[0:01] Well, it is 702. So, we'll go ahead and get started. Welcome, everyone, to this evening's council special meeting. I'd like to start off with a call, the meeting to order with Maggie. Maggie, if you would do roll call for us, please. Councillor Diaz. Here. Councillor Tracy. Here. Councillor Mahoney. Here. Councillor Sharp. Here. Councillor Morton. Here. Councillor Hawk. Here. Councillor Vance. Here. Thank you. That's everyone. Great. Thank you, Maggie.

[0:30] The item number one on the agenda this evening is in order to adopt amendments to the Community Development Department fees schedules with the effective date of September 22nd, 2026.

[0:42] The fiscal 2027 budget proposed to amend and increase permitting fees associated with the applications administered by the Community Development Department.

[0:52] The purpose of these proposed fee increases is to generate an additional $100,000 in non-property

[0:59] tax revenue annually.

[1:01] The primary focus of the amendment is to update fees that have not been increased in 24

[1:06] years.

[1:07] More modest fee adjustments are being proposed to fees that have been updated more recently.

[1:14] The amendments have a proposed effective date of September 22, 2026 to allow a week of

[1:21] time to update forms, website pages, and accounting systems.

[1:25] A public comment period has been included with this item, so before bringing this back

[1:30] to the council, I'd like to extend an invitation to anyone who's attending in person who would

[1:34] like to speak to this item, you have three minutes if you introduce yourself.

[1:42] And not seeing anyone in person like to extend that invitation to anyone who's attending remotely

[1:47] if you would raise your hand,

[1:53] not seeing any hands raised, we're going to bring this back

[1:56] to the council. Again, this is, or to adopt amendments, the community development department

[2:00] fee schedules for September 22nd this year. Does anyone have, I know this is a subject

[2:07] that was brought up in the last council meeting, but wanted to see if there's anyone has any

[2:11] additional thoughts, comments on this item this evening.

[2:16] Yes, Councillor Morden.

[2:18] Thank you, Councillor Hock. I just wanted to maybe point out the importance of building

[2:24] in more regular review of these fees and other fees rather than making sure that we're enforcing

[2:30] or adopting large adjustments after several decades.

[2:36] So just the proposal to make sure that we are more regularly reviewing fees such as this.

[2:44] Great.

[2:44] Thank you, Councillor Mornin.

[2:45] Mornin for bringing that point up.

[2:48] Anyone else have any comments, questions at this time, we're hurting these amendments.

[2:59] Okay. Not seeing any other comments, I will go ahead and then ask for a motion to order adopt amendments to community development department fee schedules, again, effective dates September 22nd.

[3:14] Do I have a motion?

[3:16] So moved, Councillor Vance, to have a second, Councillor Sharp.

[3:21] So all those in favor, and in order to adopt amendments to the Community Development Department

[3:25] fees, again effective dates of number 22, 2022, all of those in favor, and that is unanimous.

[3:35] That closes out item number one.

[3:37] We're now moving on to item number two on the agenda.

[3:42] Thank you.

[3:44] Item number two on the agenda is Route 1 and Route 88 intersection discussion.

[3:49] The town of Falma is considering moving forward with preliminary engineering for improvements

[3:54] at the intersection of Route 1 and Route 88.

[3:57] This intersection has previously been studied by the town, the Portland area, comprehensive

[4:02] transportation system, otherwise known as PACS, and the main department of transportation.

[4:08] As part of the fiscal year 2027 budget review, $300,000 was placed into the Route 1 South TIF budget for preliminary engineering for the Route 1 slash Route 88 intersection.

[4:21] Staff have developed a request for proposals for interested engineering firms to review and apply.

[4:28] Public comment period has not been included with this item, so we're going to go ahead and bring this back to the council.

[4:42] That would be great.

[4:44] Thank you, Adam, for being here.

[4:47] Of course, thank you.

[4:48] Adam calls the long range planning director.

[4:51] This is a long plan for part of the town and our planning

[4:58] efforts to make safer bike and bed and transportation network.

[5:04] If I could take like real two minutes real quick, I did a group

[5:09] bike ride for the first time as part of our bike bed planning last week.

[5:12] and I just want to thank the police department, Sergeant Terrio, who was our sweeper in his bike,

[5:18] that the participants there loved, that he was able to help us have a safer bike ride.

[5:24] We got the full treatment, it did not ask for it, but the police were there, we had two cruisers,

[5:28] the block, we had one or two left hands, we had to make left hand turns.

[5:32] And so, if you can never get a police escort on a bike ride, I recommend it.

[5:36] But I know we don't always have that, thus we need to talk about safer infrastructure.

[5:40] We had about 18 people join us for their ride, had a good conversation at a couple of points and just did a little mini loop around families.

[5:47] So thank you very much for all sort of public works, forgive me, my best that maybe look very official.

[5:53] And police and fire were on the ready, but thankfully we did not need them.

[5:57] But yeah, trying to do some more outreach for our bike, bike ped efforts.

[6:01] This intersection actually was in the, is in the 2016 bicycle pedestrian plan if you look there.

[6:09] We have two maps in that document with one with the pedestrian, one with the bicycle.

[6:13] It's both in there.

[6:14] And it just poses the question of whether there should be a round about there because

[6:18] it was studied previously about doing an intersection here.

[6:22] So in 2016, there was kind of a temporary measure as it was discussed in the project to make

[6:33] it what it is today where there's – we had some excess ride away after a federal highway

[6:38] a safety study back in 2014.

[6:41] And so that excess right away added some more,

[6:45] well, constrained the lanes,

[6:47] but added some more bicycle-only infrastructure

[6:51] that kind of exit you can take off to route 88

[6:53] if you're coming northbound,

[6:55] and then the path that links back over across the median.

[6:58] But it is a bit busy.

[7:00] Then there's a number of turning movements

[7:01] that are in that median right now.

[7:04] If you look at it now and just with the support

[7:06] of roundabout infrastructure that we've seen,

[7:09] including what we've seen in the town already

[7:11] at middle and longwoods, it kind of screams around about.

[7:16] But we don't know that 20 certain degrees.

[7:19] So the next phase would be to engineer

[7:23] that particular intersection.

[7:26] So after those improvements were put in,

[7:29] there was a subsequent study that the town participated

[7:32] associated with the Portland area conference of translation system that looked at the complete,

[7:38] it was called a complete streets plan for the North of Portland corridor. So

[7:41] it was us and Kamala Nyarmeth and I think in the free port. And

[7:46] that's where that roundabout concept came from, from the engineers on that study. And

[7:53] so one of the, you know, this is a first and foremost, a transportation issue is to figure

[7:59] out is there a safer way to design that intersection that gets people, you know, all users in and

[8:07] out. And we've got some indications from our current surveying from the bike pet plan.

[8:12] People are still making comments about that. Had someone make a comment to say, when cyclists

[8:18] are coming south on 88 into that intersection, there is a little path that you can take. It's

[8:23] marked. It's got the little bicycle paintings that you can take across Route 1. If you're continuing

[8:29] on southbound cyclists don't do that. They use the car lane so they're using the same

[8:34] stop signs and the left turn of events just because they're all unprotected so they're

[8:41] going to be in the lane if you're a serious rider. The pedestrians will use the path so

[8:46] there's just some things to figure out and this has been kind of on the books for a while

[8:51] and then we talked last year during the capital improvement plan you know this kind of

[8:56] landed in the Ruins Health Tiff, and Justin, early with the Public Works Department, and I looked at it.

[9:03] We have our kind of our standard issue, RFP document that's on the agenda, and yeah, I'll answer any questions I can.

[9:16] Great, thank you.

[9:17] Thank you very much.

[9:18] I appreciate this.

[9:20] Anyone on the council have any questions?

[9:23] I'm cosy while we have them here this evening.

[9:28] Oh, yes, Councillor Vance.

[9:30] Thank you, Councillor Hock.

[9:31] Yeah, Adam, I'm very sorry. I missed the ride last week. I hope it went well. It sounds like it did.

[9:37] One of the things I was interested in in this piece was the design of the pedestrian

[9:43] and specifically and the cycling

[9:46] you know areas here and and you know I looked at the diagram from above and I have some idea of

[9:52] how it's going to look but the only other example I have is the route 9 roundabout

[9:56] out, which doesn't really have a pedestrian component. I actually do run that like when

[10:01] I do runs like up to free port and it's, it's pretty dangerous because it has such low

[10:06] visibility from all the vegetation that blocks the sight line and you know, when you're

[10:12] coming around essentially traffic coming, you know, south on longwoods is moving at a pretty

[10:16] good clip and comes at you. For like, it's not as bad, you know, I'm usually just going

[10:21] up middle road and I just follow it to the side. So I'm just kind of curious about how we think

[10:28] about the existing example we have in the town and how we ensure that like the design

[10:34] proposals that come back to us think about you know what's coming here from the perspective of

[10:40] the one example we have in town and then any other sort of things like how can we ensure

[10:45] that that we actually end up with something that that is going to make people feel comfortable as

[10:50] move around. Yeah, I think that the engineering is what will bring those answers to us. We'll

[10:56] figure out the best way to get the sidewalks and the bicycle lanes through. The good thing is

[11:01] those there's already bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure through that area right now. It's

[11:06] just a little awkward and we have a way more right away right there. So different from the long

[11:14] was like we will have bite and head through this area, it just remains to be seen how far

[11:21] out it goes, how closely does it follow kind of the roundabout design? I mean first of

[11:26] all we're going to see if the roundabout works for it, I think it does. There is a lot

[11:30] of right away, there's an existing sidewalk on the southbound side that's intact that goes

[11:35] down. So is that going to need to shift in any way or we can keep that connection, but

[11:42] that things may need to move, but the good thing is there's a lot of right away within

[11:45] there to figure it out.

[11:49] But yeah, the concept plan definitely is way, way higher.

[11:53] I don't think it shows everything that could be in that new intersection.

[11:57] Great.

[11:58] Thank you.

[11:58] I have more questions.

[11:59] But I'll yield if somebody else wants to go.

[12:01] Okay.

[12:01] Thank you, Councillor Vance.

[12:02] I appreciate that.

[12:03] Good points about Councillor Tracy and then Councillor Mahoney.

[12:07] Thank you.

[12:08] Yeah.

[12:08] Yeah, thanks Adam, I'm sorry, the ride gets switched to from Wednesday to Thursday.

[12:14] But I like seeing your figure 21, it's, you know, fun to look back and see that you have

[12:22] this has been a truly a comprehensive conversation and to see all the things that I sort of take

[12:31] for granted now.

[12:32] Well, you know, I mean the sidewalks through that area from the gateway through Falmouth

[12:37] foreside and, you know, the El Island Farm Road area and, you know, looking at all these

[12:44] different steps in the plan that are there that clearly were well thought out and I think

[12:51] are successful.

[12:53] But then you get to that, you know, I live in the flat.

[12:57] So when I walk over and I get to that corner and it's easy.

[13:02] If you're heading north to stay safe on the bicycle side of things, but yeah, when you

[13:08] coming back down south, so I'll be curious to see where the engineering goes for how

[13:18] to do that.

[13:20] And I think there were somewhere else in here, the two opportunities, one, yeah, the alternative

[13:28] of two which doesn't seem to make as much sense. So I appreciate the alternative one.

[13:37] And I think of the road down just south of there where that 3G's auto is. And that road

[13:47] was like similarly two different sides of the road. You were heading north and heading

[13:51] south. And now it's one side of the road and you get that little park area next to the ocean.

[13:58] And I think that has worked out really well for that area.

[14:01] And I think of this somewhat similar to that in that, you know, bringing the two north and south lanes together.

[14:08] Is just clear.

[14:11] Yeah, I mean, well, we, we, through the process, we'd like to have some meetings to figure out.

[14:15] It's kind of an interesting point where, where the infrastructure comes together to the north,

[14:21] you've got the streetscape that was put in, I mean, a little bit to the north, where it's

[14:26] bike lane curbing sidewalk. You know, you have that relief because it's all right there,

[14:30] but to the south side, it's a little bit, you have a little bit more room. So there's

[14:35] traveling, there's the bike lane, then there's a little grassy area, and then there's sidewalk.

[14:40] And so there's room to kind of figure out, is it all going to be separated? Or is there a chance

[14:44] to do kind of what we're talking about on the route north, is maybe it's a wide path. Maybe there's

[14:48] a 8 to 10, 12-foot path, where it's a multi-use to get people through a little safer and a little

[14:55] a little bit more straightforwardly, then you go that way, you go that way.

[15:00] Yeah, I think there's options. So I'm interested to see how creative we can be with it. Great. Councilor Mahoney?

[15:12] Okay. Councilor Vance? Oh, going all the way around here. Yes, Councilor Mort. Thank you. Quick question. I was just curious if I know some of the data that has been used to inform all the work that's gone to date was from 2018-16. I was curious is part of the plan to

[15:33] make sure that we are getting updated numbers in terms of traffic counts, safety, transit

[15:40] needs, things of that nature that we're kind of looking at current state because I believe

[15:43] part of the kind of future state projection was to 2030 and knowing that that's just around

[15:49] the corner, is that part of what we would want to make sure that we're assessing at this

[15:52] point?

[15:52] Yes, we have some updated traffic counts and then we also have Metro's standard bus stop and

[15:58] so we'll work with them to see if they need a shelter, you know, I think that there's

[16:02] bus stop right there there was previously, but it's just a sign. It's nothing you want

[16:11] to hang around in in the rain or anything like that. So there we opportunities to include

[16:16] our partners DOT and Metro to make sure that it's services to all the users. But yes,

[16:23] the update that we do have update travel accounts. And just an icon went back about throwing

[16:27] that tape. We put the table in there from the 2018 study that had the figures. I mean, obviously

[16:31] those costs have gone up. But it does show kind of the split in those scenarios where you

[16:38] want to want to share costs with DOT. So when you're moving forward in a construction phase,

[16:43] which would be later, I mean, we're definitely, this is a partnership with the state.

[16:46] We're going to go to DOT and say, hey, we think we've got a solution here.

[16:49] Let's do it together. So this is not something that would be all in the town.

[16:55] Couple with that, you know, we'd like to stretch our dollar. And we will definitely apply

[17:01] to planning funds that come up with PACS or any other MDOT money that might be available for engineering, you know, as those come up.

[17:12] Thank you.

[17:13] Can't promise those, but, you know, we try for them.

[17:17] Great.

[17:18] Yes, Councillor Scharfe.

[17:19] A couple kind of related questions.

[17:20] And I think we were chatting a little bit at Finance Committee about this referencing back to maybe the last meeting or two meetings ago.

[17:29] So I, you know, conversation related to a different intersection was surprised to hear from, I think it was, was that Department of Transportation that, hey, you know, don't hold your breath, like 10 years, you know, before we're getting to that thing.

[17:44] And so my question would be like, do we have any sense of when this work would actually happen, one, and two, as a non-engineer, does it make sense to do an engineering study today, if the work's not going to take place for 10 years.

[18:01] Well, I can say it's so as part of a number of plans, it's in the, the PACS, so the,

[18:08] the GPCAG does their own kind of comprehensive transportation plan, connect, I think there

[18:13] were a, connect 2050 now, we were, it was connect 2045 now, it's connect 2050.

[18:18] This corridor features heavily, obviously, in those plans.

[18:23] I think this project is mentioned in it, because I think I put it in there.

[18:26] And so, you know, the more the more steps we take, the more real it is to go to DOT and

[18:33] say, hey, this is ready to pull down, you know, any funds they may they may have.

[18:38] I mean, it's about getting ready and I will say that this it's 10 years now that we've

[18:41] talked about this.

[18:42] And so at some point, I think you do have to move on when there is money, you know, available.

[18:49] And, you know, every three years DOT packs and DOT they do their work planning.

[18:53] And so, this is something that if we got engineered, then I would push hard to put it in the next work plan so that it does have some money tied to it.

[19:03] Now, that's a conversation with DOT to figure out what money are they using for this.

[19:09] And so, right now, I don't know what program it would be, but they have many.

[19:17] Yes, Councillor Diaz.

[19:20] I guess, oh, seems like I'm always downer.

[19:27] I guess I just don't understand why we're doing this.

[19:32] This was finished 10 years ago, and 10 years

[19:36] it must have cost a pretty penny as well,

[19:40] and now we're doing it again.

[19:42] That's the part that I'm a little confused by.

[19:45] Were we thinking about redoing it after 10 years

[19:47] when we did it?

[19:51] I wasn't here, but in reading through the materials in the plan

[19:54] And there was mention of short-term when they did the VHB plan that came through when the paving project came through, but I'm not sure.

[20:04] Nathan, maybe you could offer all inside on us.

[20:07] Pretty clear at the time that they saw what is in place right now and that got constructed as a holding pattern, temporary type solution, that they would pursue a more permanent solution later.

[20:20] And

[20:24] so the point is that

[20:30] why are we, what's broken?

[20:33] It's not pretty, I understand, and it can be confusing, and when it was first built, I was confused by it.

[20:39] But now it's been around for 10 years, and using 2018 numbers, it's going to cost $1.7 million, so why do it?

[20:54] I'm happy to defer to Nathan, to answer first, and I just wanted to make a comment.

[21:00] But I

[21:04] think Adam, you referenced bike, pad safety, traffic, traffic safety.

[21:10] I'd have to refer to the report to get into the details of why it was considered.

[21:15] Did you, anything add to your summer that you gave earlier?

[21:19] It's generally considered just an awkward intersection.

[21:22] it's not stabilized, it's less safe than the roundabout that was proposed, but I can get

[21:31] more data on, I mean I think in the past maybe it was a high crash location, I don't know,

[21:36] they do three year lookbacks, I don't know in the last three years if it has been.

[21:41] But those tend to move around, we've had a few intersections that have done that over time.

[21:47] Great. Yes, Councilor Mahoney. So my comment was going to be that I find this as a bike rider,

[21:56] I find this intersection the approach and coming and going far more challenging than anything

[22:05] on 88 by Johnson Road, far more challenging. And I've also anecdotally seen people unable

[22:14] able to navigate that kind of split as you're coming off of 88.

[22:20] So there's the split where you're supposed to stay to the left and then merge into the

[22:23] right.

[22:23] I've seen people go straight across and not do that that merge.

[22:28] I've seen bicyclists who aren't cautious and so there was a couple of close calls.

[22:35] So I mean, from my own perspective, beyond the fact that I'm like the world's number one

[22:41] fan of rotaries. And I think the root nine rotary is probably the best thing that's happened

[22:46] in Phamath for a long time. But I would agree with what Michael said earlier about it.

[22:53] The root nine rotary doesn't get as much walking traffic in that area. But this one certainly

[22:59] does. And so making sure that their pedestrian pieces weaved into this better than at root

[23:04] nine I think is really important. But I do think that this is one where there's a safety

[23:09] I'd be curious to see what the police or DOT has with respect to kind of incident reports on, you know, accidents or whatnot.

[23:21] And so, and I had heard that you like roundabout, so that's, but I guess that's, I guess not,

[23:33] I don't want to spend 1.7 in 2018 dollars, even including whatever help we may get from the state,

[23:45] And understanding that there's two options here, one, it's less expensive, but it doesn't include two acres of public land.

[23:54] I guess I wonder, and I crave for, is there a third alternative where we solve for that problem where,

[24:00] hey, let's just get our heads together, if the problem is people riding their bikes, can we fix that for half a million?

[24:08] Before I jump into just a really expensive project, just I don't know.

[24:18] Yes, Nathan.

[24:19] So going back quite a few years when we were having these conversations but I do believe the intent was to try to do this project with his little taxpayer-funded money, local taxpayer-funded money as possible, and to try to go up the state and federal money, taxes, it's the same thing.

[24:36] but also the council of the time and staff looked at that now surplus DOT right away that could be developed, you know, the sale of that land, the tax revenue from that property could also help pay for it if there was a gap.

[24:54] And it even became, oh, this could be another housing opportunity for the town as well in that area.

[25:00] So, all conversations that I recall where we want to do the intersection, but we don't want to use a lot of local property tax money for it.

[25:11] But we've got to that point now in order to know feasibility and moving forward, you have to invest some money to get some of the answers to that.

[25:19] Right,

[25:24] Adam, I've got a group made just a little quick jump in, too, is that I'm thinking about this from the standpoint of our comprehensive plan, where we've put a lot of focus, a lot of onus around root one and thinking about with this roundabout and thinking about the different channels of transportation, you've got 2.95 there, root one, root 88 going off to the side.

[25:51] even 95 will further out, but just thinking about, again, this is really being this area where we want to really put some real focus around density and really nurturing this downtown village.

[26:05] How do you see this roundabout having any bearing, or maybe it doesn't in terms of kind of helping to kind of funnel traffic as in ways that are going to be conducive toward some of the development goals that we have laid out with our comprehensive plan.

[26:21] and some of the visions that we have moving forward on the road?

[26:23] Well, I think as a potential to make a safer connection to the neighborhoods around that area

[26:28] into the south, up to the Rewon shopping area.

[26:31] I mean, yeah, there's infrastructure in there now.

[26:33] It's a little funky to get through.

[26:36] But, you know, in the RP, I do mention because it was in the report.

[26:41] It was in the concept report for the complete streets plan.

[26:44] It did contemplate the extra right away being available for some type of development.

[26:52] That's kind of secondary in my mind.

[26:54] I mean, you've got to get the right improvements here.

[26:58] If that's what we wish to do is to get the intersection

[27:01] right, that's definitely a bonus.

[27:03] If there's some developable land that comes from that,

[27:06] because there's a lot of right away there.

[27:08] That's land that duty owns.

[27:10] It's not tax.

[27:13] So again, you could have something that could contribute to that.

[27:16] That's a separate process.

[27:17] us. Of course that would be great from the financial perspective of it, which could also

[27:23] just enhance, because that is, you know, it's kind of the tail end, but it's in the growth

[27:27] area for our comprehensive plan. I consider it, you know, part of that rural and south

[27:32] area.

[27:35] Thank you. Let's say I think we had Council of Ants and then Councilor Trace, so thank you

[27:40] Tim.

[27:40] So I mean, to kind of go back to Councilor Diaz's question, I mean, it looks like that

[27:46] part of the FY27 budget review funds were set aside for this specific endeavor in the budget.

[27:53] So it was sort of identified as a priority in the work plan that year,

[27:58] or the kind of Nathan or you someone speak kind of the historicals of like the timeline of why now essentially.

[28:06] So it started out being part of the TIFF development plan after that 2016,

[28:13] at some point I'm going to put in there, and then priorities, especially staff capacity,

[28:20] what they could take along for projects, kept getting, well, we knew we were going

[28:23] to do it right away anyway, because we wanted to give it time for the temporary solution.

[28:31] It made it into the work plan probably three years ago.

[28:34] I think so.

[28:35] We did a presentation here during the work plan.

[28:37] And then it got kicked down the can to the next year.

[28:42] Until finally, it made it into the budget approved this year.

[28:47] When it went to you at work plan, I think you're like,

[28:50] oh, we got to really kind of take this seriously.

[28:54] This is getting real.

[28:56] We actually had the budget authorization.

[28:57] We were ready to maybe even put it out to RFP.

[29:00] And then we kind of scratched our heads and said,

[29:03] the council really hasn't talked a lot about this.

[29:05] Before we start wasting a lot of people's time, let's go visit with the Council to find out if this is still a project, if they want us to take the next step.

[29:14] Did that answer your question?

[29:15] Yeah, thank you. I guess if I can have one brief fall, this is, I'm not sure I know what we estimate the cost of the engineering study is.

[29:23] I see the 300,000 was set aside, but I'm not sure looking through the materials here, where we expect like an engineering study to land.

[29:31] I think the table will call for about 150 for design, something like that.

[29:35] That was a $20 or $20.

[29:36] Yeah, but this, what we're putting out right now is what they call 80% design or preliminary

[29:42] engineering.

[29:43] So.

[29:44] We think it will be less than the budget.

[29:46] I hope it's not 300.

[29:49] I agree.

[29:50] Yeah.

[29:53] Let's see, Councillor Tracy.

[29:55] So the RFP is for preliminary design.

[29:59] Is

[30:00] Is there something in there, you know, to Councillor Diaz's point of something less than around about, you know, some, some, I don't want to say simple, but some simple road adjustments.

[30:22] You know, because this is, we're just talking about the engineering study here. So, could there be, you know, I don't know what, I haven't, you know, seen our people.

[30:29] Yeah, I think there could be, I mean, this is a conversation, the way that this would

[30:35] work is they take the available information that we have, you know, from traffic data,

[30:39] from previous studies, but we're also going to have, we can put, I mean, we do that with

[30:44] these because there's adjacent property owners, there's people who use the road.

[30:48] So could we have an alternative analysis in there?

[30:51] Yeah, I mean, I think that's something that engineers do quite frequently.

[30:54] I don't know what that would look like relative to what's there now, but there could be, I'm

[30:58] not an engineer.

[30:59] But it's something I think we could add in there as a task.

[31:03] Yeah, if I might jump into it might be almost an evaluation too of how it worked for the last eight or nine years.

[31:10] And now that we know how it's working, we could write that up in the RFP,

[31:16] do some discovery in analytics evaluating how it's working and then what would be version 2.0 on the temporary solution.

[31:27] could you get ten more years? I think we could do that. I might want to talk to the

[31:32] PACS about the sequencing of that. It could be even before we go...

[31:38] Will they be biased, right? Oh, no, we want the bigger project, so we're going to

[31:42] show you there's nothing you can do here. Right? I'm not saying they would, they're

[31:46] all good professional companies, but it may be that we go to PACS and say, hey,

[31:51] Could we hire the company that did the report that gave all the options and

[31:56] recommended this to do an evaluation and see how it's been working?

[32:01] That might be a preliminary stop.

[32:03] But we might have to pay for it, but we could use this money, I think, to pay for it.

[32:11] It could be a pre-step.

[32:13] Right.

[32:14] Other questions?

[32:16] The question I have is, again, it says that, yes, staff felt requests for

[32:22] proposal for interested in engineering firms, is there a time frame or kind of what are

[32:30] you kind of hoping from us and kind of when are you hoping to have something solid in

[32:36] terms of your mind, in your mind what's the process moving forward that you are kind of

[32:41] playing with?

[32:43] Well, when we get some direction, we'll drop the RP, it'll take a few months or a few weeks

[32:49] to get responses back, but this wasn't really on a time, obviously it's in the CIP, it's

[32:55] in this year's budget, this will not take a long time for an engineer to do, but we're

[33:01] not chasing some date future.

[33:05] I would like to get back to DOT to see if it's something that they want to do, when that

[33:13] could be programmed into their funding and what program we would need to apply for.

[33:18] And usually some of those are in the late spring, some of those are in the early summer packs has something to that's usually do like August 1st of next year.

[33:27] So the timeline in terms of right now I'm not worried about it because the engineering won't take that long.

[33:34] It's just how we fit it in the calendar because we're going to have to meet and, you know, if we move forward and get people to input.

[33:42] Okay, thank you.

[33:45] Again, we're not looking necessarily for

[33:47] council action this evening.

[33:49] This is really just an opportunity for us to kind of learn a little bit more about

[33:52] this project and kind of where it's at at this stage in the game.

[33:55] Anyone else? Yes, Councilor Vance.

[33:57] Thank you, Councilor.

[33:59] Two questions then.

[34:00] One very boring procedural one, which is that I think when the funding was done,

[34:04] the first time around, packs covered 75%.

[34:07] And so the town of the paying like four, six years, something like that.

[34:13] The $2 million threshold is for what the town ends up paying off of the total project costs.

[34:18] That is correct.

[34:19] Okay, thank you.

[34:20] And then the second piece about the RFP, specifically, you would ask, it was stated in there that they weren't going to contemplate the development of the two-acre parcel as part of the initial work study.

[34:32] Is there any chance that that becomes problematic if there's something structural about the roundabout design or something that affects the developer ability of that parcel?

[34:40] Is there something we need to consider there?

[34:41] I think what we can ask is to delineate, you know, if they've got a movie to engineering, we're going to know kind of the bright lines of where stuff has got to move.

[34:52] So I think in the very end we'd know what area would be available.

[34:55] I just didn't want to move too far forward in that process because DOT kind of has a separate process that they can bring us in later with regard to the disposition or what that becomes.

[35:07] But I think we would know maybe a could get a proposed boundary line out of it, but in

[35:14] terms of like what could go there, I don't see this group doing that, you know, what

[35:19] is the right thing here in terms of a developable piece of property I think that would be the next

[35:25] step with DOT.

[35:29] And I will put a plug-in since someone mentioned around about Council Monty, there are a lot

[35:34] of people that like around about, and if you go to GP COGs webpage you might be able to

[35:38] see it. They did a flash vote, I think, with the surrounding commute. It wasn't us.

[35:41] It was the greater Portland. And they asked some questions around about, and there's

[35:45] a lot. There's like 70% of people who like the roundabouts. So, yeah.

[35:51] Or rotary. I don't

[35:52] know the difference. I should know the difference if there's one.

[35:54] All right. Right. Yes. Councillor Diaz. Any chance that we can get updated numbers on this?

[36:04] I do have to pay, I think, to get those numbers. Oh, OK. Yeah. I mean, part of the preliminary

[36:09] or engineering is where you would get it.

[36:11] That would be it, okay.

[36:12] Yeah.

[36:13] I could try and get tighter numbers on what we think

[36:16] the engineering cost would be.

[36:17] I mean, I know we know what the budget of cost is, right?

[36:19] But I could-

[36:19] Eight years of this economy, though.

[36:22] I don't think double would be out of the reason.

[36:29] All right, anyone else have any comments, questions?

[36:34] So, again, kind of bringing this back a little bit,

[36:36] kind of what the next steps then with regards to this item

[36:39] Is that we would then circle, no pun intended, circle back on this in the next rekind of thinking in October?

[36:51] Yeah, I mean, if we'll get to you as soon as we can, I would like to recommend that because it's already authorized in the budget, technically you've authorized this to happen.

[37:02] We're not going to do it.

[37:04] We structure something in the form of a resolution instead of an order.

[37:07] Basically, that resolves, it gives us authority to move forward in one direction or the other.

[37:12] I'm thinking, two, one would be the temporary route, one would be go right to the RFP.

[37:23] Okay.

[37:24] That's okay.

[37:25] Yep.

[37:26] The comments?

[37:26] Yes, Councillor Diaz.

[37:27] Say that again.

[37:28] So, one resolution, we need to explore a little bit more with PACS, I think, like this idea

[37:34] How can we evaluate how it's been working and is there a little money available or could

[37:39] we spend some money evaluating that and seeing if there are tweaks to the current situation?

[37:47] I would see that as a first step do that and then decide later if you want to do the RFP.

[37:57] But you aren't telling us tonight and I'm not asking you to what your preference is.

[38:03] Some of you may say, you know what, we got to do this to skip the first phase.

[38:08] Or you may all say, you know what, let's, we're not in hurry, Adam's saying we were in hurry.

[38:12] So, let's try the short-term one.

[38:15] Either way, it doesn't require an appropriation because the money's there.

[38:24] Any other last comments, questions of Adam, otherwise, okay.

[38:30] Well, with that then, we'll close out item number two on the agenda,

[38:34] that which now brings us to adjourn.

[38:38] I would ask for a motion to adjourn.

[38:42] I have one.

[38:42] Councillor Tracey, do I have a second?

[38:45] Councillor Morton, all those in favor of adjourning?

[38:48] That is unanimous.

[38:50] Thank you, everyone, and good evening.

[38:51] Thank you.

[38:51] Thank you very much.

2026.09.14 Special Town Council Meeting

Transcript