Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-0801 REG MINMINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL August 1, 1995 CALLED TO ORDER Mayor Golden called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilors Laws, Reid, Hauck, Hagen were present. Councilors Thompson and Winthrop arrived at 7: 04 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes for the regular meeting of July 18, 1995 will be available at the August 15 Council meeting due to illness. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions and Committees. 2. Departmental Reports for July, 1995. 3. City Administrator's Monthly Report for July, 1995. 4. Authorization for Mayor and Recorder to sign contract amendment with OMECA to delete Canby Utility Board and amend other provisions of the agreement. 5. Approval of liquor license application from Connie and Michael Robbins dba/Outback Cafe, 3070 Highway 66. 6. Authorization for Mayor and Recorder to sign quitclaim deed for sewer easement near Randy Street and Elizabeth Avenue. Councilors Winthrop/Hauck m/s approval of Consent Agenda. Voice vote: all AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Continuation of Public Hearing on request for annexation of 47.7 acres located east of Interstate 5 and west of East Main; zone change from C-1 to R-l-5; and request for outline plan approval for 173-1ot subdivision (Diamond D Corporation, applicants). Mayor Golden reviewed Criteria for Annexation (AMC 18. 108.085). Councilor Winthrop asked for an interpretation by Community Development Director McLaughlin regarding criteria pertaining to Comprehensive Plan findings. McLaughlin responded that LUBA has responded using the question: Does the zoning the applicant propose match with the Land Use Ordinance criteria? City Attorney (r:8-1-95.min) pg. 1 Nolte stated that there remains an issue of how a policy is being implemented by the annexation criteria used. Public Hearing opened at 7:23 p.m. In Opposition: Joe Eckhart, 108 Bush - Opposes annexation request on the basis: CPAC noted in Comprehensive Plan to review all annexation hearings. If anything overlooked in Comprehensive Plan, that would be grounds for an appeal to LUBA. Gerald Cavanaugh,483 Euclid -- Opposes annexation request. Read his previously- submitted written comments in reverse numerical order due to the question posed earlier by Councilor Winthrop. Richard Ernst, P.O. Box 1134 -- Opposes annexation request based on not meeting "orderly and sequential growth" criteria noted in Comp Plan. He does not think City needs number of homes noted in proposed development; City should need more commercial property rather than residential. Marilyn Briggs, 590 Glenview Drive -- Opposes annexation request: Burden of proof of need is to be borne by developer and she has not heard that addressed by developer. She thinks more clarity needs to be added to annexation Ordinances and is glad to have the opportunity to "clean up" the Ordinances. Claire Collins, 315 High Street -- Asked for clarification regarding the July 18 meeting when David Lane brought up point that Council "may" approve the project - Council still does have discretion to not approve it. City Attorney Nolte stated that the Planning Commission and Council MUST approve if all criteria have been met just as Planning Commission and Council can NOT approve if one of the annexation criterium was not met. Letter from Jack Nicholson, 1575 Greenmeadows Way: Letter was read by Mayor Golden to be included in public record at his request. Staff rebuttal: Community Development Director McLaughlin spoke to how annexation criteria was established by Ordinance. He reported that he had not heard from Ashland Hills Inn in response to his letter to them last week regarding their removal of the RVTD bus stop from their property. He expects the issue to be discussed at the August 16 RVTD Board meeting. (r:8-1-95.min) pg. 2 Councilor Reid asked if we are mandated by law to use the SRC figures as correct for water planning in the future and can we use the SRC figures to determine if adequate water is available for the vacant land within the City limits. City Attorney Nolte explained that if water amounts are used to deny the annexation request, Council would have to state the basis for this decision and if Council said there was not enough water for the current City vacant lands and therefore denied the request for annexation, then a moratorium would have to be enacted and State law would prevail towards the resolution of this problem. Councilor Hagen asked for information on transportation systems to be used by the residents, specifically students that would require transportation to the schools. Councilor Hauck asked for clarification on requirements to approve with conditions to add conditions to intersection that is already in place. We could allow annexation provided these conditions have been met and we could allow the annexation at such time when these conditions have been met. City Attorney agreed with that option. Rebuttal: Doug Lee of Crawford, Multari & Starr, representing developers: Stated sewer increase would be 1% and there is adequate water. There was no problem with road capacity on adjacent roads; improvements agreed upon at East Main and Hwy 66 could be accomplished at their propotionate share; there was a bike lane in the Comprehensive Plan; there is a municipal bus route nearby; they are paying the SDC fees; the development will not trigger a need for a new school; school-age children will feed into existing school bus line; development is within the Urban Growth Boundary; development is surrounded by collector and arterial roads and adjacent to freeway; sewer and electricity are already on East Main; site is not prime agricultural land; will not infringe on forest land; least impacted location for new growth; believe they meet or exceed criteria established beforehand. Closed public hearing at 8:09 p.m. Councilor Reid stated she was not opposed to subdivisions; town is made up of many subdivisions that have produced many valuable people to our community. Concerned about water availability within development; concerned that transportation needs are not addressed adequately in the proposal. Councilors Laws/Reid m/s deny application for annexation because adequate transportation cannot or will not be provided. Councilor Laws feels that the intersections of East Main and Hwy 66 and East Main and Lithia Way will not adequately serve the traffic flow. (r:8-1-95.min) pg. 3 Councilor Hauck also is concerned with pedestrian/bicycle access over East Main Street bridge. Asked that request be denied without prejudice so developer may clarify their propotionate contribution if they wish. Councilor Hagen also objects to proposed development because of transportation issues that have not been met within the current City limits and, therefore, will be impacted even further by the proposed annexation plans. Councilor Winthrop has problems with adequate water availability and transportation issues. Does not support suggestion by Councilor Hauck to deny without prejudice. He is particularly pleased that developer addressed affordability issue so completely and adequately. Does not think we have adequate SRC study information to determine water availability within City limits that can be used in proposed annexation criteria. Councilor Thompson has concerns with water availability and transportation issues. Councilor Laws complemented staff and developer on efforts put forth with this request. He also supports time limits set for public hearings. Councilor Hauck stated that the 25 % criteria be modified and is being reviewed by Affordable Housing Committee. He is not in agreement with statements regarding infill and Urban Growth Boundary. Mayor Golden responded to CPAC having a determination in this request. The main goal is to involve their citizens in planning issues. There is no technical discrepancy in the Comprehensive Plan. Roll call vote: Laws, Reid, Hauck, Hagen, Winthrop, Thompson YES. Motion passed. Regarding the zone change request from C-1 to R-l-5 '- John Hassen, attorney for the applicant: requested Council approve zone change. Councilors Hauck/Laws m/s approval of zone change. Councilor Thompson does not feel the zone change is necessary to the City's further development. Councilor Reid approves request for zone change because transportation issues are better met by this being used as residential. Councilor Winthrop opposes motion because applicant did not meet criteria. (r:g-l-95.min) pg. 4 Roll call vote: Hagen, Winthrop, Thompson NO; Laws, Reid, Hauck YES; Mayor Golden NO. Motion denied. Councilor Hagen/Thompson m/s deny zone change request. Roll call vote: Hagen, Winthrop, Thompson YES; Laws, Reid, Hauck NO; Mayor Golden YES. Motion passed. PUBLIC FORUM: Business from the audience not included on the agenda (limited to 5 minutes per speaker and 15 minutes total). Larry Medinger, 95 Mistletoe Road - Sorry to see efforts towards Affordable Housing become part of annexation hearing backlash. Councilor Reid suggested this be discussed at the next Council Study Session. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Draft of ordinance proposed by Councilors Hauck and Thompson setting contribution and spending limits for local elections and recommendation to set public hearing for August 15. Mayor Golden asked City Attorney to delve into the 1st amendment issues regarding proposed Ordinance. Councilor Reid stated that the voluntary compliance stated in the Ordinance made the Ordinance ineffective. Councilor Hauck stated that there were severe limitations that would only allow this to be a voluntary action. Councilor Thompson asked that this issue be discussed at a public hearing to explore the issue more fully. Mayor Golden stated that the proposal would make it difficult for the average person to understand the process. Council requested the draft Ordinance be the subject of a Public Hearing on September 19. Recommendation by ad hoc committee designated by Budget committee to study feasibility of departmental self-studies. Council discussed the recommendation. Councilor Thompson/Hauck m/s approval of reconunendation. Councilor Winthrop suggested the departments hold Public Forums to gather citizen input. It was recommended by Councilors Reid and Thompson to hold tours and/or open houses in various departments periodically for the public. Voice vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Request for Council sponsorship ($200) of Easter Seals Benefit on August 5 (referred by Councilor Reid). Council review request and decided not to take any action on it. (r:8-1-95.min) pg. 5 ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS & CONTRACTS 1. First reading of "An Ordinance amending the A.M.C. Section 9.08.120 to increase ground clearance of trees over roadways from ten feet to twelve feet." Councilors Laws/Hauck m/s approval to second reading. Roll call vote: Laws, Reid, Hauck, Hagen, Winthrop, Thompson YES. Motion passed. First reading of "An Ordinance adding Section 9.16.055 to the Ashland Municipal Code to require removal of dog waste from public areas." Councilors Hauck/Hagen m/s to hold public hearing on September 5 and have f'wst reading at that meeting. Voice vote aH AYES. Motion passed. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL lV!F~MBERS Councilor Winthrop noted the federal court action removing the employee utility discount. Council suggested not appealing the action. Council asked the City Attorney to prepare options for presentation to Council. Councilor Thompson suggested a review of the Comprehensive Plan. Mayor Golden stated she will work with the Community Development Director on the CPAC status. Councilors Hauck/Winthrop m/s to continue meeting past 10:00 p.m. Voice vote: aH AYES. Motion passed. Councilor Thompson asked Council to consider addressing in~ll recommendations to the Planning Commission. Councilor Laws suggested infill be brought to Council through a public heating with a staff report. Councilor Hagen asked that the timing device used during public hearings be equipped with a tone that will alert speakers that their time has expired. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjoumed at 10:09 p.m. Rhonda E. Mooref x~~udve Secretary Susan~d, Acting Mayor (r:8-1-95.min) pg. 6