a factory outlet center and the retail uses to be developed are the same. The City Council finds that the proposed factory outlet center is substantially the same as that described by the applicant in the 1992 decision. Because the City Council approved the comprehensive plan map and zoning map amendments in 1992, it is required to determine that these conditions of approval are satisfied. The City Council determines that these conditions of approval are satisfied. C. UDzonin2. FINDING: Condition of Approval III(D) requires the City to upzone approximately 28 acres of single-family residential property, the multi-family prior to final approval of the applicant's proposal. Since 1992, the City has added 30.60 acres of multi-family residential zoning in Ordinance Nos. 2162 (11.92 acres) and 2124 (19 acres). The City Council can fmd that this condition of approval has been satisfied. PDXIA-137106.1 2708~1 ,-- --'T-----.--- ATTACHMENT i.3 Page.3!e... of 5.3 VII. SIGN VARIANCES A. Silm Variance 98-04. 1. ProJlOsal. The applicant proposes to vary the standards to allow a free standing sign for an integrated business center of 620 square feet where 150 square feet is allowed. (Section 12(A) - Ordinance No. 2092). 2. Relevant Aoproval Criteria. Section 12 of the Ordinance No. 2092 states that all requests for variance shall be processed in accordance with the variance procedures set forth in the Woodburn Zoning Ordinance. The conditions (a through f) for granting a variance, WZO Section 12.020 are cited below. All of the conditions must be found to have been met. (a) That there are unnecessary, unreasonable hardships or practical difficulties which can be relieved only by modifying the literal requirements of the Ordinance. FINDING: The proposed use is almost exclusively freeway oriented. Potential customers traveling the freeway will be approaching at speeds up to 65 mph. Customers must have time to identify the location of the center and safely transition to a freeway exit. The integrated business center standard does not differentiate between an arterial street location and one on a freeway, where traffic moves at a higher rate of speed and requires notice visible at a greater distance to react. Consequently a larger sign face is needed. The practical difficulty justifying the variance is the speed of traffic and the need to alert motorists to the center. (b) That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to land, buildings or use referred to in the application, which circumstances or conditions do no apply generally to land, buildings, or uses in the same District: however, non-conforming land uses or structures in the vicinity shall not in themselves constitute such circumstances or conditions. FINDING: The proposed use is freeway oriented and that orientation requires identification of the development from greater distances than other CR properties in Woodburn. (c) That granting the application will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or be injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood of the premises. PDXIA-137106.1 2708Q..OOll -- ---....'..-.-.-....--....---r--- ATTACHMENT D Page~ of 1:>3 FINDING: The sign is part of the commercial business. The surrounding developed uses are commercial in character and the other surrounding land is mostly vacant. Consequently the impact is minimal. Having one sign rather a proliferation of individual smaller signs is of lesser impact. (d) That such Variance is necessary for the preservation and employment of substantial property right of the applicant. FINDING: The City Council approved the proposed use in 1992 and the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of the owner's substantial property rights. (e) That the granting of the application will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, adversely affect the health or safety of person working or residing in the neighborhood of the property of the applicant. FINDING: There is no adverse health or safety effects based on its findings for (c) above. (f) That the granting of the application will be in general harmony with the intent and purpose of this Ordinance and will not adversely affect any officially adopted Comprehensive Plan. FINDING: The applicant finds the simplicity, lack of detail, type of illumination of the sign, concentration on a single free standing form, mitigate the potential clutter and visual impacts associated with alternatives and are in keeping with the intent of the Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant goes on to indicate that the variance preserves free speech. 3. Decision. Based on the evidence, the City Council finds that a variance allowing a 300 square foot sign is justified. B. Sil!n Variance 98-05. 1. Proposal. The applicant proposes to vary the standards to allow one free standing sign for an integrated business center 75 feet in height where 35 feet is allowed. (Section l2(a) - Ordinance No. 2092). PDXIA-137106.1 27080-0001 .. .--- --- ---"-~ ---T'.---.. ATTACHMENT b Page~ of -5_1 2. Relevant Ap.,proval Criteria. Section 13 of the Ordinance No. 2092 states that all requests for variance shall be processed in accordance with the variance procedures set forth in the Woodburn Zoning Ordinance. The conditions (a through f) for granting a variance, WZO Section 13.020 are cited below. All of the condition must be found to have been met. (a) That there are unnecessary, unreasonable hardships or practical difficulties which can be relieved only by modifying the literal requirements of the Ordinance. FINDING: The proposed use is freeway oriented and that to identify the site to motorists traveling 65 mph a very high sign is needed. The applicant states that the integrated business sign criteria do not differentiate between a sign on the freeway and on an arterial street. (b) That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to land, buildings or use referred to in the application, with circumstances or conditions do not apply generally to land, buildings, or uses in the same District: however, non-conforming land uses or structures in the vicinity shall not in themselves constitute such circumstances or conditions. FINDING: The proposed use is freeway oriented and that orientation requires identification of the use from greater distances than by other CR properties in Woodburn. (c) That granting the application will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or be injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood of the premises. FINDING: The sign is part of a commercial business. The surrounding uses are either commercial in character or rural, thereby creating minimal impacts. (d) That such Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property right of the applicant. FINDING: The City Council approved the proposed use in 1992 and that the variance is necessary for preservation and enjoyment of the owner's substantial property rights. (e) That the granting of the application will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, adversely affect the health or safety of person working or residing in the neighborhood of the property of the applicant; and PDXIA-137106.1 27080-0001 __. .__..._~.~_ m',"",_.,_ _'~._._..._.,.".._. ~___,_.,.... "_'__<""'-- ATTACHMENT J'3 Page .:;<7 of 53 FINDING: The applicant finds no adverse health or safety effects based on its findings for (c) above. (f) That the granting of the application will be in general harmony with the intent and purpose of this Ordinance and will not adversely affect any officially adopted Comprehensive Plan. FINDING: The applicant finds the simplicity, lack of detail, type of illumination of the sign, concentration on a single free standing form, mitigate the potential clutter and visual impacts associated with alternatives and are in keeping with the intent of the Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant goes on to indicate that the variance preserves free speech. 3. Decision. Based on the evidence, the City Council approves a maximum sign height of forty-five (45) feet. C. Silm Variance 98-06 1. Proposal. A variance to allow one wall sign for each business facing 1-5 with the area of 1-1/2 square feet per foot of frontage on a street or parking lot where 1 foot per foot of frontage is allowed. (Section l2(C)-Ordinance No. 2092). 2. Relevant ApJlroval Criteria. Section 13 of the Ordinance No. 2092 states that all requests for variance shall be processed in accordance with the variance procedures set forth in the Woodburn Zoning Ordinance. The conditions (a through f) for granting a variance, WZO Section 13.020 are cited below. All of the conditions must be found to have been met. (a) That there are unnecessary, unreasonable hardships or practical difficulties which can be relieved only by modifying the literal requirements of the Ordinance. FINDING: The variance only applies to businesses fronting on the freeway. Further, that the standard does not address uses located 350 feet from the freeway. The visibility from the freeway is part of the overall site and use consideration. Larger signs are appropriate if they are to be seen from the freeway. A fifty percent increase in size would be in scale with the mass of the proposed mall structure. It would also be an aid in assuring visibility of the specific commercial tenants. Considering the distance from the freeway, the speed of vehicles, PDXIA-137106.1 2708~1 .__. .'-,.,_.~,^_.,-_... .....,...__ .__....,..."_ ,".__._.,_....__'_".~.._,._.._u.___._,,__,~~_._....~_. ATTACHMENT B Page ~ of ,<)?, intervening landscaping, and the relative scale of the proposal it is reasonable to assure commercial visibility. (b) That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to land, buildings or use referred to in the application, which circumstances or conditions do not apply generally to land, buildings, Of uses in the same District: however, non-conforming land uses or structures in the vicinity shall not in themselves constitute such circumstances or conditions. FINDING: As indicated previously by the applicant, the use has freeway orientation and requires identification from a distance. The size and orientation of the signs is in scale with the mall structure and appropriate for the use. (c) That granting the application will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or be injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood of the premises. FINDING: The applicant finds that the signs are directly associated with the use and the freeway location. Further by limiting the variance to the freeway exposure, none of the neighboring uses are directly impacted. The staff finds that due to the limited exposure, none of the surrounding neighborhood is directly effected. (d) That such Variance is necessary for the preservation and employment of substantial property right of the applicant. FINDING: The applicant finds that the signing variance is in fact necessary to preserve property rights due to the 1992 land use actions. The ability to adapt the use and the signing in a manner that is harmonious and in scale with the location is appropriate. (e) That the granting of the application will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, adversely affect the health or safety of persons working or residing in the neighborhood of the property of the applicant; and FINDING: The applicant finds that there are no adverse health or safety effects due the orientation of the signs effected. PDXIA-\37106.\ 2708~\ . .-. -...--..-.-..-1.-----..-.." ATTACHMENT l3 Page.!LL of 5 ~ (t) That the granting of the application will be in general harmony with the intent and purpose of this Ordinance and will not adversely affect any officially adopted Comprehensive Plan. FINDING: The applicant finds the Ordinance and the Plan allow for adapting requirements to specific conditions. Adaptation such as proposed, is appropriate where it has no adverse effect on the surroundings or the community, it supports the designated use and is in balance with the requirements of other commercial uses. C. Decision. Grant the variance to allow one wall sign for each business facing 1-5 with an area of 1- 1/2 square feet per foot of frontage on a street or parking lot where 1 square foot of frontage is allowed. D. Citv of Woodburn Access Manal!:ement Ordinance. The Access Management Ordinance adopted in 1997 by City Ordinance No. 2186 is not an applicable approval criterion for this application. Nevertheless, the applicant will meet applicable portions of the Access Management Ordinance. E. Citv of Woodburn TransDortation Svstem Plan. The Transportation System Plan does not contain any applicable approval criterion for these applications. However, the Transportation System Plan is relevant as noted above because the City found in connection with the 1996 adoption of the TSP that it provided for the necessary roadway improvements and capacity enhancements at this interchange area. "TSP Section 9.2.3, required street upgrades" describes the short-term improvements to the I-5/Highway 214 intersection. TSP also notes with respect to longer-term improvements: "*** a reconfiguration of the interchange is proposed. A specific improvement (including but not limited to the following: improve existing interchange, split diamond interchange or second interchange at Butteville Road) will be identified through a follow-up interchange refinement study to the TSP. The specific alignment for the Western Portion of the South Arterial will also be identified in the study. The South Arterial will have a grade separation with 1-5 and have a direct connection to 1-5 under either of the split diamond or second interchange alternatives. The alignment of the South Arterial will need to be coordinated with site development plans on both sides of 1-5." ~ TSP at pages 89 and 90.) PDXIA-137106.1 27080-0001 -.-. ~-'"-_..-,.,_.-.--_....._~..~-"'~~ -~,~.~-~_. ATTACI;IMENT B Page.:ti!,... of !:,-~ The City Council finds that the TSP now contains the required improvements necessary to fmd that this proposed land use is consistent with the transportation capacity of the surrounding streets. This application consists of four (4) lots of record. In order to meet zoning and building code requirements that no building be constructed over property lines, the applicant has received administrative approval for property line adjustments. The purpose of the property line adjustment was to relocate property lines so that property lines conform to applicable city requirements. vm. RESPONSE TO OTHER ISSUES. A. Citv of Woodburn Access Manal!:ement Ordinance. The Access Management Ordinance adopted in 1997 by City Ordinance No. 2186 is not an applicable approval criterion for this application. Nevertheless, the applicant will meet applicable portions of the Access Management Ordinance. B. Citv of Woodburn Transnortation Svstem Plan. The Transportation System Plan does not contain any applicable approval criterion for these applications. However, the Transportation System Plan is relevant as noted above because the City found in connection with the 1996 adoption of the TSP that it planned for the necessary roadway improvements and capacity enhancements at this interchange area. "TSP Section 9.2.3, required street upgrades" describes the short-term improvements to the I-5/Highway 214 intersection. TSP also notes with respect to longer-term improvements: "*** a reconfiguration of the interchange is proposed. A specific improvement (including but not limited to the following: improve existing interchange, split diamond interchange or second interchange at Butteville Road) will be identified through a follow-up interchange refinement study to the TSP. The specific alignment for the Western Portion of the South Arterial will also be identified in the study. The South Arterial will have a grade separation with 1-5 and have a direct connection to 1-5 under either of the split diamond or second interchange alternatives. The alignment of the South Arterial will need to be coordinated with site development plans on both sides of 1-5." ~ TSP at pages 89 and 90.) C. Response to Issues Raised by Department of Land Conservation and DeveloDment. The Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development ("DLCD") submitted its only testimony in a July 27, 1998 letter submitted that same afternoon to the City of PDXIA-137106.1 27080-0001 H _H_ _____,...'' ______ _.__ ________ ATTAC~~ENT ~~ Page of .... Woodburn. DLCD raised two issues: "long-range transportation and land use issues" and "land use and subdivision regulations. " The City Council has adopted findings addressing OAR 660-12-045. The City Council has reviewed DLCD's comments regarding long-range transportation and land use issues. The City is required to coordinate this application with DLCD meaning that it must provide DLCD with notice of the application, an opportunity to comment, and must consider the comment. The City Council rejects DLCD's comments for the following reasons. First, DLCD asserts that the factory outlet center will congest the 1-5/214 interchange. In fact, substantial evidence in the whole record supports a contrary conclusion. The traffic analysis made by Kittelson & Associates including the March 1998 transportation study and May 1998 letters demonstrate that the interchange ofI-5 and 214 will operate as acceptable levels of service both the year of opening the factory outlet center and five years later. DLCD also suggested the City should postpone this action for five to eight years. The City notes that DLCD requested in 1992 that it not approve the factory outlet center application then pending before it until such time as the City adopted a TSP. The City adopted a TSP in 1996 after coordinating with ODOT, DLCD and Marion County. No party appealed the City's TSP adoption and the TSP is now a part of the City's acknowledged comprehensive plan. The City believes that it has adequately addressed long-range transportation issues through the adoption of the TSP. Further deferral of this decision is neither desirable nor warranted. Further, the City Council finds the TSP includes both a long-range plan for improving the 1-5/214 interchange including a number of options and includes a recommendation for a refinement plan. Further, the TSP includes an analysis of financing mechanisms. Nothing requires those decisions to be final now, consistent with the TSP's requirements that they be adopted later. D. Resnonse to Issues Raised bv ODOT. ODOT appeared in this hearing through oral and written testimony. During the July 27, 1998 City Council hearing, ODOT representative acknowledged that ODOT cannot impose conditions of approval on the application. City Council finds that it has coordinated the application with ODOT. City Council also notes that ODOT's July 27, 1998 letter agrees with another of the proposed conditions of approval for roadway improvement. At no time has ODOT disputed in testimony either before the Planning Commission or the City Council the traffic analysis methodology used by the applicant's traffic expert. IX. CONCLUSION. PDXIA.137106.1 2708Q.(XX)1 ""'"'"-,__ "'__'O"~__""'_'_.'__"_ "_"_"_"~'''''"'.'''_'''''____~__.__'_ ATTACH~ENT j) page.'f of -") "~ The City Council finds that the criteria for the annexation, comprehensive plan map amendment, zoning map amendments and the site plan review are satisfied. The City Council also finds that the 1992 Comprehensive Plan map and zoning map decision is now effective because the conditions of approval are deemed satisfied. The City Council hereby approves these applications subject to the following conditions of approval: These conditions shall apply to each of the approvals granted by the City Council unless a condition specifically states otherwise. 1. RoadwllY and RoadwllY-related Conditions. A. The applicant shall not be responsible for acquisition of any right-of-way for any Oregon Department of Transportation ("ODOT") facility nor shall the applicant be responsible for reimbursement to ODOT or the City of Woodburn (the "City") should they be required to obtain any additional right-of-way for any of its facilities. B. The applicant shall not be required to pay for installation of a median on State Highway 214 east of 1-5. It may be paid for from resources provided from other sources. C. The applicant shall provide two (2) westbound through travel lanes and one (1) eastbound travel lane within the existing State Highway 214 right-of-way. ODOT has determined the right-of-way to be sixty (60) feet wide. All applicant-installed improvements (restriping) to State Highway 214 shall be constructed to ODOT standards and specifications. The two (2) westbound through travel lanes and one (1) eastbound through travel lane shall be installed by restriping the existing roadway, using a "dura-stripe" material for a distance of two hundred fifty (250) feet east beginning at the "stop bar" at the east side of the State Highway 214 overcrossing at 1-5. The applicant shall not be required to connect State Highway 214 or the frontage road to Stacy Allison Road. The applicant shall not be required to pave or repave the roadway in connection with restriping the roadway. The installation described in this paragraph significantly reduces capacity and level of service and will require a median to maintain level of service. D. The applicant shall restripe the State Highway 214 overcrossing bridge structure over 1-5 to provide a two (2) foot wide median, two (2) twelve-foot wide side-by-side turn lanes, two (2) twelve-foot wide through travel lanes and two (2) 4.5-foot wide bicycle lanes. The restriping shall use a "dura-stripe" material. The applicant shall not be required to pave or repave the roadway in connection with restriping the roadway. E. The applicant's contribution to the cost of signage, including sign bridge or other supporting structure for traffic lane information shall be fifty thousand dollars ($50,000). Any costs in excess of fifty thousand dollars shall be paid by other sources. PDXIA-137106.1 27080..0001 -_. --.,.-....-. ---.---.---.----.-.-.--. ATTA~~ENT 13 Page of 5 :3 F. The applicant may apply for such permits as are necessary to allow four (4) 36-inch wide by l2-inch tall blue and white destination signs reading "Woodburn Company Stores - Outlets" and including a directional arrow that may be installed in the ODOT right-of- way. If such signs are approved, two (2) shall be placed at the northbound 1-5 off-ramp, one (1) at the 1-5 southbound off-ramp and one (1) at the intersection of Arney Road and State Highway 219. G. The applicant shall widen the 1-5 southbound off-ramp to two (2) full lanes for two hundred seventy-five (275) feet as described in Table 2 of the updated Year 2003 Queue Length Requirements. The appropriate taper, approximately four hundred eighty (480) feet, shall be in addition to the two (2) lanes. The right turn radius of the intersection of the 1- 5 southbound ramp and State Highway 219 shall be fifty (50) feet. In the event the right turn radius requires the relocation of a traffic signal pole structure, the signal control box and all or a portion of the existing guardrail, the applicant shall be responsible for such changes. All such improvements to the 1-5 southbound off ramp and other improvements required to accommodate the right turn radius shall occur in existing ODOT right-of-way. H. The applicant shall install a traffic signal at the intersection of Woodland Avenue and State Highway 219, using applicant's proceeds, as well as those of previously conditioned applicants, and other subsequently benefitted properties, and funds from any local improvement district ("LID"). In the event the LID is not approved, the applicant shall abide by the cost sharing decision of the City Council. The installation of the signal shall be subject to ODOT approval. I. The required signal at Woodland Avenue and State Highway 219 shall be interconnected with the existing wireless system (currently connecting the signals at Oregon Way and Country Club Lane, Evergreen Avenue, the northbound 1-5 on ramp and the southbound 1-5 off ramp), using the same brand and model of wireless controller to ensure compatibility. The controller model is a Spread Spectrum Radio GINA model 6000, which is currently available from Capital Enterprise & Engineering Corporation. The master controller for the interconnect system is located at the Evergreen Avenue intersection and connected to the ODOT system by a hard-wired telephone line. All of the signals use an antennae that must point directly at the master controller and has a clear line of site for proper operation. The applicant may choose any of the following three (3) alternatives to implement the wireless system: (i) The master controller may be moved to either the southbound or northbound ramp terminals (depending on which has the better line of site) and shall be connected to the ODOT system by a cellular telephone. (ii) The antennae at Woodland Avenue may be elevated to provide a clear line of site to Evergreen Avenue, however, some of the radio signal may be lost in the additiona1length of wire to elevate the antennae and may require a signal booster. (iii) Evergreen Avenue may remain the master controller if the Woodland Avenue signal antennae is directed at the southbound ramp signal. Relay-repeater PDXIA-137106.1 2708()...()()()1 .'-""'-''-'-'-'- .__...,...--._~-~-~-,_..".~---_. ATTAC~~ENT 13 Page of /53 equipment may be installed at the southbound ramp that will forward the information to Evergreen Avenue (this method has not been tried and is experimental). J. The applicant shall install, at applicant's expense, a raised median on State Highway 219 between the 1-5 southbound ramp and Woodland Avenue. K. Arney Road. (i) Certain portions of Arney Road shall be vacated and rededicated. The applicant has provided an executed easement over and across the new Arney Road right- of-way that it will dedicate to the City. Vacation and rededication shall be accomplished either by a property owner-initiated street vacation petition approved by the Woodburn City Council or by a street vacation initiated by the Woodburn City Council. wide right of way. (ii) The rededicated Arney Road shall have a seventy-four (74) foot (iii) The-rededicated Arney Road shall be improved with a forty-eight (48) foot wide pavement cross section, curb-to-curb, with a five (5) foot planting strip adjacent to the curb on each side and a five (5) foot sidewalk on each side. (iv) The existing Arney Road at the north property line of this site shall remain a public street from its connection with the relocated Arney Road, to the west end of the site. This portion of Arney Road shall be improved with a thirty-four (34) foot wide paving mat curb-to-curb and a five (5) foot wide sidewalk on the south side only. An additional ten (10) foot wide street dedication shall be required on the south side of the existing Arney Road right-of-way which is not to be vacated along the north line to provide for a total right-of-way width of fifty (50) feet. (v) The Marion County Public Works Department, the Oregon Department of Transportation and the City of Woodburn shall approve the connection between the existing segments of Arney Road and the new Arney Road right-of-way and street surface. (vi) Driveway approaches in this development from public streets shall comply with City of Woodburn standards and shall be constructed of concrete. Road. (vii) Street lights shall be installed along the improved part of Arney (viii) To accomplish the portion of the project for which costs are to be shared by other benefitted properties, a formal city LID process shall be followed. Exhibits "A" and "B" demonstrate a possible method of sharing costs within the LID. In the event the LID is not approved, the applicant shall abide by the decision of the City Council as to project transportation improvement cost sharing. PDXIA-\37106.\ 2708~1 -_.. ~--"-_..._..- '--.~.*..,....... ATTACHMENT 8 page.....t:Z.. of "1.3 (ix) The applicant shall dedicate a forty (40) foot wide right-of-way for the new public road known as "Sprague Lane" between the west side of Arney Road and the east property line of tax lot 300. The west termini of Sprague Lane shall provide for a temporary vehicle turnaround satisfactory for emergency vehicles. 2. Drainae:e Conditions. A. The Arney Road storm sewer system must be separate from the applicant's private storm sewer system and shall provide sufficient depth for future extensions to the north and to the south. B. The applicant shall provide a storm sewer runoff study for this development that includes an analysis of detention requirements. C. The existing drainage ditch, to be used as an outlet, may be modified and such modification shall comply with the City of Woodburn's Storm Water Management Plan (working document) and the City of Woodburn Public Works Department's Storm Water Practices. The applicant shall provide a hydraulic analysis to the City of Woodburn Public Works Department for review and approval prior to modifications to the drainage ditch. The applicant may improve any drainage ditch within this site or within tax lot 101 if the applicant demonstrates to the City of Woodburn Public Works Department that such improvements shall provide improved storm drainage. D. Storm runoff on the site shall be discharged through a pollution control device consisting of either a manhole or an inlet prior to its discharge into the drainageway or wetlands. 3. Water Conditions. A. The applicant shall provide an interior looped twelve (12) inch water line. The applicant shall be allowed to install the water line to King Way in the most direct route possible, which may include the westerly edge of the golf course. The City shall pay fifty (50) percent of the costs (construction and easement) associated with the water line extension beyond applicant's property. The City of Woodburn shall assist the applicant to obtain necessary easements from the golf course owner. B. Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the Woodburn Fire Department. C. Back flow devices may be required depending on water usage. D. Water meters shall be located within an easement granted to the City. PDXIA-\37\06.\ 2708~\ --. ---".--..-- --..--.------ ---.r-~----.-.~- ATTACH~ENT8 Page 'f of.~? E. Back flow devices for fire sprinkler systems shall be located outside of buildings. F. The applicant shall install an eight (8) inch water main line to the west end of its property along Sprague Lane. G. The applicant shall install a double check assembly ("DC") back flow preventor on each domestic water line, the irrigation system and each fire sprinkler water line. The DC shall be installed by the water meter next to the property line unless otherwise provided by the City Engineer. H. and dishwasher. The applicant shall install grease traps in all kitchen areas by the sink 4. Sanitary Sewer Conditions. A. The applicant shall extend the sanitary sewer line from the existing manhole in Arney Road adjacent to the east line of the recreational vehicle park. Depending on the depth of the line, the sewer main shall extend to the most northeasterly corner of applicant's site. B. The applicant shall investigate whether the sanitary sewer line as proposed is deep enough to serve the entire development. This study may require the applicant to provide alternative designs. C. This site is subject to repayment of a conditional grant in the amount of $26,372.67. In the event the applicant disputes its liability for payment of such sum, it shall be entitled to litigate said liability. 5. Police Department Conditions. A. If the development includes an automated teller machine, the applicant is encouraged to locate it in a highly visible area with adequate lighting during nighttime hours and the automatic teller machine should not be obscured by shrubs or other landscaping. B. The structure should be prewired for an alarm system and the applicant shall encourage individual businesses to install an intruder alarm system. C. The applicant shall consider measures to secure restroom locations. 6. Fire Department Conditions. A. The applicant shall provide sufficient information to the Woodburn Fire District as to allow it to provide addresses for each business. PDXIA-131106.1 2708~1 ATTA~~ENT !??-, Page of __ B. Structures shall be provided with a sprinkled facility providing 2,000 gpm, based on a credit of 75 % for fully sprinkled covered structures. C. Fire hydrants shall be located at four hundred (400) foot intervals around the exterior of each structure. The applicant shall determine specific fire hydrant locations by consulting with the City of Woodburn Water Department and the Woodburn Fire District prior to installation. D. Structures shall be sprinkled. The FDC shall be within twenty-five (25) feet of a hydrant and shall not be attached to a stnicture. The applicant shall consult with the Woodburn Fire District prior to submitting sprinkler plans. Additionally, the applicant shall install a Class II standpipe system. The Woodburn Fire District will waive the requirement for hose and cabinets but shall require a two (2) 1/2 inch valve on the discharge side of the standpipe. E. The applicant shall install an alarm system that monitors the sprinkler system. F. The applicant shall provide premises identification visible from public rights-of-way and shall submit a plan to the Woodburn Fire District for identifying and locating the businesses. G. The applicant shall consult with the Woodburn Fire District regarding storage of flammable and combustible materials and liquids. H. The applicant shall either obtain an easement or shall record conditions, covenants and restrictions to provide for adequate setbacks along the north property line from structures for fire protection purposes. I. The applicant shall provide an operational water system acceptable to the City of Woodburn prior to the construction of combustible buildings. Access during construction shall support the weight of fire trucks and shall allow access to all structures. 7. Planning Department Conditions. A. The applicant shall construct the factory outlet center consistent with the preliminary development plans dated May 26, 1998 as subsequently amended by revised landscaping plans. B. Site plan approval shall be subject to approval of the annexation request and the comprehensive plan map and zoning map amendments. C. The acceptance of public improvements constructed and installed by the applicant, or the acceptance of public improvement agreements for public facilities serving the factory outlet center, shall be subject to City of Woodburn Public Works Department and Waste Water and Water Department approval. PDXtA-137106.1 27OSO-{l()()I ,...-._...,-_..-...~.-. ATTAC~ENT c,13.3 Page 0 of . D. All required landscaping areas shall include a permanently installed irrigation system. The applicant shall submit an irrigation plan prior to construction of the factory outlet center for approval by the Woodburn Planning Department. E. The landscaping area shall be divided into four (4) components (street frontage, parking lots, interior planter areas and buffer strip landscaping). Fifteen (15 %) percent of the site area shall be landscaped. The applicant shall provide a total of 153,986 square feet of landscaping, including approximately 30,661 additional square feet than that included on the preliminary plans dated May 26, 1998. The applicant shall install a five (5) foot wide planting strip between the curb and sidewalks along all public streets. The applicant shall provide for at least ten (10%) percent of the interior parking stalls to be landscaped. F. The number of trees and location to be installed by the applicant shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Director, and maybe determined in the following manner: (i) Frontage Street Landscaping: This condition and the associated tree sizes and quantities may be limited to Sprague Lane. With respect to Arney Road, the applicant may alternatively provide the required trees either on another location within the subject site, or the neighboring wetlands or in the newly proposed Centennial Park. By way of example, if twenty-five (25) trees are required along Arney Road, the applicant may install twenty-five (25) properly sized trees at Centennial Park. (ii) Parking Lot Landscaping: In lieu of planting the required number of trees in the front two (2) parking lots, the applicant may have the option to plant such trees in the alternative locations specified above ~ Frontage Street Landscaping section above). The applicant will accept the parking lot landscaping requirement for the side and rear parking areas as specified below: 1 small tree for each five (5) parking stalls; 1 medium tree for each ten (10) parking stalls; or 1 large tree for each fourteen (14) parking stalls. G. The portion of the site abutting the RM zoning district, except that eight (8) acres located contiguous with and abutting to the north of the site, shall be landscaped with a ten (10) foot wide planting strip and shall contain a seven (7) foot tall fence. The number of trees to be planted in this area shall be determined by using the formula in "F(i) " , above for street frontage landscaping. H. The applicant shall identify the number and location of ADA-accessible parking spaces on the site plan. I. The applicant shall install a minimum seven (7) foot high solid wall on the north side of Woodland Avenue abutting the rear line of the lots fronting Acacia Avenue between the intersection of extended Arney Road and Woodland Avenue and Myrtle Street. The applicant shall install plantings such as arborvitae on the east side of the solid wall. The PDXIA-I31I06.1 2708~1 ATTACI:!M.ENT fJ Page...2..L of .) .,., "clear vision triangle" at the intersection of Woodland Avenue and Myrtle Street shall be maintained. J. The applicant shall amend the site plan to identify the number and location of bicycle parking spaces. The applicant shall provide for sixty-three (63) bicycle parking spaces. . K. The applicant shall amend the site plan to provide for preferential carpool and vanpool parking. 8. Applicant agrees to pay for all costs associated with preliminary LID engineering, preliminary LID cost estimates, and related administrative costs for all LID improvements. Payment of these costs shall be made by the applicant without any reimbursement from LID beneficiaries. PDXIA-137106.1 2708()..()()()1 ._~- ..----.--..-----.----.~-"r-~-'..-.~-'-"--.- 1:~~s It'JOOa:OIl'lOOO g ATTACHMENT PJ h.EO ~i8~o~~ill::S: C> Page >)A- of 5"> .n":a)a)lliMlli~M ~ _0::10 :llt'JMQ)N-<O ... ;.t:18 .~<i(o -. : ..... ~ .!! '0 c o1:~ ........................... ... G G 0 N~~S~g~~~ C> ",EO C> J!lG O"":cONltlC"'i";";ai d ie -- N -- C> ~ l!o. G E ...- . _Ill _CC~N~o)~N<O C> J!' N..,. 0 0 Mr--. C> o + O.....CCN M..,"'Q) C> ..... .......... ON 00.......... 0 ~ ;< cicicicicicic:ioo ~ 01 -E ;;t. .~o ~~~ N C> .c~'" ~ C> .,u. '" ""... ~ ..:L:. 000 cicici ci C> 01 0 . C 0 c .s ~ ." :i 1&3 "'....'" '" C> G .,J!l0:: M~~ '" C> ,,~ o~i '" C> NN~ '" ~ ZG ~u.E 000 ci ~ -> 0::.. . .. h ." "J!I G _ ~8 ~ 010 GO H~ 8"'''' 0 N NN "' .. 8~ .,OG ......'" '" - "'1! .:: E 0_ .. Z." 01 ~l! c >t 80:: "C~E ~Q)ON~Q)NNCO C> ~f l!SCD COMe ONM,.... C> .,u. ..........NIl'lM_..,.m C> ~ -. OOONooe-o ... 0::.. aLL.;C: c:iociocicic:ic:ici 0 111_ 0 0 c ~i 0 .. c m~~Q)e~C!;~~ C> ~ .....NN~1'l')NM<O C> I!o C> G ~ 000 OOON- C> >... c:ic:iciciooc:ic:io '" 0'5 H :::l0~8O:5888 ... 109 MgCO..,.NIO .... N _ U M..,.CONOMr--.MCCl ~ ..... ....:N...:...:<<i.....:OM oft '" N_ ., '0-' c'" ~<i ., "'~cocoe_...r--.o o "'.....,~Cll...... 01 It)M....O,....(CHO co~cicico~.n~a) W")_c.o~*C';~,....CIO~ ., "' ~ ;t ... ... c- .Q C 1; .Q U5 ~ 8 8- IV _N en ~ C ....4).,....N ~ 3:l IV .!:!! -- IV IV .= .u S~~jfjf '0 ~ X IV IV . *e _ U 41 CL a.. 0.. e. 0 C '" c: * * 65 _ 41 c -'l!'l!~...o~ '" ~~~C)C)~IVC:i;' 8.>>~~" ~.l\O:: e a:: a:: :g :g e'o * >. U) a..enena::a::.8c~.!! -' ...4141 .cOOle. '" ~~~.21.2'e g'<<l E to- IV :3 ::) l! l! 41 ... 5..!! 0.... aJCOaJU(,)XOcncn EXHIBIT A Gl = C GI > c( Cl'a zc -It 0::- c('a :]:0 lI)~ I-'a lI) C 0" o a>> 11.... ON Z>. ;:; O.c C.21 ~:z: c(= WIt o::C m.21 lI) u IE I! I- .... ~ 0).... C"l:CIll GI GI'- 0 E Q,EO 1110=0 111"1110 GlQ.III<<? 1II..c(0 IIIG1 0 c(Q. N .. ~ ..!!! '0 C --- o C III GlGlO ClEO .l! GI c> GI e u Q, ~ E Q.- -- - C I! GI GlE" >GlGI 0>.. _Oct oa, '#.E ca III ! ! c(u 'act C " ..J ca.oJ l!!u. c(Q- 'all) C ca ..J 00000000000 oCOCOCOOCOCO"<tNNO IOCOOf'-.O>COC"lo>co"<tO> "':N"N"...roo...rr-:"':N".or-: b9- ("") C\I.....O) '#.'#'#*,<f!.'#cf!.rf!.?fl.'#?f!. 1OC"lC"lCOIO"<tCO f'-............. 10 f'-.C"lOC"l"<t"<tCOO>C"lf'-.O> c:i~~r....:-.:iN("")ci~r--.:a:i ...... ...... "<t l()('l")("')COLOVCOr--...........L() f'-.C"lOC"l"<t"<tCOO>C"lf'-.O> 0..........""", V N('l')O.....,....." ro ooo......oooo......o"<t c:ic:ic:ic:ic:ic:ic:ic:ic:ic:ic:i C"l0000000000 NOOOOIOOOOOO 1001OC"lOCON"<tNIOCO C"l"<tCONOC"lCOf'-.C"lCOO> ""':N""':""':cO...rcO""':c:iC"i"": ("l") N.....CO CO"<tCOCOO......f'-."<tf'-.OO> o"<tCOf'-.co......coO>"<t"<to O>IOIOC"l"<tOC"lf'-.COco"<t oo...roooo"':oo.o...rmN" 100COCO"<tO>COf'-.100C"l ..... ('l")('l')..-N CO<OCX) .....~ M ~ c o c: :.;::; 0 co +:; - co en t:: o 0 o c.. co _N '" )( Q)Q) C ~.....N f/) f/) ~ .~ o fl fl ~ ~ !: '0 -........Q.a.. 0 c3 x co co - -'" - al a.. a.. c.. c.. ....0 C "0 c_~::3:::J_ Q) c:: -~~eeo...E co ~coco(!)(!):E~1ijc~ ~~~~~Qj ~ g.~a:: ea::a::mmE'J:!Cl _>.t:: a.. '" "'c::c:: alo C al~ co ....alal i! os,c..E ~ ,c", ,c", .!2l.!2l '" "'Q) en co E l!! -- coca..... G)'-com (tli::S::J '-.... 0):":..... 0._> cococooo:]::Eoenen> ..' - . -""....-,._, '---"T'-' ..'"--~~~. "W._..""~,~.._.,_ ~~"--'-'-'---'---""~ EXHmIT B o o ~ o o ~ ~ o o o ci o ... ATTACHMENT--..l2. Page..Q..2.. of ""- o o o <=! ... .., f'-. N r-- en f'-. ... "<t U) ~ "<t o co r-- lI) ..J c( I- o I-