ESTACADA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES

CITY HALL

THURSDAY, APRIL 26, 2001 - 7:00 PM

1. CALL TO ORDER

Chrm. Cameron called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm.

2. ROLL CALL

Present: Cm. Crosby, Cm. Erickson, Cm. McGregor, Cm. Sager, Cm. Durham, Chrm. Cameron, CP McCallister, DCR Hovda.

Absent: Cm. Coyle.

3. APPROVAL OF THE FEBRUARY 12, 2001 MINUTES

Cm. Sager moved to approve the February 12, 2002 minutes. Cm. McGregor seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously.

4. PUBLIC HEARING - PLANNING COMMISSION DELIBERATION ONLY - NO

ADDITIONAL PUBLIC TESTIMONY WILL BE RECEIVED

Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #2000-2 & Zone Change Application #2000-2. The applicant, Bernard Atkinson, is requesting a comprehensive plan amendment from Light Industrial to Commercial, and corresponding zone change from M-1 to C-1 for property described as 34E 20, tax lots 1700 & 1800.

CP informed the Commission that this meeting will be for the Commission to deliberate only, no testimony with the audience or applicant will be taken. CP stated that the traffic study submitted only addresses 10 acres and there are a lot of possibilities with this property. When using a traffic study for planning issues, you must look at the worse case scenario. The traffic study shows there will be a need for a traffic signal at Highway 224 & River Mill Road. CP spoke with Kittelson & Associates regarding the reference to the wrong property number in the traffic study. He stated that it was simply a typo; the figures, reasons and conclusions are accurate for this report.

Cm. McGregor asked if ODOT has responded to the traffic study. CP stated that ODOT has been given a copy of the traffic study but has not responded yet. He stated that their comments will be submitted during to the City Council.

Cm. McGregor stated that the Commission isn't voting on a car lot, they are voting on changing the zone. The applicant can put anything on the property after that. He further stated that a car lot is now a conditional use in either light industrial or commercial zones, so the applicant will have to go through that process before putting a car lot on the property. CP stated that this is irrelevant to this application.

Cm. McGregor stated that the application is confusing, first they asked to have 20 acres rezoned; now they submit a traffic study for only 10 acres.

Cm. Sager is uncomfortable with proceeding until ODOT responds. CP stated that ODOT can respond to the City Council. CP stated it would be helpful if we had comments from ODOT, but they are not necessary. A professional traffic engineer has completed the traffic study and the Commission should use that info. ODOT cannot stop the City from rezoning the property. CP feels that a condition of approval needs to be that the traffic light must be installed at Highway 224 & River Mill Road before any development is completed. The question would be who is going to pay for it and if ODOT will allow a light there. CP stated that ODOT probably isn't going to pay for it, and he is sure the City can't afford to install it, so it will be up to the applicant to install.

Cm. Crosby asked if the property stays light industrial and the applicant gets a conditional use permit for a car lot, would a traffic light still be needed? CP stated that if the property is built out as zoned the system is adequate. He isn't sure if it is built out as zoned but with a conditional use permit for a car lot if it would need a traffic light.

Cm. Durham doesn't feel that we should piece zoning together; it should be all or nothing. He feels that we need to plan for the future needs instead of addressing lot by lot as development occurs. He doesn’t think that installing a traffic light would be a problem; Sandy has several along Highway 26.

Chrm. Cameron stated that he is considering this application without involving the Atkinson's or a car lot, simply what is best for Estacada. He doesn’t like the idea of commercial property in the middle of industrial land/fields. He stated that this area is developed today because of grants and property owner participation and this wouldn't have happened if it had been zoned commercial. ODOT has not recommended approval, LCDC states that it is contrary to our goals, CP has stated it is contrary to our goals, Oregon Economic Development recommends denial, Chrm. Cameron agrees.

Cm. McGregor stated that we are supposed to do annual amendments to our Comprehensive Plan to encourage diversification. He pointed out that the Commission did approved a car lot there once through the conditional use process.

Chrm. Cameron would rather see a conditional use permit on industrial land than rezoning it to commercial.

Cm. Durham feels that someone is ready to do something in Estacada and we should let them. He stated that this rezone would not create an island of commercial; there is commercial property across the highway. He feels that we need to open up our options a little to get growth in Estacada.

Chrm. Cameron stated when the City zoned this property light industrial the idea was to create an area with the greatest possibility for jobs, now they are being asked to change this.

Cm. Durham stated that there isn't a place in Estacada large enough for development, people are looking at Estacada for development but are turning away due to lack of land.

Cm. Erickson feels that rezoning this property would not take away all of the light industrial land. He stated the Comprehensive Plan says that the City should designate additional commercial land as needed to satisfy demands. He wants to encourage development, otherwise we are sending a message to the citizens that we don't want to grow. He is also concerned with jeopardizing future grants if they approve this application.

Cm. Crosby feels that commercial land shouldn't be across the street from light industrial land. The possibility of looking out from a commercial use at a foundry would not be appealing.

Cm. Durham stated it would take possibly 5-7 years for the light industrial land to build out.

Cm. Durham moved to recommend approval to the City Council with the condition that a traffic light be installed at Highway 224 and River Mill Road. Cm. McGregor seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: Cm. Crosby - yes, Cm. Erickson - no, Cm. McGregor - yes, Cm. Sager - no, Cm. Durham - yes, Chrm. Cameron - no. Motion fails 3-3.

Cm. Sager stated that he has unanswered questions since ODOT hasn't responded, therefore, he will be voting no.

Cm. McGregor moved to recommend approval to the City Council of 9.06 acres (lots 1, 2 & 3) being rezoned with the condition that a traffic light be installed at Highway 224 & River Mill Road. Cm. Durham seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: Cm. Crosby - no, Cm. Erickson - no, Cm. McGregor - yes, Cm. Sager - no, Cm. Durham - yes, Chrm. Cameron - no. Motion failed 2-4.

CP stated that since the Commission is unable to make a recommendation to the City Council they should submit their written reasons to the City by May 10^th for him to compile into a staff report to the City Council for their public hearing on this application.

5. ADJOURNMENT

The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 pm.