Dunes City Council     M I N U T E S    July 15, 2008     7:00 P.M.       Printable rtf file

City Hall – 82877 Spruce Street 97493

 

1.  Call to Order and Roll Call  

Mayor Eric Hauptman called the Special Session of the Dunes City Council to order at 7:01pm .  Amy Graham, Dunes City Recorder, took roll call. 

Present:          Mayor Eric Hauptman, Councilor Peter Howison, Councilor Susie Navetta, Councilor Richard Koehler, Councilor Gerald Curran.  Councilor Bob Petersdorf was not present and excused.  

Others Present:  City Recorder Amy Graham, Planning Secretary Lisa Ekelund, City Attorney David Allen of the Law Office of Macpherson, Gintner & Diaz, and 15 members of the community.   

2.  Pledge of Allegiance  

The Mayor, the City Councilors, and joined in the Pledge of Allegiance.  

3.  Consent Agenda  

A.  City Council Meeting Minutes from June 12, 2008 and July 1, 2008  

Councilor Howison said with regard to the June 12th minutes, he would like to pull them off of the consent agenda.  

Councilor Navetta said she would like to pull the July 1st minutes off of the consent agenda.   

B.  Bills of the Session through July 10, 2008  

Councilor Navetta moved to withdraw the bills of the session.   

C.  Receipts of the Session through July 10, 2008  

            No concerns addressed  

D.  Revenue Expense Report  

            No concerns addressed  

Councilor Howison moved to accept the consent agenda minus the minutes of the June 12th minutes, the July 1st minutes, as well as the bills of the session.   

Councilor Navetta seconded the motion and after unanimous vote, it carried.  

Councilor Howison said with regard to the June 12th minutes, on page ten under heading B Woahink Creek, he was quoted as saying “He said, there is no hard evidence, but neighbors have reported structures along the creek including grass, gazebo’s, bridges, and walkways.”  He believes the intention of what he said with the several sentences he spoke at the meeting (not just one sentence), was that there was no hard evidence but neighbors had reported structures along the creek, including grass, gazebo’s, bridges, and walkways.  Further, he thinks it’s important this is put into the record because he remembered saying it, that aerial photo’s and kayaking up the creek from Siltcoos Lake confirmed the neighbors' reports.  

He said he would like to propose they add to the minutes under “B Woahink Creek” under sentence two that the “is” be changed to “was” and that after neighbors, the “have” be changed to “had”, and that a one sentence be added after that, which is “Aerial photo’s and kayaking up the creek from Siltcoos Lake confirmed the neighbors reports.”  

Councilor Navetta said on page three under Public Hearings, it states “Mayor Hauptman said it was determined that Ordinance 194 was incorrect.”  She said she believed it was “miss-numbered” instead of “incorrect.”  

Councilor Howison moved to accept the minutes of the June 12th meeting as corrected.  

Councilor Koehler seconded the motion and after unanimous vote, the motioned carried as accepted with corrections.  

Councilor Navetta said for the July 1st minutes on page two, last paragraph, the sentence says “Councilor moved to appoint Rob Quandt” but it doesn’t say whom.  She said the Councilor is not named.   

Councilor Howison stated he believed it was himself.   

Mayor Hauptman asked Lisa Ekelund to verify this.   

According the audio tape of July 1st, 2008 meeting, Lisa Ekelund verified, Councilor Howison did in fact make the motion to appoint Mr. Robert Quandt to City Council and Councilor Navetta Seconded the motion with unanimous vote from Council in favor.  

City Recorder, Amy Graham said David Allen’s name needs to be added to the July 1st minutes because he was present as City Attorney.  

Councilor Howison moved to accept the minutes of July 1st, 2008 as corrected.  Councilor Navetta seconded the motion and after unanimous vote, it passed.  

Regarding the Bills of the Session, Councilor Navetta said she was concerned about the insurance (auto and general insurance).  She said the City has dealt with the same company for several years now.  She asked if it goes out to bid.  

Mayor Hauptman said he had discussed this with the prior City Recorder but it was not done.  He said the insurance is up for renewal on July 1 and the City did renew with the same company.  He said the City is required to send it out for bid and the City did find out that the carrier (City County Insurance) is the only carrier in the State.  Dunes City cannot go direct to them, and they have to go through a broker.  The RFB will be sent out to brokers.     

Councilor Navetta asked if the City was going to continue with LCOG.  Mayor Hauptman said he discussed this with the City Recorder and his opinion was no but he wanted Council feedback. 

 Councilor Howison asked if it was necessary to maintain the database through LCOG.  

Mayor Hauptman said Mr. Quandt had offered to work with the City for programming options.  

Councilor Navetta asked if the League of Oregon Cities was of value to the City.  Mayor Hauptman said yes and Amy Graham said she had gone to meetings.  

The Mayor asked for all in favor of accepting the Bills of the Sessions signify by saying aye.  After unanimous vote the Bills of the Session was accepted.  

4.  Swearing in of New Council Member  

Councilor Howison made a motion to appoint Mr. Quandt into the vacant position of the Dunes City Council.  Councilor Navetta seconded and after unanimous vote, it passed.  

Mayor Eric Hauptman swore in Mr. Robert Quandt as a City Council member.  

5.  Announcements / Correspondence  

A.  Festival of the Lakes  

The Mayor announced this is August 9th.  Councilor Navetta confirmed it runs from 10am to 3pm .  

B.  Relay for Life  

The Mayor announced the City was going to do the Relay for Life.  City Recorder, Amy Graham spoke to the attendees of the meeting, explaining what this fundraiser entails.   

6.  Citizen Input on Unscheduled Items / Public Comment  

NONE  

7.  Reports  

A.  Mayor’s Report-  

Mayor Hauptman said the staff has been working hard.  This has been a busy summer for the City.  He said some committees needed to be filled and volunteers for the office would be great.  The fiscal New Year started on July 1st and the more help the better for the City.  

B.  Community Center/CCI-  

Councilor Howison had no report.   

C.  Conservation Committee-  

Councilor Curran said he had no report but there were several things on the way.  

D.  Road Commission-  

Councilor Petersdorf had no report.  

E.  Site Review / Grants / Police-  

Councilor Navetta said she had a few things winding up.  The house behind City Hall is coming to completion of cleaning up.  Robert May's property is being cleaned up and the tenant had left.  On Terry Austin’s property, the clean up is continuing.  On the Watts property, they sent a registered letter and nothing came back.  The Mayor asked if the Post Office has record.  On Woahink Drive , there was a report of kids on all terrain vehicles.  She said she spoke with the family and things have improved.  

F.  Water Quality / Communication & Education-  

Councilor Koehler said the Water Quality Committee did not meet this month and they will meet Thursday.  They are formatting data in the form of graphs for the web site.  The Communication committee just completed the newsletter and it should be on the website later in the week.  Councilor Koehler gave information regarding the happenings at the Festival of the Lakes.   

G.  Planning Commission-  

Lisa Ekelund was not able to speak due to illness and Amy Graham read her report.  She gave information regarding permits issued and meeting times.  

8.  Unfinished / Old Business  

A.  Montgomery View Estates / SUB 01-07 / Map Number 19-12-23-40Tax Lot 100  

Councilor Quandt said he would recuse himself from this issue.  

Mayor Hauptman asked if there were any ex-parte contacts and the Council said no.  

Mayor Hauptman said he had written a letter to LUBA denying an extension to a different matter.  He said he referenced the Montgomery View Estates.  He wanted this to be public knowledge.   

David Allen reiterated the letter the Mayor wrote was concerning Martin vs. City of Dunes City no. 2007-163 and not the Montgomery View Estates.  

David Allen explained that the record is closed and deliberation had started.  He said due to time frames, it was tabled and is commencing tonight.  He said the goal for tonight is to continue deliberation then afterwards, the Council can ask questions of the staff.  At that point, he said the Council should reach a tentative oral decision.  He said it needs to be stated as specifically as possible.  After this, it will be put into a written final order prepared by staff.  This will include findings, conclusions etc…it will be brought forth at the July 24th meeting.  The Council will review it and changes can be noted.  At that time, they will reach their decision and adopt the order based on tonight’s decision.  

Mr. Allen wanted to bring his memo to the attention of the Council that was emailed to staff on July 14th and is before the council.  He said he reviewed Ms. O’Dea’s legal arguments.  He said he had looked through her materials and laid out the framework in the form of a memo.  He said this is public record and anyone can request a copy.  

He brought the issue of the additional materials, which were provided after the record was closed.  He said the Council accepted the materials even though the record was closed and there needs to be a motion of acceptance making this part of the record.  

Councilor Howison moved to accept the information provided by Mr. Montgomery and his attorney, which was submitted regarding a water permit issued by the Water Resources Department, along with a WRD proposed final order and draft permit, WRD preliminary analysis and application fact sheet, and the WRD final order that was also submitted.  Councilor Navetta seconded the motion and after unanimous vote, it passed.  

Deliberation  

Councilor Koehler said he was concerned there were a few unanswered items.  He said the steep road and the 90-degree turn seemed dangerous.  He said the length of road seems inordinately long without any breaks.  He wondered how the road would be taken care of after the initial construction.  He questioned what would happen to water run off.  He did not see an erosion control plan at that end, given the amount of water involved with the given slope.  He also was concerned about permit to Clear Lake Road , plus he wasn’t aware of the viability of CC&R’s and if they were adequate.  

The Mayor said there were two CC&R’s.   

Mr. Allen explained the original application had a CC&R.  After the renewal of the application, another CC&R appeared.  The one stamped Oct 5th 2006 is the original one.  The other one without the stamp is assumed current.  He believes this because it states Montgomery “View Estates” Sub-Division instead of just Montgomery Sub-Division.  

Councilor Navetta said the CC&R’s suggest this road may or may not need to be improved.  She said it mentions irrigation facilities, entrance monuments, sidewalks, dwellings not exceed 2 ½ stories in height (she said a # would be better), incinerators, and many mentions of the City of Eugene .  She said it’s not well thought out and not acceptable.  

Councilor Howison said a number of concerns were mentioned in the pre-application conference of 10-15-2007 .  He said there was a high erosion potential mentioned because of the steep slope.  He said the road impact with the lake needed to be addressed.  He said an engineer report was required and a separate storm water drainage plan would be required because of slopes greater than 12%.  He said there was a need for higher design standards.  He said there were rules for tree maps and maximization of conifers.  He said none of these details were addressed in the final application.  He said, the traffic impact study was not submitted with the applicant saying this was needed housing and it was not necessary.  Councilor Howison said they had a false basis because Dunes City had a small population.  He said a reforestation or a re-vegetation plan was required after logging.  He felt this had not met the standards for approval.  

Councilor Curran said as of July 1, the following pieces of information were not supplied to this particular property dwelling. 

Number 1:      an erosion control plan that's required by DCC141.004 (A). 

Number 2:      proof of substantiated assurance of the availability of water to all proposed building lots as required by DCC155.4.3.110 (B), and ORS                   92.090(4). 

Number 3:      Evidence of contact with Lane County to acquire access permission to Clear Lake Rd. as required by DCC 155.4.3.130(B)(3)(l). 

Number 4:      A licensed engineer's documentation of the safety of all the developments proposed on slopes in excess of 16% as required by the                      DCC section 155.4.3.140(A)(5). 

Number 5:      The application for phased development of lots 19 and 20 as required by DCC 155.4.3.120(E)(2)(d) the applicant states that the owner                         intends to further divide lots 20 and possibly lot 19 in the future with a planned unit development application.  Councilor Curran said with this definite statement included in the preliminary permit application this can be reasonably considered a phased development.

Number 6:      This impact study as required by DCC 155.4.1.6(B)(2)(d) mean that this application as stated, some of the information was supplied but at this time (by the writing of this document, at least as of July 1) no such information exists as part of the application materials.  Councilor Curran stated this is not his information but rather, it's from the applicants' lawyer.  

Mr. Allen clarified the pre-application conference report from 10-15-07 by Hilary Dearborn from LCOG was given to the Council.  He also said Ms. O’Dea placed a lot of her response on standards and criteria of “clear and objective”.  She said the reasoning was that this is single-family housing and is defined as needed housing.  Mr. Allen said this is for purposes of population over 2500 persons.  Dunes City is less than 2500 population so her reasons do not apply to this City.  

Councilor Howison questioned the past comment of mobile homes and Mr. Allen said that possibly Ms. O'Dea said this in jest.  

Councilor Navetta said she was concerned over septic systems.  She did not see clear tests done for this.  She said perk tests were not done and Dunes City ground is sensitive.  She said her concerns for water resulted in no response from the applicant or their attorney.  She said in last sub-divisions, sprinklers or fire retardant roofs were required.  This was not addressed and she feels the applicant did not do all of their work.  

Mr. Allen said he could discuss any of the issues with the Council and reassured them he is happy to help.  

Councilor Koehler asked him to elaborate water as surface, or subterranean.  He expressed concern of streams and high and/or steep slopes.  He asked if this should be required in an engineering report.  

Mr. Allen said he did not have the technical expertise to answer this.  He said he could address the code standards.  He said the Council needs to decide if the information provided by the applicant is sufficient for a decision.  

Mayor Hauptman asked if this would have come up in an environmental impact report.  

Mr. Allen said this is a type III quasi-judicial procedure.  There is a requirement of information.  He said the impact study is a study that should quantify the impact of the development.  He said by not providing it, the Council needs to decide if they would have needed this to make an informed decision.  He said the Council needs to make this finding and state it clearly if they truly believe this to be so.  

Mr. Allen said another information item not provided were two traffic studies.  He said the attorney acknowledged in a previous message that they would provide this information but they never did.  He said the other study was a traffic impact study that was not provided and justification was not provided as to why they did not submit it.  

Mr. Allen brought forward the question of maximizing conifer preservation.  He said the applicant and the staff reports are inconsistent.  He reiterated the types of standards that are required and gave case examples.  

Mr. Allen then said these are items the Council needs to question to base their decision.  

Councilor Curran said this area was logged/clear cut.  He read the Forestry Department rules.  He said he did not see any reforestation plan.   

Mr. Allen said he cited an Oregon administrative rule saying that if a property owner has logged the property, it’s subject under the Department of Forestry.  If the owner wants to exempt themselves from the Dept. of Forestry, they need to show proof of land use changes.  He said this has not been granted as of yet by Dunes City and the owner is still required to follow the Dept. of Forestry rules.  If there were an approval by Council, the code provisions would change after notification to the Forestry Department.  

Councilor Howison asked when the DCC 154.06 re-vegetation of cleared areas plan would kick in and Mr. Allen said it would kick in after approval.  Councilor Howison clarified that part of the approval would be that they would need to re-vegetate.   

Mr. Allen said that technically the Department of Forestry still has jurisdiction until the change of land use is approved and then the City code would kick in.  This could be applied as a condition, but it should have been discussed between the applicant and the City, or at least worked on before the decision phase.  He said the Council could consider it though.  

Mayor Hauptman asked for re-forestation timelines.  Mr. Allen said he would have to look into it.  

Councilor Curran questioned a letter from the office of Bill Kloos where they state logging had occurred on the property recently and because of the pending sub-division application it is considered by the State Forestry Department to have been removed from it's jurisdiction.   

Mr. Allen said the City has not received any notification that this property had been removed from the State Department of Forestry jurisdiction.  He said the Oregon Administrative Rules state the exemption to be removed from the Department of Forestry jurisdiction occurs when the property owner submits the approval for the land use change and any other relevant permits.  

Councilor Curran read another statement from a letter from the office of Bill Kloos dated July 1st 2008 .  It said the property was re-seeded with grass 4 years ago after it was logged and no soil erosion is occurring.  Councilor Curran said grass is really not trees.  He questioned how they know about the soil erosion.  He said it say "see soils report for the engineers report" which the Council hasn't seen.  He said the Council should refuse it.  

Mayor Hauptman asked about stumps.  Councilor Howison said the excavation and grading permit was dated after they said they removed the stumps.  

Mr. Allen read an administrative rule regarding the Department of Forestry and exemption to re-forestation.  He said, the land owner can request an exemption for re-forestation requirements under the Department of Forestry, but, in seeking that exemption approval from the Department of Forestry, the land owner has to provide written documentation to the State Forester that the intended change of land use is authorized under the local land use and zoning ordinances and all necessary permits and approvals have been obtained.  He said City hasn't administrated approval.  He said it also states, or, will be obtained within 12 months following the reduction of tree stocking.  

Councilor Howison said the applicant has not provided appropriate documentation.  He said there should be a document of exemption to re-forest with the State Forestry Department.  

Councilor Koehler said he is looking at 20 points of conditions that have not been met.  He said the amount of time taken so far is a tremendous drain on a town with no tax base.  He questions, “What does Dunes City get?”  He said the presentation is inadequate and it’s absorbing more time when better things for the City could be done.  

Councilor Navetta agreed with Councilor Koehler.

Mr. Allen explained the level of specificity needed for the final written order.  He made note to his memo submitted 07-14-08 .   

Councilor Howison asked if there were any more justifications for denial.  Mr. Allen said he tried to lay out the standards such as surface water and transportation.  He said they need to look at what was provided and what wasn’t provided.  He said statements are not the same as information provided. In addition, the Council needs to decide whether they feel they have sufficient information for a decision.   

Councilor Navetta stated she spent a lot of time on the maps.  She said the attorney for the applicant said there were not significant wetlands.  She said she looked at soil suitability and development suitability maps.  She said a lot of caution needs to be used because of the steep slopes and the wetlands.   

Mr. Allen said the variance also needs to be looked at and should be looked upon as part of the overall application.  

Councilor Howison clarified the decision of the variance and Mr. Allen replied.  

Councilor Navetta said in looking at the variance, a couple of areas of the road are on steep slopes and the City would need to maintain it.  

Councilor Curran said he believed the variance was another reason the application should be denied.  

Mr. Allen said if the variance would not be allowed, the applicant submitted an alternate plan that would meet the block length requirements.  

Councilor Howison wanted to clarify the wording for a motion and Mr. Allen responded.  

Councilor Howison said he thought they were prepared for a denial but wondered if there needed to be a consensus and reason for denial bundled.  

Mr. Allen said they would make a motion and address the basis for the motion.  

Mayor Hauptman asked if the Council was ready to make a motion.  

Mr. Allen said this is a tentative oral decision.  The final written order will be adopted next week.   

Councilor Howison said he would like to move that, based upon the preponderance of the evidence and also the lack of information and inadequate information as the Council has discussed, such as, inadequate or no impact study, no traffic study, not enough information to maximize conifers, no attempt at providing a storm water drainage plan, a development that involves very steep topography, at least in some areas, requiring higher standards and then not having enough information to really adequately address those concerns, that he therefore moves to deny the Montgomery application.  

Councilor Curran seconded the motion.  

Mr. Allen said those concerns were concerns that were expressed previously in this meeting prior to the motion.  

Councilor Howison amended his motion to state that the concerns he listed were expressed previously in this meeting prior to his motion.   

Councilor Curran seconded the amendment.  

Mayor Hauptman asked for all those in favor of the motion to deny, to signify by saying aye.  At 8:45pm , it passed unanimously.  Mayor Hauptman said the motion to deny carries unanimously.  

City Recorder asked Mayor Hauptman if Mr. Quandt should take his seat.  He said yes.  

The Mayor discussed a date for the final order on or before July 24th.   

Councilor Navetta asked what day Councilor Howison would be there.   

The Council discussed a majority of people available to vote next as opposed to tonight’s attendance.  

Councilor Quandt recused himself again since the discussion was still regarding the Montgomery View Subdivision.  

Councilor Koehler said July 22nd was a good date.  Councilor Howison, Councilor Curran, and Councilor Navetta all agreed this would work.  

At 8:49pm , Councilor Navetta motioned to set the next meeting on Tuesday July 22nd 2008 at 7:00pm .  Councilor Koehler seconded the motion and after unanimous vote, the motion passed.  

9.  New Business  

None  

10.  Unscheduled Items Not Listed on Agenda  

Mr. Allen announced the extension for the Martin vs. City of Dunes City LUBA decision was an extension that was through today so he is anticipating that a decision will be in the mail today and the City should receive it in tomorrow.  

11.  Executive Session  

None  

12.  Adjournment  

Councilor Curran moved to adjourn the meeting.

Councilor Quandt seconded the motion and after unanimous vote, the meeting adjourned at 8:51pm .

 

Respectfully Submitted,

Lisa Ekelund  Planning Secretary