e e
okay it t the hour so let's call the meeting of the 11 and Planning
Commission order please be standing for a flag
salute iedge aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the for
which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for
all right thank you and Kelly would you call a roll
absolutely uh Commissioners Miller here Malloy here angelp here bount here
commissioner Baxter is excused brashers here mlan here Vice chair gar kunowski
here and chair Robertson here okay I hope everybody's had an
opportunity to review the minutes from our June Planning
Commission uh any additions corrections to those
minutes hearing none then the minutes will be approved as
presented [Music]
um just skip over that um we have three public hearings on our agenda tonight
and I am going to turn it over to our legal guy legal guy for some great stuff
thank you chair uh tonight's hearing will be pursuant to the quasa judicial
procedure set out in 97797 at the start of each hearing
commission members will be asked to disclose any ex party Communications
conflict of interest or bias if you have any questions as to what that is please
let me know the applicable substantive criteria for this hearing will be
addressed in the staff report testimony may be in any oral or written form but
must be directed towards the criteria outlined in the staff report the
comprehensive plan are the city's land use regulations any issue raised must be
accompanied accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient enough to allow the
commission and parties an opportunity to respond please note the failure to raise
an issue including a constitutional issue by the close of the hearing will
prevent any appeal to the land board of appeals you may ask for any uh bias or
expar contct act okay and with that we will open public
hearing uh ar-24 d05 as for any exper contact uh conflict of interest or
bias I live near
by so you're saying you live nearby the proposed development yes and will the
fact that you live nearby that development have any influence in your
decision-making process tonight no okay okay any other
disclosures if not then we will turn it over to staff for staff
report uh so good evening everybody before you tonight is a proposed uh
apartment development for a 20 unit uh development at
377 Von Lane the property is on the south side of Von Lane it is located
within the residential mixed density Zone uh it is surrounded by properties
that is within a mix of City uh limits and County limits all within the urban
growth boundary um and the comprehensive plan designation and Zoning designation
match as residential mixed density um it is surrounded by residential uses of um
single family homes in nature um and the property to the South is currently
vacant um but it has been previously approved for a subdivision um and an
application before you tonight is also uh a proposal for a subdivision
modification for that site as well um there are public facilities within Von
Lane that are available to be extended to the site um to serve the development
as well um and we will be able to talk about those in the next
slide um this is the proposed uh development again the assigned zoning is
residential mixed density uh the proposal is 28 uh apartment units all of
them would be one bedroom units uh it is proposed to be single
story um the density for the property meets code uh in terms of how many units
are provided for the size of the property um it's actually less dense
than what is technically authorized per the code um per what is required for uh
the area you uh to make the number of units um that are proposed you require
just under an acre in size and the property is 1.88 Acres so it is less
dense than what is uh authorized um the property uh includes a
total of three building blocks two of them are oriented kind of in a north
south Direction um and one of them towards the south side of the property
is oriented in an East West Direction um and they're oriented around the main
Drive aisles to provide the parking and access uh to the sites uh the property
and the development is designed to meet the required setback standards uh it
meets the required 10- foot front setback along Von Lane uh the five foot
setbacks along the side property line is the minimum um that minimum is provided
for the southern building block um um for that east west building um for the
Eastern property line uh a 10- foot setback is provided for the north south
building on the western uh building block uh and then a much larger setback
is provided for the north south building block uh on the western side of the
property um where the uh remainder part of that property area is provided as the
open space area but it is also a large Wetland area for the site um as you can
see um also south of that uh building that's oriented in the east west
direction there's also a large area that's about 79 feet uh in setback area
from the southern property line um that is the rear setback um that is far more
than the minimum the ma the minimum 20 foot setback and that is largely because
that area is also designated Wetland area
um so for lot coverage purposes the maximum allowed under code is 60% of the
lot area um what is proposed is 25 so that meets the
requirements um for open space standards 25% of the lot must meet the uh must be
provided for open space um and then the standards as dictated in the uh in the
staff reports uh are are uh separated for uh commment open space and usable
open space um the blue area is designated as the common and usable open
space and within that includes the children's play area um and they're also
providing private uh patio areas um which provides the the open space area
as well um to meet the code requirements uh in terms of parking uh
to within our code um there is a mixture of B bicycle parking requirements and
vehicle parking requirements um it's 2.25 parking spaces
per unit um for vehicle parking spaces and 0.5 parking spaces uh vehicle spaces
per unit uh sorry backtrack 0.5 bicycle spaces per unit um for for the bike
standards um however our code does provide what's called an earned um
parking reduction for vehicle parking uh if you provide additional bicycle
parking um on the property which is provided um so providing additional
bicycle amenities with covered bicycle spaces um they are providing uh
ultimately a 10% parking redu vehicle parking reduction um which is authorized
by right in the code um so a total of 54 vehicle parking spaces is provided for
the 28 uh one-bedroom units and 20 for uh uh bicycle parking spaces and as
covered bicycle spaces uh in terms of access uh there
would be one vehicle access uh from Von Lane as a driveway uh and then there's
parking on both sides of the main Drive aisle access and then it goes into a a
hammerhead Drive AIS um and they have provided the the template that
demonstrates that it meets the the fire turnaround radiuses is uh to be able to
to get a fir Tru in there and then be able to turn around and be able to and
exit the property appropriately um and then in terms of
utilities um there is the um Westside Interceptor uh project that was just
completed at uh fifth in vaugh um before it turns southwards on Fifth um this
property as part of the development would extend the sewer um to and through
this property um there is water already uh along the frontage of this property
um and then there is a storm drainage ditch along the front edge of this
property that would be able to serve the property as well um and then as part of
the development you can see that there are storm drainage basins that are
designed to hold the water on the site um to retain the the natural drainage as
well um for offsite improvements for the street um if if you look at the natural
development of the area and the the street
elevations um the street proposed improvements are are proposed to be
deferred so that a larger project can occur um because of the street
elevations to the the height of the property um you can't get Street grade
to do half Street improvements um that are would be naturally required for this
type of a project um and so the developer would be required to pay their
fair share as part of those improvements to the city to then do a larger project
of of Street improvements as part of improvements to bond
Lane um in terms of traffic um for analysis of um traffic uh
for the site um there's a Traffic Engineers manual that basically
identifies for units like this it's 7.3 to average daily trips uh per day with
0.56 um trips um per unit uh per peak time basically um so that would be 28 uh
sorry 16 peak hour trips and 205 average daily trips um and so per hour
development code and per our engineering review standards um this does increase
traffic on the road Road um Von Lane is identified within our transportation
system plan as a minor arterial um and so it is uh intended for
uh traffic of of this uh type um and and so there was no additional traffic
analysis identified as as required um and the system is able to hold that
additional traffic so we can move on to next
comment area um as was identified within the agenda
packet we did receive some written comments um after the agenda packet was
published we received some additional written comments and so we just wanted
to summarize those um I am not going to be the voice to those comments I want to
um make sure that those uh individuals feel that those written comments are
their voice we have provided those to the Planning Commission um the Planning
Commission has had the time to read them um ahead of time um and they have been
provided on the Das as well for further review and Analysis um so I am just
simply identifying the main talking points of them as just sort of a
refresher for everybody um but I do want to make sure that the public is aware
that the full comments have been provided to the Planning
Commission um so for General talking point purposes um the first public was
uh identified opposition due to concerns regarding um loss of a neighborhood
atmosphere um the issues regarding the fact that a lot of the properties around
the area are on well and that the property could affect the water aquifer
um and then increase traffic and loss of natural
viewpoints um generally speaking this property is within the city's Urban
growth boundary um per the state of Oregon per the city's growth patterns
the urban growth boundary is intended for urbanization it is for City growth
purposes um the city's General uh comprehensive plan and zoning ordinances
identify as residential mixed density that this type of development is
intended and and for its purposes um to meet the housing purposes and growth for
the city um and so if the project meets the development code um the
comprehensive plan identifies that this is the intended purpose of this area um
and so it's the the purpose and growth of the neighborhood um the water aquifer
this development would connect to the city's water services and the city's
infrastructure um which we pull water from the sou sanum River so it would not
affect the AER in the area um and then increased traffic um yes there will be
an increased traffic the city is growing um but uh that that is the nature of
growth um but the the street system does have the capacity to accommodate that
growth um for comment number two uh again there was opposition
generally due to the fact that the city's infrastructure can't handle more
apartment development um that is
uh the infrastructure can handle it uh we do have uh Master plans that uh
accommodates growth we regularly review those Master plans we have projects uh
that we plan regularly and we require developers to pay their fair share
through system development charges to help pay for improvements to the system
to to help pay for the city's growth in the
infrastructure um um public uh opposition comment number three is
concerns about impact of the wells and offers increased traffic and loss of the
small town atmosphere um I think already kind of addressed
those um comment number four improvements to Von Lane for pedestrian
uh safety and vehicle safety uh addressing flooding and needed
development uh needed as development in the area is increasing so I believe the
area of flooding that they're talking about is to the West um by Oak Creek um
that is in County jurisdiction um and so
as we continue to grow we'll continue to work with the county and identify areas
that need to be improved we we continue to have relationships with them to
identify areas within our um city and urban growth boundary where they need to
to work with us to make improvements um but if there are areas that that are um
of concern we will work with the county to notify them of such um and then
improvements on Von Lane as I identified the developer will be uh providing
funding for their Fair Shore portion of any future project on Von Lane to do a
buildout project um uh opposition number five is
very similar um lack of street lights as part of this project uh there is a
condition I believe for street lights to be improved um as part of a future
project um and then opposition number six uh the neighborhood is single family
dwellings and should remain as such um and then concerns for traffic on Bon
Lane um residential mixed density um zoning is that it is mixed density it is
identified that if your property is of a certain size you allowed to build of
many different types of housing um and so it is a meant to be a mixture of
different opportunities um and if the developer chooses to do um a different
type of uh housing than single family um the development code provides that that
right to that property same as if the property owner next door had that design
desire to do so as well and then finally um comment number
seven was concerns about traffic safety um at vau and main streets um and I
think I would turn that over to Ron to extrapolate on anything further yeah so
we've had a lot of complaints about that intersection biggest complaint is not
having uh visual to pull out um we've actually gone back after the project and
looked at that and it does meet uh ashto requirements for safe stopping distance
and safe sight distance while those requirements are met I think what's
confusing for most drivers is yes you cannot see where you need to go from
behind the crosswalk which is pretty standard of most intersections that we
have throughout town uh the idea here and it's even in the Oregon driver's
manual is that you stop the crosswalk check for pedestrians and then you move
forward uh and that's typical of most of our intersections if you really stop and
think about it where access ramps are um it it doesn't even have to be a an
intersection with crosswalks and if you look at where our stop bars are at so it
does meet the standards uh it's it just feels different I think because you've
got a three-story apartment there and uh but all in all it functions um and I you
know there's not much else to say about it other than it does function and we've
gone back and looked at it twice we've had it surveyed and to make sure and uh
we do meet all those ashto requirements
so I think with uh that that would conclude the summary of the project um
and the summary of the written comments uh and we'll conclude staff's report and
answer any
questions any questions for
Kelly Kelly I'm going to assume since it meets the open space requirement they're
not going to do any Wetlands mitigation even though Wetlands exist so the
wetlands mitigation would occur uh can you see my cursor within the areas that
buildings overlap um the area um and then there
might be some areas uh in the open space I have I don't have the exact map that
they might do a little bit in the open space uh area itself um but only in the
areas that that are identified as um the building area I believe is where they
would be doing the mitigation but they do meet the the open space requirements
in the Blue Area itself to where they might not need to and our development
code does say that 20% of wetland areas can also count towards open space um so
they they don't necessarily have to okay any other questions I had a
question do you have another one I do oh go ahead well it's just for onon when I
realize they're going to pay for Street improvements when they come but
postponing those with the new development what is that going to have
any kind of impact or what would that look
like so when you say impact what do you mean well you have all this uh more
traffic on the road that already exists and they're paying should be paying for
Street improvements that are going to come at some point but not doing those
with the development I'm a little concerned about that that's all going to
sh sure sure so so if you think about their lot Frontage out there and you
think about that's a county standard Road as it sits today uh I've looked at
it and you're probably looking at about two foot of elevation drop in order to
make that a city standard street so to try and build a Half street in
that and widen it um it can be done but it actually probably creates more of a
safety hazard for drivers than anything else because you're you're taper and
you're drop you're dropping down and to try and match that all up cuz all we can
condition is the half Street on their side so that was the reason for the
deferral if you're starting this at an intersection it's a little bit easier to
start into it but to try and hit grades Midstream and the block is it's it's
really tough uh Walker Road's a prime example of that where we did that and uh
we tried to save some of the stuff that they've done back and forth and and it
couldn't be done we ended up taking it all out and redoing doing it all again
so this is this is the response to this um we know at some point Von Lane's
going to have to be rebuilt uh it's in the SDC plans and okay it's just a
matter of getting into it but I think that's does that answer your question
yes it okay and that was going to be my question too is sort of could you help
us understand what triggers the road Improvement as far as
like in the future I mean as tra as it begins to develop you know I said
ultimately we want to see development pay for this right so rather than using
what little Street funds we have or resources that we have we would like to
see development pay for this now timing May dictate that we have to step in at
some point and do that uh we pushed all of our traffic when we had Walker Road
closed down to bond Lane um yeah it increase the traffic but if you think
about all the the traffic that uses Walker Road and you push that all down
to Von Lane and South Main we made that work and there's going to be less than
that here uh so is there a trigger there probably should be but
it's going to come down to resources uh you know and how soon that happens
because right now the city doesn't have enough money to fund the improvements uh
you know even with what they're they're they're doing here so just to clarify
will or will not there be a sidewalk there will not be a sidewalk no on this
on this portion right here there will be in the future yes we will tie it all
together as more of the properties along the road
are annexed and development again it comes back to we can put a sidewalk out
there um it's really a sidewalk to Nowhere at this point yeah and you'd
have to tear it back up and and most likely yeah it's going to come back
up okay any other
questions hearing none then we will open the public testimony portion of our
hearing and invite the applicant or the applicant representative to come forward
sign in state your names please I guess you've already signed
in okay good evening um my name is Laura Lor rock with Udell engineering and
joining me today is Andrew rape um civil engineering questions can be directed
towards Andrew so as always I say this every time but Kelly does such a great
overview there's not too much more for me to add to the presentation um so I'll
just briefly recap The Proposal um so again you have almost a two just under a
2 Acre Site proposed for development is a 28 unit one-bedroom apartments it's
going to be a lowrise development um so less than two stories likely just one
majority of the site does have delineated Wetlands on it and many of
that Wetland area is going to be set aside and preserved and going to be open
space um for the the residents of this site um parking is um asked to be a
reduction however um if you calculate it it's almost two parking spaces per one
bedroom unit so there's sufficient parking for the site um access um to the
high volume roadway is always encouraged to be single access and that's what's
proposed here um and all the development code standards in terms of flock
coverage and setback and things of those nature are met um so I'll be very brief
today and hand it over to Andrew to just give a quick overview of Public
Utilities and
drainage yeah thank you Laura so just to recap what Kelly already said a lot of
the utilities are already available in vaugh uh with the exception of um the
sewer line which is at the intersection of South Fifth and vaugh so the
applicant will be installing a new main from that intersection across the front
edge of this site uh water will be coming from a existing Main in mon in
vaugh and we'll be installing a new fire
hydrant in vaugh to serve the site and then storm drain will be discharging uh
into the southwest corner of the site uh to an existing ditch that's running
along the South
border we are here primarily just to answer any questions so is there
anything that we can answer for you terms of site design or use yeah from
what I understand you're going to drain that wet land towards Joy Street into
that drainage ditch so they're going to create an improved surface so any sort
of parking area and building area is going to have um be drained and I
shouldn't speak for Andrew because he's here so I'll let him finish yeah for the
portion of the wetlands that will be disturbed they'll be capturing the run
off and running it to the South and it'll end up meeting that ditch and joy
you know I like to visualize things so you know that's that's I'm asking I've
driven by there before in the winter and seen a lake out there in that area so it
does get quite a bit of water buildt up and part of the improvements will be
cleaning up that roadside ditch a lot of times they become plugged over time with
sediment and vegetation so part of this project will be clearing out some of
that if any of that has occurred in that area now that ditch to the South that
you're going to be draining into just looking at it it looks to be maybe 3 or
4T deep are you going to have to change
that in order to drain everything out of that parking lot and that Wetland into
that is it you know just looking at it visualizing it looks like it's going
uphill yeah I guess one clarification is wetland wouldn't be drained necessarily
across the site so the storm water retention and drainage is going to be
anything that's created as impervious surface so pay building area things like
that um preserving the wetlands allows those areas to function naturally so
there's going to be some sort of um water retention in those natural areas
and then the rest of the site that's being improved um that would be
addressed through grading on site and detention and possibly treatment in
terms of the Calver um this is a preliminary planning approval so once we
get to the next stage in development there'll be more engineering that has
occurred and we'll take a closer look at those elevations and solutions for those
if they're needed
um I don't know if you're able to answer this question or not but I'd like to ask
about the Builder's intent as to Future changes or what their target occupancy
is are they targeting you know because they're one-bedroom apartments are they
targeting um uh elderly people for occupants
or um and the second part question is and
this has happened before is a builder will come in and say I'd like to do this
and then he comes in six months later and he says I want to change this to
that so the Builder that you're representing would they are they likely
to come back and ask for changes yeah to answer that kind of
two-part question so the owner is present in the room today today and I'll
I'll briefly address your question if he has anything to fill in I can ask him to
come up um but um Mr wh he's the property owner and he will be the
developer as well um I can say that he spent a considerable amount of time um
researching projects um to be able to build something like this uh in the
immediate area he spent um considerable time on this particular site um and he
is very mindful about what he's going to be constructing he wants it to be
something that's affordable to the broad population um and he didn't want it to
be high density as what could have been developed on this site so he's very
mindful about keeping the construction cost down which trickles down to keeping
the rents lower and um affordable for a wider range of public in terms of tenant
restrictions I have not heard any um any to a specific population group answer
that
uh about a year ago I sat in this room and listen to you guys uh discuss the
need for housing and the the lower portion of the housing is um or the the
more affordable housing units were one of the things that had a higher need and
and less actual apartments or homes being built so I'm I'm trying to address
that calculated need and I I do have a target
market um of older individuals on fixed incomes but I can't just rent to those
um and I don't plan on any age restrictions but um my entire uh that's
why we're not doing a two-story or three-story apartment building because I
hate those giant boxes I really do they're more profitable but um they
don't add to any Community value and it doesn't address the need for
um uh the Lower Side of the housing the lower cost housing for the record could
you state your name please Braden wayy thank
you you live here in town Braden uh yeah I graduated from lemon High School in
2005 and I was born here
it's not too often somebody sits before us with a project that's that's from
here or lives oh gotcha home Crown is that what you said
yes no okay any other questions for the applicant that'll come in due
time any other questions from the Planning
Commission okay thank you okay so our Our Testimony portion is
divided into three segments first we have the applicant which we just heard
from then we will take testimony in as approving or in favor of I should say of
the application then finally we will do testimony in
opposition um once the opposition is completed if the applicant wishes to do
a rebuttal they can then that would close the public testimony so following
that prescription then is there anybody with us that wishes to speak in favor of
the
application seeing no movement then we would open up to anybody that wish to
speak in opposition of the application okay come forward uh if
you've not already signed in please do so and state your name have a question
that's okay come to the mic question is if it's one-bedroom
apartment why do they need a playr could you state your name
please okay so your question is not I'm not opposed I think it's a wonderful
idea to
have Boris I'm sorry to bug you but can you speak in the microphone so we can
catch it for minute purpos I'm not opposed I think it's a
great idea and have it low like that but I'm just concerned if there are
one-bedroom apartments and they B playground around where they going to
put the children okay we can have the applicant
address
that uh any other testimony and opposition of the application okay come
forward if you're not already signed in please do so and state your
name um I'm merth lenford I actually live on Von Lane where South fif comes
and the traffic there is so horrendous and I I think that's my biggest concern
is the traffic people just run down that street they go screaming down that
street and um about last year I think early last year I or maybe even this
year I contacted the city and I said hey could you maybe could we do something
about lowering the speed limit on there because almost almost where um Chuck
lives uh right next to where this property is going to be the speed Lim is
40 and there's nowhere to get off the street and U it's it's a dangerous
Street to walk on and so I I don't have any opposition particularly but I'm
really worried about that traffic it's going to if I don't know if the city
could just lower the speed limit and things would be better that that's
probably a really good option I think and try and and you know the the kids
that go up to school there this Christian School up on the hill this
time of year we're just people are coming in and out so much it's really
hard for me to even get out my driveway but again that's my problem I lived
there for 29 years it's okay but I am concerned about more a lot more traffic
there okay thank you Meredith what is the posted speed limit there right now
40 yeah I drove by just to make sure because I think when we're coming off
second you know we're coming to the Sanam school is a Sanam um the school
district is 20 no Sandridge I mean yeah so it's 20 and then it goes to 25 I
think and then then it starts to go to 35 after it gets I think after it goes
past vaugh and then I'm not really sure when you first turn around V where that
what that speed limit is right there from South Main to vaugh but then again
at 40 it goes 40 just almost in front of where the subd development is going to
be going Kelly what is the criteria for setting a speed limit on the street like
blond ltic question to ask
not wrong okay so so there's there's quite a
process no a portion of its City a portion of its County so really what you
have to is is you have to uh you have to do a speed study so you
go out do a speed study um I think we've done speed studies on Von Lane before
and what we've come back with is your it it's changed a little bit used
to be the 85th percentile now I think it's the 50th percentile uh basically
that's what your speed limit is set to what 50% I think it's 50% of your your
motorists are traveling is what your speed limit is set at so then you've got
some that are Under and Over um what we found is that it was posted within the
speed limit that met most of the traffic and most drivers will drive at a speed
that's comfortable for the road conditions and that's that's how they
set the speed limit that's not to say that we can't look at it again but it's
not going to guarantee that people are going to slow down yeah and I know
that's what we find they did put that sign they did put that speed check there
for a while but you know the other day stand by my garbage can some guy's
coming down the street he's going up and down the street really really one of
these cars and I stood there and they went
with my neighbor I went like that and he just spit up as fast as he could I'm
thinking yeah sure why are you doing that but you know we have a lot of
people that do that kind of thing and so when you're talking about the bikes
there's not going to be there's no room for bikes to be you might be wasting
your time to put in bike bike uh parking because there's no room for bikes on the
on that road Road at all now yeah it it's dangerous for for the speed I mean
it becomes an Enforcement issue right so if people are aren't driving the speed
limit or driving recklessly then it's an Enforcement issue and sometimes lowering
the speed limit is not quite the answer I mean it seems like the answer but if
people are driving it at a comfortable speed that's not going to change their
habits until they get a ticket of course but until we have police officer on
every street we run into this a lot and sh fifth even when they they used to
come down South Fifth just tearing down there and I've had three three people in
my yard actually over the years and they put street light up up on the corner
there and then not too long ago somebody went speeding around the corner and they
took out the the light on the the power pole on South Fifth so that's my only
gripe well we'll continue to monitor we're we're constantly monitoring speed
on streets and we we'll continue to do so and we have to throw out tax out on
the road right I don't do that cuz I'll probably be the get one to get the flat
tire yeah we'll continue to monitor that all right thank
you all right anybody else wishing to speak in
opposition all right seeing none then we will turn it back to the applicant or
applicants
representative thank you so the question I heard was um why is there a children's
play area if it's one bedroom units uh questions that Kelly and I have talked
about before um so this is a development code standard the development code
states that multif family development with eight or more units needs to
provide a children's play area uh doesn't stipulate about bedrooms so this
would be a possible code amendment in the future to address this um because
it's not likely that childrens would use such a facility if it is only one
bedroom typically that's just one adult um what has occurred in other situations
around town is that what is considered a children's play area is widely defined
um and types of improvements can be modified per development um so onless
there is an area for a children's play area to be developed um alternatively it
could contain things like a barbecue pits or some more adult um amenities for
the site that would be better utilized all right any final
questions all right thank you thank you and with that we will close the public
testimony portion of our hearing all further discussion will be among staff
and planning
Commissioners okay what are you
thinking um I'd just like to say that uh I I really appreciate the uh uh
developer being present in person um also really appre appreciate
the um local aspect um and the consideration of not
trying to milk every last commercial Penny available out of the property and
being mindful about the community um I I am very appreciative to
to hear those kinds of things and um also want to make note of the fact that
um The Proposal is directly in alignment with uh existing Provisions within the
code uh not seeking uh you know um uh variances or or or anything like that
um to me this has a very different feel than a a
um previous development that came through uh the planning Planning
Commission uh there uh at Crowfoot and we had many people out there that were
unhappy and and present and vocal about it um and I I feel very good about uh
what's what's been proposed here today okay thank
you uh any other questions
comments then let me ask the commission do you feel that the criteria in this
application has been met yes okay see heads nod positively
any other
concerns all right is anybody prepared to make a motion I'll make a motion I
move that the Planning Commission approve the proposed administrative
review AR 24-5 adopting the written findings
contained in the staff Report with the development conditions and direct the
staff to draft an order of decision incorporating the findings and
conditions of the approval okay it's been motion and
seconded any further
discussion okay all those then in favor of the motion please say I I and those
opposed motion carries unanimously okay thank
you uh moving on to our second public hearing uh sday
2404 again ask if there's any conflict of interest exp party contact or bias
that the Planning Commission needs to disclose I live near this development as
well it's still not a it's still not a conf still not a I mean I I no bu Mr
chairman I still do have to unfortunately read the certain
Provisions into the record uh testim this will be pursuant to quasa judicial
hearing procedures testimony may be in oral or written form but must be
directed towards a criteria the comprehensive plan are the city's land
use regulations any issue raised must be accompanied by statements and evidence
of efficient to allow the commission and parties an opportunity to respond please
note the failure to raise an issue including constitutional issues by the
close of the hearing will prevent any appeal to the land use board of appeals
please recognize that my requirement to read this is by Statute and not by
choice okay thank
you you just saying that so that we're paying attention yeah I wanted to see if
anybody giggled he's just feeling really spunky tonight practicing for a
commercial it sounded like I was reading it right
um all right we've already established no export contact conflict of interest
or bias and we will turn it over staff for staff report thank you sir uh this
uh proposal should look somewhat familiar for uh everybody here I think
um this is a development proposal for a property at the northwest corner of
South Fifth and Joy Street um the zoning is residential mixed density it is
surrounded by properties within the city and within the county um all either
designated within the zoning code or within the comprehensive plan as
residential mixed density and uh surrounded by um either vacant
properties uh properties that are uh improved with single family homes or now
recently approved for an apartment development um The
Proposal is to modify or uh obtain a new uh subdivision plan um back in
2022 or 23 one of those two um the Planning Commission approved this
property for a 22 lot subdivision um and that was for a duplex
development um now the same developer and property owner um is proposing a 35
l lot subdivision um and based off of The Narrative it is a um understanding
with the traffic analysis that was provided that the general intention is
to provide single family homes um however it's important to note that
based off of House Bill 2001 uh any property that we do approve for a um
single family home is also eligible for a duplex as well um but uh from the
small Lots the these lots have been uh indicated
to intend for single family homes based off of The Narrative um the lots that
are proposed are between 5,5 square feet uh to 7, uh 29 square F feet um and they
maintain at least a minimum of uh 50 feet in width each uh meeting those uh
minimum requirements for a lot size to meet the single family home uh lot
requirements within the residential mixed density Zone
um the access requirements and improvements uh are exactly the same in
terms of public Street improvements for uh the subdivision uh new access would
be provided off of Fifth Street in uh the creation of a new public Street um
which would then turn into a little mini caac and then down and turn into Kingdom
drive and connect to uh Joy Street um and then to access the properties to the
east is a proposal to provide a private Street um which has a maximum of 16
units that would be eligible to be built off of the private Street um so even if
um some duplexes are proposed for the property um that does restrict um the
number of duplexes that could be combined within on this uh private
Street um or it could be single family homes um where with some accessory
dwelling units as well um in terms of roadway improvements
uh as well on Joy Street as part of The Proposal improvements would also be
included to require what's uh called a full Street Improvement is um we
wouldn't be including uh sidewalks and curbing gutter because of the drainage
ditch that's there um as our maintenance crews are still requiring um to be able
to maintain that drainage ditch um but uh four feet of additional pavement
would be provided on Joy Street which would actually open up uh Joy Street to
be able to provide parking uh on one side of the street um and so that would
actually provide a parking Improvement to uh the neighborhood as well um in
terms of uh traffic considerations uh since we're on road conditions as well
um for single family homes uh there is a traffic count requirement of somewhere
around get to it have that paper in front of
me
um 9.34 vehicles per day um and uh .94 trips uh per uh Peak PM traffic hour um
and with 30 Lots uh that would equates to 330 trips
per day um and so our development code does identify that we may trigger a
traffic impact analysis for a a project that could equat to trips per day of
that size um however we did look at um the roadway uh system in this area um
and all of the intersections in this area and they are all already improved
and appropriately metered with stop signs um and uh the the roads are
improved with the appropriate um amount of lanes um and improvements and so a
traffic impact analysis would not have uh metered any additional mitigation
measures out of it um and so it was determined that no additional analysis
was needed um for a traffic at this point um we do have uh
an added condition um that we we are um proposing uh that would uh clarify that
additional stop signs as part of the subdivision would be required um the
just to clarify that that is a Improvement as part of the subdivision
um so we do have a modified uh Motion in front of you to to consider uh that
would just clarify that stop signs would be required for the intersection of
Fifth and the new public Street um joy and the new public Street and then also
the the private Street and the new public streets to make sure that that
traffic pattern is also uh metered appropriately um in terms of utility
extensions uh there's the Westside Interceptor was recently pulled through
uh this section of fist Street um and so now uh the uh sewer would be extended
through the new public Street and then connected down to Joy um water utility
would also be extended through the new public Street as well as storm drainage
um and then uh private uh utilities would be extended through the um private
Street to service those lots uh along that
Corridor um we would also maintain the private uh ditch uh sorry the storm
drainage ditch um on the south side of the property is along Joy um and so that
means we would also be maintaining the easements on the south side of the
property um one change from the previous consideration of this is we did go back
and evaluate the size of the easement that was required for this prop for this
easement um for maintenance purposes um and instead of the um size that we
currently have uh we can reduce it down to a 20 foot easement
um and so that is what is currently um proposed as part of the subdivision plan
and so that would give uh 7 feet of additional land back to the property um
for use and enjoyment as well um and there are um as with the previous uh
development as well there are wetlands on this site uh that would be uh
proposed to be um delineated and then mitigated uh for the development to the
private streets and and uh future development um we did receive written
public comments for this project as well um we received a letter of opposition um
for the development that generally again caveat I am not speaking for the
individuals um you did receive these comments ahead of time um and so just a
a sum not even a summary but just general comment points are being
provided um um but commission had time to fully review the
comments um but for the the first public comment the opposition was generally um
the desire to maintain the approval at the smaller number of lots um and that
uh we are already um strapped in terms of police and fire capacity and instead
of this development they'd rather see a new grocery store uh built somewhere
else in town um I cannot speak for the fire district RCT they are a separate
entity than the Lebanon um and for the the police department um we provide
services with our Police Department um we are constantly striving to provide
the best service we possibly can um and we continue to provide that service um
to our community uh so was uh um for comment number two um this did
not identify opposition or uh in favor it was mostly just asking
questions um in the comments that were provided you also saw a dialogue um with
myself where I answered those questions um but it asked questions regarding the
Joy Street roadway parking and sidewalk improvements which I I summarized in my
presentation it asked about building Heights and occupancy um the building
height maximum within the residential mixed density uh zone is 40 feet um that
is for three generally a three-story dwelling um these are intended for um
single family homes or duplexes which generally speaking within the city have
been built as single story or twostory homes um which um is the norm however
they are allowed to be built up to 40 feet uh if the developer so
chose um in terms of occupancy they were asking whether or not they were going to
be renter own or um rented or own owner occupied I would leave that up to the
applicant to answer um they asked about traffic impacts uh I have spoke about
that already and then in terms of street lights they asked uh if street lights
were going to be provided and if so if they can be uh informed about where
exactly they were going to be provided um yes street lights will be provided as
part part of this development uh the exact location will be determined uh
through the engineering site plan review and has not been specifically laid out
at this point in time
so sure if you have anything um so that at this point would
conclude staff's report there any questions all right any
questions do you know the square footage of the Lots
across the street across the street right on Joy
Street there uh they sou that you know how big those lots are about 5,000
square
feet so pretty much the
same yeah okay all
right all right thank
you all right any other ask the tough questions well I I'll have a couple more
down the road here any other questions um I have one
Kelly um I vaguely remember us doing this for the other one and I remember
the people on Joy Street complaining about looking at the in the backyards of
the homes we maintained the condition that
the Planning Commission ultimately ended up with from the previous discussion and
it was copied and pasted okay I was just wondering if it followed through okay it
followed through okay thank you right anything
else okay then we'll open our public testimony portion and ask the applicant
or applicants representative to come
forward okay good evening Laura Lorac with Udell engineering and land
surveying joining me this evening is Andrew repe uh also with Udell so thank
you for hearing the presentation tonight what you have before you is a 30 lot
subdivision proposal uh most of these Lots will be served by the creation of
new public streets one is a longer section the other is short uh those
streets that will be developed will have connections to South Fifth and also Joy
Street um sidewalk connections to the existing sidewalk system on the opposite
side of Joy Street will be created through the creation of these Lots um
there's also included in the proposal is a short private Street section um that
will provide access to just a few Lots off the end of the sub subdivision
called a sack um included in that private street is a fire turnaround so
fire apparatuses will have the ability to drive down and serve those um created
lots and also make the backing movements to move out of that
area um and as Kelly mentioned I think the the the highlight of this
application is it's one that you have seen before um the earlier proposal had
less Lots proposed um those lots were bigger in size the intention of the
development on those lots were duplex so primarily duplex development uh the
proposal before you today is intended to um serve what the market is demanding
and that's primarily sing single family development possibly a mix of some
duplexes in there as well um and as your planning commissioner already has
pointed out the lots that are proposed this evening with the current
subdivision proposal are the same size and width and dimensions as things that
already exist in the surrounding neighborhood so the subdivision directly
um south of the project has similar size Lots as the proposal that's in front of
you this evening um so we'll think it'll add some consist y um to the already
developed neighborhood in the area that I'll complete mine and hand it over to
Andrew talk a little bit about Utilities in
storm yeah briefly for the utilities uh there's water available in South fif and
enjoy so we'll be connecting to both of those Mains and looping it through this
development there's sewer available in South fif and the West Side Interceptor
and so we'll be creating a new main running east and west through the
development for sewer uh storm drain will all be gathered to
the Southwest there will be a new track created that will be owned by the HOA
and uh where we'll have a detention Pond and that will detain the runoff to
pre-developed levels and then it will discharge into the the ditch that runs
along joy and uh South Fifth so it will discharge down there at the intersection
of those you'll notice there's several new box cul
uh two on South Fifth and one on Joy that will be created for these Crossings
and uh those are regulated by ODFW and they're they're quite large to
uh to enable fish fish passage so um that's why they're so big um we'll also
be creating a sidewalk along South Fifth Street but the the paved surface will
remain as it is
now that concludes our presentation but we're happy to answer any questions that
you have any
questions dang you done good all right all right thank you again
appreciate your
time all right then we will open it up for Testimony in in favor of the
application seeing none is there testimony in opposition of the
application okay come forward again state your
name I'm Doris modman and I live right across the street from this and the size
of my L lot is
6,535 5,000 foot lot is considerably smaller than what most of us have I can
put an RV next to my house I think some of these other ones I really good
friends with Mark Schneider who is the owner of the property and helping these
people do this I'm not against the project I just like to see it much less
dense okay maybe 24 was too little maybe 35 is too big I'd like to see a
compromise thank you any other testimony and opposition
of the
application all right seeing none then we will close public testimony portion
all further discussion will be amongst planning Commissioners and
staff so the private the private Street that's maintained by the homeowner right
yes simple
question okay I can't remember the last application we had a combination of
public and private this a little unique I thought
so too but what what is the point in making
that private the
uh public Street can't extend far enough to make a
culac large enough um without impeding on other
people's properties basically you there's no land
to be able to build a public Street and actually have
property um basically yeah so you you can't we
couldn't technically allow people to drive down there and turn around in
somebody's driveway so that's that's the reason for the private street because
it's just those folks that live down there that would use that portion of the
street very similar to what's built over on um off of U and yes yeah same same
situation
right any other questions go ahead for the private street is there
going to be some kind of HOA or something to uh fund maintenance Etc on
that yeah I think they alluded to an HOA for the uh the drainage so I would
assume that the same thing would apply here too yeah it would have to there's a
condition that says that there has to be a reciprocal access and maintenance
agreement at minimum but then with drainage
it probably has the age away as well so Kelly um I have a question if
they and I could be um from if they use if they put
duplexes in there is that considered a multif family no okay it's just a it's
just a shared wall right like a zero lot line okay the only reason I was asking
was because of green space for children if you have if we require for multif
family if that was something that would be required because I didn't see it so
our code only identifies multif family multi more than three units more than
three okay thank you Joy since they came back and changed their their plan did
they have to pay their fees all over again yes
sir okay any other
questions okay is anybody prepared well first let me ask this question do you
feel the criteria has been
met okay I think we have an agreement that it has been so in that case then is
there a
motion I'll make a motion um I move that the Planning
Commission approved the subdivision s-22 d03 adopting the written findings
contained in the staff report for the decision criteria and conditions of
development with the modification to add an engineering condition for
transportation to require a total of three stop signs at the intersections of
the new public Street and South Fifth Street and Joy Street and the
intersection of the private Street and the new public Street and direct staff
to D draft an order of decision with the modified findings and conditions of
approval It's s 24-4 you said 22 oh that's because it
says 03 in there 04 I'm so sorry I'll second okay it's been motioned and
seconded does everybody understand the motion and the
correction okay any further
discussion okay all those then in favor of the motion please say I I I and those
oppose same sign right motion carries
unanimously again thank you all right moving on to our third and
final public hearing uh annexation a-24
d02 pursuant to 97797 testimony may be in any oral or
written form but must be directed towards the criteria outlined in the
staff report the comprehensive plan of the city's land use regulations any
issue raised must be accompanied by statements and evidence sufficient to
allow the commission and parties an opportunity to respond please note
failure to raise an issue including constitutional issues by the close of
the hearing will prevent any appeal to the land board of
appeals okay any expert take contact conflict of
interest or
bias you don't live next to it no
I was expecting that all right then we will turn it over
to staff for staff report okay this is the longest one of the night guys so 785
West B Street would like to Annex into the city to be able to connect to City
uh sewer Services uh the property is contiguous to City boundaries on the
north and west property lines um and it is uh identified in the comprehensive
plan as residential mixed density and assigned zoning of residential mixed
density upon annexation the applicant has identified acceptance of the initial
zoning uh the surrounding properties are residential uses in nature um and public
facilities are available in Ninth Street and able to be uh extended to the
property uh once annexed into the City and so therefore it is eligible for
urbanization although it is already developed uh so it meets the criteria
for annexation so staff recommendation is for approval of the annexation and
that concludes my staff's report I'm available for any
questions any questions for
staff okay um then we will open public testimony
portion [Laughter]
then we will close public testimony portion um any any further questions any
comments any concerns I'm going to assume that they
must have had a septic failure maybe don't know because I know
that we have some property that's County so it's a good possibility or they want
to sell the property and it's easier to sell a property when it's connected to
City all the better reason either way yeah I think this is a pretty
straightforward thing so slowly this little island of
County Properties is shrinking yeah which is a good thing all right any
further discussion concerns are we uh I assume you feel that we've met
the criteria you'd be asking questions y okay um anybody prepared for
a motion go ahead are you sure okay um I move
that the Planning Commission recommend approval of annexation A-
24-02 to the city council based on the written findings and the staff report
and direct staff to draft an order of recommendation incorporating the
findings and conditions of
approval okay been motion and seconded any further
discussion all those any in favor please say I I those oppose same sign motion
carries unanimously all right um citizens
comments see no movement then we will go on to commission
business uh we will have a meeting in October um please remember that we will
have a joint Planning Commission and city council meeting in November believe
we have it set to start it at 4:30 uh yes what's that date in
November date is the 2 uh Wednesday of the month so it's
November 13th November 13th at 4:30 yes uh and that's uh again for an update
on the code amendment process much like we did the last go around uh in between
now and then we'll have another project advisory committee for those that are
participating on the project advisory committee um I think that's all I have
unless anybody has questions for
us has it okay so November we have the joint meeting but we're not going to
actually have a Planning Commission meeting we might depending on whether or
not we have applications
okay um just a question um in the first hearing we had lot coverage does that
include impervious areas like parking lot no it includes pretty much just the
building footprint okay that makes more
sense all
right any updates any questions comments