Dunes
City Planning Commission
M
I N U T E S
Print file
Regular Meeting – December 28, 2006 - 7:00 P.M.
City Hall - 82877
Spruce St.
Westlake, OR 97439
I.
CALL TO ORDER
Chair George Burke called the meeting to order at
7:04 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present:
Chair George Burke; Commissioners, Dick Anderson,
Susie Navetta, Ron Shearer, David Bellemore; Planning
Secretary, Teri Tinker; Office Assistant; Sue Scott;
City Attorney, Gary Darnielle; and numerous citizens in
the
audience.
II.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
ACTION:
George Burke asked for the approval of the
November 21, 2006
Minutes.
Susie Navetta made the motion to approved the minutes with the
following corrections: second
page, 2nd paragraph change to "Given 15 minutes for
review" and page 3, under Cynthia Chandler, first paragraph change
the word plant to plan. Ron
Shearer seconded the motion. There
were 5 ayes, 0 nays.
Motion carried.
III. ANNOUNCEMENTS
New Planning Commission will not be sworn in due to an error in
the
public notification. Gary
Darnielle said the December City Council
meeting was cancelled due to weather related conditions.
Council was to
take care of bills and appoint Planning Commission to ensure that a
Planning Commission was in place.
Darnielle said that state law requires
24 hour notice, including the media, and that the Councilors had
not
been given the 24 hours notice required under the public meeting
law
when they voted by phone on Thursday. Darnielle informed council
president, Judy Martin, who made the decision to schedule a special
meeting for
Saturday, December 30, 2006
at
11:00
, to ratify acceptance
of the bills of session and appoint Planning Commissioners.
Then on
Tuesday, January 02, 2007
at
11:00
the new Planning Commissioners
will be sworn in.
IV. CORRESPONDENCE
- None
V.
NEW BUSINESS
1. Concept Assistance -
Adrian Vanderhave
To
enlarge the garage that is within 5 feet of the property line.
Adrian
& Bonnie Vanderhave,
6270 Corvallis Road
,
Independence
,
OR
97351
gave a brief description of what they
Would like to do on the remodel of the house and garage.
Bellemore asked about the garage floor settling and they should
Find out why before they pour new floor.
Burke said they need to
Apply for a variance and have it approved by the City Council.
There was mention that Navetta and Bellemore had gone to the
Property and asked questions regarding measuring from house to
Bank.
Tinker commented that when you rebuild garage move it
10' from property line. Vanderhave
wants to keep north wall of
existing garage. Burke
said we can't advise you on what you need
to do. Must apply for a
variance and show reason why you need
variance. Discussion
regarding septic and notification of
neighbors.
VI. OLD
BUSINESS -
None
VII.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. PUD - Little Woahink
PUD Phase III located at the end of Little
Woahink Drive
.
Tinker
passed out information regarding Little Woahink that was
received on
December 28th, 2006
in the a.m.
Burke
read the hearing procedure notifying the public of their rights.
Burke
asked the Planning Commission to declare any conflicts of
interests.
There were none. Burke
asked the Commission if there were
any ex parte contacts.
There were none.
George Burke opened the
public hearing at
7:34 pm
.
Tinker presented the staff
report and the findings of fact recommending approval to go to City
Council with conditions.
Navette raised questions
regarding the sprinklers in the completed phases.
Tinker said, that the city could not require sprinklers.
There was a question and discussion regarding carrying capacity of
land and vegetation. Burke
stated these were questions for EGR not the staff and wants to know if
there are any other questions for the staff.
Navetta asked about the
word Architect on page 15, paragraph 8 in the finds of fact, Burke
clarified that the PUD requires that the applicant have an Architect as
part of the design team. Burke
asked again if there were any other questions regarding the staff report.
Burke asked
applicant(s)
to summarize the application.
Mike
Farthing, Attorney,
767 Willamette
St
,
Eugene
,
OR
Farthing
provided a brief overview of the changes that were made
including
reducing the number of lots and taking the lake out of the
equation,
at least for now. Farthing
noted, for the record, that
if
and when the lake issue is settled that there's a process where we
can
incorporate it back into the PUD. Farthing
said he supports the
staff
report and draft findings and would like Mr. Hughes to comment
on
one of the conditions and make a slight suggestion.
Shane
Hughes, EGR and Associates, 2535B
Prairie Road
,
Eugene
,
OR
Hughes
discussed page 15, condition 6 of the draft
finding,
specifically in regards to on-site septic systems, which states
they
shall utilize the technology recommended by EGR & Associates
and
application materials in the letter dated
December 12, 2006
. Hughes
said
he had no objection to that language, but suggested that
ERR
and
Dunes
City
recognize that the
County
Sanitarian
has the
authority
over final approval of septic systems and is subject
to
their review and approval. We
would be happy to incorporate as
many
of the Best Management practices in the septic system design as
Lane
County
would be willing to permit.
If
Lane
County
finds some
conflict
with their rules, with respect to shallow drainfields systems,
EG&R
will be happy to place them as shallow as possible, but in
some
circumstances
Lane
County
’s rules require them to be
placed at a
certain
depth. Hughes asks that
Dunes
City
recognized that is Lane
County’s
requirement and their authority.
Farthing
referenced a letter by Mark Chernaik (Exhibit A) indicating he
was
unclear on the status of the letter and that it didn't reference their
particular
application. Farthing said the
letter was only addressed to
Ms.
Tinker and not addressed to the Planning Commission.
Farthing
Asked if
it was new information that he would be addressing or not.
Burke
said the Planning Commission was unclear of the whole
situation of
this letter/report also and he suggested that since the
Planning Commission had just received the letter they would not
consider it that night, but the City Council would consider the
letter at
the second public hearing. There
was a discussion regarding who Mark
Chernaik
was and his involvement with new ordinances.
Farthing
asked if he should request a postponement after reviewing the
policies
referenced in the letter and had time to discuss it with Mr.
Hughes so that they could address it in writing.
Farthing asked, "How
"how important is it to address all of this."
Burke said the letter was unfair to the applicant and unfair to the
Planning
Commission. The staff will
accept documents up until
Wednesday before the Planning Commission meeting.
Burke said the
applicant is going to have to deal with it sometime, but the
Planning
Commission is not going to spend the time tonight.
Navetta
commented that Mark Chernaik is a lawyer dealing with
environmental issues.
Bellemore
said despite Burke's statement that the Planning
Commission does not entertain these last minute documents, he would
like to point out that at the
November 21, 2006
, meeting, under
old business, the final Plat of Sunset Cove PUD, which we received
at
the meeting, was considered that night.
Burke
said it was a completely different situation.
There was
a reference to Chernaik's letter being 3 pages and Sunset Cove PUD
was 100 pages. Burke said Sunset Cove was a review of a final
document that goes
onto City Council for approval. There
was no
decision to make other then reviewing the final documents.
Bellemore
said, so we're to review the final document when we receive
them
at the meeting.
Burke
said, "That’s the way we’ve done it in the past and that’s the
way we will continue to do it.
Let’s move on."
Farthing
commented on the PUD, Mr. Chernaik’s letter and zero
Tolerance. There was a
discussion on policy and code, subdividing the
property and going with the PUD to preserve the things that
everyone
wants to preserve. There
was a discussion on carrying capacity,
the Comprehensive plan and the impact on the lake, including how
they
have reduced the impact by reducing the number of lots and keeping
the
perimeter of the subdivision in its natural state.
Farthing discussed the case of Woahink ridge and how LUBA
discussed policy in regards to land use applications and the
different
kinds of policies. Farthing
said that if the applicant had just subdivided
the property the policies would not have been an issue; the
policies are
not part of the subdivision code.
Farthing said that by putting
development away from the lake and using the advanced systems and
employing Best Management Practices, they have done everything
possible to significantly decrease the impacts of the PUD on the
lake.
Anderson, Planning Commissioner, asked if Farthing agrees with all
of
the conditions.
Farthing
said yes, except for the one
change Hughes mentioned before
regarding the Lane County Sanitarian approving the septic systems.
Peter
Mohr, EGR and Associates, 2535B
Prairie Road
,
Eugene
,
OR
Mohr
said with respect to the withdrawal of the lake bed from the
open space consideration and calculations, for the record, on
behalf
of the applicant, that due to the down sizing/reduction of the
number
of lots, that is why the lake bed was pulled out of consideration,
because the space was no longer needed for purposes of percentage
calculation, it was not withdrawn for any other reason relative to
issues concerning title of the water or anything of that nature.
Mohr
said he wanted to clarify, for the record
that it was in no way an
admission regarding water rights and that MJK still owned all the
water rights to Little Woahink and could do as he wishes.
Hughes said he would also like to make some points, for the record,
regarding how the reduction in the number of lots was an attempt to
be
responsive to the Planning Commission’s concerns and not due to
sanitation or water quality.
Farthing said he did submit a waiver for the statutory deadline in
which
Dunes
City
must make a final decision (Exhibit B).
Burke
ask if anyone have any questions regarding the proposal
and the information presented. There
was no response.
Burke asked if anyone wanted to testify in support of the Little Woahink
PUD application. There were
none.
Burke asked if there were any members of the audience who wanted to
testify in opposition of the application.
Christine May, 5445 Little
Woahink Drive
,
Florence
,
OR
97439
.
May
said she wanted to read a letter into the record, but wanted
to comment on the Chernaik letter beforehand.
May said it was the
first time she had a chance to see it, and read
a portion of a paragraph from page number 2 (Exhibit
A). May
read her letter (Exhibit C ). May
commented that she didn’t have a
chance to read the new response from the applicant, but is sure her
quotes still apply and noted that she did not correct her letter to
reflect
the change of the PUD from 27 to 23 lots.
Greg
Barnes,
05425 Canary Road
,
Florence
,
OR
97439
Barnes said May’s
letter addressed a lot of his own
concerns. Barnes said
some things doesn’t add up and is
in
disagreement with Dunes City Comprehensive Plan.
Barnes commented on the reduction in lot size from 1/3 acre
to ½ acre and questioned what was wrong with the original acre
and
how the one acre keeps with the appearance of
Dunes
City
.
Barnes asked if EGR engineered the
Canary Road
cut.
Hughes said to his understanding it was a
Lane
County
designed road.
Barnes said he talked to the County and they indicated that EGR
was part of the design team. Barnes
went on the say that the road is
too steep/unstable, creating a problem with emergency equipment
having access, slides, and the salmon in Little Woahink are not at
the
level they should be implying something has changed.
Barnes said the
lake water is
brown and the fish aren't coming to the surface.
John
Stead,
83505 South Cove Way
,
Florence
,
OR
97439
Stead
said the storm water management plan provides
no
guarantee and there is nothing in the CC&R's regarding sprinklers
being
installed. Stead said
"systems are going to fail. What
are they
going to
do if there's a fire? Who's
going to take responsible when the
Fire
Marshall can't get in to do his job because a tree is down, an RV is
parked in
the way, an emergency vehicle is dealing with someone
who has
had a heart attack due to the fire down the street."
There is
only one access; we have a very long dead end street.
Stead
said the CC&R's state that the permitted use for water is both
domestic
and irrigation. Water use is
for domestic use only. Stead
said the
city must consider the liability potential;
Dunes
City
domestic
use authorization does not include the use of water for fire
protection
purposes.
Jerry
Wasserburg,
84606 East Lake Dr.
,
Florence
,
OR
97439
Wasserburg asked where are there any means to
measure/monitor the
septic system and their drainages and what monitoring systems will
be established? Wasserburg
said he would like to emphasize
the fact that the traffic report is grossly inadequate.
Traffic that must
be considered is the traffic that will exists both in Woahink Ridge
and
Little Woahink PUD. Wasserburg
discussed the narrow section of
Canary Road which is known to be in almost a state of complete
failure
and has been documented. Wasserburg
also discussed the slumping
of the road from one development into the other development and it
is
not addressed.
Burke asked if anyone else had anything to say in opposition to
this
application.
Burke asked if the
Applicant would like rebut or submit a final
argument.
Farthing
said in reviewing testimony that was just presented,
it's a
little difficult to respond. There
was a discussion regarding
quotes
from the old staff report. Farthing
said a lot of information
that was
presented was just opinions; there was no supporting
documentation.
A lot of the information presented did not apply to the
subdivision.
Farthing said he believed logging was a contributing factor to
the silt
in the lake. DEQ had no
problem with what was going on.
Farthing
said they are following Dunes City Comprehensive Plan and
referenced
city code and established policies.
Farthings said "I do not
see
anything documented or in the record that supports what we have
here
presented." Farthings
discussed
Dunes
City
's starting point for the
review
on this PUD and said, "This is a low density residential area in
Dunes
City
's Comprehensive Plan. It is
targeted for residential
Development.
Then we have regulations that say how that development
shall
occur. It gives the owner an
option to do a PUD to accomplish some
of those
requirements." Farthing
discussed how they could have gone with
a
conventional subdivision, but then the Comprehensive Plan, which
everyone was discussing wouldn't apply.
Farthing discussed the traffic
study and said it speaks for itself.
Hughes said he wanted to emphasize that whenever they do a
development in any jurisdiction they start with that city's
guidelines
and rules, as well as State and Federal regulations that are
required.
Hughes said, "We start with the rule books.
Those are the minimum
standards. It's like a
building code, it's minimum standards.
It
doesn't say it's the best you can do.
If you meet those building code
standards; you've met the standards and you're going to get your
plan
approved." Hughes
said they have designed this plan to be more
protective then the rule book requires.
Hughes discussed secondary
access and stated for the record that they had checked to see if it
was
possible, but they were up against urban growth boundaries.
It wouldn't
even be possible if the urban growth boundary were moved.
Mohr
commented that a lot of people have made comments &
conclusions have been drawn, but there have been no supporting
information for the basis of these conclusions.
Mohr discussed the water
right
for the lake and that it was a recreational water right.
The applicant
has a vested interest in keeping water quality high.
There was a discussion
about the sediment in the lake, land under laying the lake, pump
failures,
water rights, and how information was needed in the record which
actually
says what was going on, what was the basis, what the concerns are,
and
question the validity of these statements that are being made.
In response to Stead's comment that fire protection or irrigation,
Darnielle asked for clarification from Mohr, a water rights expert.
Mohr said a domestic use water right is
simply that; it's for domestic
purposes and unless a water right is amended to accommodate other
uses that is it's limitation.
Mohr said how the state would interpret
that for the
Dunes
City
's application, he has not been asked to address.
Dunes
City
also has a municipal use water rights, which is in the permit
Stage and without a municipal water system,
Dunes
City
uses it's domestic
water rights to address all their needs and this comes straight
from
Water Resources. Mohr discussed Woahink lake water rights and
Little Woahink and limited right access.
There was additional discussion
regarding water rights.
Wasserburg said he wanted to make a statement for clarification
regarding the statements he had made are provided to the
Dunes
City
Council and that public testimony is fully documented since last
October.
Farthing said Stead had raised a point about CC&R and water
use, but
believed the preferred option was that the CC&R could be
changed
to limit irrigation.
Mohr stated, "When it says domestic use, I would ask that we
obtain
clarification from Water Resources as to how they interpret that
limitation, and under a domestic water right application irrigate
up
to ½ an acre." There
was a discussion regarding conversations with Water
Resources and rules.
Burke opened the meeting up for Planning Commission
questions.
Navetta said she would like to address the small lots 1-11;
(existing platted lots) that the applicant wants to bring into the
PUD.
Farthing said lots 1-11 are plated lots and they can be developed
tomorrow. Farthing
stated, "If we do nothing else with the properties and
dropped
the PUD, they could be developed tomorrow using the existing
road that is there." Farthing
said they were adding those lots to the PUD to
serve those lots with the community water system for efficiency, so
each of those lots would not have to drill wells; the lots are not
being re-
platted. There was a
discussion regarding water would be obtained if
the pre-platted lots were not brought into the PUD.
ACTION:
Shearer made a motion to extend the meeting past
9:00 p.m.
Navetta seconded the motion. There
were 5 ayes, 0 nays.
Motion carried.
There were discussions of water system line vs. individual lines,
length of
water line to length of their individual lines, water systems,
community
water systems and how they maintained the water systems, pump size,
flow
rates, and balance. Ensure
owners having sprinklers installed are
addressed in the CC&R's.
There was more discussions regarding concern over water quality,
pumps,
wells, and lines. There
was a discussion regarding
Dunes
City
's options to
inherit the community water system, how long CC&R's run and can
that
option be added to the C&R's.
There was a discussion regarding the lots
in Phase I and it's incorporation into the PUD and the effect the
lots
would have on the overall density of the PUD, storm water and
piping the
storm water. Best
Management practices, gravel ditches, pollution
problems, bio-soils, hydro seeding, and well drilling was discussed
as well
as the applicants' concern for water quality and the lake.
Tinker answered one of the previous questions regarding if the 11
lots
were figured into the density, by saying they have the 23 lots plus
the 11,
totaling 34 lots and since they have 34 acres, they meet the
requirements.
Darnielle
said he'd like to clarify that DEQ requires a monitoring of the
water system over time to make sure the system is working as
proposed.
Hughes said an Managed Public Development is obligated to make sure
a
water management plan works.
Burke commented on the private/public road issue on the cul-de-sacs
and
as far as he could remember, the Road Commission requested that all
the
roads be public.
Farthing said the applicant's intent was to make public roads.
Farthing
said he does not believe
Dunes
City
has a mechanism whereby a public
road is
maintained by the users of the road.
Burke agreed that there was no such mechanism.
Farthing said there is a declaration of public road and maintenance
agreement; the County required it for those particular subdivisions
were a major component of the assessment is maintenance of the
road.
Burke said the City didn't have any mechanism and he didn't think
the City
would want it. Burke
said that the issue was that we don't want to find
ourselves with private roads at the end of every public street.
There can be
a private road from usually a gated community entrance; a private
road
from the gate in, but not a public road, 100' for private road,
then back to
public road.
Farthing said the applicant would agree.
Tinker
said that the July 17th minutes from the Road Commission says:
Roads and cul de sacs shall be dedicated to the City.
Burke asked if there were any more questions of the Planning
Commission.
Bellemore said one of the issues was the common space around the
edge
and the trees and maintaining the forest.
There was discussion regarding
buyers/developers being allowed to remove trees to improve the
marketing
of the lot (from the original proposal).
Bellemore said he's concerned
with a possible problem trying to preserve vegetation, questioned
the
common area
and if the HOA would control that area, and wondered if it
would be possible to add some kind of legal method such as a
conservation
easement, to protect the forested areas.
Farthing said the short answer
was yes. Farthing recommended
that the
common area down by the lake would continue as is and then along
the
perimeter of the subdivision, have a set back.
There was discussion
regarding an existing road, establishing a set back for the
perimeter or
impose an easement.
Bellemore said he would like to treat the common area like the City
treats the first 15' feet of the shoreline, which is basically
untouchable,
unless there is a danger
tree, but to leave the area as natural as possible.
Mohr said he'd like to clarify the difference between Little
Woahink
Water rights, which states for domestic use only and the people who
are
currently seeking the ability to divert water out of Little Woahink
Lake
which is under a limited exception, a human consumption, in-house
use
only, but is often referred to as domestic use only water right and
is distinct
from
Dunes
City
's permit for domestic use, which allows a broader base.
Burke asked if anyone had any other questions. -
There were none.
Burke closed the public hearing at
9:48 pm
.
There was a brief recess.
DELIBERATION:
Burke called the meeting back to order at
10:04 pm
.
Bellemore brought up concerns regarding being elected to the
City Council and if this posed a conflict.
Darnielle discussed the options and future actions if he was to
recuse
himself.
Bellemore & Navetta recused themselves from deliberations.
Darnielle
said if the Planning Commission moves forward with the proposal
he would like fire hydrants incorporated into the findings of
facts.
There was a discussion regarding the restrictions and
modifications.
ACTION:
Shearer made a motion to approved the application for Woods at
Little
Woahink PUD with 14 conditions and 2 modifications.
Anderson
seconded the motion. There
were 3 ayes (Anderson, Burke, Shearer) and
2 recused (Bellemore, Navetta).
Motion carried.
VIII.
UNSCHEDULED BUSINESS
Chain of Command
Darnielle said there was clear inconsistency in part of the
Comprehensive
Plan and the sub-part of Comprehensive Plan needs to be fixed.
ACTION:
Anderson
made a motion to revise/update Master Road Plan and to
Have it activated. Shearer
seconded the motion. There
were 5 ayes, 0
nays.
Motion carried.
IX.
ADJOURNMENT
Burke adjourned the meeting at
11:11 p.m.
________________________________
__________________________________
George Burke, Chairperson
Teri
Tinker, Planning Secretary
________________________________
__________________________________
Richard Anderson, Planning
Commission David
Bellemore, Planning Commission
________________________________
__________________________________
Susie
Navetta, Planning
Commission
Ron Shearer, Planning Commission