City Council

PORT ORFORD PLANNING COMMISSION GABLE CHAMBERS, PORT ORFORD CITY HALL REGULAR MEETING Tuesday, November 7th, 2023, 3:30 PM Tuesday, November 7th, 2023, 3:30 PM Please join the meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone. https://meet.goto.com/580316989 You can also dial in using your phone. United States (Toll Free): 1 866 899 4679 United States: +1 (571) 317-3166 Access Code: 580-316-989 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of October 3rd Minutes 3. Chair Comments 4. Public Comments (On Agenda Items Only) 5. Public Hearings A. Continuation POC 23-02: Clark, Proposed RV Park @ 510 Madrona 6. Discussion Items A. Planning clearances approved since last meeting B. What is doable by PC given available City/Planning resources? C. Speeding on city streets D. Adding criteria for CUP extensions E. Comprehensive Plan update F. County/City UGB agreement update 7. Planning Matters A. Appointment Application: Susan Russell 8. Other Business a. City Planner Comments – House Bill 2415 b. Planning Commission Comments 9. Public Considerations 10. Adjourn 1  City of Port Orford Planning Commission Meeting In the Gable Chambers / Virtual participants Tuesday, September 5th, 2023 at 3:30 P.M. Commission Member Present City Staff Present Chariman Greg Thelen Present Joseph Harrison, Planning Tech. Present Vice Chair Pamela Berndt Present Crystal Shoji, City Planner Present Comm Sara Lovendahl Excused CA Huttl Partial Comm Jennifer Head Present Comm Carol Lawton Present Others Present: Tim Leslie, Dave Bartholomew The minutes were prepared using the video available at: 1. Call to Order (0:00-0:01) A. Chair Thelen called to order this Meeting of the Planning Commission on October 3 rd, 2023, at (3:31) p.m. with a roll call showing Comm. Sara Lovendahl is excused from todays meeting. 2. Approval of September 5th meeting Minutes (0:01-0:02) A. Comm. Berndt moves to approve the minutes as written. B. The motion to approve the minutes is seconded by Comm. Head C. The vote passes unanimously with no further discussion at (3:38). Chairman Thelen Yes Commissioner Lovendahl Absent Commissioner Head Yes Commissioner Lawton Yes Commissioner Berndt Yes 3. Chair Comments A. Adding STR application and checklist discussion as item 6 (f). B. We received a written request from the applicant agent to continue POC 2023-2; The Commission still needs to formally open the hearing scheduled for today and vote on granting a continuance. While the hearing is open, the Commission is allowed to accept testimony from proponents and opponents to the application POC 2023-02. 2 4. Public Comment (0:02-0:06) A. None 5. Public Hearings (0:07-0:20) A. The Public Hearing began with Chair Thelen reading the intro script (included in the record) and reiterating for the record that this is a continuation of a Public Hearing from September 5th. B. Proponents: None C. Opponents: i. Tim Leslie: Entered Sutherland Municipal Code Chapter 12.40 into the written record since it is code from a town of roughly equal size Municipality and he feels the local code is outdated and insubstantial. Mr. Leslie believes that most of the information in the application is not truthful; namely the application stated that there was 1 dwelling on the property, but there are 2 and that the utilities are not up to code. Additionally, the proposal doesn’t align with the Sutherland Municipal Code Chapter 12.40 as the property does not have a 40 ft access and is less than the required 2 acres. Additionally, there is not enough space for facilities the are required and stated that the owner isn’t doing minimal upkeep on the property even though its currently vacant and doubts that they’ll do any upkeep on it after the proposed park goes in. 1. Commissioners ask how he knows that the utilities aren’t up to code and Mr. Leslie stated he watched them put it in years ago and that the existing 4 inch pipe wouldn’t be able to handle the proposed use. ii. Dave Bartholomew: Neighbor of the proposed lot that’s lived here since the 70’s that believes that allowing the park would cause him and his mother hardship and is unnecessary due to there being other RV parks in town. He also reiterated that the current tenant on the property of the proposed RV park can’t do necessary maintenance on the property as is. He also corroborated that there are 2 occupants on the lot. D. Commissioner Head moves to all a continuance to the next planning meeting scheduled for November 7th @ 3:30 pm. The motion was made at (3:51) pm E. Commissioner Berndt seconds the motion F. Vote: Commissioners voted unanimously in favor of allowing the continuance @ (3:51) pm with no further discussion. 3 Chairman Thelen Yes Commissioner Lovendahl Absent Commissioner Head Yes Commissioner Lawton Yes Commissioner Berndt Yes 6. (0:21-1:20) Discussion Items A. Speeding on Jackson: Not just an issue on Jackson, its an issue the is pervasive around town. 2 traffic calming device options are being presented by Commissioner Head as possible solutions. The first “Speed Cushions” are similar to speed bumps but are spaced to allow emergency vehicles to drive over them with ease and cost $2280 per strip. The Second option are “Speed Humps” which are speed bumps that be installed without major road modifications and cost $2660. Additionally, a camera connected to a flashing sign that displays the speed of vehicles in the camera was discussed as an alternative way to potentially manage the situation without modifying the roads. The model of camera/sign that were looked into collect and record data on the times when speeding is most prevalent and how fast people are speeding, all of which can be retrieved for analysis via cloud or Bluetooth interface. This system costs $2749 per camera/sign combo + potential additional costs. i. Commissioners request clarification on how the “Speed Cushions” allow emergency vehicles to drive over them with ease?; the have a space in the middle that allows the wider wheelbase of emergency vehicles to have a wheel on either side of the cushion, allowing the wheels to go around the cushion instead of over it. ii. Have we looked at other small cities to see if traffic calming devices like these have successfully been implemented?; not yet, but during the conversation with the company that produces them several other cities names came up, Comm. Head volunteered to do follow up research. iii. Would this be useful for the local Port Orford Police Department?; Based off of a conversation with one officer, Comm. Head believes that the PD would approve of trying them, we will try to get an Officer in the next meeting to weigh in on the record. iv. What Roads are experiencing the worst speeding and why are people speeding?; The roads we know are experiencing trouble are: Jackson, Idaho, Arizona, Pinehurst, Hamlet, Port Orford Loop, and Washington, but its all around town. Daytime speeders seem to be unaware they are violating speeding laws. Nighttime speeders seem to be racing in the streets at night. This means that there are two different groups of people that will need different speed reducing measures to effectively deal with. v. CA Huttl weighed in that the previous City Council meeting had a group of concerned citizens present a petition to reduce speed limit on Hamlet and as 4  a result the City Council directed staff to research potential solutions. He then requested the Planning Commission present something to the City Council or worked with a member of it to get both groups involved. Comm Head Volunteered to coordinate with Gary Burns and Chief Hobart on the issue. B. Derelict Buildings: Chair Thelen requested this item as he wanted to assist the City Council to deal the dangerous abandoned building in town. Currently the Issues that are preventing the City from moving forward are 1) that it requires funding upfront and 2) the wording in our code isn’t precise and is difficult to interpret by an inspection. The commissioners believed that the code focused on abandoned (unoccupied) buildings, but it does not which is the main source of the code problem. i. CA Huttl explained that the code for abated buildings has been absorbed into Chapter 8 “Health and Safety” of The City Municipal Code. Then explained his experience with this process and went through it step by step; Starting with observing from outside to gather evidence, get a warrant from a judge based on that evidence, using the warrant enter the property to gain more evidence, with sufficient evidence publish notice of abatement, wait for a response to that notice then begin actual demolition depending on the response to the notice. This is an expensive and time-consuming process; demolition usually costs $10,000-22,000 with no guarantee of recoup. 1. Commissioners request clarification on if our code is sufficient to deal with abated buildings; yes, but the process is always going to be long and costly. 2. Commissioners ask if the city can contract out to deal with this; no, government functions cant be privatized and this is a government function. 3. Commissioners inquire if the City can erect a fence around the properties for safety reasons; that would be at the discretion of the property owner to limit their own liability. C. Short Term Rentals: Moved ahead from item 6(f) since CA Huttl is currently in the audience. CA Huttl is working on a press release, application and checklist for STR permit approval. The items on the application and checklist come directly from the ordinance that was approved by the City Council. Commissioners volunteer to connect CA Huttl to Mr. McVannel, a local contactor who is willing to do inspections for the city, and to send info on GRANICUS, a system designed to make managing STRs easier. D. Planning Clearance List & E. Wells: Joseph Reviewed the list he provided showing the planning clearances that had been approved within the last 6 months. The list has been included with the minutes. 5 7. Planning Matters A. City Planner Comments i. Crystal made reference to Port Orford Municipal Code Section 17.04.155, Final action on certain applications required within 120 days. She explained that this code section is pertinent to continuances and extensions on applications, and that it is from State law. While the Planning Commission confirms continuances and exceptions, the code spells out the processes. B. Planning Commission Comments i. Comm. Berndt: Since the commission is close to finishing the STR discussions, we should look ahead to other issues we would like to discuss; affordable housing is a top priority in town right now and is linked to the discussions on homelessness that the City Council is having. Additionally, Comm. Berndt would like to revisit the Comprehensive Plan to review and potentially bring it more in line with what the Planning Commission and City Councils vision of the city; another commissioner requested to add “Adding criteria for CUP extension” and “Urban Growth Management Agreement discussion” onto the agenda. 8. Public Considerations A. None 9. Adjourn A. With no further business, Chairman Thelen closed the meeting of the Planning Commission at (5:27) pm. Attest: _____________________________ _______________________________ Chair, Greg Thelen Date _______________________________ _______________________________ City Recorder, Joseph Harrison Date 6  Documents on the Public Hearing POC 23-02 are available online at Planning Commission - City of Port Orford (https://portorford.org/planning-commission/) They are also available at the front office upon request. 7 TO: The Port Orford Planning Commission City of Port rford FROM: Joseph Harrison, Planning Assistant DATE: October 3rd, 2023 RE: Planning Clearance Approvals and Well Approvals __________________________________________________________________ Since last meeting there have only been 3 approved Planning Clearances; two building permits for new housing, one at Lakeshore, one on Arizona. The other was a planning Clearance for a Foundation repair on a house on 5th street. There is one more in the works that I am aware of, a house that is going to be demolished, address unknown at this time. 8 9