1. Call to Order, Roll Call and Pledge of Allegiance

 

Mayor Meyer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

PRESENT: Mayor S. Meyer; Councilors, S. Navetta, P. Howison, R. Koehler, D. Bellemore, J. Scott, and R. Petersdorf.

ALSO PRESENT: G. Darnielle, City Attorney; T. Tinker, Planning Secretary; C. Lewis (arrived at 9:00 p.m.), Recording Secretary; G. Burke, Planning Commission; LCAN; and approximately 30 citizens from the community.

A. Resolution 01-18-07(A), a resolution adopting an amended

Dunes City Fee Schedule for activities requiring permits. Tabled from

the January 11, 2007, City Council Meeting.

ACTION: P. Howison made a motion add the approval of the Mayor to the resolution. R. Koehler seconded the motion. There were 5 ayes, 1 nay (Scott). Motion carried.

Darnielle said notice would be provided to DLCD within five days and the resolution would not go into effect until that date.

B. Little Woahink PUD hydro-seeding. Tabled from the January 11, 2007, City Council Meeting. Note: Did not have time to discuss since it was time for the Public Hearing.

 

3. Public Hearing - - to begin promptly at 7:30 p.m.

A. CDS Properties, Inc. – Clearwater Cove Subdivision, SUB-02-06,

Map and Tax Lot 19-12-23-10-806.

Rick Cox, Dan Scarberry and David Davis

Mayor Meyer opened the public hearing at 7:34 p.m.

Meyer asked if there were any declarations of conflict of interest or ex parte contact of the Council.

Councilor Koehler objected to Councilor Scott hearing the subdivision, since Scott would make money from the subdivision in the future. Scott said two of the three owners of the corporation are not primary owners. Scott further stated that he would not directly benefit from the development of the subdivision.

Councilor Bellemore commented on the stormwater drainage that is next to the road would swell at the bottom of the road and that there should be underground treatment, but the pipe does not allow for that type of treatment. There was a comment that the grade of the slope is approximately ½%.

Councilor Howison inquired and was answered about the following:

1). Why the CC&Rs requires that homes to be at least 1600 square feet.

2) Previous subdivision is not finalized: the drainage is not finalized.

3) Tree removal: the developer does not want to see the land stripped of trees.

4) Drainage pattern should be interminable: the developer will look at that aspect but does not want to hold future owners to those standards. Howison commented that the surface water drainage should never be able to be separated and that the system should be maintained forever. An attorney would be consulted, since in the event the CC&Rs were terminated, the adjoining property owners would take over.

Bellemore asked that the CC&Rs be changed so that on street parking would be "prohibited" instead of "discouraged." It was suggested that if there was something in the CC&Rs that the Council did not like, instead of changing those, indicate on the final plat notes since the City cannot control the CC&Rs.

Meyer asked if there were any proponents.

Jerry Wasserburg, Eastlake Drive, Florence OR 97439. Wasserburg commented that he liked the subdivision.

Meyer asked if there were any opponents. There were none.

ACTION: J. Scott made a motion to approve Staff Report. B. Petersdorf seconded the motion. There were 6 ayes, 0 nays. Motion carried.

ACTION: J. Scott made a motion to approve CDS Properties, Inc. – Clearwater Cove Subdivision, SUB-02-06, Map and Tax Lot 19-12-23-10-806 . B. Peterdorf seconded the motion. There were 6 ayes, 0 nays. Motion carried.

B. LUBA Remand:

Woahink Ridge Estates – Planned Unit Development (PUD 01-05)

and Zone Change (ZON 01-05), Tax Map 19-12-11-40, Lot 1400, -

20.3 acres.

Meyer asked if there were any declarations of conflict of interest or ex parte contact of the Council. There were none.

Bill Kloos, attorney for Woahink Ridge Estates, said that Dr. Chernaiks letters has an appearance that he had contact with some of the City Council members. Howison said it was required that Chernaik be involved in the remand and he was also involved in the Moratorium and Phosphorus Ordinance. Howison commented that the City needed more information in order to follow the guidance of the Dunes City Comprehensive Plan???? Darnielle said he could draft a resolution to ask for an expert opinion. Kloos wanted to now how it was that the report came about before the resolution. Howison said he had concern about another PUD in November and at that time he felt he needed additional information. The resolution was scheduled to be before the Council at the December 14, 2006, regular City Council meeting, but was cancelled due to adverse weather. During the Planning Commission on December 28^th, Chernaik submitted his letter as a concerned citizen during testimony for the Little Woahink PUD. There was further discussions concerning Chernaik and any contact that Councilors might need to disclose as ex parte contact. Howison said he did contact Chernaik, but received no details, only wanted an opinion. Howison said the contact would not affect his ability to render an impartial decision. Darnielle said that the nature of the contact would need to be disclosed in detail. Kloos requested disclosure of all information including e-mails from November 2006, until present time.

Meyer opened the public hearing at 8:50 p.m.

Applicant: Bill Kloos and Rob Ward.

The applicant went over the details of the change to the PUD since the remand was issued such as a landscape architect being added to the design team.

Shane Hughes, Principle Engineer, EGR, 2535 Prairie Road, Eugene OR 97401.

Hughes explained the wastewater design that exceeds current standards. Hughes said he is not aware of a low phosphorus system for under $20,000. Hughes talked about the difference between a subdivision and a PUD. Howison asked questions about a soil map. Hughes said that a community sewage system is a collection system and is much better that having individual systems spread out over a larger area. Bellemore asked about a scaled down system and if it would be beneficial. Hughes explained why it would not be beneficial.

Dan Olmstead, 2535 "D" Prairie Road, Eugene OR 97401.

Olmstead designed the stormwater system. Olmstead said the Clean Water Act required the State (DEQ) to regulate the water quality. Olmstead explained using the wetland to treat stormwater flows. Howison asked if the soil is similar to the Canary Road cut bank soil which is prone to caving off. Olmstead said the Canary cut bank is much, much steeper, which does not apply to their development.

Hughes said the phosphorus would bind with the soil and that Howison was confusing wastewater with surface water. Hughes said septic effluent will connect with the lake only underground. It was very unlikely that septic effluent would run-off, but the run-off would be stormwater from rain.

Bellemore asked about the outflow from the wetland. Olmstead said the road would be higher than present, plus there would be an orifice with a holding area to control the outflow. The wetland itself would act as a bio-swale.

Meyer asked if there were anyone who wished to speak who were in favor of the development. There were none.

Meyer asked if there were anyone who wished to speak who were opposed to the development.

Jerry Wasserburg, 84606 Eastlake Drive, Florence OR 97439.

Wasserburg presented powerpoint photos which were taken December 11, 2006, showing the Canary Road cut bank. Wasserburg said that the area that is designated as common area is very steep. Wasserburg said that the runoff drainage is not controlled.

Holly Martin, attorney for Wasserburg, Riesenhuber and Cherones, Boring OR.

Martin referenced two documents that were entered into the record. See Exhibits A and B. Martin said there was not effective technology to control phsphorus, but it could be controlled by controlling housing density. Martin said that 19 lots on the property might be too many lots to protect the drinking water for the City. Martin asked the Council to carefully consider each of the policies from the Comprehensive Plan as identified by LUBA. Martin suggested reinstating the findings from Howison that he presented at the time the PUD was first approved. Martin also suggested inserting the Comprehensive Plan policies into the subdivision code. Martin said that the PUD was squeezing the maximum amount of lots using unusable land and would need something else to define it as a PUD. Martin said a tree map should be used.

Lois Wilson, 84444 Green Gate Road, Florence OR 97439.

Wilson presented a photo showing run-off from the wetland across Green Gate Road. Wilson said at the time last fall, she had contacted David Bellemore with her concerns and asked him if he still had the photos she had given him.

It was identified that the contact that Bellemore had with Wilson would be considered an ex parte contact that had not been disclosed by Bellemore at the beginning of the public hearing. Darnielle said it would be best if Bellemore gave a full disclosure at that time. Bellemore said Wilson had contacted him, had looked at the wetland and decided it was what was expected of a wetland. Bellemore said it would not affect his ability to render an impartial decision.

Del Riesenhuber, 5394 Cancary Road, Florence OR 97439.

Riesenhuber presented a binder of information for the record (see Exhibit C). Riesenhuber remarked that if there was less density, there would be less traffic on Canary Road.

John Stead, 83505 South Cove Way, Florence OR 97439.

Stead read a letter into the record. See Exhibit D.

Darnielle responded to Stead’s letter by saying that the 90-day period does not start until the applicant re-submits their information and that was submitted in October.

Bill Kloos, 375 W. 4^th, Eugene OR 97401.

Kloos said that Wasserburg had talked about a structural problem with Canary Road. LUBA remand required a traffic study, which has been completed.

Ward said the photos that were provided were not on the property where the ground is not steep and that presentation could be of value to Lane County. Ward said the development design has pulled the houses away from the edge and the project was noticed to Lane County and there were no issues that were raised about the traffic study.

Bellemore asked what would happen if Lane County needed to acquire additional land in the common area to accommodate any slippage that might occur in the future. Darnielle said that would make the PUD non-conforming in percentages in that respect.

Kloos commented on the trees that would remain that had a diameter of 12" or larger. Kloos said there was conflicting standards between the solar access and "no-cuttting" of trees. Kloos suggested using the conditions of approval to control any tree removal.

Hughes said that in regards to Stead’s comments, DEQ would approve the drainfields. Hughes commented on Wasserburg’s photos by saying that water causes slumps in steep slopes, but a drainfield would discharge well back from a scarf and the effluent would be well treated before it would get to the surface. Hughes said the stormwater standards complied with the Code and they had given what the City Council requested exceeding Code requirements.

ACTION: S. Navetta made a motion to extend the meeting past 11:00 p.m. D. Bellemore seconded the motion. There were 6 ayes, 0 nays. Motion carried.

There was a discussion about a 10-year event (relating to stormwater) vs. a 25-year event.

Kloos brought up to topic a document presented to the City from H. Martin that was 51 pages in length. Kloos said that it were to remain in the record, he would have to rebut the document and would need one week. Martin requested that the document be kept in the record. There was a lengthy discussion of the Council. Darnielle suggested that the Council accept the document and move forward, or address Kloos’ concerns and exclude Martin’s testimony (document) or part of the testimony. Howison, Koehler, Bellemore addressed concerns for excluding testimony.

Meyer closed the public hearing at 11:15 p.m.

Deliberations:

There was a lengthy discussion as to whether to open the record for Mark Chernaik’s testimony.

ACTION: P. Howison made a motion open the public hearing to testimony from Chernaik. R. Koehler seconded the motion. There were 4 ayes, 2 nays (Scott and Petersdorf). Motion carried.

Mark Chernaik, 1877 Garden Avenue, Eugene OR 97403

Letter submitted to the record – See Exhibit E. Chernaik said a wetland is a surface which is excellent at stopping solids, but if you get phosphorus in that wetland, it will directly flow into the lake. Chernaik said the Council should think twice about using a wetland as a receptor for stormwater.

Rebuttal: Bill Kloos

Kloos comment that Chernaik talked about phosphorus tracking and what the City’s standards allow. Kloos asked that the Council address clear and objective standards instead of making the applicant guess what might be required. Kloos said that the Council just approved a subdivision that is in the same watershed. Hughes said that the City does need to develop standards that protect the watershed; standards that can be applied. Hughes said what they are proposing is a standard that will protect the lake better than the subdivision that was just approved. Hughes offered probono services towards the development of new standards to protect the lake. Hughes said they have applied every Best Management Practices that they know how to meet.

Holly Martin: Martin said that LUBA gave its opinion that the Comprehensive Plan policies should be applied, but left the decision up to the City Council. Martin said there should be one house per acre and not a PUD.

Meyer closed the Public Hearing at 12:02 a.m.

ACTION: B. Petersdorf made a motion to recommend before approval that the carrying capacity be defined through scientific standards and show that the development will not exceed that capacity and more than minimally degrade the land air and water quality resources. P. Howison seconded the motion. There were 5 ayes, 1 nays (Scott). Motion carried.

There was a discussion regarding Policy C4 of the Comprehensive Plan.

ACTION: J. Scott made a motion that Policy C4 cannot be applied specifically to the Woahink Ridge PUD. B. Petersdorf seconded the motion. There were 4 ayes, 2 nays (Koehler and Navetta). Motion carried.

ACTION: D. Bellemore made a motion that Policy B9 does apply to the Woahink Ridge PUD. S. Navetta seconded the motion. There were 4 ayes, 2 nays (Scott and Petersdorf). Motion carried.

ACTION: P. Howison made a motion that Policy B1 cannot be applied specifically to the Woahink Ridge PUD. S. Navetta seconded the motion. There were 6 ayes, 0 nays. Motion carried.

ACTION: S. Navetta made a motion that Policy B2 cannot be applied specifically to the Woahink Ridge PUD. P. Howison seconded the motion. There were 6 ayes, 0 nays. Motion carried.

ACTION: S. Navetta made a motion to consider Policy B5 for the Woahink Ridge PUD. B. Petersdorf seconded the motion. There were 6 ayes, 0 nays. Motion carried.

ACTION: J. Scott made a motion that the application complies with Policy B9. B. Petersdorf seconded the motion. There were 4 ayes, 2 nays (Koehler and Navetta). Motion carried.

ACTION: D. Bellemore made a motion that Policy E3 has not been applied to the Woahink Ridge PUD. B. Petersdorf seconded the motion. There were 4 ayes, 2 nays (Petersdorf and Scott). Motion carried.

ACTION: D. Bellemore made a motion that the applicant has not met Policy A9 by not addressing the carrying capacity of the land. P. Howison seconded the motion. There were 3 ayes, 4 nays (Petersdorf, Scott, Bellemore. Meyer tiebreaker). Motion failed.

ACTION: J. Scott made a motion that the applicant is in compliance with Policy B5. D. Bellemore seconded the motion. There were 5 ayes, 1 nay (Koehler). Motion carried.

ACTION: J. Scott made a motion that the applicant is in compliance with the traffic study requirement. B. Petersdorf seconded the motion. There were 5 ayes, 1 nay (Koehler). Motion carried.

ACTION: J. Scott made a motion that the applicant is in compliance with the Landscape Architect requirement. P. Howison seconded the motion. There were 5 ayes, 1 nay (Koehler). Motion carried.

ACTION: B. Petersdorf made a motion that the applicant meets the tree standard. D. Bellemore seconded the motion. There were 6 ayes, 0 nays. Motion carried.

ACTION: D. Bellemore made a motion –Note: it was a motion regarding solar access that was not audible. After reviewing DVD of that segment, there was no clear motion stated.

B. Petersdorf seconded the motion. There were 6 ayes, 0 nays. Motion carried.

There was a discussion regarding having the development fall back to a subdivision with four fewer lots.

ACTION: R. Koehler made a motion to deny the Woahink Ridge PUD. D. Bellemore seconded the motion. There were 2 ayes (Koehler and Navetta), 4 nays. Motion failed.

Kloos said that the applicant would grant an extension to the remand deadline.

ACTION: D. Bellemore made a motion to accept a valid subdivision application as modified at a meeting on February 1, 2007. J. Scott seconded the motion. There were 4ayes, 1 nays, 1 not present. Motion carried.

The public hearing on February 1^st will allow applicant and public comment.

It was decided that the agenda item for the Little Woahink Drive hydro-seeding issues would be postponed until the regularly scheduled City Council meeting in February.

4. Adjournment

 

Meeting was adjourned at 2:10 a.m.

 

 

____________________________ _______________________________

Sheldon Meyer, Mayor                                     Joanne Hickey, City Recorder