HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-02-22 Business Meeting Minutes
3. Before the Board was a Public Hearing on Ordinance No. 2010-010, a Text
Amendment regarding Bicycle Parking Standards.
Chair Luke read the opening statement. Regarding disclosures of bias,
prejudgment or personal interest, none of the Commissioners had anything to
disclose.
Ms. Craghead said that the word “bias” should be removed as it has been
determined that someone could be biased on an issue, but still make an
impartial decision.
Chair Luke opened the hearing. Paul Blikstad gave a staff report explaining
that clarification is needed in regard to bicycle parking standards, which are not
consistent at this time. Typically bicycles are seen mostly in resort areas. It
makes sense to clarify where the bicycle parking standards should apply. The
Planning Commission has agreed. It is believed that the standards were
established mostly for quasi-urban areas such as resorts or rural commercial
areas. Other locations have such minimal bicycle activity that the same
standards do not seem to be necessary.
Commissioners Unger and Baney asked if the language could be expanded to
include future locations that might need to meet these criteria. Ms. Craghead
said that it cannot be left open in this manner, but instead has to be more
specific.
The Commissioners feel that it needs to cover potential future locations and
uses so that the applicants will know what might be expected in this regard.
Mr. Blikstad said staff has administered this for seventeen years and feel that
the changes as presented are adequate. Commissioner Luke stated that there is
an increasing use of bicycles and more bicycle-related events, and future needs
must be considered.
No public testimony was offered. The oral portion of the hearing was closed;
the written record was left open and the hearing continued until Monday,
March 15, 2010 at 10:00 a.m.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Monday, February 22, 2010
Page 2 of 8 Pages
Mr. Davenport said there will be no batch plant on the property. He stated that
the weigh master said they will not utilize the site for weighing trucks during
this process.
Leslie Ketrenos and Harry Ketrenos also commented. (A handout was
distributed.) Ms. Katrenos said that ODOT was asked to work with the County
on the alternate site. She thinks they are now using both and not honoring their
word. ODOT said they needed more than three acres, and the Powell Butte site
is eight acres. But it is in a visual management area and the Forest Service uses
part of it. She feels that ODOT is not even considering the area’s residents.
She would like to see the noise permit rescinded for the staging site.
Mr. Ketrenos added that he wants to know if this would generate any real cost
savings. He does not think they are making a good effort to locate another site.
There seems to be a dual set of standards in regard to visual corridors.
Darrell Barnes said that in regard to the comment about bike lanes, he would
like to see them for safety reasons. He feels that they have the funding to do
this.
No other testimony was offered.
Commissioner Baney asked about the alternate site, the old highway. Mr.
Davenport stated that they did not consider it. There are four prospective sites
already.
The night work to be done was within the city limits, but now that funding
allows for a longer portion of the road to be done, the County needs to allow the
noise generated by the paving. If additional funding does not come in, they
need to stage close-in. If more funding is available, they need to have a site
ready. The City is agreeable to this project.
The Powell Butte site is still available for contractors for their use during the
day. If equipment is parked there, it could be at use during the day.
Chair Luke asked if the Board could require the use of an alternate site. Ms.
Craghead replied she is not sure how they can revoke a previous permit, Mr.
Raguine stated that the Board cannot revoke the permit for the work being done
in the City. The contractor would not use the site for half the project.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Monday, February 22, 2010
Page 6 of 8 Pages
Commissioner Luke said that the work needs to be done. The State did look at
the County’s location and he thinks this is the best area for staging.
Commissioner Unger feels that the site should stay in the mix to make the
project work. It’s for thirty days and it needs to be done. Commissioner Baney
feels they need to do as much as they can during normal hours.
Ms. Craghead said there is no revocation process. However, nearby residents
can file an appeal at any time during the work; the work has to be underway.
There is no other way to, in essence, revoke permission.
Commissioner Unger feels that ODOT should be supported for the greater
good, and should be allowed to save money if possible. They need to get this in
place quickly. He feels that too much is being made of the whole issue.
Mr. Davenport said that the paving is anticipated to take twelve days.
Chair Luke closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Baney said that proximity is important to get the work done as
quickly as possible. The Powell Butte site is a problem because of all kinds of
activity in that area that impacts the residents. It will be used during the
daytime anyway, as it is government owned and used already.
UNGER: Move signature of the noise permit.
The motion died for lack of a second.
Ms. Craghead said that a revocation process is not available. There is an appeal
process for residents.
BANEY: Move that Document No. 2010-068 be approved, but Noise Permit
SOP 09-1 be revoked, contingent upon approvals being obtained to
use the 27th Street site, with use of the Powell Butte site being
reinstated if said approval cannot be obtained.
LUKE: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
UNGER: No. (Split vote.)
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
Commissioner Unger said that this is making it too complicated for ODOT to
do its work.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Monday, February 22, 2010
Page 7 of 8 Pages