Www.ci.sisters.or.us



City Planning Commission MinutesThursday, October 18, 2018– 5:30 P.M.City Hall Council Chambers, 520 E. Cascade Avenue, Sisters, OR 97759Chairman: David GentryCommissioners:Jeff Seymour, Cris Converse, Art Blumenkron, Jack Nagel, Daryl Tewalt, Bob WrightCity Staff:Patrick Davenport, CDD Director, BreAnne McConkie, Principal Planner, Garrett Chrostek, City AttorneyVisitor:Sue Stafford, Nugget NewspaperRecording Secretary:Carol Jenkins CALL TO ORDERChairman Gentry called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.II.ADOPTION OF AGENDACommissioner Nagel made a motion to accept the Agenda for Thursday, October 18, 2018 as proposed. Commissioner Blumenkron seconded. Motion carries.III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – May 17, 2018, August 16, 2018, September 20, 2018.Vice Chairman Seymour made a motion to approve the May 17, 2018, August 16, 2018, and September 20, 2018 minutes as presented. Commissioner Converse seconded the motion. Motion carries.IV.VISITOR COMMUNICATION – NoneV.PUBLIC HEARINGS – 5:30 PMTA 18-02 Development Code text amendments for Marijuana - Related Businesses: Amendments to the SDC text establishing land use regulations for Marijuana Businesses including retail sales, production, growing, processing, wholesaling, research, and testing of marijuana. Adding new section: SDC Chapter 2.15.2800 Special Provisions – Marijuana Businesses; Adding new definitions: Chapter 1.3: Definitions; Adding new uses: Table 2.4.1 –Downtown Commercial District, Table 2.5.1 –Highway Commercial District, Table 2.6.1 –Light Industrial District, and Table 2.14.300A –North Sisters Business Park District.TA 18-03 Development Code text amendments for Short Term Rentals (Vacation Rentals).Amendments to Chapter 2.15.2700 Special Provisions – Vacation Rental Housing UnitsRevising definitions: Chapter 1.3 Definitions Revising related uses tables: Table 2.2.1 Residential District; Table 2.3.1 Multi-Family Residential District; Table 2.4.1 Downtown Commercial District; Table 2.51 Highway Commercial District; Table 2.9.1 Urban Area Reserve District; Table 2.13.300.A Sun Ranch Residential District; and Table 2.14.300.A North Sisters Business Park District.Chairman Gentry read the Rules for Conducting a Public Hearing at this time.Chairman Gentry asked the Planning Commission to disclose any ex-parte contacts, bias, or conflicts of interest. Please indicate the nature of the ex-parte contact, bias, or conflicts of interest, and indicate whether you intend to participate in, or abstain from the hearing. No one came forward. TA18-02 – Marijuana Related BusinessesChairman Gentry asked for staff to come forward and present the staff report on TA18-02.Planner McConkie stated that TA18-02 is an application on behalf of the City as the applicant to amend the City’s Development Code, in order to authorize and adopt standards for marijuana related businesses. The purpose of this Text Amendment is to establish new land use regulations specific to land use regulations and Time/Place/Manner (TPM) through the Municipal Code. These are regulations for retail sales, producing, growing, processing, wholesaling, research and testing of marijuana, and related amendments to the Definitions Chapter and Use Tables. Planner McConkie stated that the purpose of these land use regulations are needed in the event that marijuana businesses become allowed in the City limits as we currently don’t have any land use regulations in the Development Code to regulate marijuana businesses specifically. These were reviewed by the Planning Commission in two (2) workshops back in July and August, and by the City Council in August at two (2) workshops as well. Planner McConkie gave a quick summary of the changes proposed in Text Amendment TA18-02, stating that there is a full text of all of the Development Code, and a detail summary of the proposed amendments in the staff report. Creation of new Special Provisions (SDC Section 2.15.2800) for Marijuana Businesses and establishing permitted locations for different types of Marijuana Businesses (in use tables within existing zones).Industrial Type Uses: Production, Processing, Wholesaling, Testing Laboratories, Researchers – Allowed By Right in LI and NSBP Districts with Special Provisions; Standard provisions for outdoor activities, lighting, odor, and opaqueness; No outdoor grows are allowed in those zones; No spacing requirements between any uses on separate parcels; Default to other OLCC mandated requirements.Retail establishments (including Recreational Marijuana retailers and Medical Marijuana dispensaries): – Allowed in DC and HC by right; 1,000 ft. buffer requirement from schools, public or private from the property boundary; No spacing requirements between establishments (subject to state standards applicable to medical marijuana dispensaries; 114’ buffer from Cascade Avenue right-of-way from Pine to Locust where retail marijuana related establishments would not be allowed to be located ; No special requirements or hours of operation, lighting, or signage; Default to Sisters Development Code on parking, loading, signage, and dark skies lighting; Default to other OLCC mandated requirements.Definitions and Use Tables: Chapter 1.3: Establishing definitions for Marijuana uses; Table 2.4.1: Use Table for the Downtown Commercial District; Table 2.51: Use Table for the Highway Commercial District; Table 2.6.1: Use Table for the Light Industrial District; Table 2.14.300A: Use Table for the North Sisters Business Park District; Table 4.1.200: Summary of Development Decisions/Permit by Type of Decision-Making Procedure.Changes to the City’s Municipal Code related to Marijuana businesses are also proposed including Time, Place, and Manner (TPM) Regulations. The ordinance to adopt Municipal Code amendments related to Marijuana Businesses is tentatively scheduled for a City Council Public Hearing on November 14, 2018, and will run concurrently with the Municipal Code changes.Planner McConkie stated that the applicable criteria which is in the Development Code Section 4.1.600E is the applicable criteria by which the Planning Commission is to make their recommendation tonight and are listed in the staff report. Planner McConkie stated that staff has not received any formal written comments since the initiation of this specific application for TA18-02. Planner McConkie stated that staff is requesting that the Planning Commission review the proposed Text Amendments, hear statements from the participants, and adopt PC Resolution 2018-07 to recommend that the City Council adopt the amendments as proposed. Chairman Gentry asked if the Planning Commission had any questions for staff at this time. None at this time.Chairman Gentry opened the public hearing for public testimony, and asked if anyone would like to come forward and speak on the application TA18-02 at this time. Chairman Gentry asked if anyone would like to speak in favor of the application, speak in opposition, or provide neutral testimony at this time. No one came forward. Chairman Gentry closed the public hearing and asked the Planning Commission if they would like to make a missioner Nagel made a motion to accept TA18-02 as written. Commissioner Tewalt second. Motion carries (7-0).TA18-03 – Short Term Rental Regulations (Vacation Rentals)Chairman Gentry read the Rules for Conducting a Public Hearing at this time.Chairman Gentry asked the Planning Commission to disclose any ex-parte contacts, bias, or conflicts of interest. Please indicate the nature of the ex-parte contact, bias, or conflicts of interest, and indicate whether you intend to participate in, or abstain from the hearing. No one came forward. Planner McConkie stated that TA18-03 is an application on behalf of the City of Sisters to make changes to the City’s Vacation Rental, currently known as Vacation Rental Regulations proposed to be Short Term Rental Regulations. Over the last two (2) years, staff has worked closely with the Planning Commission, City Attorney, and City Council on Text Amendments related to Short Term Rental Regulations. There have been over 10 workshops and multiple public hearings. The previous draft of the Short Term Rental Regulations was included in Text Amendment application TA18-01, but was removed from the final adopting ordinance at the direction of the City Council, and is now coming back at its own standalone as TA18-03. Planner McConkie stated that the full text and detailed summary of the proposed text amendments are provided in the staff report. They are a complete re-instatement of SDC Section 2.15.2700 which is the Special Provisions for Short Term Rentals, proposing a new replacement of the current section, and a number of text amendments throughout related to the Use Tables and Definitions. Planner McConkie stated that the terminology is being changed from Vacation Rentals to Short Term Rentals; Adding a requirement to obtain an STR Operator’s License; Adding a requirement to obtain a Short Term Rental permit for each unit; Clarifying that all STR regulations apply to all residential units including when located in a commercial district.Noticing and Review Type: Establishing STR permits as a Type I application and review process; Removing noticing requirements and availability to appeal to the Planning Commission (appeals possible to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA). Concentration Limits: Establishing concentration limits. Prohibiting new STR’s from locating within 250 ft. of an existing STR (condominiums exempt from the concentration limits).STR Permit Transferability: New STRs (established on or after the effective date of the proposed ordinance): STR land use permit and STR Operator License are specific to the owner of a property and are not transferable when properties are sold; Existing STRs (established prior to the effective date of the proposed ordinance): New owners of an existing vacation rental must submit a complete application for an STR Operator License within 60 days of property transfer in order to maintain the existing use (SMC 5.50.040(C)(3). If an existing owner does not apply within the 60 days, the use will be abandoned per SDC 2.15.2700.H. and be subject to the spacing requirements. Definitions and Use Tables: Modifying the definition of a “Vacation Rental” (VR) to “Short Term Rentals” (STR); Modifying related Tables to reflect changed definition from VR to STR:Table 2.2.1: Use Table for the Residential District; Table 2.3.1: Use Table for the Multi-Family Residential District; Table 2.4.1: Use Table for the Downtown Commercial District; Table 2.5.1: Use Table for the Highway Commercial District; Table 2.9.1: Use Table for the Urban Area Reserve District; Table 2.13.300.A: Use Table for the Sun Ranch Residential District; Table 2.14.300.A: Use Table for the North Sisters Business Park District; Table 4.1.200: Summary of the Development Decision/Permit by Type of Decision-Making Procedure. Planner McConkie stated that there are also changes to the City’s Municipal Code for Short Term Rental Operator’s License, there have not been any substantial changes to that since this body saw it previously, however, there was a draft included in the staff report just for reference in Chapter 5.50 – Short Term Rental Operator’s License. Since the formal initiation of this application, staff has not received any formal written comments, however, it is worth noting because it went through as TA18-01; there were written comments as well as comments in the public hearing and are contained in that file. Planner McConkie stated that there is a detailed analysis of the applicable criteria by which the Planning Commission will need to make their decision on and is located in the staff report. Staff is requesting that the Planning Commission review the proposed text amendments, and adopt PC Resolution 2018-08 to recommend to the City Council that they adopt the amendments as proposed. Chairman Gentry asked the Planning Commission if they had any questions of staff. None at this time.Chairman Gentry opened the public hearing for public testimony, and asked if anyone would like to come forward and speak on the application TA18-03 at this time. Chairman Gentry asked if anyone would like to speak in favor to the application. No one came forward.Chairman Gentry asked if anyone would like to speak in opposition to the application.Tyler Neese – Central Oregon Association of Realtors1435 NE Boston PlaceBend, OR Mr. Neese stated that he has spoken to the Commission on numerous occasions, and has provided testimony, written comments, and letters to both the Commission and City Council on this issue. There have been some concerns throughout this process with the policy that has been proposed. These were initially submitted for TA18-01, and the primary concern is with the transferability component for new permit holders as well as the spacing at this point. While they are disappointed with the policy direction and the process, they recognize the charge that the Planning Commission has from the City Council to come up with something that has the spacing requirements as well as the non-transferability. Mr. Neese stated that they believe there are still some important questions and technical changes that they would like the Commission to consider tonight. Those include first of all – it still seems to be unclear how the City will address the administrative burden that will be placed on staff as a result of having to determine whether properties are eligible based on that spacing as well as the non-transferability piece and knowing how properties change hands during those transactions and keeping track of all those different components that will now be part of the rule moving forward. Mr. Neese asked the Commission to consider whether concentration limit of 250 ft. is appropriate for a community the size of Sisters, and the size of the lots here. The spacing requirement for the City of Bend is 250-ft. and Bend is a lot larger community and a different makeup than Sisters. They would like to ask the Commission to consider revising that concentration limit to 160-ft., or a distance that is more appropriate in keeping with the makeup of the community. Finally, whatever these new rules take, they would ask that the City put together a robust education process because it is going to be a lot for property owners to have to comprehend what exactly is changing, what the requirements are – the 60-day piece, and ask that a lot of effort to put into getting that information out for property owners, and Short Term Rentals owners primarily. Mr. Neese asked if the City would be willing to commit to re-examining the new rules, and the impact 1-year from the effective date of the Ordinance. Basically, looking at whether this has accomplished the Goals that it was intended to accomplish when it was put together, and what is the impact on Short Term Rental owners in the local community.Vice Chairman Seymour asked Mr. Neese how he determine the 160-ft.Mr. Neese stated that basically, it was looking at what some other communities have done and his question is - is there any methodology, or a real formula based on the 250-ft. They were looking at what would be more reasonable based on the lot sizes, and it appears that the average lot size here is smaller, in general, than some of the lot sizes with the 250-ft. rule in other communities. The 160-ft. would not be set in stone from their perspective, they would just request that there could be some consideration to going smaller considering the makeup.Chairman Gentry asked if anyone would like to provide neutral testimony. None at this time.Chairman Gentry asked if staff had anything further to add.Planner McConkie thanked the Commission for their patience since this has been going on long before she was even here, and with multiple meetings on this topic. Secondly, we have gone through an extensive public process on this with over 10 different meetings. Specifically, in response to the 160-ft., we did examine 150-ft. spacing, and that was not recommended by the Planning Commission nor the City Council at that time. Part of it was that originally, we had talked about a cap of 8 percent, and when looking at what those numbers would mean – 250-ft. got us closer to that same percentage cap, and that is where we landed. Planner McConkie stated that she agrees with Mr. Neese in that a robust education process will be needed, something that we are already mindful of, and have started to draft some type of handout materials to really simplify this as much as possible. We need to educate the public with the existing Short Term Rental Operators to let them know what their obligations are in order to come up to the current Code. Staff will be working on this over the next few month and when this is actually implemented, we will have a one (1) page missioner Converse asked about the concerns over the additional workload added to staff. Planner McConkie stated that in some ways by having the Operator’s License, it will be a little bit easier to track and manage these permits. The spacing is relatively straight forward to determine using GIS, and can easily figure out if a property is 250 ft. away or not. With the Operator’s License, there will be some increases in fees, but we have not formalized what that increase will be, but it is anticipated that it would be covered by the administrate staff having a good support team as well. From a land use perspective and for a land use permit, it is no more cumbersome than the current process. Right now, we require noticing and have to respond to every person that has comments, etc. It is the on-going Operator’s License, but also a way to track it more accurately. Commissioner Tewalt asked if the Operator’s License has to be the owner of the property.Planner McConkie stated yes, the owner of the property will have to get the Operator’s License. If there is a 3rd party doing this, they will need to get a Business License, but they won’t have to get an Operator’s License. It will also allow for the 60-days for us to catch up and understand when the properties were actually transferred, etc. There will be a new numbering system and will know automatically if they are an STR permit starting under the new Code. Commissioner Blumenkron stated that the Real Estate Brokers could also help with the education process when a person is listing a house, and they can let any interested parties know that either before or after on the Short Term Rental process. Commissioner Wright inquired about condominium’s being excluded based on the density, and when does that condo become a hotel. There being a hotel in a residential area is in violation of the Code. Planner McConkie stated that we would continue to look at it as a residential use as long as they are owned by individuals and their primary use is residential. We discussed that in length and the City Council agreed that they wanted to see condos exempt. Commissioner Tewalt stated that if somebody bought the entire 4th Sisters Lodge, then he agreed at that point, it would be a hotel. Commissioner Wright stated that is why he brought that issue up and maybe there is a percentage of the units, etc. Planner McConkie stated that this type of scenario is not exclusive to this use either – it happens even in the Light Industrial zone where they are allowed to have 25 percent of retail sales – and at what point does it become more retail than commercial to make a determination of what definition do they better meet, and then it becomes a Development Code issue. If when reading the definitions for a Hotel versus Short Term Rental, if they start to fit more under a Hotel, you essentially have a non-conforming use, or an illegal non-conforming use, and then it goes into enforcement. Commissioner Wright asked if somebody put in an application, or it was determined that somebody is going to buy all of the units, and basically makes it a hotel, it seems that the perspective buyer would have an obligation to go through the Planning process to actually make it a hotel.Planner McConkie stated that they would still need to get a Short Term Operator’s License for each unit, and that would be a pretty big ‘red’ flag for the City asking for 30 licenses for these units – it is a possibility, but it is not likely. We could make that call when they came in for their Operator’s License, look at the land use definition, and decide how they are really functioning – is it a hotel, or primarily a residential use with a secondary use as a Short Term Rental. Chairman Gentry asked if there could be an exam of these permits to track the data and how often.Planner McConkie stated that she would recommend waiting 2-years only because we are not going to make people get Operator’s Licenses until July of next year. It would be interesting to track the data, totally support the two (2) years from now, and seeing how many are being denied, etc. just to see what the numbers are.Planner McConkie stated that the Planning Commission could make a recommendation, it wouldn’t be in the Text Amendments, but it could be more of a policy decision, and that recommendation would be passed onto the City Council. Commissioner Nagel asked if these rules would go into effect once this has been passed, but the Operator’s License doesn’t start until July.Planner McConkie stated that with the Operator’s License – the language from the Municipal Code is tentatively scheduled to go on November 14th to the City Council with this Text Amendment, and that would be effective immediately. We are giving people a grace period to get an Operator’s License, and if you are an existing Short Term Rental, we are giving them 6-months to get one. We want to make sure that we let everyone get their Operator’s License and see how it is really functioning. City Attorney Chrostek stated that it is an administrative issue too, where we want everyone to have the same start and stop date, as opposed to tracking different dates, etc. and everybody is on the same start date. Planner McConkie stated that it also meres the Business Licensing start date too – the fiscal year and helps with the noticing requirements.Vice Chairman Seymour stated that he wanted to make his position clear with respect to the spacing. He stated that he is against the spacing and feels that it takes away from the private property ownership aspect. He doesn’t think it is right for our community, and can’t get behind this at least with the 250-ft. that has been presented tonight. He stated that the Commission has been discussing this for two (2) years, he felt they came up with what they all thought was a viable solution, and Council sent it back to us, and said that they want spacing. Commissioner Nagel made a motion to approve TA18-03 as missioner Wright seconded. Vice Chairman Seymour opposed. Motion carries (6-0). VII.DEPARTMENT STAFF UPDATES AND OPEN DISCUSSION A. Review of recommendations from Community Planning Assistance for Wildfire grantB. New construction and land use applications updateDirector Davenport stated that he wanted to go over the Community Planning Assistance for Wildfire report. This grant was awarded from the Headquarters Economics and implemented by Wildfire Planning International Consultants – CPAW. In the packet is a draft report on some recommendations that these consultants gave when they came to town in two (2) different site visits. They looked at the regulatory environment, Code and Policies, and looked at the built environment as far as what is constructed, natural environment within the built environment, and the critical infrastructure. This report was prepared, available to the public, and is asking the Planning Commission to take a look at what they are recommending for some action to be taken in the future, bundle the Planning Commissions comments, staff comments on everything from grammatical to policy recommendations, Code requirements, and bundle everything together and give it to the City Council. Director Davenport stated that the consultants are going to look at all the comments, and then come back to the City Council for a request to adopt this study on December 12, 2018. He gave a brief summary of these recommendations that are in bullet points on the report, and in the packet for October 18th as missioner Wright asked if this conflicts with the Tree City USA that we have here in the City of Sisters known as the Tree City – what trees can stay and which ones cannot that are flammable, etc.Director Davenport stated a little bit, but that is what part of the report is that we need to align our tree preservation policies versus fuels management. Those are the things that we need to look at in greater detail. It is not necessarily a conflict, but certainly there are different sections that don’t agree with each other very well. To avoid catastrophic wildfire – it would certainly damage and kill trees and that is against what Tree City USA wants us to do. There are certain things in the Code that say you can’t have trees too close, but then it does emphasize tree protection. Director Davenport stated that in the Municipal Code, we do have a Wildland Urban Interface that is not actively enforced now, but we will need the Fire District to help with existing properties as far as property maintenance. Commissioner Converse asked that if this is adopted – there are a lot of areas in town that need a lot of work to be done and how would that happen? If it is adopted would there be a “must do”, and how would it be implemented and enforced.Vice Chairman Seymour asked how it is funded. Director Davenport stated that it would be with staff here, but with existing properties – we have to have the help of the Fire District. They have a good education program and are experienced of going out house by house and giving people the right advice with smoke alarms, and they will access the property if you ask them what the potential risk is of the property, etc. Once it is in the Code, it can be mandatory, but first, it is with education. Commissioner Blumenkron asked if the County is making the final decision on whether this goes through or not.Director Davenport stated yes for Appendix W in the Building Code – it will be their call. The County administers the Building Code, Appendix W is optional, and that was one way to get it on the books.Vice Chairman Seymour stated that this is a really good first step and more than anything, it brings awareness to the community which will have to be consensus building. Sisters is not the only community in the northwest that is dealing with this. There are other communities dealing with this as well and it comes down to funding and who pays for it. It is mainly the existing properties and how do you address that. Director Davenport stated that he would just like the Planning Commissions thoughts on this at this point.A brief discussion took place regarding new construction, flooding, wildfire protection, insurance industries, individual policies, risk management and hazard policies, missioner Converse stated that she thinks it is a good idea to at least get people thinking, start doing something, and by getting educated.Director Davenport stated that the Housing Needs Analysis – we got a grant from the State and still waiting on them to review the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to get the grant project started. Director Davenport stated that the Housing Policy Advisory Board will be doing interviews for the memberships on Tuesday, and Vice Chairman Seymour offered to be a representative for the Planning Commission and except from the interview process. The Council will select the members for that Board, and they will begin working on the Affordable Housing Funding Policy. They will work on some other Development Code Text Amendments and get their take on it as another stakeholder group. Director Davenport stated that on the Housing Works project – the apartments on Brooks Camp Rd. and said they are on track to be occupied by the end of this year, or maybe January. There are 48 units of rentals that are 60 percent lower AMI and they are still taking applications – and it will be a lottery process.Sue Stafford, Nugget Newspaper stated that all of the three (3) bedrooms and two (2) of the two bedrooms are being held in reserve for a particular program that the people specifically qualify for. None of the three (3) bedrooms are going to be available open in the lottery. That is how they got the funding for this project. Director Davenport stated that for residential new construction, there are currently 77 single family units, and we will probably get over 80 before the year end – not quite a record year, but probably a top three (3). Cowboy Court apartments will be starting construction for 22 multi-family units – market rate apartments, and they would like to have them occupied by June of next year. Director Davenport stated that the new City Manager is being recruited and the City Council has nearly finalized a choice, but staff doesn’t know who it is. The new City Manager will be announced on Wednesday night, the 24th. TENTATIVE AGENDA for November 15, 2018 meeting:WORKSHOP: Continue FY 2018/19 Work Plan itemsDirector Davenport stated that they would like to have another workshop next month on Thursday, November 15th at 4:00 pm. A brief discussion took place regarding the Assisted Living Facility, application process, different prices for the units, and that they are about 40 percent filled up. The goal is to have everything open later this winter. There is going to be an Open House on Sunday, the 20th. Director Davenport stated that Hayden Homes continues to build and they have their construction drawings approved and are going to do some work – on the Conditions of Approval that are tied to the apartments – one of the apartment buildings on the south side of Rail Way has to have an occupancy before the first occupancy of Phase VI is issued. He stated that it will take a Site Plan before the apartments can get started. Planner McConkie stated that they have an application in, but it hasn’t been reviewed for completeness because there are some questions on a possible Variance. ADJOURN Chairman Gentry adjourned the meeting at 6:45 pm.Respectfully submitted,Carol Jenkins, Recording Secretary ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download