ESTACADA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES

THURSDAY, MARCH 24, 2005 – 7:00 PM

CITY HALL

 

1.       CALL TO ORDER

 

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

 

2.       ROLL CALL

 

Present:  Cm. Cameron, Cm. McGregor, Cm. Crosby , Cm. Copeland, Cm. Sager, Cm. James, Cm. Webber, CP McCallister, PWF Randall, DCR Hovda.

 

3.          APPROVAL OF FEBRUARY 24, 2005 MINUTES

 

Consensus was to approve the minutes as presented.

 

4.         PUBLIC HEARINGS

A.     Land Partition application 2005-1 - The applicant, Zachari Partridge is requesting a three-lot partition on property described as 34E, 20, tax lot 401, which is zoned low density residential.  The application is subject to the criteria in Section 16.16, 16.104, 16.108, 16.116, 16.120 and 16.132 of the Estacada Code.  The property is located on the north side of NE 6th Avenue, approximately 200 feet west of its intersection with Cemetery Road. 

 

The applicant requested this application be continued to the April meeting.  Consensus was to continue to the April 28th meeting. 

 

B.     Subdivision application #2005-1.  The applicant, Cascade Communities (Don Oakley), is requesting a 162 lot residential subdivision for property described as 34E, 21, tax lot 401, which is zoned R-1 (low density residential).  The application is subject to the criteria in Section 16.16, 16.104-108 and 16.116 of the Estacada City Code.  The property is located on the east side of Cemetery Road, north of its intersection with Hill Way Road.  The Planning Commission will forward a recommendation of this application to the Estacada City Council, who will hold a public meeting on Monday, April 25, 2005, beginning at 7:00 pm in the Estacada City Council Chambers, Estacada, Oregon.

 

C.     Variance Application #2005-1.  The applicant, Cascade Communities (Don Oakley) is requesting a variance from 16.116.010 (F)(4) of the Estacada City Code to allow one 500’ cul-de-sac length in the proposed subdivision application #2005-1.  The application is subject to the criteria in Section 16.16, 16.100 & 16.116 of the Estacada City Code.  The property is described as 34E, 21, tax lot 401 and is located on the east side of Cemetery Road, north of its intersection with Hill Way Road

 

D.     Variance Application #2005-2.  The applicant, Cascade Communities (Don Oakley) is requesting a variance from 16.116.030 (A) of the Estacada City Code to allow sidewalks only on one side of the street for approximately 20% of the streets in the proposed subdivision application #2005-1.  The application is subject to the criteria in Section 16.16, 16.100 & 16.116 of the Estacada City Code.  The property is described as 34E, 21, tax lot 401 and is located on the east side of Cemetery Road, north of its intersection with Hill Way Road. 

 

The Commission heard testimony regarding the above three applications together.  Chrm. Cameron asked for abstentions or exparte contact, there was none.

 

CP McCallister reviewed the staff reports.  CP explained that the Planning Commission will be making a recommendation to the City Council and because the variance applications are a part of the subdivision application, they will automatically go to the City Council also. 

 

Chrm. Cameron feels that the other ½ of the ½ street improvements will never be developed.  CP stated the additional improvement would only happen if the property on the other side of the road were developed.  CP discussed another option that could be a possible condition of approval would be requiring the applicant to improve the entire Cemetery Road from Coupland Road to the front of this development, and the City would then revise the CIP list to include this project, therefore allowing the applicant to receive SDC credits. 

 

Chrm. Cameron read a statement regarding evidence.

 

Don Oakley, Cascade Communities, developer, owner/applicant, 13535 SE 145th, Clackamas, reviewed the layout of the development, explained the improvements they have done to date, and future improvements.  He explained that they have met with the Parks & Recreation Commission and toured the area.  He pointed out that they recommend approval of the dedication of park area and he discussed the development of this area. 

 

Jim Embry, 27005 SE Ladhill Road, Sherwood, Geotechnical Engineer, explained areas of instability, which included a self inflicted slide onto Cemetery Road a few months ago.  They had stockpiled too much material in this area and overloaded it.  It was cleaned up quickly and precautions have been taken to keep this from happening again.  He also explained how areas would have material removed, and that material will be placed along other slope areas to strengthen them. 

 

John VanStavren, Pacific Wetland Services, completed a wetland survey of the property and explained his findings. 

 

Cm. Webber asked about who would be responsible for the fencing along the wetlands.  Mr. Oakley stated they would install that fencing.  Cm. Webber asked about access to this wetland area.  Mr. Oakley stated there would be gates installed for the properties abutting this area. 

 

Kent Seida, 17501 SE Forest Hill Drive, Clackamas, owns property contiguous to this property.  Mr. Seida feels this is a good project and would be good for Estacada.  He wants to make sure that when the wter main is installed for this project that the pipe be laid to serve the adjacent properties.  He would like to keep the record open for 7 days to allow for public input on this issue.  He submitted a letter and map, labeled as exhibit 14.

 

Curt McLeod, Curran McLeod, City Engineer, stated that there are several options for the placement of the water main.  It will serve adjacent properties as well and the project could be funded through SDC’s. 

 

Kent Seida, would like to see the plan for the waterline decided upon before this application is approved.  Chrm. Cameron stated that generally waterlines are not decided upon at this level, it would be up to the developer and staff to work out these details before development happens. 

 

Harold West, 1730 SE Harbor Way, Portland, owns property adjacent to the development.  He would like to see access be stubbed out to neighboring properties. 

 

Cm. McGregor asked CP if he is satisfied for roadway access to neighboring properties.  CP stated that he is satisfied. 

 

Don Oakley, discussed that he has met with Mr. Seida regarding the location of the waterline.  He stated they have been looking for the best alternative for the waterline and working on easements for such.

 

CP asked if the applicant has any concerns regarding the conditions of approval.  Mr. Oakley stated he does not have any concerns with these conditions and stated that he was in agreement with the condition requiring Cemetery Road be improved from Coupland Road as long as this qualifies for SDC credits. 

 

Chrm. Cameron asked if giving SDC credits for this area would move this project higher up the CIP list than other much needed improvements.  He would not want to see current SDC money used for this development.

 

Curt McLeod, feels this improvement is rather minor and he does not see an issue with allowing SDC credits for this project.  Mr. McLeod stated that it would only be SDC’s from this project that would be used for the CIP in this area.  He does feel that Cemetery Road is a high priority area.  Staff consensus, because of slope, is to require the developer improve a 28-foot roadway along Cemetery Road with sidewalks on one side of the road.  

 

Cm. Webber discussed the amount of money the proposed park and wetland area will end up costing the City when SDC credits are given.

 

Curt McLeod, has never heard a dollar value related to this area when it comes to the complete development of park land, development, pathways, etc.  It is both the land value and the development value. 

 

Mr. Oakley stated the parkway that they are proposing includes the development of the park areas and the trails.  He discussed the value of this land in comparison of market value of the lots not developed, but he stated that they are proposing this park area because they feel it is the right thing to do. 

 

Cm. McGregor stated that originally they heard about possible development from Coupland Road along Cemetery Road through phase 3.  Now the engineer states it would only be to phase 1, and then ½ street improvements along phase 2 & 3. 

 

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

 

Chrm. Cameron commended Mr. Oakley on a very thorough application.

 

Cm. McGregor moved to recommend approval of Subdivision application #2005-1, with the conditions of approval including the addition of condition #33, which requires full development of a 28-foot roadway with a sidewalk on one side of Cemetery Road from Coupland Road through to the north edge of this development.  Cm. James seconded the motion.  Roll call vote:  Cm. McGregor – yes, Cm. Crosby – yes, Cm. Copeland – yes, Cm. Sager – yes, Cm. James – yes, Cm. Webber – yes, Chrm. Cameron – yes.  Motion passed 7-0. 

 

 

Cm. Crosby moved to recommend approval of Variance Application #2005-1.  Cm. Sager seconded the motion.  Roll call vote:  Cm. McGregor – yes, Cm. Crosby – yes, Cm. Copeland – yes, Cm. Sager – yes, Cm. James – yes, Cm. Webber – yes, Chrm. Cameron – yes.  Motion passed 7-0. 

 

Cm. Crosby moved to recommend approval of Variance Application #2005-2.  Cm. Webber seconded the motion.  Roll call vote:  Cm. McGregor – yes, Cm. Crosby – yes, Cm. Copeland – yes, Cm. Sager – no, Cm. James – yes, Cm. Webber – yes, Chrm. Cameron – yes.  Motion passed 6-1. 

 

5.          ADJOURNMENT

 

          The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 pm.