FEBRUARY, 2002 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES:

1.    ROLL CALL: Chair Balen called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Chair Balen and Commissioners Meatzie, Hauser, Cutter and Cvar answered the roll. Commissioner Uhl was absent.
2.    CITIZEN COMMENTS AND CONCERNS: None.
3.    COMMISSION COMMENTS AND CONCERNS: Commissioner Cvar expressed a concern regarding the availability of the packet materials. He would like to see the packets ready by Wednesday of the week prior to the meeting. Following a brief discussion, staff noted that future packets will be mailed to him as they are to other members of the Commission. Chair Balen noted that he had missed the last meeting, but felt that the Commission had performed admirably in his absence.
4.    MINUTES: The Commission considered the minutes from the January 22, 2002 meeting. Commissioner Cutter moved to approve the minutes as submitted, Commissioner Meatzie seconded. The motion carried, with Commissioner Cvar abstaining due to the lack of time to peruse the material.
5.    CORRESPONDENCE: Mr. Thompson noted that he had received a meeting packet for the upcoming Urban Growth Boundary hearing at the County on February 25, 2002, at 7:30 p.m. for the County's approval of the City of Waldport proposed Urban Growth Boundary expansion. Copies will be made for any interested Commission member.
6.    PUBLIC HEARING: Chair Balen opened the continuation of the Public Hearing, noting that all requirements for ex parte contact, etc. from the previous meeting still applied. Mr. Thompson indicated that the requested material had been included in the packet materials. Chair Balen noted that the reason that the hearing had been held over was to provide the requested material, and asked if there was any further information to be provided. Mr. Thompson stated that two building permits had been previously taken out, but additional building had taken place without appropriate permitting. The County had inspected the situation, and had found that the carport had been enclosed and additional rafters installed on the west side of the house. Chair Balen noted that the permit was originally issued for a one-bedroom house with carport, and a subsequent building permit had been obtained to install a roof over the existing parking slab. Enclosing the parking area was not included in the permit, and Mr. Thompson stated that, according to the City's ordinance, the amount of structural change would require an additional building permit. Mr. Thompson showed photos of the existing structures. Chair Balen mentioned that the slab now has plates installed to receive wall studs. Commissioner Cvar asked about the amount of space between the drain field and the existing house. Mr. Thompson noted that when the drainfield was established, it was 84' from the eastern end of the property to the septic tank. That leaves an area of approximately 84'X75' to build in. Commissioner Cvar indicated that his calculations showed about 40' between the house and the drainfield. Mr. Thompson noted that the rafters were not included in that calculation. Commissioner Cutter confirmed that the covered addition was originally the carport. Mr. Thompson stated that the required setback between the septic tank and the house had to be 10'. Chair Balen noted that it appeared there was about 24' for a garage to be constructed between the house and the septic tank, which could meet the required setback from the street, if all the dimensions were correct on the submitted drawings. He stated that he would like the owners to have an opportunity to express themselves at this time.
   Ms. Wentworth noted that the area in discussion was her front porch, directly off her living room, and would require removal of trees as well, and asked that the Commission consider this in their deliberations. Chair Balen noted that, although there were no expressed objections to the two-car garage, there must be another way to put in a garage and comply with the conditions of the law. He expressed concern that the slab was poured before the plan was considered. Ms. Wentworth noted that they probably been hasty in putting in the slab, but also pled with the Commission to consider the aerial photographs and the nature of the neighborhood, and asked that they visualize how the garage would look in conjunction with the other houses in the neighborhood. Mr. Peterson noted that, according to the aerial, the area they were proposing to install the garage was the best area to put it in. He felt this was a good common-sense solution to the existing situation. Chair Balen closed the public hearing again, and reopened the deliberations.
   Commissioner Hauser expressed concern regarding the pros and cons, noting she could go either way. Commissioner Cvar agreed with Mr. Peterson that the proposal was a common-sense solution to the problem, but stated that the Commission was there to uphold land-use laws. The variance questions have to be answered affirmatively before a variance can be granted, and unfortunately, they did not have enough "yeses". Commissioner Cvar felt that he would have to vote to deny. Commissioner Cutter asked what would happen if the request was turned down, Mr. Thompson indicated the decision could be appealed to the City Council. Commissioner Cutter noted that he also would like to allow them to build the garage, but felt that the hardship did not exist to grant the variance. His concern was that the existing carport had been converted into extra living space, and preparation of the slab for construction was continuing. He stated that, although the proposed area was as good a place as any to put a garage, it did not meet the standards required by the Code, and those standards could be met without a variance. He encouraged the applicant to consider breaking, moving or finding other uses for the slab, and to find an alternative site for the garage that would meet the Code requirements. Commissioner Meatzie concurred. Commissioner Cutter then moved to deny the request. Commissioner Cvar seconded. The motion to deny carried unanimously on a voice vote. Mr. Thompson informed the applicant of the appeal process.
7.    OLD BUSINESS: None.
8.    NEW BUSINESS:
   A.    Findings, Conclusion and Final Order for Time Extension Request - Whispering Woods: A brief discussion ensued. Mr. Thompson clarified that the property went on the market the week following the last Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Cutter moved to approve the findings, Commissioner Hauser seconded, and the motion carried unanimously on a voice vote.
   B.    Planning Report: Mr. Thompson reviewed his submitted report. He noted issuance of a couple of letters regarding debris and garbage in a storage shed. Also, an abandoned vehicle off of Range Drive had been reported, and the property owner would be notified. Chair Balen asked about the new structure on the Waldport Ready-Mix property, Mr. Thompson noted it would be for storage, and this was an outright permitted use. Mr. Thompson also reported receipt of a $4000 grant from the State to implement the Riparian Ordinance, and to provide information and training to developers. He noted that he had his first referral from the County, for property in the UGB adjacent to Corona Court/Range Drive area. Mr. Thompson had to review the site with the individual doing the clearing. He had also had two inquiries from citizens about whether their property was within the riparian area, and had reviewed and corresponded with them.
9.    ADJOURNMENT: At 7:25 p.m., there being no further business to come before the Commission, Commissioner Hauser moved to adjourn, Commissioner Cvar seconded. The motion carried unanimously on a voice vote.

Back To Planning Minutes
Home