Chairman Saylor called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.  Commissioners Ottmar, Caplinger, Fialka, Erz, Rebman, Ferguson, and Sheffield were present.  Commissioner Quick was absent.

Minutes

Commissioner Erz moved to approve the minutes of the March 31, 2010 special meeting.  Commissioner Rebman seconded the motion; the minutes were approved unanimously.

Hearing/Request for Comprehensive Plan Map & Rezone/Les Schwab Ltd.

Chairman Saylor announced that the Planning Commission is holding a hearing to consider a request to amend the City’s Comprehensive Plan Map from Low Density Residential (L) to Commercial (C) with a corresponding change in the zoning designation from Duplex Residential (R-2) to Outlying Commercial (C-2).  The property, located at both 175 E. Jennie Avenue and 180 E. Beebe Avenue, is also describes as 4N 28 11BB, Tax Lots 6400 and 6401.  The proposed changes would allow the expansion of the existing Les Schwab.  The applicant is Marty Stiven on behalf of Schwab Properties, Ltd.

Declaration of Potential Conflict of Interest

Chairman Saylor asked if any commissioner wished to declare a potential conflict of interest.  Hearing none, the hearing opened at 7:01 pm.

Hearing Guidelines

Chairman Saylor read the following guidelines:

The planning commission is holding a hearing to consider a request to amend the City’s comprehensive plan map from Low Density Residential (L) to Commercial (C) with a corresponding change in zoning designation from Duplex Residential (R-2) to Outlying Commercial (C-2). The planning commission will consider the request and make a decision based on the criteria established in §157.226 of the Hermiston Code of Ordinances.  The property is located at 175 E. Jennie Avenue and at 180 E. Beebe Avenue.   The applicant is Marty Stiven on behalf of Schwab Properties, Ltd.

1. The applicable substantive criteria relied upon by the City in rendering the decision to amend the comprehensive plan map and annex the property are contained in §157.226 of the Hermiston Code of Ordinances.
2. Testimony and evidence must be directed toward the criteria described above or other criteria in the comprehensive plan or land use regulations which the person believes apply to the decision.
3. Failure to raise an issue by the close of the record at or following the hearing, in person or by letter, precludes appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) or the city council based on that issue.
4. Failure to raise an issue with sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker and the parties an opportunity to respond to that issue precludes appeal to LUBA or the city council based on that issue.
5. Failure to raise constitutional or other issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow the local government or its designee to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court.
6. Prior to the conclusion of the evidentiary hearing, any participant may request an opportunity to present additional evidence, arguments or testimony regarding the application.  The planning commission shall grant such a request by continuing the public hearing pursuant to ORS 197.763(6)(B) or leaving the record open for additional written evidence, arguments or testimony pursuant to ORS 197.763(6)(C).

For this hearing, the process begins with the staff report, followed by testimony from the applicants and any other supporters of the application.  This will be followed by opponents to the application.  Finally, a rebuttal by the applicant will be allowed.  The public hearing portion of the procedure will then be closed, and the planning commission will consider the information and testimony received, adopt findings of fact, and make a recommendation to the city council on the comprehensive plan map and zoning map amendments.

Staff Report

City Planner Spencer stated that the city has received an application to amend the comprehensive plan and zoning map for two residential lots adjacent to the existing Les Schwab tire center located at 830 N First Street.  The property is owned by Schwab Properties Ltd and contains and existing storage area and an existing residential dwelling.  Schwab Properties Ltd proposes to redevelop the existing tire center and seeks to expand the overall land usage to include these two lots in the development area.  The existing tire center is zoned Outlying Commercial (C-2) and has a Commercial comprehensive plan map designation.  The two adjacent lots to the east are zoned Duplex Residential (R-2) and have a Low Density Residential comprehensive plan map designation.  The two lots proposed for amendment and redevelopment encompass approximately 19,400 square feet and are described as 4N 28 11BB Tax Lots 6400 and 6401.

The proposal will remove the two R-2 lots from the city’s residential land inventory and add them to the commercial inventory.  The additional property will then be used to improve traffic circulation on the tire center site and contain an awning for truck servicing. 

The overall redevelopment proposal will not increase the overall land use intensity of the site, even when taking into account the addition of 19,000 more square feet of lot area.  The overall lot coverage of all structures will decrease with the removal of the existing 12,495 square foot tire center and addition of a new 12,200 square foot building.  The overall site access will be improved through the reduction of driveway approaches to Highway 395 and reconfiguration of driveways on E Jennie and E Beebe Avenues.

The lands to the west, north and south are all developed with commercial land uses near the existing tire center.  The lands to the east, north and south of the proposed amendment area are all developed with low-density single family housing.  The land to the north and west of the amendment area is designated commercially on the comprehensive plan and zoning maps.  The land to the east and south of the amendment area is designated for low-density residential housing on the comprehensive plan and zoning maps.

The applicant commissioned traffic engineers Kittleson and Associates to analyze the traffic impacts of the proposed map amendment and redevelopment.  The engineer’s report states that changing the comprehensive plan designation to commercial will generate approximately 138 trips more per day and 11 more peak hour trips than if the property develops residentially.  The analysis continues on to state that the increase in trips will not have a significant effect on any of the intersections studied and all intersections will continue to operate at an acceptable level of service.  Additionally, the applicant proposes to renovate and improve the driveway connections to E Beebe and E Jennie Avenues.  These reconfigured driveways will decrease reliance on E Beebe Avenue to exit the property and increase traffic flow to the E Jennie Ave signalized intersection.

When considering a request to amend the comprehensive plan or zoning maps, an applicant must demonstrate compliance with the city’s amendment criteria.  The criteria are as follows:

• The requested change is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and the goals and policies of the plan.
• There is public need for the comprehensive plan amendment/zone change and whether that need is best served by changing the zoning classification on the property under consideration.
• The public need is best served by changing the classification for the site in question as compared with other available property.
• The potential impact upon the area from the change has been considered.

Commissioner Sheffield asked City Planner Spencer if notices were posted on the property.  Mr. Spencer indicated that notices were mailed to the properties within 300 feet and published in the Herald.  At this time, there are no code regulations requiring the posting of notices at the site under consideration.

Hearing no further questions, Chairman Saylor opened the floor for testimony.

Testimony

Proponents:

David Gibson, Schwab Properties, Ltd., PO Box 5350, Bend, OR 97708, stated he is looking forward to updating the store.

Marty Stiven, Land Use Planning Consultant, 300 Oswego Pointe Drive, Ste 200, Lake Oswego, OR 97034; approval will allow Les Schwab to remodel the facility by reconfiguring the building and reconfiguring the access to the store.  The expansion of the site will not increase the size of the store; rather, the expansion will allow Les Schwab to modernize and update the store with a much better site plan. 

Three concerns we addressed in the site design are traffic circulation, pedestrian safety, and noise mitigation.

• More on-site parking
• Different driveway access – reducing the three driveways from Hwy 395 to one
• One-way entrance for trucks – designed to lessen congestion on the side streets
• Enclosed canopy – the east side of the canopy will be enclosed with the addition of sound insulating materials; wing-walls will also be used on the north and south ends of the canopy
• Replacing existing fence with an eight foot wall made with CMU (concrete cinder-like blocks)

Commissioner Caplinger asked if Les Schwab representatives have spoken with the neighbors.  Marty Stiven stated that she thought that had occurred; David Gibson stated he was advised that the owner of a rental home was contacted.  An audience member who owns a rental interjected that no one has spoken to her about the proposed plans.  Mr. Gibson apologized for the misleading information and told her that he would speak to her privately if she so desired.

Commissioner Ottmar clarified that the north entrance is the truck entrance while the south drive is the truck exit. 

Commissioner Erz wanted to know if the portion of E. Jennie Avenue along Les Schwab could be deemed a No Parking zone.  City Planner Spencer indicated that it would be up to the city council.

Commissioner Rebman asked if a landscaped barrier in the front would be created. According to Mr. Gibson, there will be a landscaped strip.

The plan is to keep the store open during the remodel.  They hope to begin in mid- June with a 4 – 5 month construction phase.

Opponents:

Geri Weigum, owner of 190 E Beebe Avenue but lives at 655 W. Hemlock Avenue, stated she is not against the remodel or against trucks but she is concerned with traffic flow, noise levels and the proposed 8 foot wall.  She indicated that there have been times when trucks block her driveway while waiting for service.  Also, her renters complain about early morning deliveries as well as nighttime servicing of trucks.  Ms. Weigum felt that an eight foot wall would make her property feel like a jail.  Commissioner Caplinger asked her preference regarding the wall – eight feet or six feet?  Ms. Weigum thought that six feet might be better.

Edward Lee, owner of 165 E. Beebe Avenue, lives at 81780 Lee Estates, Umatilla, OR 97882, stated that he is concerned with noise, thinking that the wall might funnel more noise to his rental home which would sit directly across from the new truck entrance.  Chairman Saylor added that the wing-walls on the canopy might help abate the noise.

Marty Stiven stated that nighttime serving of trucks occurs infrequently as it is only performed on an emergency basis.  Steve Scott from the Hermiston Les Schwab responded to the concerns by stating that his commercial customers know to enter off of Beebe Avenue but that occasionally, a trucker will go around the block.  Also the blocking of Ms. Weigum’s driveway may occur during snow season.  Wing-walls on each end of the canopy will help with noise abatement.  Wing-walls were described as being similar to the side and top walls of the face of a garage opening.

Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Saylor closed the hearing at 7:50 pm.

Chairman Saylor asked for a motion.  Commissioner Ferguson moved and Commissioner Rebman seconded the motion to accept the draft findings as written.  Motion passed.

DRAFT FINDINGS

The requested change is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and the goals and policies of the plan.

• The proposed comprehensive plan map amendment and zone change are consistent with those plan policies that are relevant to this request.  The relevant goals are those that address the addition of commercial land and the removal of residential land.
• The public has had adequate opportunity to review and comment on the proposal as required by Policy 1 of the comprehensive plan.  The city published a notice of public hearing on April 18, 2010 notifying the public of the proposed amendment and provided a direct mailing of the proposal to all property owners within 300 feet.  The planning commission held a public hearing on May 12, 2010 at which time the public was provided an opportunity to comment on the proposal.
• The city is required by Policy 2 to monitor and periodically update the comprehensive plan in response to changing conditions.  Amending the designation of the 19,000 square feet in question will allow the applicant to construct a modern facility which is more efficient and better suited to the traffic patterns which have changed substantially since the site was originally developed.
• Policy 7 requires the city to protect natural resources.  There are no identified natural resources on the site.  The site is designed to contain all storm water on-site, thereby limiting storm run-off impacts on water quality.
• Policy 8 requires protection of groundwater resources.  The site is serviced by existing municipal water supplies and will not draw down the groundwater supply.
• Policy 11 requires compliance with state and federal air quality standards.  There are no major point sources of air pollution in the city’s UGB.  The proposed amendment and subsequent redevelopment will not generate significant amounts of air pollution.
• Policy 12 requires the city to comply with state noise standards to minimize impacts to residential uses.  Consideration of a map amendment is not an approval of a specific development proposal.  However, the applicant employs an acoustical consultant to assist in development plan which will minimize noise impacts from the redevelopment on adjacent residential uses.
• Policy 14 requires the city to control or prohibit development in areas with natural hazards or other development limitations.  There are no known or mapped development hazards on the subject property.
• Policy 15 requires the city to encourage energy conservation.  The subject property is centrally located in the city’s commercial core.  Available alternative locations to rebuild the site are all located farther from the city core and would require more travel time and energy usage for customers.  The redeveloped facility will also utilize more efficient construction techniques and building materials which will result in a more energy efficient structure.
• Policy 19 requires the city to assure the availability of commercial land.  The city adopted findings in 2005 which indicated a shortage of available commercial land in the northern portion of the city.  It is not possible to redevelop the existing tire center on this site without adding additional land to the commercial inventory. 
• Policy 20 requires the city to promote varied housing opportunities in the city.  The subject property is located in an area where commercial and residential zoning abut mid-block rather than at a street intersection.  The proposed amendment moves this mid-block boundary 65 feet to the east and maintains the existing pattern of commercial development adjacent to residential uses in this neighborhood.
• The site is already serviced by municipal facilities and no extensions or upgrades will be required.  Therefore, the proposal is in conformance with Policies 22, 23 and 24 regarding provision of urban services.
• Policy 25 requires the city to support the provision of high quality education.  The expansion will add substantial value to the city’s tax base which supports the school system. 
• The proposed amendment will result in a commercial development of slightly smaller size than the existing use on a larger lot.  There should be no additional demand for police, fire or other governmental services as a result of the redevelopment.  Policies 26, 27 and 28 relating to provision of government services.
• Policy 30 requires the city to promote a balanced, well-integrated transportation system.  The applicant has prepared a traffic impact analysis which demonstrates that the proposed amendment will not impede traffic on Highway 395.
• Policy 31 requires the city to comply with the provisions of the transportation planning rule as required by the State of Oregon.  The applicant’s analysis has determined that the intersection of E Beebe and Highway 395 will meet ODOT’s mobility standard for the planning horizon.  The full build-out of the site will generate more traffic, specifically 11 additional peak hour trips and 138 daily trips, but the intersections in the affected area will still function within mobility standards.

The public need for the comprehensive plan amendment and whether the public need is best served by changing the zoning classification on the property under consideration.

• The proposed amendment and redevelopment of the tire center provides a service to the residents of Hermiston and the surrounding area.  The amendment will allow for more efficient operation and improved service to customers.
• The tire center site is located along Highway 395 which creates a convenient access point for customers, especially truck customers, minimizing truck traffic on local residential and commercial streets.
• It is in the public interest to facilitate growth of the business to provide efficient service to new and existing customers.  The enlarged site will allow the business to continue to operate while redevelopment occurs.

The public need is best served by changing the classification for the site in question as compared with other available property.

• The existing tire center is a well-known presence in Hermiston and it is in the public’s interest for operations to continue at a central, convenient and well-known location.
• Adding additional property to the existing tire center will allow the creation of an improved circulation system which provides one-way ingress and egress for large trucks.
• Driveway consolidation on Highway 395 will reduce congestion and cause less traffic disruption on the highway.
• The property is bounded by existing streets on the west, north and south, leaving eastward expansion as the only expansion option.
• The applicant has considered alternative sites in the past; however the signalized intersection, good visibility and available property for expansion make this the optimal location for expanding the business.

Explain how the potential impact upon the area from the change has been considered.

• The proposed land use change maintains the existing land use pattern, but moves said pattern further to the east.
• The applicant commissioned a traffic impact analysis.  The analysis determined that the change would have no negative impact on the traffic infrastructure.
• The proposed driveway reconstruction and relocation plan will minimize the impact of truck traffic in the neighborhood.
• The applicant will be required to design the final site plan to provide noise mitigation techniques to maintain compliance with §92.27 of the ordinance code relating to noise.
• The relocated truck canopy will be setback from the eastern property line 30 feet in order to minimize noise impacts to the neighboring residential use.
• The new site design will accommodate better on-site circulation resulting in less vehicle maneuvering (and therefore noise) on the local street system.
• A new concrete wall will be located along the eastern property line between the residential and commercial uses, minimizing noise impacts to the east.

Consistency with statewide planning goals

• Goal 1: Citizen Involvement:  The city has an acknowledged citizen involvement plan.  The city has followed the applicable procedures in the plan in considering the application by holding a public hearing before the planning commission on May 12, 2010.
• Goal 2: Land Use Planning:  The city’s comprehensive plan and land use regulations are acknowledged by LCDC.  The proposed amendment has been processed according to the acknowledged procedures and the city has adopted findings supporting the factual base for the application as required.
• Goal 3: Agricultural Lands: The site is within the Hermiston UGB and is urban.  Goal 3 is not applicable.
• Goal 4: Forest Lands:  The amendment does not affect any existing forest lands.  Goal is not applicable.
• Goal 5: Natural Resources: The subject property is not within any identified natural resource, scenic, historic or other Goal 5 resource land.  Therefore, Goal 5 is not applicable.
• Goal 6: Air, Water and Land Resource Quality:  The development will be required to comply with all state, federal and local regulations for air and water quality.  Redevelopment will allow improved compliance with water quality standards with on-site treatment of storm water in bioswales.
• Goal 7: Areas Subject to Natural Hazards:  The site is not within any mapped natural disaster or natural hazard area.  Goal 7 is not applicable.
• Goal 8: Recreational Needs:  The amendment and redevelopment will enhance the travel safety of residents and visitors allowing greater access to recreational needs.
• Goal 9: Economic Development:  The proposed amendment will allow an existing business to remain current, modern and efficient and provide adequate size to continue operations.
• Goal 10: Housing:  The removal of 0.44 acres from the housing inventory will not materially diminish housing opportunities within the city.
• Goal 11: Public Facilities and Services:  The site is already serviced by public facilities to the north, west and south.  All services are adequate for the proposal.
• Goal 12: Transportation Planning:  The applicant’s traffic analysis determined that the impact of adding 0.44 acres to the commercial land supply will have a minimal impact on the street system.  The engineers have determined that there will be no negative impact on the city’s transportation system which is consistent with Goal 12.
• Goal 13: Energy Conservation:  It is more energy efficient to rebuild the tire center on-site rather than relocate to another location which is further from the downtown core.
• Goal 14: Urbanization:  The site is already within the UGB and city limits and is existing urban property.
• Goal 15: Willamette River Greenway:  This goal is not applicable to the request.
• Goal 16: Estuarine Resources:  This goal is not applicable to the request.
• Goal 17: Coastal Shorelands:  This goal is not applicable to the request.
• Goal 18: Beaches and Dunes:  This goal is not applicable to the request.
• Goal 19: Ocean Resources:  This goal is not applicable to the request.

Staff Recommendation

Staff recommends that the planning commission make a recommendation to the city council that the proposed map amendments be approved subject to the following conditions:

• The driveway entrance to E Jennie Avenue shall be reconfigured to be at least 75 feet from the intersection with Highway 395 as recommended by Kittleson and Associates.
• All driveway cuts which are proposed for abandonment or consolidation shall be removed at such time that redevelopment occurs on the property.  New driveway cuts and those driveway cuts to remain shall be installed or improved to comply with ADA requirements.  Those portions of the sidewalk on E Jennie and E Beebe Avenues which are broken or damaged shall be replaced when redevelopment occurs.

Chairman Saylor asked for a motion.  Commissioner Caplinger moved and Commissioner Rebman seconded the motion to make a recommendation to the city council to approve the comprehensive plan map and zoning map amendments subject to the two conditions along with a recommendation to the city council to create a “No Parking” zone on E. Jennie Avenue.

Hearing/Request for Conditional Use Permit/east end of E. Oregon Ave, south of E. Theater Lane, and north of the Hermiston Ditch/Hanes-Zoller JV, Kalal, American Dev Co.

Chairman Saylor announced that the Planning Commission is holding a hearing to consider a request for a conditional use permit where the applicant seeks to create a planned unit development (PUD) consisting of 114 single family lots, 229 town home lots, 7 multi-family lots, and a 7 acre wetland and city park with picnic tables and a parking lot.  The property, located at the east end of E. Oregon Avenue, south of E. Theater Lane, and north of the Hermiston Ditch, is owned by American Development Company, Hanes-Zoller Joint Venture and Vivian Kalal. The property is also described as 4N 28 02D, Tax Lots 400, 500, and 600.

Declaration of Potential Conflict of Interest

Chairman Saylor asked if any commissioner wished to declare a potential conflict of interest.  Hearing none, Chairman Saylor opened the hearing at 7:53 pm.

Hearing Guidelines

Chairman Saylor read the following guidelines:

The planning commission is holding a hearing to consider a request for a conditional use permit.  The request must be approved by the planning commission subject to the criteria established in §157.208 of the Hermiston Code of Ordinances.  The applicant wishes to create a Planned Unit Development (PUD).  The property, located at the east end of E. Oregon Avenue, south of E. Theater Lane, and north of the Hermiston Ditch, is owned by the American Development Company, Hanes-Zoller, Joint Venture, and Vivian Kalal with the applicant being Mark Zoller.

1. The applicable substantive criteria relied upon by the City in rendering the decision to grant the conditional use permit which are contained in §157.208 of the Hermiston Code of Ordinances.
2. Testimony and evidence must be directed toward the criteria described above or other criteria in the comprehensive plan or land use regulations which the person believes apply to the decision.
3. Failure to raise an issue by the close of the record at or following the hearing, in person or by letter, precludes appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) or the city council based on that issue.
4. Failure to raise an issue with sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker and the parties an opportunity to respond to that issue precludes appeal to LUBA or the city council based on that issue.
5. Failure to raise constitutional or other issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow the local government or its designee to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court.
6. Prior to the conclusion of the evidentiary hearing, any participant may request an opportunity to present additional evidence, arguments or testimony regarding the application.  The planning commission shall grant such a request by continuing the public hearing pursuant to ORS 197.763(6)(B) or leaving the record open for additional written evidence, arguments or testimony pursuant to ORS 197.763(6)(C).

For this hearing, the process begins with the staff report, followed by testimony from the applicants and any other supporters of the application.  This will be followed by opponents to the application.  Finally, a rebuttal by the applicant will be allowed.  The public hearing portion of the procedure will then be closed, and the planning commission will consider the information and testimony received and may render a decision.

Staff Report

City Planner Spencer stated that American Development Company has submitted an application for a residential planned unit development.  The proposed development sits upon approximately 64 acres of Multi-Family Residential (R-3) land which is located on the south side of E Theater Lane, east of the Pheasant Run Subdivision and north of E Elm Ave.  The overall development proposal will create 114 single-family lots, 229 town home lots, 7 multi-family lots and 7.09 acres for a city park.

The applicant proposes to develop this subdivision as a planned unit development due to the need for several variations from the city’s development code.  PUDs are governed by §157.110 through §157.120 of the Hermiston Code of Ordinances.  This portion of the code is attached to this report for reference.  In summary, a PUD is allowed in all residential zones except the R-1 zone and is treated as a conditional use permit rather than as a land division.  The intent of a PUD is to produce a development which is superior to that which can be obtained through typical lot by lot development and allows greater flexibility in the overall land use regulatory process.  Density requirements and setbacks may be modified through the PUD process.  In exchange for the modification of typical development standards, the developer is expected to comply with special requirements imposed by the City.  These requirements often take the form of additional public improvements or open space creation.

The property contains a large area which has been designated by the State of Oregon as a wetland. The developer has proposed and the Parks and Recreation Department has accepted that this wetland area be preserved as open space and dedicated to the city for park purposes.  The Parks and Recreation Department has submitted testimony in support of the park dedication and includes suggested development requirements.  A memo from Ivan Anderholm with comments on the proposal is attached to this memo.

In February of 2010, the planning commission held a preliminary public hearing on the proposed Cimarron Terrace Planned Unit Development.  The initial public hearing spanned several hours and the planning commission received testimony from several audience members.  Concerns raised by the audience include:

• Locating multi-family housing adjacent to single-family housing
• Increased traffic in the Pheasant Run subdivision
• Preservation of property values

In addition to the concerns raised by participants in the hearing, staff noted several concerns which the applicant would be required to correct prior to another hearing before the planning commission:

• Draft restrictive covenants and maintenance agreements for any open spaces to be retained by the development.
• A development agreement for the dedication of the 7.09 acre public park agreeing to dedication and construction of park improvements as requested by the Parks and Recreation Department.
• A signage plan for street signage and development signage.
• Landscape plans for street trees, drainage swales and other minimum landscaping requirements as requested by the planning commission.
• A plan for all water line extensions to service the subdivision.  The applicant must show the extension of the E Theater Lane water line to the east boundary of the subdivision.  However, the line does not need to extend through the entire length of the development; it may be extended through the development and returned to E Theater Lane at the east boundary.
• A plan for providing alternate water supply to the subdivision and a phasing plan for installation of the line.
• A parking plan for the townhouse lots which demonstrates that there is adequate off-street parking provided for each dwelling and that the streets can provide overflow parking without impeding access to each town home.
• A building plan for the townhouses on Lots 1 through 38 which will enable the planning commission to determine if townhouses on these lots are compatible with the adjacent, existing low density single-family lots.

The applicant has submitted the above listed requirements.  The applicant has not, however, submitted the water system improvements detailed above.  At this time it is not clear how a secondary water connection will be provided to the development.  However, there is sufficient water available to construct Phase 1 of the development.  Staff recommends that the planning commission require the applicant to provide a secondary connection plan with the infrastructure plans for Phase 2 of the development.

The applicant’s draft covenants and maintenance agreements are attached to this report.  According to the covenants, each property will be assessed fees for the maintenance of common areas and to promote the safety and welfare of the residents.  Specifically, these fees shall be used for front yard landscape maintenance, common area maintenance and overflow parking maintenance.  The covenants also provide for architectural control and standards as well as weed, nuisance and parking controls.

The applicant has agreed to the dedication and improvement of the public park as suggested by the parks and recreation department and approved by the planning commission in February.  Dedication of the park shall be processed as a tract on the final plat for the third phase of the development.

The applicant has submitted the landscape, signage and parking plans as required.  There will be 109 overflow parking spaces created to accommodate extra parking for the zero lot-line townhomes.  Since each townhome will have two off-street parking spaces, the creation of 109 additional overflow spaces should be adequate to provide overflow and event parking.

The applicant has submitted a list of the types of buildings to be constructed on the zero lot-line lots.  The buildings will be a mix of common wall townhomes with three and four units in each cluster. 

There will be no townhome buildings with more than four units in the first phase adjacent to Pheasant Run. 

The concerns raised by participants in the hearing must be addressed by the planning commission.  The primary concern raised at the hearing was the appropriateness of locating multi-family housing adjacent to single-family dwellings.  The property under consideration is zoned Multi-Family Residential (R-3).  Uses permitted in the R-3 zone include single, two-family and multi-family dwellings.  All of these uses are considered outright uses in the R-3 zone and can be built without a public hearing or review by the planning commission.  The proposal has come before the planning commission due to the applicant’s desire to create non-standard lot sizes to allow for private ownership of commonwall dwellings.  The density and land uses are identical to those permitted by standard R-3 regulations.  Only the size of underlying lots is changing from an outright R-3 use.

With regards to traffic, there is a legitimate concern that the development will generate substantial traffic through the Pheasant Run development rather than using E Theater Lane which is better equipped to handle the traffic.  To mitigate this potentiality, the planning commission directed staff to research the possibility of delaying any street connection to E Oregon Avenue until additional access points are developed.  Hermiston Fire and Emergency Services feels that a temporary barrier could be erected which blocks access to E Oregon Avenue.  However, this barrier would need to be removed when a connection to E Elm Avenue is completed.  This barrier would prevent traffic from Phase 1 traveling through Pheasant Run, but once there are multiple street connections established, the barrier would be removed.  Whether this barrier is necessary is at the discretion of the planning commission.

Property value impacts are a nebulous issue for the planning commission to address.  In this instance, there has been no evidence submitted beyond oral testimony that the proposed development will impact property values.  As noted by the planning commission in the February hearing, there has been similar housing constructed immediately adjacent to the Pheasant Run single-family homes along the south boundary of the development.  There is no evidence in the record that construction of those multi-family units has in any way impacted property values along E Oregon Avenue.  Similarly, the city has no outstanding complaints about noise, zoning violations, or other land use issues relating to the multi-family units in The Aspens development.  Similarly, the dwellings will be owner occupied as in the Pheasant Run development and will have a homeowner’s association which owners will pay maintenance fees into.  This association will be responsible for maintaining uniform landscaping in the front yards of all dwellings.

Hearing no further questions, Chairman Saylor opened the floor for testimony.

Testimony

Proponents:

Mark Zoller, American Development Company, PO Box 288, Washougal, WA 98671, stated that the findings are satisfactory and the staff report was fairly accurate.  The density will be less than what it could be and he defaulted to the state’s required buffer for a wetland.  Mr. Zoller said that the town homes will be privately owned and that the development will be governed by the HOA (Home Owners’ Association).  He feels that his development will be an affordable one and will be a step above what is presently south of Pheasant Run.  The footprint of each two-story town-home will be 20 feet by 40 feet, which includes the garage.  There will be rear fencing installed which will abut Pheasant Run and no easement exists on the property along the back of Pheasant Run.   City Planner Spencer interjected that the only easement on record is a 25 foot sewer easement at the top of NE 6th. 

Aaron Hoeft, ACH Engineering, stated that there are two possibilities for added water lines once the first 80 homes are built.  One option is to bring lines from Elm Avenue while the other is to gain an easement.  Fencing will either be a nice 6 foot sight obscuring wood fence or a 6 foot non-white vinyl fence.  The fencing would be maintained under the maintenance assessment applied to each owner.  An addition of 109 parking spaces will be spread through-out the development to be used as over-flow parking.  The wetland area will include a paved driveway and parking plus picnic tables.  Bathrooms are not scheduled but utility stubbing will be available for future use.  The wetland is currently like a “mud puddle” due to 4-wheeling but we would like to enhance the site.  Specific requirements are involved in enhancing a wetland.  Commissioner Ferguson wanted to know if the Hermiston Irrigation District project of piping all ditches will dry up the wetlands.  Since it is more like a spring and not irrigation run-off, the piping should not affect the wetlands.

Opponents:

Ken Nielson, 1822 NE 6th Place, Pheasant Run, wanted the town-homes along the back of Pheasant Run and single family homes along Elm Avenue be switched.  He also questioned the ROW along the east side of Pheasant Run.  The ROW was already addressed – no easement exists according to documents available, Mr. Zoller explained that the main reason for the location of the town-homes is economics. Doing the town-home first at the selected location is more economical.  Otherwise, funds would have to be spent on paving Theater Lane and getting utilities to that area of the site.

Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Saylor closed the hearing at 8:25 pm.

Chairman Saylor asked for a motion.  Commissioner Rebman moved and Commissioner Erz seconded the motion to accept the draft findings as written.  Motion passed.

Draft Findings

Under §157.116(C) the planning commission must review the proposed development plan and determine if the proposed development meets all of the following conditions:   

• The proposed development will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the city, specifically including the following:
  • Information indicating how the housing provided in the PUD relates to Hermiston area housing need indicators.  All PUD proposals may, consistent with the underlying zoning, propose housing concepts including townhouses, condominiums, owned multifamily units, mixtures of housing types and lot sizes, multiplex construction, manufactured dwellings and other kinds of dwellings constructed offsite.
    • The PUD proposal is consistent with the underlying zoning of R-3 on the property.  The proposal includes a mix of detached single-family, attached single-family and multi-family dwellings.  All of these housing types are permitted at this location.
    • The proposal includes townhouses and owned multi-family units which are specifically authorized by the PUD regulations.
  • Description of the municipal service and utilities needed at initial and later phases of PUD occupancy.
    • The application indicates the size and availability of water and sewer lines which will serve the development at the initial stage.
    • The city engineer has reviewed the proposed lot layout and determined that given the scope of the development and potential number of dwellings in the development, there is not adequate evidence to determine if there is sufficient water service for the entire development.  The plans show that the entire development will be serviced by a 12 inch water line in the Pheasant Run subdivision.  This could create a situation where the entire 350 lot development does not have water in the event that the line suffers a break or is shut down for maintenance.  The city engineer recommends that the applicant develop a secondary source of water, either through the Aspens development or construction of a new line in E Elm Avenue.
    • The north portion of the development lies within the pressure zone served by the Alora Heights booster station.  This station presently operates at or near capacity.  The construction of additional dwellings in this area will require the developer to contribute to the upgrading of the station to adequately service the development.  The city has established that the amount necessary for the improvement of the station will total $309.50 per lot in the Alora pressure zone.
    • Water services must be extended to the east boundary of the development site.  This will require extension of water lines in E Theater Lane and new street extensions as shown on the preliminary maps.
    • Adequate sewer service is available to service the development.  However, the applicant will be required to construct sewer extensions to the east end of the property in accordance with §157.164(D) of the Hermiston Code of Ordinances.  The applicant proposes to meet this requirement through the installation of a new sewer line in the Hermiston Ditch which would extend to the east boundary of the property.  Additionally, there will be a new street connection to the east and a utility extension to Vista Park Mobile Home Park.
  • Indication that the arterial streets required offsite are provided already, or planned and funded by appropriate city or county agencies.  Sufficient access will be required to meet vehicular movement and storage generated by the proposed development.  Continuity with future streets in adjoining development and dedication of sufficient right-of-way for the proposed development and other developments.
    • The applicant has provided street connections to the existing arterial street at E Elm Avenue.  There are additional connections to E Theater Lane (A collector street) and E Oregon Avenue.  There are additional provisions for future local street extensions to the east and west.
    • Although the city has not received comments from the Oregon Department of Transportation on the proposed new connection to E Elm Avenue, it is highly likely that ODOT will require a traffic analysis to be performed prior to issuance of a new street connection permit.  The applicant provided a traffic analysis of the overall development proposal when the property was annexed to the city.
    • The applicant has provided evidence that there is sufficient storage space to accommodate on-street parking in the townhouse areas.  The city engineer has noted that the 20 foot lots are not wide enough to allow on-street parking without seriously impeding the ability of each dwelling to access the street frontage.  In response to the city engineer’s concerns, the applicant has provided a plan for the creation of 109 additional overflow parking spaces.
  • Assurance that if the density of the development in the PUD’s initial stages does not warrant public water or sewer connections, that the layout allows for later increases of density to a level that makes connections financially feasible.
    • The development will be connected to city services in all phases.  The proposed street layout allows for the orderly extension of services as each phase of the development is constructed.
  • Deed restrictions to support future assessments to provide services necessary for urban densities of development.
    • Deed restrictions are not proposed and they will not be required as the developer will be required to construct public improvements for each phase of development.
• The planned unit development can be developed in harmony with the surrounding area and between uses within the PUD itself.  Specifically:
  • Height, bulk and density of buildings not radically different from those anticipated on adjacent or facing properties.  Exceptions could be made if the PUD were in a transitional area between higher intensity district and a lower intensity residential district.
    • The overall development plan contains a mixture of single-family, attached single-family and multi-family dwellings. 
    • The multi-family and single-family dwellings are located in areas where they will be compatible with existing and future development.
    • Lots 1 through 38 of Phase I of the development are attached single-family dwellings which directly abut existing detached single-family on large lots in the Pheasant Run subdivision.  This development plan is consistent with development allowed outright in the existing R-3 zoning.  If the applicant had not chosen to pursue a PUD approval for lot size and setback variations, it would be possible to develop three and four family dwellings outright in this location.
  • Preservation of natural and cultural assets within the area.
    • There is a large wetland in the center of the development area.  The applicant has proposed and the city has accepted that this area be preserved as open space and dedicated to the city for park purposes.
  • Density bonuses of 15% are granted as an incentive to go through the PUD process.  Maximum 5% bonuses may be granted for additional design features such as superior design of structures or landscaping.
    • The applicant proposes a density of 5.4 dwelling units per acre.  This is comparable to the allowable density of 7.26 single family units per acre and 22 multi-family units per acre allowed in the R-3 zone.  No density bonus is needed to build the development as proposed.
• The time table for completion of the PUD is within reason.
  • The applicant has not provided a timetable for build-out of the development.  However, a phasing plan has been provided which is comparable in scope to other multi-stage residential developments which have been built in the city.

The proposal is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance.

• The comprehensive plan map designation for the property is Medium Density Residential.
• This designation allows a density of 7.26 lots per acre.
• The development proposal establishes a density of 5.4 lots per acre.
• The property has a zoning designation of Multi-Family Residential (R-3). 
• A PUD is permitted as a conditional use in the R-3 zone.
• The planning commission held a public hearing on February 10, 2010 and a second hearing on May 12, 2010 to consider the request for a conditional use permit as required by §157.207 of the Hermiston Code of Ordinances.
• The planning commission reviewed the development plan for compliance with the PUD standards established in §157.116 of the Hermiston Code of Ordinances.

The property is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use, together with all other zoning requirements and any additional conditions imposed by the planning commission.

• The minimum parcel size for a PUD is 2 acres per the Hermiston Zoning Ordinance.
• The parcel exceeds the minimum parcel size and is adequate to accommodate all of the proposed lots.
• All utilities are available for extension through the property.
• Public facilities are of adequate size and quality to serve the proposed use.
• All utilities are currently stubbed to the property boundaries.
• There is a 12 inch water line available to the property in E Oregon Avenue and a 12 inch water line available in E Theater Lane.  Although the 12 inch line can provide water for the development, it creates the potential to cut off water to the entire development in the event of a breakage.  The city engineer has determined that safety standards require a second connection to be constructed at such time that 80 dwellings are constructed outside the Alora pressure zone.
• The E Theater Lane water line is supplied from the Alora Heights booster station.  This station operates near capacity at the present time.  To help improve the Alora Pump Station, those lots which fall within the station’s pressure zone will be required to contribute $309 per lot at the time connection is made to the system.  According to the topographical maps attached to the application, it appears that 74 lots will fall within the Alora Pressure Zone.
• There is adequate sewer for the majority of the development available at the existing sewer termination point in E Oregon Avenue.  However, the southern portions of the development are too low in elevation to gravity flow to E Oregon Avenue and the developer will be required to construct a new sewer line in the Hermiston Drain or a sewer lift station to adequate drain this portion of the development.
• All stormwater will be retained and disposed of on-site through the use of drainage swales along all street frontages.
• E Theater Lane adjacent to this property is improved with a gravel surface only.  The city’s development standards require installation of street improvements at the time of development when a property abuts existing paving or if the impact of the overall development plan is sufficient to require installation of improvements.  In the case of Cimmaron Terrace, the overall development plan calls for the creation of 350 lots which will generate a substantial amount of traffic which will disperse from the subdivision in several directions.  The development will generate eastbound traffic onto Theater Lane.  This street is presently graveled and incapable of handling the full build-out of the subdivision.  ITE traffic standards estimate that each dwelling will generate 10 trips per day or 3,500 trips per day for the entire development.  All of the existing and proposed street connections, with the exception of E Theater Lane eastbound, are adequate to accommodate this traffic.  Therefore, the applicant will be required to completely pave E Theater Lane with two travel lanes of paving from the western boundary of the development to NE 10th Street when Phase IV as shown on the preliminary map is completed.  Curbing, drainage and sidewalks will be required for the development frontage of Theater Lane only and will not be required off-site or on the north side of Theater Lane.  The developer prepared a traffic impact analysis for the development at the time of annexation which is on file for this application.
• The proposed use will prove reasonably compatible with surrounding properties.
• Property to the north is vacant residential land with a Future Residential comprehensive plan map designation.  Land to the west is developed with low-density single-family housing (Pheasant Run) and multi-family housing (The Aspens Multi-family complex).  Land to the east is developed with single-family dwellings and the Vista Park Manufactured Home Park.  Land to south contains industrial development.
• The overall development plan calls for a mix of residential uses.  The overall development plan calls for low density single-family and attached single-family in the northern portion of the development and attached single-family and multi-family housing in the southern portion of the development near the industrial developments.
• This mix of housing is reasonably compatible with surrounding land uses.  The development will have a lower density than the manufactured dwelling park to the east, a lower density than the industrial development to the south and a slightly higher density than the low density housing to the west. 
• The multi-family dwellings in the southern portion will provide adequate buffering between the industrial uses to the south and the low density housing to the north.

In addition to those standards for PUDs established in §157.116 and §157.208, any proposed subdivision of land is also subject to the design standards established in §154.15 through §154.22 of the Hermiston Code of Ordinances. 

§154.15 Relation to Adjoining Street System

The subdivision proposes a new street connection to E Elm Avenue.  Elm is a state highway and approval of new access to this road requires approval from the Oregon Department of Transportation.  The applicant must obtain this approval prior to receiving final approval from the planning commission for the overall development plan.

Three new connections are proposed to E Theater Lane.  Access spacing and alignment is acceptable for these connections.

Two new connections are proposed to the west.  These connections align with E Oregon Avenue in the Pheasant Run Subdivision and the future location of E Aspen Avenue.

Two new connections are proposed to the east.  These connections do not align with any future or proposed streets.  The city does not generally plan for future local residential street locations.  Therefore, the locations are acceptable.

§154.16 Street and Alley Width

All of the proposed internal streets will be developed to city standards with 36 feet of paving.  However, the right-of-way width will be 44 feet instead of the required 50 feet.  The narrower right-of-way width is allowed within PUDs in exchange for other public facilities.  In this case, a 7 acre public park is proposed.

E Theater Lane is designated as a minor collector in the Hermiston Transportation System Plan.  As such, the projected traffic volume for this street does not allow for narrower street widths.  Therefore, the applicant will be required to dedicate 5 feet for right-of-way purposes along the entire north boundary of the development site to match the existing E Theater Lane right-of-way to the west.  Additionally, the street improvements must be installed to match those existing to the west of the property.

§154.17 Easements

Easements are provided on the preliminary plat providing storm-drainage, sidewalks and utility access for each lot.  Additionally, a utility easement is proposed for the eastern boundary to allow for the future connection of the Vista Park manufactured home park to city services.

§154.18 Blocks

All of the proposed blocks conform to the maximum length for blocks in the subdivision design standards and have adequate spacing between cross streets.

§154.19 Lots

The lots are designed in accordance with the design standards contained in this subsection.  All of the lot lines are at right angles to straight street lines, with exceptions for those along streets which are curved to take advantage of the natural topography of the site.  All of the single-family lots are at least 60 feet wide at the building lines, with the exception of the narrower attached single-family lots which are intended for zero lot line development as allowed through the PUD process. 

§154.20 Character of Development

The development is planned as a mixed use residential development which will combine single-family, attached single-family, duplex, tri-plex and multi-family housing.  All of these uses are permitted outright in the R-3 zone.

§154.21 Parks, School Sites and the Like

The developer has proposed to dedicate a 7 acre park inside this development.  There is not a public park in the northeast quadrant of the city at this time.  The Parks and Recreation Department supports the dedication of a park at this location and has requested the planning commission require certain minimum improvements to the park prior to city acceptance.

§154.22 Access Management

All of the proposed new street connections meet the access spacing standards established in the Hermiston Transportation System Plan.

§154.60 Permanent Markers

All subdivisions are required to be surveyed in accordance with ORS 92.050 through 92.080.  All phases of the development will be required to install permanent markers indicating the corners of each lot.

§154.61 General Improvements

As conditions of approval of any final plat, the city will require the installation of storm drainage, curbing, sidewalks, paving and all service utilities.  A developer’s agreement shall be drafted guaranteeing installation of said improvements to standard city specifications.

§154.62 Water Lines

There is one connection to city water shown on the preliminary plans.  The city engineer recommends that the applicant provide a second connection to city water to insure that the development will have adequate water supplies in the event of a line breakage or maintenance.  The city engineer has determined that approximately 80 lots can be built in the development before a second connection is needed for redundancy.  Additionally, the northern 78 lots of the development lie within the pressure service area of the Alora Heights booster station.  This station operates at or near capacity and will need upgrading to insure adequate service for all residents of the pressure zone.  Therefore, each of the lots in this pressure zone will be required to pay $309.50 towards the future upgrading of this station in addition to regular connection fees and charges.  In accordance with §157.164(E) of the Hermiston Code of Ordinances, water services shall be extended to the eastern boundary of the development site in E Theater Lane and at all connections shown on the preliminary plan in order to service future development.

§154.63 Sanitary Sewers

There is adequate sanitary sewer service available to service the development.  However, a portion of the development site is too low to adequately gravity flow to the sewer service in E Oregon Avenue.  Therefore, the developer will be required to either construct a second sewer line to service this portion of the development or construct a sewer pump station for service.  In accordance with §157.164(E) of the Hermiston Code of Ordinances, sewer services shall be extended to the eastern boundary of the development site in E Theater Lane and at all connections shown on the preliminary plan in order to service future development.

§154.64 Drainage

The developer will install all necessary facilities to prevent the collection of surface water in any low spot and to adequately maintain all stormwater on-site.\

§154.65 Sidewalks

Sidewalks shall be installed along all new and existing street frontages within the development and along the southern boundary of E Theater Lane adjacent to the development.

Draft Conditions

• Applicant shall dedicate to the city the 7.09 acre wetland area to the city for park purposes.  As requested by the Parks and Recreation Department, the applicant shall install the following improvements on the park site prior to city acceptance of the park:
  • Utility stubs (water, sewer, and electricity) to the property.
  • A natural surface trail loop (department will work with developer to establish route).
  • Entrance paving and four paved parking spaces.
  • Simple kiosk (department will provide plans).
• Applicant shall work with and receive certification from the Hermiston Irrigation District.  The applicant should be aware that the City of Hermiston will not sign the final plat until the Hermiston Irrigation District has been satisfied and signs the final plat.
• Applicant must sign a developer’s agreement and shall install grading, storm drainage, curb and gutter, sidewalks, street paving, and all service utilities for each phase of the Cimmaron Terrace development.  All improvements for each phase shall comply with city standards and specifications and shall receive final approval from the city engineer.
• Streetlights shall also be installed at the applicant’s cost.  Once installed, the City will assume the monthly service charges.
• Per Section 157.164(E) of the Hermiston Code of Ordinances, where it has been determined that the extension of public facilities is required, all costs related to such extension shall be borne by the developer.  In addition, any extension of the facilities shall be continued and extended in a logical fashion to the extent of the development site so as to be readily available for adjacent development.
• Comprehensive Plan Figure 12 identifies this site as an area subject to development hazards due to excessively well drained soils.  Therefore, the City will prohibit the outdoor storage of hazardous chemicals and underground storage of gasoline and diesel fuels.
• The applicant will be required to completely pave E Theater Lane with two travel lanes of paving from the western boundary of the development to NE 10th Street when Phase IV as shown on the preliminary map is completed.  Curbing, drainage and sidewalks will be required for the development frontage of Theater Lane only and will not be required off-site or on the north side of Theater Lane.
• Each of the lots in the Alora Heights pressure zone shall be required to pay $309.50 at the time of connection to water and sewer services.  This money shall be used to fund future improvements to the Alora Heights booster station which operates near capacity.
• A portion of the development site is too low to adequately gravity flow to the sewer service in E Oregon Avenue.  Therefore, the developer will be required to either construct a second sewer line to service this portion of the development or construct a sewer pump station for service. 
• Sidewalks shall be installed along all new and existing street frontages within the development and along the southern boundary of E Theater Lane adjacent to the development.
• The developer will install all necessary facilities to prevent the collection of surface water in any low spot and to adequately maintain all stormwater on-site.
• The developer shall be responsible for obtaining access for NE 9th Street onto E Elm Avenue from the Oregon Department of Transportation.  This shall include all required access permits from the State of Oregon as well as all necessary right-of-way acquisition from affected property owners.
• The off-site portion of NE 9th Street between the development and E Elm Avenue shall be improved with paving only.  Curbs and sidewalks are not necessary for the off-site portion.
• All utilities shall be extended to the eastern property boundary to be available for future extensions in accordance with §157.164(E) of the Hermiston Code of Ordinances.
• The developer shall dedicate 5 feet of right-of-way to E Theater Lane, bringing the south half of the right-of-way to 25 feet from centerline.
• At such time that 80 dwellings are constructed outside the Alora pressure zone, the developer will be responsible for constructing a second water connection to provide redundancy to the development.
• The developer shall erect a break-away barrier at E. Oregon Avenue during Phase 1 until such time when access to E. Elm Avenue is available.

Chairman Saylor asked for a motion.  Commissioner Erz moved and Commissioner Ottmar seconded the motion to grant the condition use permit subject to the seventeen draft conditions as written and to approve the PUD.  Motion passed.

Planner Comments and Unscheduled Communications

City Planner Spencer announced that the June meeting will include a conditional use permit application for the addition of sports field amenities at the new Armand Larive Middle School.  Those additions include field lighting, outdoor bleachers, press boxes with a PA system, and a concession/restroom building.

There was no further business and the meeting was adjourned at 8:35 pm.