Estacada Planning Commission Workshop Minutes

Monday, November 15, 2004

City Hall

 

 

1.         The workshop was called to order at 7:00 pm.

 

2.         Roll Call :  Present:  Cm. Hartwig, Cm. McGregor, Cm. Sager, Cm. Copeland, Cm. Crosby, Chrm. Cameron, CP McCallister, DCR Hovda, Cr. Atkinson, Consultant John Morgan. 

 

3.         Review of Draft Comprehensive Plan – John Morgan, Consultant

 

Cr. Atkinson – Chair of committee formed in January 2002 to review and make changes to the current Comprehensive plan.  He reviewed who made up the committee, how they chose their consultant and a brief overview of the process. 

 

John Morgan reviewed the draft plan and the proposed zoning maps.  He explained that tonight is a work session to brief the Commission on the plan and answer questions or concerns.  Thursday night will begin the public hearing process before the Commission, who will ultimately forward a recommendation to the City Council.  He explained that there are issues that have come up that may not be able to be resolved by Thursday night.  He feels that it is appropriate for the Commission to begin the public hearing process and continue it while the details are ironed out.  He briefly addressed some of the concerns the committee dealt with in updating our 20-year old plan.  He gave detailed explanations of the reasoning behind the rezoning of areas within the UGB. 

 

He reviewed the letter from DLCD and the issues they brought up.  DLCD feels the City must amend the transportation plan  - the committee didn’t feel the changes to the plan were drastic enough to warrant these decisions.  However, the City is willing to make these changes, but first funding would need to be secured. 

 

Cm. McGregor asked if the City did a traffic study when they made the current Comprehensive plan?  He feels it hard to do a traffic study based upon the proposed development, even though it’s not happening now.  Mr. Morgan thinks DLCD feels there are enough changes proposed in the new plan to warrant a review of whether the TSP should be revised to take into account the impact of the plan. 

 

CP explained that state wide planning goal #12 says you have to have a transportation system plan that works and is based on your proposed zoning map.  If you change the zoning map significantly enough then you must make sure your TSP is still adequate and works. 

 

The group discussed the TSP and what it would take to revise it.  Mr. Morgan feels it might take a month to secure funding before this plan it completely ready to move forward. 

 

Cm. Crosby asked about goal #9 and how much industrial land was compromised?  Mr. Morgan stated the net change in industrial land was a reduction of 56 acres, but the quality of the remaining industrial land is the issue. 

 

Cm. Hartwig asked how much land is being removed with the airport.  Mr. Morgan stated the airport area alone is almost 200 acres, but 125 acres are being gained by extending the UGB along Highway 224 north of the City. 

 

Mr. Morgan stated that a notice was mailed to every property owner within the existing and proposed UGB area. 

 

Cm. McGregor asked what happens if the airport property owner do not want to be removed from the UGB.  Mr. Morgan stated that ultimately the city could make that decision.  It didn’t seem reasonable by the Committee that that property would ever want or need City services, therefore, it seemed better to remove it.  If the property owners in that area feel differently they are welcome to bring their concerns forward.  The committee felt it was a fair trade to remove that area while adding other areas.  He stated it doesn’t hurt the City to leave this area in, but doesn’t seem realistic to leave it. 

 

CP clarified his and the Counties role in this process.  He explained that in this process Mr. Morgan is the planning staff and CP is just here to provide technical assistance and help answer questions.  The only real concerns the County is going to have in this proposal is population projections.  He explained why the County is concerned about population projections.  The only other real issue the County will have is with the extension with our UGB, which only really affects the County because they will have to revise their maps. 

 

CP discussed an ORS that has language about whether property owner permission is needed before you include them in the UGB.  CP and Mr. Morgan will discuss this issue further before the meeting Thursday night.  CP agrees the Planning Commission should proceed with the proposed plan.  He explained this is a draft and can be changed.  He feels the Commission should have a good understanding of the proposed plan and why the changes are being proposed.  He told the Commission 1,400 property owners were mailed a notice about the meeting Thursday, which could mean a large turn out for the public hearing. 

 

CP wants the Commission to decide how they are going to handle the potential input from the public Thursday night.  CP suggested a more summarized version of what Mr. Morgan gave tonight to begin the meeting Thursday night.  The Commission also needs to decide if they are going to limit testimony in some fashion, 5 or 10 minutes for example.  At the end of the meeting the Commission would need to decide if the public hearing will need to be continued to allow additional testimony as well as clarification on pending issues. 

 

CP asked about changing zoning in this process.  CP asked what incentive there would be for property owners to ever change their zoning, for example why the school would ever want to apply to have their zoning changed to be consistent with the new comp plan map.  Mr. Morgan stated the City could legislatively change the zoning with one fowl swoop to put the new comp plan zoning in effect. 

 

CP does not feel Measure 37 should in any way weigh into the decisions of this public hearing process.  That is an issue for the City leaders to consider.  This draft should be based upon current land use regulations.

 

Mr. Morgan feels he could give a significant overview of the maps and proposed plan Thursday night in a maximum of 10 minutes.  Mr. Morgan anticipates the Commission holding over the public hearing and giving specific direction to Mr. Morgan and CP as to what they want to see for future meetings. 

 

Mr. Morgan stated the property owners along the SE corner of Estacada have come to workshops and asked to be included in the UGB.  The committee asked these property owners to show the Commission and the Council why they should be included. 

 

Cm. Sager and the Commission discussed how long they should let the meeting go Thursday night.  CP feels they should see how many people show up and then decide.  If all of the testimony is not heard Thursday it is ok because they can take additional testimony at the next meeting. 

 

CP stated that there are two pending subdivision applications that might want to be heard at the December 18th meeting.  Thursday night if the Commission continues the public hearing they need to decide if they want to reserve December 18th for only the continued public hearing or if they can hear two subdivision applications in addition to continuing this public hearing. 

 

Cm. Crosby asked if the City rezones property within the City limits if the County then changes the property taxes.   Mr. Morgan stated that ultimately it is up to the County Assessor. 

 

4.         Adjournment

 

The meeting was adjourned at 8:40 pm.