ESTACADA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES

ESTACADA CITY HALL

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 2001 - 7:00 PM

1. CALL TO ORDER

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

2. ROLL CALL

Present: Cm. McGregor, Cm. Sager, Cm. Erickson, Cm. Crosby, Chrm. Cameron, CP McCallister, CM Ealy, CR Carey.

Absent: Cm. Coyle, Cm. Durham.

3. APPROVAL OF THE OCTOBER 25, 2001 MINUTES

Cm. Sager moved to approve the minutes. Cm. Erickson seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously.

4. PUBLIC HEARING

A. Variance Application #2001-3. The applicants, Glen Pershing & William Pierce, are requesting a variance from Section 16.16.040 (C)(1), of the Estacada Municipal Code, to decrease the front yard setback to 10 feet from the required 20 feet. The purpose of the request setback variance is to accommodate construction of a single family dwelling on each parcel. The variance criteria are identified in Section 16.100 of the Estacada Municipal Code. Property is described as 34E, 28B, tax lots 2401, 2402, 2403, 2500 & 4400.

Chrm. Cameron closed the Planning Commission meeting and opened the public hearing. He asked for abstentions or ex-parte contact. Chrm. Cameron stated that he is involved with a street paving project with Mr. Pershing but does not feel this has anything to do with the variance request. Chrm. Cameron read a statement regarding evidence.

CP McCallister reviewed the staff report recommending approval with conditions.

Glen Pershing, applicant – Mr. Pershing submitted a letter from John Gray, geologist, recommending the variance in order to keep the hillside stable. They do not want to excavate the hillside any more than necessary.

There was no public input.

Cm. Cameron closed the public hearing and reopened the Planning Commission meeting.

Cm. Crosby moved to approve Variance Application #2001-3 with the conditions in the staff report. Cr. McGregor seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: Cm. McGregor - yes, Cm. Sager - no, Cm. Erickson - yes, Cm. Crosby - yes, Chrm. Cameron - yes. Motion passed 4-1.

B. Request for waiver regarding Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #2000-2 & Zone Change Application #2000-2 (Bernard Atkinson). The applicants, Northwestern Development Group, are requesting a waiver of the 1-year requirement for re-filing a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zone Change application previously denied by the City Council on June 15, 2001. Section 16.128.040 of the Estacada Municipal Code, which states no application shall be considered by the planning commission within a one-year period immediately following a previous denial of a request, except the planning commission may permit a new application, if there is new evidence or a change of circumstances. Property is described as 34E, 20, tax lots 1700 & 1800 - SW corner of Hwy 224 and Rivermill Road.

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.

CM Ealy reviewed the staff report recommending approval.

Mark Cottle, representing Northwestern Development Group, applicant – Mr. Cottle stated that the previous application that was denied was for 20 acres of rezone. There was no specified use other than the auto dealership. The new application will include a specific use and only request a 10 acre rezone.

In favor of:

Brent Dixon, Northwestern Development Group, owner – Mr. Dixon is interested in placing a large shopping center on the property.

In opposition to:

Pete O’Neal – Mr. O’Neal submitted a packet of information regarding the request for waiver. He reviewed the information in the packet. Mr. O’Neal feels there is no new evidence that would change the council decision and findings for allowing a commercial zone instead of light industrial. He also does not feel there was a change of circumstance regarding the acreage because only 10 acres were submitted to the council for the zone change. He does not understand why Randy Ealy, City Manager, wrote the staff report recommending approval when Mike McCallister, City Planner, has written every staff report for this commission in the past. He feels the municipal code requiring the one year period is so the city does not have to deal with the same application month after month. Lastly, Mr. O’Neal stated that the city will soon begin a comprehensive plan review that will benefit everyone in the city and he feels it would not be prudent for the commission or council to spot zone an area this close to the update. Mr. O’Neal stated that he is not against growth and development.

Dianna Turk, 30095 Cemetery Road – Ms. Turk stated that she was part of the Community Response Team that drew up the comp plan designations and also took part in making that area light industrial. This zone change goes totally against the plan and everything they have worked for.

Kay Nelson, 247 NW Zobrist – Mrs. Nelson said the community was led to believe light industrial was the real need for Estacada. Estacada has plenty of commercial property available already and hopes that this application will be turned down.

Tom Nelson, 247 NW Zobrist – Mr. Nelson was involved in the development of the comprehensive plan and knows that a certain amount of light industrial is required in the plan. He would hope that the commission would deny this request.

Neutral:

Dean Holden, Estacada businessman – Mr. Holden remembers when the land was zoned light industrial and was in favor of this but there has been no activity in such a long time. He thinks the city has a big decision to make and they need to begin to promote economic movement in the city.

Tracy Pharris, 184 NE Pierce Street – Mrs. Pharris is a concerned parent who attended school here and has kids that attend school here. She is afraid the town is dying and feels the city needs someone to come and invest in this town. She does not feel commercial interests will hurt the city because it will bring jobs and services that we don’t currently have. She feels that building a store on the highway makes sense.

Lisa Homan, Squaw Mountain Road – Mrs. Homan stated that if the planning commission keeps turning its back on developers they will quit coming. She conducted a poll and 92% of the people cannot conduct their monthly shopping in Estacada and they are spending a lot of money outside of town.

James Wolridge, 36665 Squaw Mountain Road – Mr. Wolridge feels the town is dying and we need people to invest in business in Estacada.

Rita Freeman, R & R Nursery, 29600 SE Kowall Road – Ms. Freeman feels we need to consider any investment into this town that is offered. There are so many services that are not offered to the residents of Estacada.

Rebuttal:

Mark Cottle – Mr. Cottle stated that with a specific use defined a more precise traffic study can be done. He also reiterated that the new application will only ask for a 10 acre rezone, not the 20 acres requested in the last application. He stated that the comprehensive plan is a living document because things change.

Chair Cameron closed the public hearing.

CM Ealy is very excited about this type of meeting and hearing the citizens and their concerns. He feels it is time to plan this community on our own, not with what the state and county tells us to do. He encouraged the commission to grant the waiver tonight.

Cm. McGregor asked why CM wrote the staff report and not CP McCallister. CM stated that he is very passionate about this and wants to encourage growth and development in Estacada.

Cm. Sager asked CP McCallister what his recommendation was. CP McCallister stated that he would just remind the commission that they should base their decision on the criteria in the code. His main concern is that 10 acres was discussed at the planning commission and they even considered a vote regarding 10 acres that did not pass.

Cm. McGregor stated that the commission is only considering allowing the application to come back in less than the year time.

Chrm. Cameron stated that he does not feel there has been significant change because 10 acres was considered at the commission level and it does not really matter what is proposed because once the property is zoned commercial any commercial entity could be placed there. He also stated that a traffic study was considered and so he does not feel the facts would allow him to vote yes.

Cm. Erickson agrees that the 10 acre condition is not new but there is a change because there would be a specific use although he realizes once the land is rezoned any commercial activity allowed could be placed on the property. The commission will have to trust the good faith of the applicant. He is also concerned with what Mr. Ealy has stated about not receiving help from the state. He is in favor of the application to waive the year waiting period.

Cm. Crosby agrees with Cm. Erickson and there will be more facts presented by the new applicant.

Cr. Sager does not see any difference in this application but he does support growth in the city and would allow the waiver but will carefully watch the application to be sure they have new information.

Cm. Erickson moved to approve the request for waiver regarding Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application #2000-2 & Zone Change Application #2000-2 (Bernard Atkinson. Cr. McGregor seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: Cm. McGregor - yes, Cm. Sager - yes, Cm. Erickson - yes, Cm. Crosby - yes, Chrm. Cameron - no. Motion passed 4-1.

5. NEW BUSINESS

Nominate 1 member to serve on the Comprehensive Review Committee

(member must reside within City limits)

Cm. Sager nominated Cm. Erickson. Cm. Crosby seconded the nomination. There were no further nominations. Cm. Erickson’s nomination will be sent to the council for approval.

CP McCallister stated that a partition application has been received and that Mr. Henrickson will submitting phase 3 of the Estacada Heights subdivision soon. He would recommend the commission to meet in early January instead of during the holiday season. The commission set their next meeting for Thursday, January 10, 2002.

6. ADJOURNMENT

The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 pm.