ESTACADA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES

ESTACADA CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBERS

475 SE MAIN STREET, ESTACADA, OREGON

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 2008 - 7:00 PM

 

CALL TO ORDER BY PRESIDING OFFICER      

 

The meeting was called to order at 7:00pm.  Council President Arnold led in the pledge of allegiance.

 

Present:  Cr. Richard Hartwig, Cr. Norm Ernst, Cr. Kay Nelson, Cr. Becky Arnold, Cr. Michele Conditt, Cr. Brent Dodrill, CM Randy Ealy, CR Denise Carey.

 

Absent:  Mayor Bob Austin.

 

CITIZEN AND COMMUNITY GROUP COMMENTS                                                       

 

Dep. Pierce, Clackamas County Sheriff, reviewed the December activity report. 

 

CONSENT AGENDA                                                                                      

§         OLCC Annual Liquor License Renewals

 

Cr. Nelson wondered if there was an ordinance that could be put in place to deny establishments a liquor license if they have a violation.  She would like staff to check with the city attorney to see what authority we have.  Cr. Conditt stated that the authority is probably with the OLCC for suspending licenses but the council could make a recommendation.  Cr. Dodrill moved to approve the consent agenda but to send a letter from the Council expressing the concern of the violation of the Get & Go Store and recommending an unfavorable recommendation for that establishment.  Cr. Ernst seconded the motion.  The motion passed unanimously. 

 

COUNCIL BUSINESS                                                                                               

 

Estacada Historic District Presentation – Phil Lingelbach stated that PRIDE has been working on an Estacada Historic District Project.  They have been talking to the City of Gresham about their historic district and how it came to be.  Mr. Lingelbach reviewed some of the ideas they have to promote this district.  There would be three parts of the project:  Street signs, brass plaques, and walking tour brochures.  PRIDE is asking for council support of the project. 

 

Resolution 2008 – 002 A Resolution approving the proposed withdrawal of territory from the Estacada Library Service District and inclusion in the Clackamas

County Library Service District – Dan Zinzer, Clackamas County, asked if there were any questions regarding the proposed resolution.  Cr. Arnold asked if the service area would remain the same and he stated that it would.  Cr. Conditt asked about the wording in section a. that states that the City does not provide support for the current operations of the Estacada City Library.  She stated that the city does contribute to the operation of the library but Mr. Zinzer stated that it is referring to the capital bond and not the operational budget. 

 

Cr. Dodrill moved to adopt Resolution 2008 – 002 – A Resolution approving the proposed withdrawal of territory from the Estacada Library Service District and inclusion in the Clackamas County Library Service District.  Cr. Ernst seconded the motion.  The motion was passed unanimously.

 

Library Strategic Plan – Katinka Bryk, Interim Library Director, reviewed the process used to create the strategic plan.  Cr. Arnold stated that she felt a lot of uneasiness regarding the document.  She would propose a workshop between the library board and the council to go over the details of the plan.  Cr. Nelson stated she has a lot of the same concerns.  Ms. Bryk stated this is a long-range planning document and are goals that will be strived for to create a great library.  Cr. Dodrill was involved with creating the strategic plan and stated that everyone is aware of the financial limitations and that they will not be the ones that make any final decisions on staffing or budgeting.  There will be a March 10th workshop at 6:00pm to review and discuss the plan.

 

Solid Waste Franchise Ordinance – CM Ealy stated there is one minor change from the last meeting and this is that both include a 5% franchise fee.  The providers will also bring a rate schedule on all the services offered and the council will need to decide what rates will be implemented at the time of the renewal.  The county is also asking if the council would be interested in an annual review of rates by the county as a whole instead of the city reviewing the rates just for the city.  The drafts will be sent to the two providers and they will come back with comments at the next meeting where we will have the first review and vote on the ordinance.  Cr. Ernst asked if the bonding and insurance is adequate for the length of the 10 year contract.  CM will ask the association to review this and come back with a response.

 

DEPARTMENT & COMMITTEE REPORTS                                                                  

 

City Manager – CM Ealy reviewed a handout in packet regarding an effort to coordinate upcoming activities and projects with town halls, etc. 

 

PUBLIC HEARINGS                                                                                       

 

Annexation Application 2007–02 – Martin Karge – Hinman Road – President Arnold closed the meeting and opened the public hearing.

 

CP Hoelscher reviewed the recommendation of approval from the Planning Commission to the City Council for the annexation and the zone change.

 

President Arnold read the statement regarding evidence and the right to appeal.  She asked if there was anyone from the public that wanted to speak on the application.  There was none.

 

President Arnold closed the public hearing and opened the regular meeting.

 

Cr. Conditt moved to approve Annexation Application 2007-02.  Cr. Hartwig seconded the motion.  The motion passed unanimously.

 

Planned Development Subdivision Application 2007–02 – Campanella Estates – President Arnold closed the meeting and opened the public hearing.  She asked if any of the council wanted to declare a conflict of interest or ex-parte contact.  There was none.

 

CP McCallister reviewed the application and the recommendation from the Planning Commission to the City Council to deny the modification of the subdivision.  He reviewed the changes or modifications proposed from the original subdivision application that was approved by the council in 2006.  The number of lots has been increased from 265 to 303.  There was also commercial use proposed that has been deleted from the design.  The applicant has proposed a four-phase development over 10 years. The smallest lot size in original application was 3700 square feet and the new proposal has a minimum lot size of 4000 square feet.  CP stated that the C-1 zoning district does not allow single family residences.  Exhibit 6 in the packet shows how the applicant determined the density calculation and CP stated he concurs with the calculations. This calculation allows 308 lots.  The density is not exceeded. 

 

CP stated that the criteria for the Planned Development require that the development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation and zoning designation.  The provisions to provide housing is consistent but the 4 acres that is zoned general commercial is not consistent if only houses are proposed.  The plan designation is to provide jobs for the area and this would not be done if all the property was built residential.  The applicant has argued that there will be economic benefit through street improvements and infrastructure.  CP stated any subdivision would do this but that these benefits are not the same that would come from commercial development.  Staff and the Planning Commission felt the commercial property should remain in the subdivision somewhere and was actually a good area for commercial with one major collector and two minor collector roads available nearby.  The property has all the components needed to provide the commercial area land uses.  He stated that if the council approves the application they would have to say it was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and zoning designation.

 

CP discussed the traffic study that warrants a couple of left turn lanes on Eagle Creek Road if the speed remains 45 mph. Modified conditions in Exhibit 7 asked that the left turn lanes be reviewed at the time of development and if the speed changes before development that the lanes may not be warranted.  CP agrees with this condition. He discussed the street standards and how the roads meet or don’t meet the criteria.

 

President Arnold read the statement regarding evidence and the right to appeal.

 

Mike Park, applicant, stated that he tried to market the property with the commercial area and it was not marketable.  All developers said that the commercial needed to go away.  After this he had Alex Hurley with AKS Engineering prepare a new design.  Mr. Hurley reviewed the proposed changes – smaller blocks, better planned open spaces, one storm drain area instead of many, etc.  He stated that the residential is allowed in the Planned Development Code as an overlay of commercial zone.  He believes that this does comply with the Comprehensive Plan criteria and zoning criteria. 

 

Mike Park asked if there were any questions.  Cr. Conditt stated she was under the impression that the Planned Development Unit was a great tool for mixed uses and was excited to have both residential and commercial uses.  Mr. Park stated that the property is not saleable with the commercial area.  Cr. Hartwig asked if the stream will remain above ground.  Mr. Hurley stated it would.

 

Cr. Dodrill asked what the reasoning was for the 300’ required between streets (block lengths).  CP McCallister said it alleviates traffic conflicts and helps pedestrian traffic. 

 

Cr. Arnold stated that the Comprehensive Plan is outdated but wants to be sure and address the needs for the community.  Mr. Park stated that commercial land has higher values than residential and he wished it would work but it just won’t. 

 

Cr. Dodrill asked when the new Comprehensive Plan will be adopted.  CP McCallister stated there are still public hearings required and acknowledgment by LCDC.  CM Ealy stated it would be about six months.  CP stated even though the plan is outdated, it is the plan that the council must follow.  CP stated that a zone change application could be made to turn the commercial property to residential for whatever reason.  He stated that the council must find that the application is consistent with the comprehensive plan and zoning designation and allows for both residential and commercial. 

 

Cr. Conditt asked what findings can the council use if they wish to support the application.  CP stated that he would have to think on that.  Mr. Hurley stated that they believe it is an allowed use in the Planned Development Unit.  Cr. Dodrill asked if the commercial property was a large part of the decision at that time.  The councilors that were there feel it was an important piece of the application.  Cr. Dodrill stated that since the focus is to develop downtown maybe this is not such a major piece of commercial property.  Cr. Hartwig stated that this represents 4 acres of commercial land that we will lose in the city and the council should look to replace is somewhere else.  Cr. Nelson stated that the city planner and Planning Commission have both recommended no and we still need the commercial property and the council should go with the recommendation.  Cr. Dodrill asked for clarification on what is allowed.  CP stated that if this application is approved residential will be built on commercial. 

 

Judy Walker, 29711 SE Eagle Creek Road, stated she likes the new design.

 

Andy Peal, 24354 SW Baker Road, Sherwood, has been involved in the process from the beginning.  He feels the PD needs to be applied to today’s standards even though the comprehensive plan may not support it.  He feels that commercial and residential does not mix in certain areas.  He feels the design is more attractive without commercial for the area. 

 

Courtney Lewis, 21219 S Springwater Road, thanked the Council for their foresight in 2006 and will appreciate their approval of this application tonight.  He stated that we need the tax dollars the development will bring.

 

Terry McCauley, PO Box 400, Estacada, stated that the comprehensive plan is a general statement plan and the specifics of the application of the plan can be debated.  He feels this application is consistent with the comprehensive plan.

 

Being no further public comments, President Arnold closed the public hearing and reopened the regular meeting.

 

Cr. Conditt moved to approve the application using the findings of the PD overlay with the conditions of approval in the staff recommendation as modified in Exhibit 7.  Cr. Ernst seconded the motion.  Roll call vote: Cr. Richard Hartwig-yes, Cr. Becky Arnold-yes, Cr. Norm Ernst-yes, Cr. Kay Nelson-no, Cr. Brent Dodrill-yes, Cr. Michele Conditt-yes.  The motion passed with 5 yes and 1 no. 

 

CITIZEN AND COMMUNITY GROUP COMMENTS                                                       

 

COUNCIL REPORTS & COMMENTS                                                                 

 

ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING

 

The meeting was adjourned at 9:25pm.