ESTACADA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES

CITY HALL

THURSDAY, MAY 31, 2001 - 7:00 PM

 

1.                   CALL TO ORDER

 

The meeting was called to order at 7:00 pm.

 

2.                 ROLL CALL

 

Present:  Cm. Crosby, Cm. Erickson, Cm. McGregor, Cm. Sager, Cm. Coyle, Cm. Durham, Chrm. Cameron, CP McCallister, CR Carey. 

 

3.                 APPROVAL OF THE APRIL 26, 2001 MINUTES

 

Change date of minutes to 2001.

 

Cm. Coyle moved to approve the April 26, 2001 minutes.  Cm. Durham seconded the motion.  Motion passed unanimously. 

 

4.                 PUBLIC HEARINGS

 

  1. Variance Application #2001-1.  The applicant, Estacada Volunteers of America Elderly Housing, Inc., is requesting a variance from Section 16.76(Q)(1) of the Estacada zoning code, to provide one parking stall for each dwelling unit instead of the required two parking spaces for each dwelling unit.  This variance is subject to section 16.10 of the Estacada Municipal Code.

 

Chrm. Cameron closed the Planning Commission meeting and opened the public hearing.  He asked for abstentions or ex-parte contact, there was none.

 

Chrm. Cameron read a statement regarding evidence. 

 

CP McCallister reviewed the staff report, which recommends denial. 

 

Michael Fancher, project architect – This project is a HUD sponsored project with very strict guidelines for the use of the project.  It is a grant for 40 years and if this use (senior housing) is not adhered to, HUD will take it over and provide this service.  This is a senior residence unit with the typical resident being approximately 76 years old, widowed with no more than one car if any at all.  There will typically be five men, one couple and the rest women.  One parking stall per unit will usually work out to provide enough parking for the residents, visitors, and visiting services.  Room for 25 additional stalls is on reserve in the plan if additional parking is needed.   

 

The Commission discussed the application and the comparison to other similar uses in Estacada and other cities. 

 

Chrm. Cameron closed the public hearing at 8:35 pm and reopened the public hearing.

 

The Commission discussed the variance.  Cm. Crosby would like to see the group of 9 spaces and 7 spaces paved as additional parking spaces because that area would not really be able to be used for anything else.  Cm. Sager feels all 25 extra spaces should be paved at this time instead of waiting to see if they are needed. 

 

Chrm. Cameron reopened the public hearing at 8:45 pm.

 

Mr. Fancher stated that in order to install the set of seven spaces they would have to cut down some blue spruce trees that act as shields for noise and dust from the mill.  They could certainly pave the other 17 spots that would not require the cutting down of any trees. 

 

Cm. Erickson is comfortable with the one-to-one parking and does not feel the extra 17 spaces need to be added. 

 

This property is unique in that there is a large pond on the property and the applicant has designated a 50’ buffer around the pond for no development to protect the pond. 

 

Chrm. Cameron closed the public hearing at 9:00 pm. and reopened the meeting.

 

Cm. Erickson moved to approve Variance Application #2001-1 because of the uniqueness of the pond and the required landscaping with the conditions outlined in the staff report.  Cm. McGregor seconded the motion.  Roll call vote:  Cm. McGregor - yes, Cm. Crosby - no, Cm. Erickson - yes, Cm. Sager - no, Cm. Coyle - no, Chrm. Cameron - no.  Motion failed with a vote of 2-4.

 

Cm. Crosby moved to approve Variance Application #2001-1 because of the uniqueness of the pond and the required landscaping with the conditions outlined in the staff report and the additional 17 parking spaces.  Cm. Erickson seconded the motion.  Roll call vote:  Cm. McGregor - yes, Cm. Crosby - yes, Cm. Erickson - yes, Cm. Sager - yes, Cm. Coyle - no, Chrm. Cameron - yes.  Motion passed with a vote of 5-1.

 

  1. Variance Application #2001-2 - Withdrawn by applicant.

 

  1. Conditional Use #2001-01.  The applicant, Dan Enterprises, Inc., is requesting a conditional use according to Section 16.28.030(J) of the Estacada Municipal Code, to allow for auto sales on property described as 34E, 29AB, tax lot 900 - 267 SW Cedar Street.  This conditional use is subject to section 16.88 of the Estacada Municipal Code.  

 

Chrm. Cameron closed the Planning Commission meeting and opened the public hearing.  He asked for abstentions, ex-parte contact or conflict of interest.  Cm. Durham stated he has a conflict of interest since he filed the application and would be leaving.  Cm. Durham excused himself.

 

Chrm. Cameron read a statement regarding evidence. 

 

CP McCallister reviewed the staff report, which recommends denial.

 

Merle Webster, applicant – Feels the current frontage of the lot is already detracting from parking on the highway to access the lot.  The house behind his lot uses this area of the lot for their access to their house and a fence would not work there.  He asked why it is not feasible to hook up storm drains to 2nd Street.  CP McCallister stated that it had something to do with the topography not being able to flow the proper direction to connect to the storm drain.  The Commission discussed the use of the property for a driveway for the house behind the property. 

 

Cr. Sager stated that when a previous car lot occupied the property, cars did park on the highway and walk over the business.  Mr. Webster stated a fence would not be feasible because it would block the access by the house behind the property.

 

CP McCallister asked the square footage of the office.  Mr. Webster stated it would be very small.  CP asked if the applicant had any additional concerns regarding the conditions of approval other than the highway blockage issue.  Mr. Webster did not have any other concerns.

 

Cm. McGregor stated that a fence would not keep people from stopping on the highway and walking in around the fence.  The Commission agreed that a no parking sign on the highway would be the best deterrent.  ODOT would have to approve this signage. 

 

Cm. McGregor stated that nothing addresses storage.  Anything classified as storage needs to be enclosed.  CP stated that a condition of approval can be added regarding this. 

 

Mr. Webster stated that he does not intend to have a junk yard on this property.  His is already making improvements to the property and intends to keep making improvements.

 

Cm. Crosby asked what he planned for customer and staff parking.  Mr. Webster stated there would be only one employee at all times and he feels there is adequate room for parking for employees and customers.  The plans show room for at least four off-street parking spaces.

 

There were no other public comments.

 

It was Commission consensus to close the public hearing.  Chrm. Cameron closed the public hearing at 7:43 pm. and reopened the meeting.

 

Cm. McGregor stated that the storm drain connection is a must, especially with the property being paved.  The Commission can put this as a condition of approval without specifying how it will be done.  Cm. McGregor stated that off-street parking is also a concern and needs to be addressed.  He would like to see off-street parking for up to five cars. 

 

Condition 11 – all storage must be enclosed.

Condition 12 – storm water drainage must be addressed

Condition 3(b) will reflect 5 off-street parking spaces

Condition 3(a) - remove the landscaping and fencing requirement along Hwy 224. 

 

Cm. McGregor moved approve Conditional Use Application #2001-1, with the conditions outlined in the staff report and the above additions and amendments.  Cm. Erickson seconded the motion.  Roll call vote:  Cm. McGregor - yes, Cm. Crosby - yes, Cm. Erickson - yes, Cm. Sager - yes, Cm. Coyle - yes, Chrm. Cameron - yes.  Motion passed 6-0.

 

CP introduced Mark Green-hite who will be our substitute planner when CP McCallister is not available.  .

 

5.                 ADJOURNMENT

 

The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 pm.