Planning Commission Meeting

April 20, 2005

Chairman Alan Blair called the meeting to order at 7 pm in the Council room of City Hall, 1655 First Street, Baker City, Oregon.  Commission members present included Blair, Wayne Burnside, Laurie Woodworth, Rob Ellingson, Wes Elder, and Ken Rockwell.  Sharon Rudi was absent.  Also present was City Attorney Tim Collins.

Upon the MOTION of Mr. Burnside, seconded by Mr. Ellingson, and the unanimous vote of the members present, the minutes of the regular Planning Commission meeting of March 16, 2005 were APPROVED as submitted.

Chairman Blair then called for the public hearing on Planning Commission case

05-CUP-02, a request by Julie Renee Capon, 1339 Valley Avenue, for permission to operate a private school at 1405 Valley Avenue.  Mr. Blair outlined the procedure that would be followed during the hearing and asked if there were any conflicts of interest to declare or ex parte contacts.  There were no such contacts or conflicts.  Mr. Collins then read the staff report that outlined a request by Ms. Capon to remodel the existing residential duplex at 1405 Valley for use as a private school.  The school would have a maximum of 10 students and would be for grades K- 3 only.

Julie Capon, 1339 Valley, stated that her school would be fully accredited and would meet state testing requirements.  She will tailor her curriculum to that of the public schools so that students could integrate into the fourth grade seamlessly.  She is a licensed teacher.  In order to remodel the existing building, she and her husband will install new a heating system as well as remove the interior partitions.  It will be a one-room school with smaller accessory rooms.  The building was checked for asbestos and lead paint at the time of her purchase and was found to be free from these contaminants.  The other unit will continue to be used as a residential apartment unless that causes problems.  In that event she will have to ask the tenant to find another place and will keep the unit empty.  Eventually she hopes to turn it into an office that would be accessory to the school.

Ms. Capon stated that the building is on a large border lot and has a number of on street parking spaces adjacent to the property.  In addition, there are four parking spaces in back off the alley.  She herself lives close enough to the school to walk and she anticipates only one volunteer would drive to the school each day.

Mr. Blair asked if there were occasions on which parents of all the children would be present at the school at one time.  Ms. Capon replied that she could foresee once or twice a year that the school would have a program in the evening that would have parents of all students present.  With only 10 students in the school, though, she did not think that there would be a great deal of traffic.  She stated that she went door-to-door around the entire two-block area surrounding the building and did not find anyone against the school.  Mr. Rockwell asked if she had been in contact with the neighbor across the alley to the south.  Ms. Capon said that she had talked to them and they had signed the petition in favor of the school. Most of the nearby residents were happy that it was no longer going to be a low-income rental.

In response to a question from Mr. Rockwell, Ms. Capon stated that she expected most parents to drop off their children at the curb on either the Valley or Ash street sides of the property.  Because the existing tenant uses the rear space, she did not think that there would be any problem with the parents pulling up right next to the curb.

The only sign that she proposes is a small one over the door.  She stated that she did not wish signs in the yard because she did not want obstructions in that area.  She felt she needs to be able to see what was going on in all parts of the yard.  She also does not plan any different outside lighting with the exception of perhaps a motion light for the front yard playground areas that she could see from her house across the street to tell if someone was in the yard after dark.

Mr. Elder asked if school zone signs were needed in the surrounding neighborhood.  Ms. Capon stated that she understood from talking to state representatives that such signage would be up to the city.   Mr. Elder stated that he was in the opinion that they were needed since Valley and Ash is an unmarked intersection where cars do not necessarily slow down.

Mr. Blair inquired whether Ms. Capon had any type of different fencing in mind.  Ms. Capon said she didn’t and would just have the four-foot cyclone fence around the property.  The landscaping would remain as it is with the only change some kind of dust free surface in the playground area.  The other rental yard will remain grass

Denise Raley, 15227 Mill Creek, stated that she was in favor of the school in that as a home schooling parent she was looking forward to having more choices.  In her work with the state in the area of child care facilities she has learned that they can have more than 10 children there and that this school would be a much more controlled environment.

There was no further testimony and Chairman Blair then closed the public hearing.

After a brief discussion, Mr. Ellingson MOVED that the Planning Commission approve this application for a conditional use permit to operate a private school at 1405 Valley upon the specific condition that the property has sufficient water flow for fire protection as required by the Fire Marshall.  Mr. Burnside seconded the motion and it CARRIED with a unanimous vote.

The next item of business was the public hearing on Planning Commission case 05-CUP-03, a request by Williams Northwest Pipeline for a Conditional Use Permit to erect a 16-foot antenna on their property at 17th and Indiana.  There were no ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest to disclose and all commission members indicated they were familiar with the property.  Mr. Woodworth stated that he lives only a short distance from the site and was very familiar with the property.

Mr. Collins then gave the staff report indicating that the antenna would be used as part of an internal communications system for the pipeline company.  It would give them real-time monitoring capabilities for the gas pipeline.

Brian Reimann, Williams Northwest Pipeline, explained the project to the commission.  In light of recent security concerns, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is requiring better real-time monitoring of all metering sites.  This antenna would give the company the ability to monitor what is happening in the pipeline at that very moment from its control room in Salt Lake City.  Presently the information is stored and has to be downloaded manually by a technician.  The antenna would relay information gathered by equipment that controls natural gas feeding off the main pipeline into the city.  They already have current information on natural gas in the pipeline itself.  He does not feel that in any way the system will be an additional hazard and it is, in fact, actually a safety enhancement.  The more information the company has about the condition of the line, the safer it is.  They need a 16-foot antenna so that they can communicate with their master site on top of the nearby ridge.

Tom Lomax, engineer for Communications Controls of Salt Lake City, stated his firm has been contracted to design and install the antenna.  He emphasized the increased safety that the antenna would provide.  This antenna is part of a multiple address system, which allows multiple remote sides to respond to the master receiving station on the ridge top.

Chairman Blair then asked if there was any testimony in opposition to the antenna.  Pam Van Duyn, 14545 Angel Lane, stated that she was not in opposition to the antenna however, as a landowner in the vicinity, she felt that this would be good opportunity to require the gas company to provide either landscaping or slats in the fencing to provide screening.  The metering station was constructed many years ago when there were no homes in the area however there are now quite a number of newer homes within sight of the station and she felt it would be good idea to screen the equipment inside.  Mr. Ellingson then questioned whether providing slats or landscaping would cause security concerns.  Mr. Reimann stated that he could not say since that is not his function within the company however he's aware that they do try to keep vegetation away from the metering station because of fire hazard.  The installation of slats in the cyclone fence would perhaps be a security hazard but he could not answer for sure.  Chairman Blair stated that he thought he'd been told the past that the company likes to keep the metering equipment in public view so they can tell if anyone is in there.  Mr. Rockwell suggested that perhaps the commission could require screening of just the east and west sides to keep visibility from the road.  The north side is already screened by a wooden fence constructed by the neighbor on that side.  Mr. Ellingson stated that he hesitated to put in a condition that would materially interfere with security of the site.  Mr. Reimann pointed out that the east side of the metering station was in the control of local gas company, Cascade Natural Gas, and he is therefore not even sure that the company has the right to put slats in that side. He stated that they could certainly look at it and decide to install the slats if that does not cause problems.  Ms. Van Duyn stated that it seems to her that since the neighbor was allowed to install a wooden fence, which effectively obscured the view of the site from that direction, the company should not care if the view is obscured from other sides as well.  Mr. Reimann asked why there was concern about the site.  Mr. Rockwell answered that he felt it was simply aesthetics.  Mr. Reimann pointed out that all homeowners who purchased land in the neighborhood had done so after the metering station was there and that they should been aware of what was there.  Mr. Burnside agreed with this point of view and added that the transmitter itself would not change much at the site. 

Mr. Elder pointed out that the application before the commission was for the erection of the 16-foot antenna.  He did not see much connection between the application and the requirement to screen the rest of the site.  Mr. Blair asked if the company would be okay with screening on three sides and in leaving it exposed from the street itself.  Mr. Reimann stated that he could not say that at this time.  Mr. Ellingson stated that he would encourage neighbors to talk to the gas company and perhaps something could be done in that area.  He would not like to see a requirement for this permit that cannot be met by the company.  He then MOVED to improve the application for a conditional use permit to allow the erection of the antenna as requested.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Burnside and CARRIED with Ellingson, Burnside, Elder and Woodworth in favor, Blair and Rockwell opposed.

After a short recess, the commission reconvened to hear the application of P & E Distributing for approval to vacate the half block of Grace Street from Seventh Street west to the alley.  This is commission case No. 05-SV-04.  Mr. Collins then read the staff report and indicated that the city had received the approval from all utilities and city departments with the exception of the public works department and Qwest.  Both of these utilities indicated that there were utilities in the portions to be vacated and that the vacation should not be granted unless easements for the wastewater main and telephone cable were granted.

Ed Elms, 42543 Pocahontas Road, stated that he has maintained the lot for the past 30 years and, if he could be sure that it wouldn’t be changed, he probably wouldn't even ask it to be vacated.  Because it is convenient for his business to use that space as a truck turning area, he would like to own it so that it could be maintained for that use.  He also felt he could do more to control the unlawful dumping in the area of Settlers Slough if he were the owner.  When he spoke with Qwest, they said that they probably had a telephone cable located in the north side of the right of way slightly north of the city's wastewater main.  If they needed to locate the cable exactly they could, but they felt a generic easement would be satisfactory.  Mr. Elms also noted that the alley running north from the street to be vacated would still be open and would allow access to the other adjoining properties.

Mr. Rockwell noted that if the street were vacated, the neighbor to the north would receive half of the street.   Mr. Elms said that he had an agreement to purchase that portion of the vacated street from that owner.  He has no plans to fence the property and recognizes that he needs to leave access to the slough in the rear to allow cleaning.  Mr. Rockwell also pointed out that this area is zoned residential and that no expansion of the P & E business would be allowed on that property.

There was no other testimony and the public hearing was closed.

Mr. Burnside then MOVED to recommend to the City Council that the half block of Grace Street from seventh West to the alley be vacated upon the condition that easements are granted to both the city for the wastewater main right-of-way and to Qwest for the telephone cable.  The motion was seconded by Mr. Ellingson and CARRIED with a unanimous vote.

The next item of business was continued discussion of an amendment to the development code for the height of accessory structures in residential zones.  Mr. Collins presented the commission with alternatives as discussed at the last meeting.  These alternatives were to allow the maximum structure height to be 16 feet or to require anything from 14 to18 feet to require a conditional use permit.  Eighteen feet would be the maximum height.

Mr. Ellingson stated that since last meeting he had been giving this matter some thought and spoke with Dan Mark, previous owner of a garage door company.  Recreational vehicles are approaching the 13 foot six inch maximum height allowed on the highway.  This means a 14 ft. door is required and a 16 foot sidewall.  He has come to see the real problem not necessarily as the height of the structure so much as the size of the over-all structure.  The model development code originally suggested that accessory buildings be limited to 800 square feet.  An 800 square foot building with 16-foot sidewalls and 3/12 pitch roof did not appear to him to be obtrusive.   He has come to believe that controlling the footprint is a better way to control the problem.  Mr. Rockwell stated that he agreed with Mr. Ellingson’s logic and recalled the earlier discussion where the Planning Commission decided to not choose to go with the 800-foot maximum but instead go with a 60 percent maximum lot coverage.  This has not worked out too well to limit the size of the structures.  Mr. Ellingson then MOVED that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that the code be amended to provide for an eighteen-foot maximum building height and an 800 square foot maximum building size.  Persons wishing either a taller building or larger structure would need a conditional use permit.  The motion was seconded by Wayne Burnside and CARRIED with unanimous vote.

The Commission also reviewed the draft language for the amendment dealing with short-term vacation rentals.  Mr. Ellingson MOVED that the language be approved as presented and forwarded to the City Council.  Mr. Burnside seconded the motion and it CARRIED with unanimous vote.

Under other business, Mr. Rockwell reported on the proposed interchange access management plan that is presently under development by the State Department of Transportation.  The purpose of the plan is to provide for future development around the 302 and 306 Interchanges along I-84.  Most of the public comment thus far has been with the area near the 302 Interchange.  There are several road junctions there that are closer than one-quarter mile from the freeway ramps and the committee is considering options on how to alleviate these concerns.  There has been one public meeting already and another is scheduled.  Mr. Collins noted that the schedule calls for a joint City Council- Planning Commission meeting on May 24.  Mr. Blair stated that he would consider calling a special meeting if necessary.

Also under other business, Jim Van Duyn stated that he had attended a meeting with Dwight Sidway, Robert Ellingson, and Tabor Clarke to discuss issues that he had previously raised regarding the Downtown Jobs Initiative project.  He felt that it was a productive meeting and that his issues could be worked through.  He trusts that the new plans will be more compatible with both zoning ordinances and transportation plans.

In a related matter, Mr. Van Duyn stated that he hopes projects of this magnitude can have regular oversight by the Planning Commission.  This can be done either through a recurring agenda item for the appointment of a Planning Commission member to the task force that works on the projects.  Mr. Rockwell stated that he agreed strongly with this point of view noting that sometime ago the Commission had had a similar discussion with the city regarding the downtown initiative and their concerns were largely about lack of communication.  Chairman Blair noted however he would not want an agenda item to simply be another chance to rehash issues that were previously discussed in other meetings.  Mr. Van Duyn stated that was not his intent.  He just wished to make sure that someone from the Planning Commission could advise on the projects and make sure they’re consistent with the development code.  Mr. Ellingson noted that he has an interest in the downtown initiative and that he intends to attend the meetings anyway.  Mr. Blair asked him to serve as liaison to the Commission on this issue and he agreed.

There was no further business and the meeting was adjourned at 9:15 PM.