Council approves first reading of annexation for 59.6-acre Golf Club Road site after split vote

The Stayton City Council approved on first reading Ordinance No. 26-002 on a 3–2 vote to annex three parcels totaling about 59.6 acres along Golf Club Road and rezone them to medium‑density residential.

The ordinance, as presented by staff, would bring the parcels inside the city boundary and establish zoning that allows single‑family homes, duplexes and triplexes. "This matter comes before the city council tonight as a public hearing following review by the planning commission and their recommendation on the annexation request," said Jennifer Cicilliano, the community and economic development director, who described staff findings that the application meets statutory annexation criteria.

Applicant representatives said the site could ultimately support roughly 126–130 lots, would preserve natural resources along its eastern edge and would be served by an extended 12‑inch water main. "We will be building a leg of the collector through this project from Golf Club Road to the east," the applicant's representative said, adding that detailed design and traffic mitigation would be addressed in future subdivision review.

Several residents opposed annexation during public testimony, urging the council to consider fiscal and infrastructure impacts. Carl Gomel, who said he has lived on Golf Lane since 1985, submitted written slides and told councilors the proposal "does not satisfy the adequate public services criteria," citing alleged shortfalls in stormwater and school funding and predicting additional flood risk to Mill Creek.

Councilors pressed staff on wastewater capacity and the assumptions in the city's master plans. Public works staff said the city's wastewater plant typically discharges about 1–1.5 million gallons per day and that a development of the scale described would be a relatively small addition to that total, but acknowledged some line‑size and inflow/infiltration issues exist in older parts of town and would be reviewed in detail at development stage.

Several council members voiced reservations about relying on older buildable‑lands inventories to show "community need." One councilor said the city has vacant buildable land and questioned whether the additional acreage is necessary now; another said the annexation decision must be based on the approval criteria in the municipal code and on evidence in the record.

Councilor Sims moved to approve Ordinance No. 26‑002 as presented by staff. The motion passed 3–2 (Hayes and Ort voted No; Patty, Carrie and Sims voted Yes). Because the vote was not unanimous, the ordinance will return for a second reading at the council's next regular meeting.

If approved after the second reading, any future development on the parcels would require separate land‑use review and approvals for subdivision, stormwater, transportation and utility improvements, at which time detailed traffic studies and mitigation, sewer capacity analyses and other technical reviews will be required.