1
00:00:05,680 --> 00:00:13,280
All right. I call the June 10th, 2026
Planning Commission meeting to order at

2
00:00:10,960 --> 00:00:18,560
6 PM.
Can I get a roll call, please?

3
00:00:15,360 --> 00:00:21,840
» Chair Jana Senova. Simova, excuse me.
>> Here.

4
00:00:19,520 --> 00:00:24,000
» Jeff Sundell
>> here.

5
00:00:22,960 --> 00:00:26,800
» Nicole Hendricks
>> here.

6
00:00:24,880 --> 00:00:29,679
» Matt Constantine.
Rob Candrian

7
00:00:28,240 --> 00:00:31,519
» here. Andrew Carr
>> here.

8
00:00:30,240 --> 00:00:34,559
» Thank you.
>> Excellent. Thank you. And uh please join

9
00:00:33,840 --> 00:00:37,559
me in the pledge of
>> allegiance

10
00:00:40,480 --> 00:00:50,160
to the flag of the United States of
America and to the stands one

11
00:00:48,559 --> 00:00:54,039
indivisible
and justice for all.

12
00:00:58,559 --> 00:01:03,039
All right. For citizen input, this is
the time the citizens have the

13
00:01:01,760 --> 00:01:07,200
opportunity to address the planning
commission regarding any item that is

14
00:01:05,680 --> 00:01:11,119
not already scheduled for a formal
public hearing tonight. Therefore, if

15
00:01:09,520 --> 00:01:15,040
any member of the audience would like to
speak about any work session item or any

16
00:01:13,439 --> 00:01:19,799
other matter of concern, please raise
your hand so we hear from you. Now,

17
00:01:20,080 --> 00:01:25,600
» I do not have anybody online.
>> Okay.

18
00:01:25,840 --> 00:01:34,360
Is is this for now? Okay. Um I do have
Cynthia Russell.

19
00:01:40,640 --> 00:01:48,399
Hello. Uh my name is Cynthia Russell. My
address is on the contact card on file.

20
00:01:46,079 --> 00:01:54,159
Um I just want to say I was on the task
force, the building height waiver task

21
00:01:50,720 --> 00:01:58,799
force committee. It's a long one. Um,
and I I think we had a lot of good

22
00:01:56,880 --> 00:02:04,000
discussion and by the end of it, I think
we came to a lot of we agreed on a lot

23
00:02:01,040 --> 00:02:07,360
of things. So, I'm just excited to see
your guys' discussion and where it goes

24
00:02:05,439 --> 00:02:10,479
with it. And thank you to everyone that
put together all the materials. There

25
00:02:08,879 --> 00:02:13,120
was a lot and all the time stamps and
everything. So, there was a lot of work

26
00:02:11,520 --> 00:02:18,640
that went into it. So, I just want to
say thanks for everyone's effort on it.

27
00:02:17,440 --> 00:02:22,360
» Thank you so much and thank you for
being on the task force.

28
00:02:23,280 --> 00:02:26,280
Okay,

29
00:02:27,200 --> 00:02:37,200
next on the agenda is a work session
for Wilsonville Industrial Land

30
00:02:32,879 --> 00:02:40,160
Readiness for Basalt Creek Master Plan.
This work session is a chance for

31
00:02:38,720 --> 00:02:44,720
planning commission to get additional
understanding of and provide guidance of

32
00:02:42,080 --> 00:02:48,280
on ongoing legislative projects prior to
a public hearing.

33
00:02:50,480 --> 00:02:55,760
So at this time I call for the city
staff to present information they have

34
00:02:53,599 --> 00:02:59,640
prepared for the work session. Will the
city staff please present?

35
00:02:59,920 --> 00:03:02,920
All right.

36
00:03:16,959 --> 00:03:19,599
» Oh, you're right.

37
00:03:23,599 --> 00:03:26,800
get started.
>> Yeah.

38
00:03:24,400 --> 00:03:31,680
» Thanks. Okay.
>> Good evening, chair, commissioners.

39
00:03:29,280 --> 00:03:35,280
» Appreciate your time this evening. Uh,
you know, so tonight's kind of a cool

40
00:03:33,120 --> 00:03:38,959
night for us. This is actually a a kind
of a milestone moment in the Basalt

41
00:03:37,200 --> 00:03:44,319
Creek master plan process that we've
been involved in. Um, it's been over two

42
00:03:41,519 --> 00:03:48,879
years. And uh tonight really begins
tonight's work work session begins a

43
00:03:46,400 --> 00:03:52,799
five-month adoption process as we move
to toward finishing up this project. So

44
00:03:51,519 --> 00:03:56,159
it's a pretty uh it's a pretty cool
night for us in the planning department.

45
00:03:54,000 --> 00:04:01,120
We're pretty excited. So before I get
too far into it, um tonight with me I

46
00:03:58,879 --> 00:04:06,319
have uh Lauren Scott from MIG, one of
our consulting firms, Alex Dupy as well,

47
00:04:03,599 --> 00:04:10,640
also from MIG. And joining us at some
point in time will be um Jenna Bogurt

48
00:04:08,879 --> 00:04:14,799
from DKS who does our transportation
analysis. So, we should have her online.

49
00:04:12,720 --> 00:04:21,919
So, um keep an eye out for her. She'll
be in. Perfect.

50
00:04:17,440 --> 00:04:26,400
Um so, let's see. Couple things here. Um
where was I? I lost my notes. Uh so,

51
00:04:24,320 --> 00:04:30,880
again, over the past several years, um
the city, the community, um our

52
00:04:28,560 --> 00:04:35,040
consulting firms, developers, property
owners, we've been involved in the in

53
00:04:32,880 --> 00:04:38,639
what was at one time known as the
Wilsonville Industrial Land Readiness

54
00:04:36,960 --> 00:04:42,240
Project, right? We've sort of morphed it
now. It's it's the Basalt Creek master

55
00:04:40,400 --> 00:04:46,800
plan is the outcome of those of that
project and of the West Railroad um

56
00:04:44,400 --> 00:04:51,360
study. And so here here we are um
starting this process. Now Basalt Creek

57
00:04:49,440 --> 00:04:56,560
represents one of the largest uh
remaining employment opportunity areas

58
00:04:53,280 --> 00:05:01,280
in Wilsonville um as well and it really
provides us a unique opportunity to look

59
00:04:59,440 --> 00:05:07,199
forward for future industrial and
employment growth um and to do so in a

60
00:05:04,639 --> 00:05:12,240
coordinated manner. Right? So through
this process we've been able to examine

61
00:05:09,120 --> 00:05:17,600
transportation needs uh environmental
resources infrastructure requirements uh

62
00:05:15,199 --> 00:05:21,280
economic development opportunities and
really doing so in a framework that will

63
00:05:19,759 --> 00:05:25,039
help us guide you know future
development in this area for decades to

64
00:05:23,199 --> 00:05:30,639
come. So it's a it's a it's a pretty
cool and big deal. Um so as we get into

65
00:05:27,840 --> 00:05:34,639
this looks like we are do you advance?
You probably have to advance. Thank you.

66
00:05:32,639 --> 00:05:39,759
So tonight's discussion, we're going to
focus on three main components of the

67
00:05:36,400 --> 00:05:44,080
draft master plan. The actual master
plan itself, the document. Um there are

68
00:05:42,479 --> 00:05:47,919
some comprehensive plan amendments in
your packet that I'll have some slides

69
00:05:45,840 --> 00:05:52,800
for as well. And then looking at the
transportation analysis um that was

70
00:05:49,840 --> 00:05:56,240
performed by Jenna at DKS. And
ultimately our goal is to receive your

71
00:05:54,639 --> 00:05:59,840
feedback about any of those components
that you feel you would like to offer

72
00:05:57,919 --> 00:06:04,880
feedback on.
One more slide, please. Um, but before

73
00:06:02,639 --> 00:06:08,400
we get too deep into it, uh, I realize
that sometimes as planners and people

74
00:06:06,400 --> 00:06:11,440
who live in this world, we get a little
bit ahead of ourselves and forget that

75
00:06:10,080 --> 00:06:14,800
not everyone knows what we're talking
about or why we're doing what we do. So,

76
00:06:13,440 --> 00:06:19,840
we're just going to take a moment and
talk about what is a master plan and and

77
00:06:18,160 --> 00:06:23,919
really just think of it this way that it
it it's the way we establish the

78
00:06:22,160 --> 00:06:27,440
long-term vision for an area that we
want to be developed, right? This is

79
00:06:25,600 --> 00:06:31,039
where we set the ground rules and the
framework. you know, we can coordinate

80
00:06:29,440 --> 00:06:34,160
infrastructure investments. Instead of
peacemeal infrastructure spending, we

81
00:06:32,880 --> 00:06:39,280
can do it in a coordinated, more
effective and efficient fashion. Um,

82
00:06:36,240 --> 00:06:43,919
this is where we identify long range
transportation needs. What do we as a

83
00:06:41,600 --> 00:06:48,400
city, what will we need as this moves
forward and we can really think about

84
00:06:45,280 --> 00:06:51,120
that in a long long term fashion. We can
also look at protecting our

85
00:06:49,520 --> 00:06:54,560
environmental resources that we all care
so much about. This is where we

86
00:06:52,960 --> 00:06:57,840
establish what we want to protect in the
future. So that when we get to that

87
00:06:56,080 --> 00:07:02,400
future, we already have that framework
set up that we have decided to protect

88
00:06:59,440 --> 00:07:07,440
that. Uh it also helps us guide future
development patterns. What kind of

89
00:07:03,919 --> 00:07:10,960
development do we want? Um current codes
don't do that. They implement that. But

90
00:07:09,199 --> 00:07:14,720
this is where we decide what we want.
And then this is also a space where we

91
00:07:12,720 --> 00:07:19,199
create certainty certainty for property
owners and investors. What can a

92
00:07:16,880 --> 00:07:22,319
property owner do or not do on their
property going into the future? Right?

93
00:07:21,120 --> 00:07:28,800
Right. So that's really what a master
plan kind of in a nutshell. Next slide.

94
00:07:26,880 --> 00:07:33,039
So then why does Basalt Creek matter?
Well, Basalt Creek represents one of the

95
00:07:30,960 --> 00:07:38,720
city's as I said largest remaining
employment growth opportunities. It's a

96
00:07:36,240 --> 00:07:42,560
key component of Wilsonville's long-term
economic strategy, right? Lots of

97
00:07:40,960 --> 00:07:46,319
employment is what we're hoping for.
It's a major industrial and employment

98
00:07:44,400 --> 00:07:51,680
center within the Portland metropolitan
region. Um and it's also an again an

99
00:07:49,280 --> 00:07:57,120
opportunity for us to coordinate growth
before development happens to do it in a

100
00:07:54,000 --> 00:08:02,479
a concerned and um a thoughtful manner.
Next slide.

101
00:07:59,680 --> 00:08:05,759
So the Basalt Creek vision, right? We
have some guiding principles that we've

102
00:08:03,919 --> 00:08:10,000
sort of been operating under. You know,
employment focused development,

103
00:08:07,759 --> 00:08:12,960
transportation connectivity, uh
environmental stewardship. These all

104
00:08:11,599 --> 00:08:16,560
kind of apply. You'll hear these themes
coming up. flexible industrial

105
00:08:15,039 --> 00:08:21,680
opportunities,
uh, efficient infrastructure investment

106
00:08:18,720 --> 00:08:28,800
and long-term economic vitality.
Thank you. So, next steps, um, we're re

107
00:08:26,560 --> 00:08:32,000
on July 8th, uh, we will be back for a
second work session here at the comm uh,

108
00:08:30,319 --> 00:08:34,800
planning commission. That's where we're
going to look at draft code amendments.

109
00:08:33,599 --> 00:08:40,479
So, you'll actually get to see some
really, um, exciting code.

110
00:08:38,800 --> 00:08:43,519
These are usually where uh, the rubber
hits the road, if you will. Those draft

111
00:08:42,399 --> 00:08:47,120
code amendments are going to help
implement some of the stuff that we're

112
00:08:45,440 --> 00:08:50,800
working on. Um you'll see the final
draft master plan um with you know

113
00:08:49,200 --> 00:08:53,279
hopefully only a few little tweaks here
and there that you might want and then

114
00:08:52,240 --> 00:08:57,839
there will be some more technical
appendices as well. Storm water, sewer,

115
00:08:56,080 --> 00:09:01,360
water lines, things like that. So those
technical appendices will come through

116
00:08:59,040 --> 00:09:06,640
as well in the second session. Go for
it.

117
00:09:03,600 --> 00:09:09,920
Oh, and now I forgot the blank slide was
my cue. And now actually Lauren is going

118
00:09:08,399 --> 00:09:14,240
to walk you through the actual draft
master plan and then she'll kick it back

119
00:09:12,080 --> 00:09:17,680
to me for some um good comp plan
amendment talk. So Lauren, take it away.

120
00:09:16,399 --> 00:09:20,560
» Thanks Chris and good evening
commissioners. It's good to see you all

121
00:09:18,959 --> 00:09:23,839
again. Like Chris said, I'll be spending
some time just briefly walking through

122
00:09:22,160 --> 00:09:27,279
the structure of the document, some key
components, reviewing some of the

123
00:09:25,120 --> 00:09:31,360
placeholders. You may have noticed uh a
bit of red text in several chapters just

124
00:09:29,519 --> 00:09:36,640
to give you an idea of what's coming in
work session number two. Um so the plan

125
00:09:34,800 --> 00:09:41,040
starts off with the introduction
providing the foundation for the master

126
00:09:38,240 --> 00:09:45,920
plan. It's introducing the Basalt Creek
uh planning area explaining how this

127
00:09:43,440 --> 00:09:51,200
document builds upon the Basalt Creek
concept plan and describing the role

128
00:09:48,560 --> 00:09:55,760
that uh or the role this area plays in
Wilsonville's long-term employment and

129
00:09:53,680 --> 00:10:00,320
industrial growth strategy. And this
chapter also spends a bit of time

130
00:09:57,600 --> 00:10:04,959
connecting this plan and this work to
the city's recently adopted economic

131
00:10:03,120 --> 00:10:09,600
opportunities analysis and economic
development strategy. Uh both of which

132
00:10:07,120 --> 00:10:14,160
spend a bit of time um and effort
talking about Basalt Creek and what

133
00:10:10,959 --> 00:10:18,399
should happen out there.
Chapter 2 uh reviews a lot of the

134
00:10:16,480 --> 00:10:22,079
information. A lot of technical analysis
and reports went into this. I think

135
00:10:20,240 --> 00:10:26,480
there's a long list of appendices. We're
adding more to that with the upcoming

136
00:10:24,480 --> 00:10:32,880
infrastructure analysis. So, this
chapter walks through that. Uh, it um

137
00:10:29,920 --> 00:10:36,240
includes the original Basalt Creek
concept plan guiding principles. It

138
00:10:34,800 --> 00:10:41,120
includes the guiding principles that
were adapted for this specific process.

139
00:10:38,880 --> 00:10:45,920
It talks about the comprehensive plan
policies, those areas of special concern

140
00:10:43,600 --> 00:10:51,040
that affected this planning work and
then listing the uh technical studies as

141
00:10:48,959 --> 00:10:56,519
well as some of the key themes from the
stakeholder outreach and work that the

142
00:10:53,040 --> 00:10:56,519
city has done.

143
00:10:56,720 --> 00:11:04,160
And then chapter 3 reviews a lot of that
information, summarizing it at a very

144
00:11:02,240 --> 00:11:08,800
high level. It's looking at the economic
conditions, summarizing the industrial

145
00:11:06,560 --> 00:11:13,839
land readiness, talking about those
contractor establishments and the role

146
00:11:10,800 --> 00:11:18,000
they play um in that area's future
development potential. Talks about

147
00:11:15,839 --> 00:11:22,720
transportation, a light touch on
infrastructure with more to come. And

148
00:11:20,000 --> 00:11:26,079
then natural resources as well. Uh, I
think Chris said this earlier, but the

149
00:11:24,160 --> 00:11:30,560
key takeaway is that Basalt Creek really
remains one of Wilsonville's most

150
00:11:28,160 --> 00:11:34,160
important long-term employment areas,
but there are challenges bringing

151
00:11:32,160 --> 00:11:37,600
infrastructure, uh, bringing
transportation, the the fragmented

152
00:11:36,079 --> 00:11:43,519
ownership and and contractor
establishments and making that work.

153
00:11:41,279 --> 00:11:48,160
Chapter four, we're really building out
the master plan. Um, so we have these

154
00:11:46,720 --> 00:11:52,880
layers. That's how the chapter is
organized. I'll spend a little bit of

155
00:11:49,760 --> 00:11:57,360
time talking about each. We have our
natural resources section. The updated

156
00:11:55,600 --> 00:12:01,440
natural resources inventory which is
included as an appendix identified the

157
00:11:59,519 --> 00:12:06,160
wetlands, the repairarian corridors,
upland tree groves, the streams and

158
00:12:04,240 --> 00:12:09,920
wildlife habitat areas throughout the
Basalt Creek planning area. And these

159
00:12:08,240 --> 00:12:13,440
resources, as we talked about a lot for
West Railroad, helped shape those land

160
00:12:11,600 --> 00:12:17,839
use considerations. They affect where
the roads will go. Um, and they also

161
00:12:15,440 --> 00:12:22,160
affected the uh bike and pedestrian
trail concepts. um the habitat

162
00:12:20,480 --> 00:12:29,279
restoration that could occur in the
environmental stewardship as well.

163
00:12:26,480 --> 00:12:34,320
And then getting into the land use
framework, this builds upon the vision

164
00:12:31,200 --> 00:12:38,880
in the 2019 concept plan while refining
some of the land use expectations and of

165
00:12:36,399 --> 00:12:43,839
course including West Railroad uh as an
area that has a land use identified for

166
00:12:41,360 --> 00:12:48,320
it. And this framework includes the
high-tech employment, light industrial,

167
00:12:46,240 --> 00:12:53,200
craft, industrial, and west railroad
districts. Each district is intended to

168
00:12:51,040 --> 00:12:57,120
support different employment and
industrial opportunities based on the

169
00:12:55,360 --> 00:13:01,560
site characteristics, infrastructure
availability, and market conditions.

170
00:13:03,200 --> 00:13:08,959
And then I'll just briefly cover
transportation. I know that Chris and

171
00:13:06,560 --> 00:13:13,279
DKS are planning a deeper dive into
that. We talked about this at the

172
00:13:11,040 --> 00:13:19,360
previous work session for West Railroad.
Um, this work integrates that and then

173
00:13:16,560 --> 00:13:25,920
includes a full uh concept and framework
plan for transportation. Um, and

174
00:13:22,800 --> 00:13:31,959
basically talking about what projects
and key intersections uh will be needed.

175
00:13:35,040 --> 00:13:42,480
In terms of the bike and pedestrian
framework that also carries through a

176
00:13:39,920 --> 00:13:47,519
lot of the concepts identified in the
2019 plan, this is emphasizing

177
00:13:44,959 --> 00:13:51,440
connections between employment areas,
uh, future transit service, natural

178
00:13:49,680 --> 00:13:54,720
resources, and those regional trail
systems that run through it. That

179
00:13:52,959 --> 00:13:59,279
includes the Basalt Creek Canyon Trail
and the Ice Age Tonkan Trail, as well as

180
00:13:57,199 --> 00:14:03,560
some future pathways and improved
crossings at certain locations.

181
00:14:04,480 --> 00:14:10,480
and then infrastructure. More to come on
this one. It remains one of the most

182
00:14:08,560 --> 00:14:14,720
important implementation considerations
for the planning area. Uh the draft plan

183
00:14:12,959 --> 00:14:18,320
builds upon the previous utility
planning and will identify

184
00:14:16,560 --> 00:14:22,079
infrastructure readiness, utility
coordination and phased investment. We

185
00:14:20,399 --> 00:14:27,600
do have a bit of information about that
in the plan now, but obviously uh

186
00:14:25,040 --> 00:14:31,519
recommendations graphics will uh be
forthcoming in work session number two

187
00:14:29,839 --> 00:14:36,639
and we'll have more information about
that.

188
00:14:34,399 --> 00:14:41,600
And then chapter five is our
implementation and phasing chapter. It

189
00:14:39,120 --> 00:14:46,000
organizes the plans recommendations into
different buckets. Those are further

190
00:14:43,279 --> 00:14:51,120
exploration, planning, funding, and
investments. And the intent here is to

191
00:14:48,880 --> 00:14:56,320
create a practical implementation
framework rather than some list of

192
00:14:53,199 --> 00:15:00,560
isolated projects. This chapter also
includes a phasing strategy that

193
00:14:58,639 --> 00:15:05,920
recognizes that implementation will
occur over many years and will depend a

194
00:15:03,440 --> 00:15:13,600
lot on infrastructure funding, market
demand, uh redevelopment opportunities

195
00:15:08,720 --> 00:15:17,839
and and those partnerships as well.
And so just a highlevel uh overview of

196
00:15:16,160 --> 00:15:22,959
the phasing strategy, it's three
buckets. Near-term actions, medium-term

197
00:15:20,320 --> 00:15:27,360
actions, and long-term actions. Those
near-term actions are really focused on

198
00:15:24,959 --> 00:15:31,519
planning, coordination, policy updates,
building a strong foundation for the

199
00:15:29,040 --> 00:15:35,920
future implementation. Medium-term
actions are focused more on

200
00:15:33,920 --> 00:15:40,480
infrastructure planning, those funding
strategies that are identified in the

201
00:15:37,760 --> 00:15:44,800
plan, working to implement those uh
creating and and forming those

202
00:15:42,480 --> 00:15:50,480
partnerships and uh addressing
redevelopment readiness. And then

203
00:15:47,440 --> 00:15:53,839
long-term actions are focused on
continued investment. It's envisioning

204
00:15:52,320 --> 00:15:58,399
the infrastructure buildout, that
redevelopment actually occurring, and

205
00:15:56,079 --> 00:16:02,800
then the longer range implementation.
Um, you'll notice that many of the

206
00:15:59,920 --> 00:16:06,720
recommendations span multiple phases,
uh, just because implementation might

207
00:16:04,959 --> 00:16:11,600
expect to start within the next year,
but would actually finally be completed

208
00:16:08,959 --> 00:16:17,759
in, you know, year 15, year 20 for some
of those longer planning items.

209
00:16:14,320 --> 00:16:22,399
And I think that oh and then covering
just the placeholder uh analysis that

210
00:16:20,160 --> 00:16:27,360
we've noted um the plan will become just
a little bit longer with the graphics

211
00:16:24,880 --> 00:16:31,759
and text covering infrastructure. We've
noted placeholders for now. Um but

212
00:16:29,839 --> 00:16:36,160
hopefully that was clear what's to come.
Like Chris said it's the water system

213
00:16:33,600 --> 00:16:40,720
analysis, the sanitary sewer analysis,
storm water. those uh zoning code

214
00:16:38,560 --> 00:16:45,519
refinements which will be a large focus
of work session two will also maybe

215
00:16:42,720 --> 00:16:51,519
affect some of the recommendations as
well as phasing in chapter 5 and build

216
00:16:47,920 --> 00:16:56,399
out some of the development district uh
descriptions in chapter 4. And then of

217
00:16:53,920 --> 00:17:00,320
course just all the maps and figures uh
that go along with with those pieces as

218
00:16:58,560 --> 00:17:04,799
well will be finalized and it will
include hopefully a nice summary graphic

219
00:17:02,160 --> 00:17:08,799
of what this master plan is in chapter
4.

220
00:17:07,360 --> 00:17:12,000
And with that, I think I'm passing it
back to

221
00:17:09,039 --> 00:17:16,959
» Chris.
>> All right, lots of slides for you guys

222
00:17:14,480 --> 00:17:22,480
tonight. Sorry about that.
Kind of is what it is sometimes.

223
00:17:20,000 --> 00:17:26,720
All right, so the next component um is
our proposed comprehensive plan

224
00:17:24,240 --> 00:17:30,080
amendments. Right, these are,
you know, essentially the point here or

225
00:17:28,079 --> 00:17:35,039
the purpose is you updating our comp
plan language that'll reflect more of

226
00:17:31,919 --> 00:17:38,720
today's current economic conditions. Um,
I believe we brought to you the economic

227
00:17:36,880 --> 00:17:42,240
opportunities analysis and the economic
development strategy. That must have

228
00:17:40,160 --> 00:17:47,440
been two or three months ago at this
point. So, we need to implement those.

229
00:17:44,960 --> 00:17:51,200
Um, and also updating the language helps
us to support future industrial and

230
00:17:49,200 --> 00:17:54,320
employment growth and then align our
policies with the Basalt Creek master

231
00:17:52,720 --> 00:17:57,919
plan. You really can't have a comp plan
and a master plan that uh that are in

232
00:17:56,400 --> 00:18:04,320
conflict with one another. They need to
align. So, we're in that process.

233
00:18:01,120 --> 00:18:10,080
Um so the existing language uh much of
our um comp plan language is written in

234
00:18:06,960 --> 00:18:15,679
in the n 1990s and early 2000s. So we
need to update to reflect more of today.

235
00:18:13,039 --> 00:18:19,919
Um we have some proposed changes in um
employment forecasts um recognizing

236
00:18:18,320 --> 00:18:24,400
Wilsonville as a major regional
employment center um and incorporate the

237
00:18:22,400 --> 00:18:29,919
findings from the economic opportunities
analysis and the um economic development

238
00:18:27,039 --> 00:18:33,600
strategy as well. Um and ultimately, you
know, the bottom bullet there, modernize

239
00:18:31,919 --> 00:18:39,919
our economic development policies, kind
of get up to date a little bit.

240
00:18:38,080 --> 00:18:44,000
So, we've highlighted a few things in
the comp plan amendments. Um you know,

241
00:18:41,760 --> 00:18:47,679
the um projected job growth is an
important piece to Wilson's view,

242
00:18:45,760 --> 00:18:53,039
Wilsonville's future over the next 20 or
more years. Um also recognizing our role

243
00:18:50,799 --> 00:18:57,600
in manufacturing and logistics,
technology, um professional services,

244
00:18:55,600 --> 00:19:00,960
health related industries. So, you know,
our breadth of industries, we needed to

245
00:18:59,280 --> 00:19:06,640
sort of get some of that um written up
into the um comprehensive plan as well.

246
00:19:03,120 --> 00:19:10,400
So, next slide.
Uh modernizing our industrial

247
00:19:08,400 --> 00:19:13,120
development policies. Yeah, economic
resilience. You know, one of the things

248
00:19:11,840 --> 00:19:17,200
that we need to make sure that we have
here in Wilsonville and we act have more

249
00:19:15,039 --> 00:19:21,520
opportunity than many jurisdictions do
um with the Basalt Creek planning area.

250
00:19:18,960 --> 00:19:26,160
It's a real advantage for our community.
um preparing and and making sure we have

251
00:19:23,360 --> 00:19:29,039
employment land readiness um strategic
infrastructure investment as I talked

252
00:19:27,600 --> 00:19:32,080
about coordinated efficient and
strategic infrastructure and then

253
00:19:30,799 --> 00:19:38,280
long-term competitiveness for
Wilsonville to be both an employment

254
00:19:34,080 --> 00:19:38,280
area and a place that people want to be.

255
00:19:38,720 --> 00:19:45,120
There we go. Um so some new uh
implementation measures development

256
00:19:43,679 --> 00:19:47,679
ready employment lands. You'll hear some
themes throughout all these work

257
00:19:46,400 --> 00:19:52,640
sessions, right? And that's a big one
for us is development ready employment

258
00:19:49,679 --> 00:19:57,760
land multiple building types and tenants
not leaning on just one thing to get us

259
00:19:54,960 --> 00:20:01,600
through to the next several generations.
Um interconnected street networks

260
00:19:59,440 --> 00:20:04,559
connectivity has been expressed as a
very important piece of what the city of

261
00:20:03,360 --> 00:20:12,160
Wilsonville and the community would
like. Um uh improving but also ensuring

262
00:20:09,280 --> 00:20:16,799
um positive freight mobility uh bicycle
and pedestrian circulation even in

263
00:20:14,080 --> 00:20:21,200
industrial areas. uh transit supportive
design, want SMA smart to be able to run

264
00:20:19,280 --> 00:20:25,280
uh get people to their jobs and
infrastructure readiness. These are all

265
00:20:23,039 --> 00:20:31,280
represented as parts of the comp plan
amendments that we've written up

266
00:20:28,880 --> 00:20:35,200
um supporting innovation and economic
diversity. So, some new industrial types

267
00:20:33,679 --> 00:20:40,720
um that we haven't had in the comp plan
previously. Craft industrial businesses,

268
00:20:37,679 --> 00:20:45,760
maker spaces, artisan manufacturing,
breweries and distilleries, um small

269
00:20:43,360 --> 00:20:49,679
business entrepreneurship. Um those are
now represented in the comp plan and

270
00:20:47,360 --> 00:20:54,000
they weren't before. Um you know,
ultimately the goal as we've kind of

271
00:20:51,360 --> 00:20:58,559
chatted about diversity, uh diversity
employment opportunities, encourage

272
00:20:56,400 --> 00:21:01,960
innovation and and support some of those
emerging industries.

273
00:21:02,320 --> 00:21:09,760
And that's my pause on the comp plan
stuff. I know we're just like flying

274
00:21:06,159 --> 00:21:13,600
through slides tonight. Sorry. Um
I have one more uh I have five more

275
00:21:11,760 --> 00:21:18,159
slides on transportation. Are we filling
up for it or you want to stop for a

276
00:21:15,280 --> 00:21:21,840
question or two or
power through? Let's do it. All right.

277
00:21:20,159 --> 00:21:26,960
These are a little more text heavy. My
apologies. Um I need I didn't uh I

278
00:21:24,640 --> 00:21:32,880
didn't edit them very well. though. Um
so, uh Jenna, who I believe is is online

279
00:21:29,600 --> 00:21:38,320
right now, um for DKS and Associates, um
she performed a transportation analysis

280
00:21:35,280 --> 00:21:42,960
of um the Basalt Creek planning area and
the West Railroad area. And this was

281
00:21:41,520 --> 00:21:46,880
essentially, as you can see, evaluating
the transportation impacts associated

282
00:21:44,960 --> 00:21:51,039
with the future buildout of those areas.
What will happen when we develop when

283
00:21:48,799 --> 00:21:56,400
those areas develop? Hey, there's Jenna.
Um hey, Jenna. Um she assessed roadway,

284
00:21:54,799 --> 00:22:00,640
freight, bicycle, ped and trail
connections. Um identified needed

285
00:21:59,120 --> 00:22:05,679
transportation improvements that will
support that future development and then

286
00:22:03,200 --> 00:22:09,039
of course ensured that whatever we're
going to do is consistent with the

287
00:22:07,039 --> 00:22:15,760
state's transportation planning rule.
Next slide, please. Um that's a lot. Um

288
00:22:13,280 --> 00:22:19,440
existing transportation conditions. So
you know some existing challenges. Uh

289
00:22:17,760 --> 00:22:24,080
the west railroad area currently has
limited access. Uh there is some

290
00:22:22,400 --> 00:22:28,640
significant environmental constraints,
wetlands and such. Uh the railroad

291
00:22:26,559 --> 00:22:31,600
corridor does limit connectivity. We all
know that that's a little too shallow

292
00:22:30,159 --> 00:22:37,520
for trucks to go under and that creates
a a bit of a conflict. Um incomplete

293
00:22:34,799 --> 00:22:42,559
pedestrian and bicycle facilities and of
course there is some existing congestion

294
00:22:39,280 --> 00:22:46,559
at Grahams Ferry and Day right now. But
some of the assets, Basalt Creek

295
00:22:44,400 --> 00:22:54,120
Parkway, Grahams Ferry Road, Tonken
Road, um good regional freight access,

296
00:22:49,200 --> 00:22:54,120
and the planned ice age tonken trail.

297
00:22:55,440 --> 00:23:02,320
So then the the access strategy and
Jenna can speak to this um after we get

298
00:23:00,080 --> 00:23:06,159
through these slides. I'm sure uh she'll
need to correct me a couple of times,

299
00:23:03,760 --> 00:23:09,600
but uh you know the future uh
development uh oh sorry the planned

300
00:23:07,919 --> 00:23:14,799
access strategy the future development
is antic anticipated to be served by the

301
00:23:12,320 --> 00:23:20,080
northern access via the Tonkan road via
Tonkan Road um southern access via

302
00:23:17,360 --> 00:23:24,000
Gramps Ferry and then the internal local
street network and in a lot of cases

303
00:23:22,480 --> 00:23:27,840
well at least in the west railroad area
that's generally going to be decided by

304
00:23:25,600 --> 00:23:32,640
the type of development that we have. Um
we'll still have code um requirements,

305
00:23:30,640 --> 00:23:37,440
but the location won't we won't
necessarily have in West Railroad. Um

306
00:23:35,280 --> 00:23:41,600
additional opportunities are potential
future public railroad crossing at

307
00:23:39,120 --> 00:23:45,440
Cahalen Road. Um the Ice Age Tonkan
Trail connection um and future

308
00:23:44,000 --> 00:23:50,320
pedestrian and bicycle network
improvements.

309
00:23:47,840 --> 00:23:55,679
I think this might be my last one here.
Oh no, it's not. Um existing conditions.

310
00:23:53,760 --> 00:23:59,840
So most study intersections, the good
news, currently meet mobility standards,

311
00:23:57,840 --> 00:24:03,520
Grahams Ferry and Day Road is the
primary existing deficiency at this

312
00:24:01,600 --> 00:24:07,919
time. Anyone who's been around there
probably understands that. Um so future

313
00:24:06,159 --> 00:24:12,960
conditions so about 20 years out the
analysis assumes completion of the

314
00:24:10,000 --> 00:24:17,840
planned transportation system uh uh
system planned projects which include

315
00:24:14,880 --> 00:24:22,400
Basalt Creek Parkway extension uh grants
fairy road improvements uh day road

316
00:24:20,320 --> 00:24:27,520
widening and garden acres road
intersection reconstruction.

317
00:24:25,039 --> 00:24:31,200
Next slide please.
So the key recommendations were to

318
00:24:29,760 --> 00:24:35,279
continue or are to continue
implementation of the transportation

319
00:24:32,880 --> 00:24:40,159
system plan projects that we have now.
Um advance ice age tonken trail

320
00:24:37,440 --> 00:24:45,039
connections, preserve opportunities for
future railroad crossing discussion. Um

321
00:24:42,640 --> 00:24:51,360
those are ongoing discussions. They're
difficult, complex, and expensive. So

322
00:24:48,400 --> 00:24:54,320
yay. Uh preserve opportunity. Oh, sorry.
Coordinate transportation improvements

323
00:24:52,720 --> 00:24:58,320
with future development. We talked
earlier about that trying to be

324
00:24:55,679 --> 00:25:01,679
efficient with our with our um looking
forward to development and how we spend

325
00:25:00,400 --> 00:25:06,320
infrastructure and transportation
dollars and it it continues to be a

326
00:25:03,760 --> 00:25:10,080
theme. The conclusion is that the
transportation and or the uh basalt

327
00:25:08,559 --> 00:25:13,840
creek planning area in the west railroad
area can be developed with planned

328
00:25:11,760 --> 00:25:18,320
network and currently identified
transportation improvements. We we don't

329
00:25:16,159 --> 00:25:22,480
need any additional major transportation
capacity projects that we don't have on

330
00:25:19,919 --> 00:25:27,840
the list now uh to support that future
buildout. So, that's all good news. Uh,

331
00:25:25,360 --> 00:25:30,400
for the most part, it's we recognize it.
The projects are in there. We just need

332
00:25:29,200 --> 00:25:38,400
to keep moving forward on those
projects. Next slide, please. Um, so the

333
00:25:35,120 --> 00:25:44,480
overall next steps for where we're at,
we'll be back here in a month uh is July

334
00:25:41,520 --> 00:25:48,000
8th for our second work session. Um, on
August 3rd, we'll be at uh city council

335
00:25:46,480 --> 00:25:52,159
for their only work session on this
project. And then on September 9th,

336
00:25:50,400 --> 00:25:55,840
we'll be back here for a public hearing
uh looking for recommendations to

337
00:25:53,520 --> 00:25:59,440
council from the commission to council.
And then we'll start the council's um

338
00:25:57,919 --> 00:26:04,240
public hearing process in October. So
we've got about five months. Um as I

339
00:26:01,760 --> 00:26:11,440
said, this is step one in in a six-step
process. Um so that might be my last

340
00:26:08,400 --> 00:26:16,559
slide. Oh my question slide. That's
right. Uh so these were the questions

341
00:26:14,320 --> 00:26:20,799
that I prompted that we have in the
staff report. Um but again the your

342
00:26:19,279 --> 00:26:26,559
questions do not have to follow this
pattern. These were just

343
00:26:23,919 --> 00:26:29,679
discussion questions to think about but
we are done with slides and we would

344
00:26:28,159 --> 00:26:36,640
like to hear any and all feedback that
you may have. Thank you.

345
00:26:32,960 --> 00:26:40,559
» Excellent. Thank you. All right members
of the commission.

346
00:26:38,640 --> 00:26:44,240
Do you have any questions for staff? Any
comments or discussions you want to

347
00:26:42,159 --> 00:26:47,720
have?
>> I see no

348
00:26:50,799 --> 00:26:56,159
Oh, awesome. All right. First of all,
thanks so much. Great presentation. It

349
00:26:54,000 --> 00:27:01,679
was um really interesting to dive into
the plan as it exists so far. So, great

350
00:26:58,320 --> 00:27:06,480
work on this. Um a lot of the the really
like burning questions that I had that I

351
00:27:03,919 --> 00:27:10,240
have had to do with the transportation
um system plan. So, excellent. Uh, one

352
00:27:08,640 --> 00:27:16,400
of the things that I was trying to make
sense of as I was looking at the studies

353
00:27:11,760 --> 00:27:22,799
and and what they might mean is uh how
do we reconcile the local traffic needs

354
00:27:19,360 --> 00:27:27,520
of this area with the uh the through
traffic needs. So like on Graham Road

355
00:27:24,960 --> 00:27:34,400
and Day Road and on Ellis or on Boon
Ferry Road that leads leads toward the

356
00:27:29,200 --> 00:27:38,559
freeway. I I my my observation as a non
professional here is that almost all of

357
00:27:36,640 --> 00:27:42,799
that traffic is through traffic and it's
not really servicing the the local

358
00:27:41,120 --> 00:27:48,960
businesses that operate there or the
local industry. Um, how do we reconcile

359
00:27:46,799 --> 00:27:53,600
kind of as we make a change to extending
B to Salt Creek,

360
00:27:50,559 --> 00:27:57,360
» how that may affect what how much Day
Road actually gets used, how much of

361
00:27:55,360 --> 00:28:02,000
that through traffic moves north and in
Dayude maybe doesn't need to be widened.

362
00:28:00,080 --> 00:28:05,039
» Um, how do how do we think about I know
we've got professionals here.

363
00:28:03,760 --> 00:28:09,279
» So, how should we be thinking about that
as a planning commission? Um, and how

364
00:28:07,279 --> 00:28:13,360
can we maybe
I guess a lot of this is coming from the

365
00:28:10,960 --> 00:28:17,760
standpoint of like how do we avoid maybe
creating such capacity that we end up

366
00:28:15,520 --> 00:28:23,360
inducing more through traffic demand in
the area. Um, so

367
00:28:20,880 --> 00:28:27,360
» that's a good question and it's one of
those moments where I'm so happy that we

368
00:28:25,200 --> 00:28:32,240
have a transportation expert here to
talk to us about stuff like that. Jenna,

369
00:28:29,919 --> 00:28:37,600
I'm hoping you heard that question.
>> I did. Yes. Yeah. Thanks for that

370
00:28:35,440 --> 00:28:41,600
question. Um it's it's a good one to
consider in this area, right? You're

371
00:28:38,880 --> 00:28:46,000
you're totally right on. There's so much
um regional and local traffic happening

372
00:28:43,919 --> 00:28:51,840
there at the interchange. We've
definitely seen an uptick since the

373
00:28:48,480 --> 00:28:57,440
124th extension was built in what 2018
2019 um of that kind of regional traffic

374
00:28:55,120 --> 00:29:02,559
moving through the area. these
transportation system plan projects that

375
00:28:59,600 --> 00:29:07,840
Chris covered in his presentation that
the city has in their TSP, they they're

376
00:29:05,120 --> 00:29:14,240
also in the metro TSP. So, the the
greater Portland area acknowledges that

377
00:29:11,120 --> 00:29:19,200
a lot of these improvements are um
needed for regional purposes, right, for

378
00:29:16,640 --> 00:29:26,640
this kind of cross city travel, access
to the I-5 interchange. Um yeah, it's

379
00:29:23,520 --> 00:29:30,000
tough there. There's definitely
kind of a chicken and egg situation,

380
00:29:28,320 --> 00:29:36,320
right, where if you build these
improvements, traffic will come. But,

381
00:29:32,480 --> 00:29:40,240
um, this area specifically just has so
much potential for development. I think

382
00:29:38,159 --> 00:29:43,600
we'll find that that these improvements
are needed and that it'll probably

383
00:29:42,240 --> 00:29:47,919
quickly fill up. You know, if we look at
the next 20 years, a lot of that traffic

384
00:29:45,600 --> 00:29:53,120
will growth will be consisting of
Assault Creek um, and just the job

385
00:29:51,039 --> 00:30:00,000
growth that we're expecting to see out
here. So, um I wouldn't say that I'm I'm

386
00:29:57,279 --> 00:30:06,000
concerned about regional traffic eating
up all of that capacity. Um and and

387
00:30:03,120 --> 00:30:11,679
there's certainly uh partners in this
these projects between city Wilsonville,

388
00:30:09,200 --> 00:30:15,120
city of Talton, Washington County, and
and Metro that are, you know, keeping

389
00:30:13,440 --> 00:30:20,720
their eye on things out here as well.
And and everyone's kind of doing their

390
00:30:18,080 --> 00:30:26,480
part to uh claim their their piece of
the the issues out here. So, um, yeah.

391
00:30:24,559 --> 00:30:29,679
Does that kind of help answer your
question or?

392
00:30:27,679 --> 00:30:34,240
» Yeah, I think that's helpful. I wonder
if there are other materials that also

393
00:30:32,559 --> 00:30:38,720
help to kind of explain how this fits
into or or maybe maybe even just for my

394
00:30:36,960 --> 00:30:42,640
benefit, but if it it would help the the
public understand also how the these

395
00:30:40,559 --> 00:30:48,080
transportation system plans fit into the
the broader regional system plans. Um

396
00:30:46,640 --> 00:30:52,480
because one of the other questions that
I that came into my mind as I was

397
00:30:49,679 --> 00:30:59,360
reading the the packet was um when we
look at the non non-car traffic that we

398
00:30:56,080 --> 00:31:05,679
expect uh and specifically the the more
human scale transportation modes like

399
00:31:02,159 --> 00:31:11,279
walking and biking. Um how do we
determine where to put those? Um, is it

400
00:31:08,880 --> 00:31:17,279
is it right to really build out a huge
like nonprotected bicycle lane

401
00:31:13,840 --> 00:31:20,880
infrastructure on the major caropair,
car and truck thoroughfare, or is that

402
00:31:19,200 --> 00:31:24,240
going to create an environment that's so
hostile to bikes that no bike is ever

403
00:31:22,640 --> 00:31:27,760
actually going to ride on it? And would
it be would it be better to maybe think

404
00:31:25,600 --> 00:31:31,120
about putting the bike somewhere else
for instance?

405
00:31:28,880 --> 00:31:36,320
» Um, creating something that's more
amendable to biking and and uh and

406
00:31:33,520 --> 00:31:39,760
pedestrian infrastructure.
And I maybe this is like too early to

407
00:31:38,320 --> 00:31:43,440
get into that level of detail. I know
like the the plan is kind of a little

408
00:31:41,519 --> 00:31:46,399
bit higher level, but it was one of the
things that popped in my head is we're

409
00:31:44,480 --> 00:31:50,720
thinking about we're measuring current
pedestrian and we're measuring current

410
00:31:48,640 --> 00:31:54,480
bicycle traffic and and it's zero right
now. And it's not hard to imagine why.

411
00:31:52,720 --> 00:31:57,200
It's such a such a very hostile
environment for a person on foot or on

412
00:31:56,480 --> 00:32:01,440
bike.
>> Um so rather than kind of continuing to

413
00:31:59,840 --> 00:32:04,080
build the infrastructure there and
assuming like well this is day road this

414
00:32:02,960 --> 00:32:08,880
is where we should put all of our
traffic. Well maybe not. Maybe bikes and

415
00:32:06,559 --> 00:32:12,720
pedestrians can be somewhere adjacent to
it or orthogonal to that main car throw

416
00:32:11,840 --> 00:32:17,679
fair.
>> Yeah.

417
00:32:13,760 --> 00:32:21,760
» So I um Commissioner Zundal, I can reply
to a few of those items and then maybe

418
00:32:19,760 --> 00:32:28,080
um Jenna might have a few things to add
as well in terms of how we model and and

419
00:32:23,919 --> 00:32:32,799
design uh the system. But um I would
note some additional documentation

420
00:32:31,039 --> 00:32:37,279
around the transportation planning in
this area that has happened over a

421
00:32:34,720 --> 00:32:40,880
number of years. So the first was um
actually the adoption of the Basalt

422
00:32:38,960 --> 00:32:47,440
Creek transportation refinement plan in
2014. Um that actually predated the

423
00:32:44,320 --> 00:32:53,440
concept plan between the cities of um
Wilsonville and Twolitin. And that was

424
00:32:50,000 --> 00:32:59,279
because uh this the Basalt Creek
planning area that's in both cities was

425
00:32:56,000 --> 00:33:04,000
brought into the metro uh urban growth
boundary for the purposes of serving

426
00:33:01,440 --> 00:33:09,840
regional industrial need. Um and there
was a recognition that a transportation

427
00:33:07,440 --> 00:33:14,799
system in the south county industrial
area was needed in order to support the

428
00:33:12,559 --> 00:33:20,480
industrial area growth of land that was
brought in in Twolitin, Wilsonville, and

429
00:33:16,960 --> 00:33:24,480
in Sherwood. So that plan was adopted
and it essentially modeled and accounted

430
00:33:22,559 --> 00:33:27,360
for the regional traffic that would be
coming through that south county area

431
00:33:25,919 --> 00:33:33,279
and connecting all three of those
industrial areas as well as what would

432
00:33:29,919 --> 00:33:37,440
be the traffic generated by the local um
growth that is planned for in this area.

433
00:33:35,120 --> 00:33:41,039
And so there was kind of this split of
trips and anybody who was around during

434
00:33:39,200 --> 00:33:46,559
the Basalt Creek concept planning might
remember we talked about trip caps and

435
00:33:43,679 --> 00:33:50,080
uh internal uh trip rates. Um and that
was a part of the discussion to ensure

436
00:33:48,080 --> 00:33:53,440
that we were being cognizant of the land
uses we were planning for in

437
00:33:51,760 --> 00:33:58,480
relationship to the transportation
system that's being planned regionally.

438
00:33:56,240 --> 00:34:03,279
Um and so you see things like the Basalt
Creek Parkway which is an investment by

439
00:34:00,799 --> 00:34:06,880
the county. um the majority of that
money coming from the county or from the

440
00:34:04,880 --> 00:34:11,280
feds uh federal money they're able to
obtain to help to build that um

441
00:34:09,520 --> 00:34:15,599
framework project. It's really a project
that will be necessary to serve all the

442
00:34:13,520 --> 00:34:19,440
industrial areas in this um kind of
south county what we call the south

443
00:34:17,119 --> 00:34:23,040
county area. So in addition to that
project, there was actually a South

444
00:34:20,720 --> 00:34:27,440
County infrastructure project that
followed. Um it was happening basically

445
00:34:25,280 --> 00:34:32,480
during the Basalt Creek planning project
that was to help the county to

446
00:34:29,280 --> 00:34:38,720
prioritize specific projects for them to
help um allocate their TDT to and one of

447
00:34:36,639 --> 00:34:42,879
the main projects there was improvements
to Day Road. understanding that the

448
00:34:41,200 --> 00:34:47,440
parallel improvements to Day Road along
with Basalt Creek Parkway are both

449
00:34:44,800 --> 00:34:51,520
needed in order for the area to function
well and efficiently. So, we can

450
00:34:49,839 --> 00:34:56,320
definitely share both of those um
planning documents uh with you. Um and I

451
00:34:54,879 --> 00:35:00,800
would just note that that is something
that we consistently model and work with

452
00:34:58,720 --> 00:35:05,839
and our own transportation modeling as
developments are approved. Um that is we

453
00:35:03,839 --> 00:35:10,560
have our traffic analysis that goes with
every development project. So we're able

454
00:35:08,000 --> 00:35:16,480
to continually track how is the growth
and the development actually um like

455
00:35:14,800 --> 00:35:19,839
happening in comparison to what we
planned for. And so then we better

456
00:35:18,160 --> 00:35:23,599
understand whether pivots need to be
made, adjustments need to be made, if

457
00:35:22,079 --> 00:35:28,960
things are developing different than
what our uh assumptions were during

458
00:35:25,839 --> 00:35:33,040
these long range uh planning projects. I
would also note on the last comment

459
00:35:30,640 --> 00:35:36,480
about kind of the multimodal um we look
at that during the planning process to

460
00:35:35,200 --> 00:35:40,720
think about what would be the best
placement for things in the Basalt Creek

461
00:35:38,800 --> 00:35:45,040
planning area. We looked at the trails
that would potentially go um off kind of

462
00:35:43,520 --> 00:35:48,720
network. We have the Ice Age Tonkan
Trail throughout West Railroad. We then

463
00:35:46,880 --> 00:35:55,680
have the hopefully ridge trail that will
happen um up in the Basalt Creek um area

464
00:35:53,200 --> 00:35:59,119
um just north of Day Road. Um, and then
we look at bicycle infrastructure

465
00:35:57,599 --> 00:36:03,040
differently than we used to in the past.
So, if you have been on Gardenacres

466
00:36:01,359 --> 00:36:08,960
Road, you'll note that our latest
industrial road project has a buffered

467
00:36:05,599 --> 00:36:14,720
bike lane um actually separated by a a
curb. Um, so we are working on

468
00:36:12,640 --> 00:36:21,599
infrastructure for bike and pedestrian
movement that is more um friendly, less

469
00:36:18,079 --> 00:36:25,760
hostile, um more buffered. Some of the
infrastructure we don't control. So,

470
00:36:24,079 --> 00:36:30,560
there are some roads out there currently
that are in like Washington County um

471
00:36:28,640 --> 00:36:35,040
ownership at this time until they
transfer to the city in the future. Uh

472
00:36:33,200 --> 00:36:40,400
during that time period, it will things
get built to Washington County

473
00:36:36,240 --> 00:36:44,720
standards. Um and so that kind of there
could be differences there in terms of

474
00:36:42,079 --> 00:36:49,200
how they'll build a cross-section uh in
versus once it becomes urbanized and the

475
00:36:46,880 --> 00:36:54,079
city um has control and we have
different cross-section standards. So, I

476
00:36:52,079 --> 00:36:56,720
hope that answered all the points. I
think I heard you made all the questions

477
00:36:55,520 --> 00:37:00,000
you had, but if I missed anything,
please let me know.

478
00:36:58,000 --> 00:37:04,079
» I think that Thank you. I think that's
great, actually. And maybe I can follow

479
00:37:01,839 --> 00:37:09,359
up um separately to get more of those
resources from benefit in education.

480
00:37:06,400 --> 00:37:12,720
Thank you.
Commissioner Kandine.

481
00:37:10,400 --> 00:37:17,680
» Um just to kind of follow up with what
Jeff said too, um especially like

482
00:37:15,520 --> 00:37:21,359
talking about the through traffic and I
know from my time on the DRB that when

483
00:37:19,599 --> 00:37:29,119
we do traffic studies, we're not allowed
to look at I5. Um but that's always the

484
00:37:26,000 --> 00:37:34,400
elephant in the room, right? Is that
if I works, we don't have as much

485
00:37:31,520 --> 00:37:37,200
through traffic to your point. But if I5
is always a bottleneck,

486
00:37:35,920 --> 00:37:40,960
» then people are always going to be
trying to save that one minute because

487
00:37:39,200 --> 00:37:45,200
ways or Google maps told them that if
they exited early and went through the

488
00:37:42,880 --> 00:37:51,599
neighborhood, they could, you know, save
a little bit of time. So,

489
00:37:47,680 --> 00:37:56,800
has that been factored into this at all
about, you know, how much does success

490
00:37:54,079 --> 00:38:00,560
from the transportation side depend upon
a boon bridge replacement?

491
00:37:59,040 --> 00:38:03,440
» Yeah. Jenna, do you want to jump on that
question, please?

492
00:38:01,920 --> 00:38:11,200
» Yeah. Thank you.
>> The traffic forecasts we um traffic

493
00:38:08,400 --> 00:38:15,520
forecast that we use from Metro from the
Metro model

494
00:38:13,200 --> 00:38:19,200
did not include the Boone Bridge
replacement. It's it's an unconstrained

495
00:38:17,839 --> 00:38:23,119
project, right? So, it's not funded.
It's not on their financially

496
00:38:21,280 --> 00:38:30,560
constrained list that's kind of on their
ability to priority right now. So, um,

497
00:38:28,079 --> 00:38:34,400
that so that wasn't that project is not
kind of baked into those traffic

498
00:38:32,640 --> 00:38:39,200
forecasts that were used for this
analysis. That's kind of standard

499
00:38:36,079 --> 00:38:44,720
practice to not include those unfunded
um, long range projects and to only

500
00:38:42,320 --> 00:38:50,960
include those projects that are um,
funded. But

501
00:38:47,760 --> 00:38:54,480
yeah, I I know that some changes to the
interchange ramps in the last few years

502
00:38:52,480 --> 00:38:57,440
have kind of made it more difficult for
folks to to make those types of

503
00:38:55,839 --> 00:39:01,440
movements. Used to be able to take the
southbound off-ramp and just keep on

504
00:38:59,599 --> 00:39:07,359
gliding on through the interchange and
get back onto I5. Um that ability has

505
00:39:05,359 --> 00:39:16,079
been kind of removed down uh up at the
North Ellison interchange. Um

506
00:39:11,920 --> 00:39:21,359
I yeah I guess the travel models and
travel forecasts account for those

507
00:39:18,960 --> 00:39:26,880
constraints, right? The the I-5 pinch
points, the the congestion at the

508
00:39:23,920 --> 00:39:33,119
offramps and through the
um corridor between 205 um on I5 and and

509
00:39:29,760 --> 00:39:36,720
the boom bridge. So um
those have been considered. Those are

510
00:39:34,880 --> 00:39:43,040
those are included in those traffic
assumptions and and the growth um growth

511
00:39:39,520 --> 00:39:47,680
rates and um we look at those peak hour
conditions and you know some days

512
00:39:44,880 --> 00:39:52,880
especially in this area are in when
incidents happen they feel um really

513
00:39:51,040 --> 00:39:57,040
catastrophic but those are not the
average days. Um, and so we really try

514
00:39:55,280 --> 00:40:01,760
to capture that that kind of typical
average day. And so I I see I see most

515
00:39:59,440 --> 00:40:06,560
of that kind of significant detour
happening when there's accidents on I5,

516
00:40:03,920 --> 00:40:14,480
when there's those road closures on I5.
And so um, yeah, I I'm Yeah, I hope that

517
00:40:11,760 --> 00:40:18,320
answers your question. I there's only
Yeah, the modeling accounts for a lot of

518
00:40:16,560 --> 00:40:21,359
that as much as it can, you know, the
congestion and the pinch points in in

519
00:40:19,839 --> 00:40:26,640
the street network. So
>> yeah.

520
00:40:24,160 --> 00:40:31,599
» Yeah. Obviously it's difficult with it
not being funded. So but I mean like in

521
00:40:29,119 --> 00:40:37,200
theory like the funding time frame would
account for this if this goes out to

522
00:40:32,960 --> 00:40:40,960
like 2046 but um and then I kind of had
a follow-up question again still

523
00:40:38,640 --> 00:40:44,960
transportation related but also um with
the overall development. What type of

524
00:40:42,720 --> 00:40:50,320
coordination do we do with Tolatin and
Sherwood as well as how this looks

525
00:40:48,960 --> 00:40:53,040
compared to like what they're planning
to build, what they're planning to do? I

526
00:40:51,680 --> 00:40:58,560
mean, I know there's a lot of housing
kind of going up um like next to Horizon

527
00:40:55,760 --> 00:41:02,480
Christian, which could feed in, you
know, to to possible employment

528
00:41:00,560 --> 00:41:05,040
opportunities for people in that area.
But is there like what type of

529
00:41:04,000 --> 00:41:07,839
collaboration do we have with
neighboring jurisdictions on these types

530
00:41:07,040 --> 00:41:10,319
of plans?
>> Yeah, that's a good question. And I'm

531
00:41:09,119 --> 00:41:13,920
actually and I think she already knows
I'm going to look toward uh toward uh

532
00:41:12,480 --> 00:41:17,200
planning director Bait Shell over here
since she's been here quite a bit longer

533
00:41:15,520 --> 00:41:19,520
than I have. We have done quite a bit of
coordination, but I'll let Miranda speak

534
00:41:18,640 --> 00:41:23,520
to that.
>> Yeah, thank you for the question,

535
00:41:20,720 --> 00:41:28,720
Commissioner Candrian. We um during the
the concept planning process, we worked

536
00:41:26,240 --> 00:41:32,560
um very like closely with the city of
Talatin. As I mentioned earlier, this

537
00:41:30,800 --> 00:41:37,200
land was brought into the urban growth
boundary by Metro and it was intended to

538
00:41:34,960 --> 00:41:41,760
be split. So essentially during that
entire process there were joint council

539
00:41:39,280 --> 00:41:47,760
meetings, there were numerous I think it
was every couple weeks um staff were

540
00:41:44,720 --> 00:41:51,520
meeting uh to work on the plan uh the
concept plan and so through that process

541
00:41:49,839 --> 00:41:56,480
is where you have like those guiding
principles that came from and a concept

542
00:41:54,079 --> 00:41:59,920
for the growth in this area. Uh what
land uses would be there and that was uh

543
00:41:58,480 --> 00:42:03,119
built upon that transportation
refinement plan I talked about. that

544
00:42:01,599 --> 00:42:09,440
transportation refinement plan was done
with uh in joint partnership with uh the

545
00:42:05,839 --> 00:42:14,800
county metro Tallatin and Wilsonville.
So both of those plans were done with a

546
00:42:11,760 --> 00:42:18,720
high level of coordination. Once we got
through that process, um there was

547
00:42:16,960 --> 00:42:23,440
continued coordination when we did our
comprehensive plan amendments um where

548
00:42:21,839 --> 00:42:28,880
because we did essentially the
transportation modeling together um with

549
00:42:26,079 --> 00:42:34,240
those findings for um uh the
transportation the TPR findings,

550
00:42:32,319 --> 00:42:39,040
transportation
planning rule. Thank you.

551
00:42:36,720 --> 00:42:44,000
How easily I can forget simple words.
Um, so we had to do those findings for

552
00:42:41,599 --> 00:42:46,960
the state and so we did all of that work
together. At this point where we're

553
00:42:45,440 --> 00:42:52,400
doing kind of master planning which
turns into our own code um and the

554
00:42:50,400 --> 00:42:56,480
details of implementation, that's where
there's less coordination that occurs

555
00:42:54,000 --> 00:43:01,680
because it's really about how we want uh
the look and feel to be how we what

556
00:42:58,720 --> 00:43:06,480
types of um kind of the details that go
into the land uses, the site design, the

557
00:43:04,079 --> 00:43:12,000
transportation design, uh the public
realm design. like those are all things

558
00:43:08,160 --> 00:43:15,119
that kind of happen um at that um more
local level and there's less

559
00:43:13,280 --> 00:43:20,400
coordination at that point. But things
like the trail um I know Tolatin has

560
00:43:18,560 --> 00:43:24,640
like we know what that alignment is
generally going to be and where it will

561
00:43:22,079 --> 00:43:29,119
connect underneath the parkway. Um and
so then we know at that point how it'll

562
00:43:26,960 --> 00:43:33,680
be designed. Uh north and south can
happen independently. But we often will

563
00:43:32,160 --> 00:43:37,200
coordinate to ensure that like if
they've created a design well what are

564
00:43:35,599 --> 00:43:41,920
they doing? what are they talking about
doing so we can look at how that might

565
00:43:40,000 --> 00:43:45,920
um be embedded within the trail design
we have to the south where it takes into

566
00:43:43,760 --> 00:43:50,800
consideration our own standards but also
would coordinate so there's continued

567
00:43:48,240 --> 00:43:55,920
coordination where um kind of the
elements in place uh need further

568
00:43:53,440 --> 00:44:00,079
coordination
and then we do track the other piece of

569
00:43:57,839 --> 00:44:05,280
it is we do track their development um
they invite us to their preapp meetings

570
00:44:02,240 --> 00:44:08,480
so if we want to connect with them um
one of the key concerns that came out

571
00:44:07,119 --> 00:44:12,560
through the concept planning is that
most of the storm water will eventually

572
00:44:10,000 --> 00:44:17,119
make its way into our system um and down
into our wetlands. And so, um one of the

573
00:44:15,680 --> 00:44:20,240
key things that we tend to coordinate
with them on is the transportation

574
00:44:18,560 --> 00:44:23,839
system and the storm water when we're
participating in that process. We don't

575
00:44:21,760 --> 00:44:27,839
really get into, uh the weeds on
anything, um because they're, you know,

576
00:44:25,839 --> 00:44:32,800
they're following the concept plan, um
through their own zoning code and and

577
00:44:30,079 --> 00:44:36,640
comprehensive plan regulations. And so,
but we do participate just to make sure

578
00:44:34,480 --> 00:44:41,760
we don't have any concerns. Um, and they
will be invited to do the same when we

579
00:44:39,280 --> 00:44:46,160
uh see development in our area of the
planning area.

580
00:44:43,440 --> 00:44:46,160
» Cool. Thank you.

581
00:44:50,079 --> 00:44:55,200
Maybe before we move off of
transportation, I don't know if Alex,

582
00:44:53,599 --> 00:44:58,880
you look like you're about to speak, but
before we move on for trans

583
00:44:56,480 --> 00:45:05,520
transportation, I had a a kind of a
curiosity around uh we in the in the uh

584
00:45:02,880 --> 00:45:08,160
in the packet, I saw a kind of open
question that some of these

585
00:45:06,560 --> 00:45:10,800
intersections as we build them will be
roundabouts, some of them will be

586
00:45:09,280 --> 00:45:16,160
signal, and we don't really know yet.
Um, right. Is is that an accurate

587
00:45:12,720 --> 00:45:19,520
interpretation of that?
>> I think so.

588
00:45:17,280 --> 00:45:25,280
» Yeah. Well, I guess I was just kind of
curious like what are the um what are

589
00:45:22,240 --> 00:45:29,040
the criteria for especially in an
industrial zone where we might see like

590
00:45:26,960 --> 00:45:32,720
heavier vehicles, larger vehicles. Are
there different criteria that we use for

591
00:45:30,720 --> 00:45:35,760
determining when something can be a
roundabout considering maybe a big

592
00:45:34,480 --> 00:45:41,720
semi-truck needs to be able to move
through it um versus a signaled

593
00:45:38,720 --> 00:45:41,720
intersection?

594
00:45:42,960 --> 00:45:47,839
Jenna, would you would you like to take
that one?

595
00:45:46,079 --> 00:45:51,440
» Yeah, sure.
>> Yeah, there's a couple things we look

596
00:45:49,040 --> 00:45:55,119
at. There's um there's an analysis we'll
do called an intersection control

597
00:45:52,800 --> 00:46:01,119
evaluation at the time when it's time to
decide what needs to be um constructed.

598
00:45:58,560 --> 00:46:07,200
And that looks at a lot of things. the
capacity um the the delay kind of those

599
00:46:05,119 --> 00:46:12,560
mobility metrics but it also looks at
the impacts from rideway cost storm

600
00:46:10,160 --> 00:46:16,079
water um it's kind of a whole slew truck
and freight movement is another big one

601
00:46:14,560 --> 00:46:21,200
so those are definitely considerations
and we look at it um you know heavy

602
00:46:19,680 --> 00:46:25,440
freight and truck movement through an
intersection does not disqualify a

603
00:46:23,520 --> 00:46:31,920
roundabout from being an option and
staying on the table um there's there's

604
00:46:28,640 --> 00:46:35,680
given if there's enough ride of way and
um ability to make a roundabout the

605
00:46:33,760 --> 00:46:42,000
right size and give it the right design.
Um freight and truck can can navigate

606
00:46:38,160 --> 00:46:47,119
those um well and safely. And so there's
there's kind of a detailed uh like list

607
00:46:44,800 --> 00:46:53,520
of criteria that we'll kind of work our
way through when the time comes. And um

608
00:46:50,400 --> 00:46:57,119
but yeah, a lot of times there's just
that kind of multiaceted

609
00:46:55,520 --> 00:47:01,520
approach. you have to look at all the
variables and and weigh the pros and

610
00:46:59,359 --> 00:47:05,680
cons of of each of those and kind of to
get a comprehensive picture of which

611
00:47:03,920 --> 00:47:12,960
option signal or roundabout is going to
be most um appropriate and preferred. So

612
00:47:09,680 --> 00:47:18,880
um yeah, there's there's definitely
benefits and um and um challenges with

613
00:47:16,400 --> 00:47:23,119
with roundabouts and freight and and
traffic. So it it will definitely be a

614
00:47:21,599 --> 00:47:26,359
consideration.
>> Thank you.

615
00:47:28,480 --> 00:47:36,240
I have a couple I guess are
transportation related. The um

616
00:47:33,119 --> 00:47:41,760
uh on the west railroad area, how
dependent

617
00:47:38,319 --> 00:47:45,480
will traffic flow be on a potential new
railroad crossing?

618
00:47:45,760 --> 00:47:51,040
» You want me to take that one? Yeah,
Chris.

619
00:47:47,599 --> 00:47:57,520
» Yeah, please.
Um, we analyzed

620
00:47:54,160 --> 00:48:05,200
the traffic for the west railroad area
and found that we can serve the area via

621
00:48:02,160 --> 00:48:11,200
two access points. one to the north um
on Tonquin Road and one to the south on

622
00:48:07,440 --> 00:48:17,760
Grahams Ferry Road um without the
connection across uh to K Halen across

623
00:48:14,640 --> 00:48:24,800
the railroad um like but that is not
necessary to serve that area under full

624
00:48:20,240 --> 00:48:32,000
development assumptions. So um of course
if that is a a opportunity that we can

625
00:48:29,440 --> 00:48:36,400
take advantage of and and you know
coordinate with railroad to get some

626
00:48:33,760 --> 00:48:40,960
kind of public crossing um at Cahalen
over the railroad there that would be

627
00:48:38,160 --> 00:48:45,839
all the much better but um those two
access points um north to Ton and south

628
00:48:43,839 --> 00:48:50,160
to Grans Ferry would will be adequate to
serve that area.

629
00:48:47,920 --> 00:48:55,680
» Okay. So follow-up question then with
the

630
00:48:51,839 --> 00:49:00,800
anticipated expense of the south
um access being Graham's Ferry

631
00:48:59,040 --> 00:49:04,400
uh the
overpass I guess you would call it the

632
00:49:02,480 --> 00:49:12,000
railroad crossing
>> uh is that a nearterm um shortterm

633
00:49:08,640 --> 00:49:14,800
near-term short-term or future
>> consideration

634
00:49:13,680 --> 00:49:19,760
commissioner you referring to the
undercrossing the under

635
00:49:15,920 --> 00:49:24,319
» crossing okay Yeah, I
I actually don't know where that slates

636
00:49:21,839 --> 00:49:30,000
out on a
>> um Commissioner Carr at this point. That

637
00:49:26,720 --> 00:49:34,480
project is a long-term investment. Um as
you know, we currently have our uh

638
00:49:32,319 --> 00:49:38,720
Coffee Creek Industrial Area and the
urban renewal plan that's helping to

639
00:49:36,960 --> 00:49:43,440
finance infrastructure projects in that
area that has a infrastructure project

640
00:49:40,559 --> 00:49:50,000
list that's incorporated into our CIP.
um until we have a sense of when this

641
00:49:45,920 --> 00:49:52,720
area might come online, um we wouldn't,
you know, we'd be looking at that point

642
00:49:51,359 --> 00:49:57,599
and trying to figure out, okay, how do
we make that project work? As we've

643
00:49:54,880 --> 00:50:04,079
already um
uh explored, the cost is high. Um it

644
00:50:01,680 --> 00:50:09,359
likely will need some kind of city
investment, likely urban renewal. Um,

645
00:50:06,960 --> 00:50:13,839
and we're doing that additional analysis
now to see like if it was integrated in,

646
00:50:11,520 --> 00:50:18,960
what impact does that have on our
initial uh, estimates for potentially

647
00:50:17,040 --> 00:50:23,200
expanding urban renewal into Basalt
Creek. So, kind of understanding what

648
00:50:21,200 --> 00:50:27,440
that might do based on the revenue we
might generate will feed at least some

649
00:50:25,040 --> 00:50:31,920
inputs for future decisions. But there
will be future decisions essentially on

650
00:50:29,520 --> 00:50:35,680
that project. Um, we're identifying it
now as we need to have a north, we need

651
00:50:34,000 --> 00:50:40,640
to have two access points getting in and
out. we likely need that south one

652
00:50:37,280 --> 00:50:44,960
regardless um even without Cahalen um to
get the connectivity that we need the

653
00:50:42,160 --> 00:50:48,880
through traffic connectivity um and that
improvement has already been identified

654
00:50:47,119 --> 00:50:53,440
not just for west road if you remember
when we were here discussing with you

655
00:50:50,319 --> 00:51:00,160
last time it's also to help citywide um
that improvement so um we essentially

656
00:50:57,839 --> 00:51:05,200
that project is it's not in the CIP now
it's probably not in the next you know

657
00:51:02,559 --> 00:51:08,160
update to it might be two or three out
um because there's a lot of other

658
00:51:06,480 --> 00:51:12,240
improvements that need to be made first
in order to then get that improvement uh

659
00:51:10,640 --> 00:51:19,520
moving forward.
>> Knowing that both

660
00:51:15,440 --> 00:51:24,319
the railroad crossing and the
undercrossing

661
00:51:21,200 --> 00:51:30,319
require coordination with
a railroad and or well I guess they're

662
00:51:27,440 --> 00:51:37,200
both with the railroad. Mhm.
>> How much

663
00:51:32,160 --> 00:51:42,319
how much of a delay is that coordination
would that coordination resulting and

664
00:51:39,040 --> 00:51:45,359
and how long of a decision point do they
have?

665
00:51:43,200 --> 00:51:50,240
» I don't think that we could provide that
information to you definitively. Every

666
00:51:47,839 --> 00:51:56,240
situation's going to look different. Uh,
but I do know that like the fifth

667
00:51:52,559 --> 00:52:03,119
tokensman project um had it took a long
time to do some work with the railroad.

668
00:51:59,359 --> 00:52:08,400
» I think that's my concern is the two
our two our two access points. The only

669
00:52:06,079 --> 00:52:10,960
one that's really viable currently is
the one that we're talking about on the

670
00:52:10,000 --> 00:52:16,559
north,
>> which isn't there yet. Mhm.

671
00:52:12,880 --> 00:52:21,280
» Um, so we've got
the two access points that we would well

672
00:52:19,599 --> 00:52:27,920
the one access point that we need on the
south and the one that we would like um

673
00:52:24,800 --> 00:52:32,319
uh the new railroad crossing are both
constrained by someone else. They're

674
00:52:29,839 --> 00:52:36,800
they're both in somebody else's control.
>> So it's going to limit our ability to do

675
00:52:34,960 --> 00:52:42,079
anything.
So, at what point do we say we have to

676
00:52:39,040 --> 00:52:48,079
get the ball rolling
before we can kind of

677
00:52:45,200 --> 00:52:52,079
approve a master plan? Well, I would I
would um pivot that maybe slightly,

678
00:52:50,800 --> 00:52:57,040
Commissioner Carr, and say that we
create a master plan to then be able to

679
00:52:54,720 --> 00:53:03,280
put in motion those decisions
>> because if we know that the that that is

680
00:53:01,520 --> 00:53:07,280
that this area, the planning commission
and city council want developed out in a

681
00:53:05,280 --> 00:53:12,319
certain way and we have that framework
adopted into our comprehensive plan and

682
00:53:09,839 --> 00:53:15,920
into a master plan, then staff have the
guidance to be able to go out and do

683
00:53:13,920 --> 00:53:19,520
that work in order to initiate those
conversations. ations in order to and we

684
00:53:18,400 --> 00:53:22,559
you know we wouldn't initiate
conversations with the railroad after

685
00:53:20,880 --> 00:53:25,599
we've figured out a whole bunch of stuff
for the right we would go out and we

686
00:53:24,160 --> 00:53:30,079
would initiate those conversations
earlier as we're doing those other

687
00:53:27,599 --> 00:53:34,480
analyses um and doing the other plans to
try to get these projects in motion.

688
00:53:32,160 --> 00:53:39,359
» So do we emphasize the new railroad
crossing to give you the the legs to go

689
00:53:37,760 --> 00:53:44,240
to the railroad and say this is what we
want?

690
00:53:41,760 --> 00:53:47,680
So both um currently right now as we
were talking about West Railroad the

691
00:53:45,839 --> 00:53:51,200
Cahalen crossing was listed I believe as
an opportunity um and I know there's

692
00:53:49,680 --> 00:53:55,920
been some preliminary conversation with
the railroads just to see is it a hard

693
00:53:53,680 --> 00:54:01,040
no is it a maybe what that starts to
look like and so as um as Miranda was

694
00:53:59,040 --> 00:54:06,880
mentioning identifying that within a
plan as a potential future connection is

695
00:54:04,720 --> 00:54:10,880
is direction enough for to be able to at
least start to look at that um you know

696
00:54:08,720 --> 00:54:15,680
the undercrossing Railroads will always
look for least kind of impact to their

697
00:54:13,839 --> 00:54:19,760
systems and so
>> they do take a long time um when you

698
00:54:17,680 --> 00:54:23,440
start to coordinate with them but that
like really those connections however

699
00:54:22,000 --> 00:54:28,960
that comes to be in the future will be
essential for that future development.

700
00:54:25,599 --> 00:54:33,599
Um and so I think showing both within
the plan gives some flexibility in how

701
00:54:31,520 --> 00:54:38,400
that starts to come for West Railroad
specifically. But as Miranda mentioned,

702
00:54:35,839 --> 00:54:42,960
the undercrossing is a broader question
um that that project that engineering is

703
00:54:41,359 --> 00:54:48,640
looking at is trying to address as well.
So it's not just about West Railroad

704
00:54:45,520 --> 00:54:53,839
area. There's there's other um kind of
benefits that that project would provide

705
00:54:50,720 --> 00:54:58,079
even if it's a long-term project.
And to just to tack one more thing on

706
00:54:55,839 --> 00:55:01,520
Alex touched on it, but our uh economic
city's economic development manager has

707
00:54:59,680 --> 00:55:04,800
reached out and been having a couple
conversations with the railroad already

708
00:55:03,200 --> 00:55:08,880
and they were actually far more positive
than we might have expected. Obviously,

709
00:55:07,359 --> 00:55:13,520
it'll still take a very it'll still take
a very long time, but the those

710
00:55:11,200 --> 00:55:19,599
conversations have started. So, um Okay.
Yeah.

711
00:55:15,520 --> 00:55:26,640
» Switching gears completely. um the BPA
um easements. Um have we done any kind

712
00:55:22,720 --> 00:55:30,960
of negotiations with them so that we can
um

713
00:55:28,800 --> 00:55:38,079
take advantage of the real estate under
their easement for uh trails, storm

714
00:55:34,720 --> 00:55:43,079
water, parking, etc.
>> Well, as far as

715
00:55:38,800 --> 00:55:43,079
» And how long does that process take?

716
00:55:43,440 --> 00:55:49,200
» Time. Time. Always time, right? Well,
uh, yeah, as far as building structures

717
00:55:47,680 --> 00:55:51,680
and whatnot, that's obviously not
something they're going to let you do,

718
00:55:50,240 --> 00:55:56,480
but I believe we're allowed to do things
that are gravel and trails and whatnot.

719
00:55:54,559 --> 00:56:00,559
I don't know if Miranda's been in those
past conversations, so I couldn't speak

720
00:55:58,079 --> 00:56:04,720
to how much time it takes. Um, but
that's something we've dealt with in the

721
00:56:02,079 --> 00:56:10,000
past. Yeah, I could note uh Commissioner
Carr that uh during the Frog Pond East

722
00:56:07,520 --> 00:56:14,960
planning uh we did have conversations
with BPA to understand what could or

723
00:56:12,880 --> 00:56:20,000
could not go in or adjacent to the
easement as we were discussing things

724
00:56:16,799 --> 00:56:24,319
like the adjacency of the park um and
the desire to make that regional trail

725
00:56:22,079 --> 00:56:28,400
connection. Um and essentially our
discussions at that point with them were

726
00:56:26,640 --> 00:56:34,720
essentially what you just heard from the
team, which is um that there you can

727
00:56:32,000 --> 00:56:38,240
have things like trails um but there's a
lot of things you can't have. So things

728
00:56:36,240 --> 00:56:45,040
that have any height pretty much so no
trees um no metal um and you also risk

729
00:56:43,119 --> 00:56:49,680
if they need to go in there to access
their facility in any way, shape or form

730
00:56:47,359 --> 00:56:54,319
that what is there could be disturbed.
Um, and so there is some ability to have

731
00:56:52,559 --> 00:56:58,480
improvements in that area, but it can be
hard to really count on its permanency

732
00:56:56,240 --> 00:57:03,839
and the cost of replacement could be on
not on BPA. Um, is typically how they

733
00:57:01,520 --> 00:57:09,440
negotiate those things in the easement.
Um, and so a lot of times what we see is

734
00:57:07,359 --> 00:57:13,680
like with Frog Pond East, we'll work on
having that regional trail. We'll

735
00:57:11,119 --> 00:57:16,960
partner to try to get um the rights to
be able to have that regional trail

736
00:57:15,040 --> 00:57:22,960
there and understand that improvements
might have to be done over time. Um but

737
00:57:19,280 --> 00:57:27,760
things like uh you know maybe parking
that would be part of a what the

738
00:57:25,359 --> 00:57:31,920
developer may or may not want. A lot of
those negotiations might be then with

739
00:57:30,000 --> 00:57:37,680
like the property owner depending upon
what how they may or may not want to um

740
00:57:35,359 --> 00:57:41,359
coordinate with BPA on accessing that
easement.

741
00:57:38,640 --> 00:57:46,880
» I just speak because there is a BPA
easement right by my house and they just

742
00:57:44,240 --> 00:57:51,760
strip mine everything that's under their
lines.

743
00:57:48,400 --> 00:57:56,640
Um, so I wouldn't want us to do any kind
of improvements that would be

744
00:57:55,200 --> 00:57:58,960
altered.
>> Yeah.

745
00:57:57,200 --> 00:58:03,839
» Right.
>> Um,

746
00:58:00,960 --> 00:58:09,520
shifting gears even more. So the uh your
question here is does the um the master

747
00:58:07,599 --> 00:58:16,000
plan reflect the long-term vision? I
think it does. I think um adding the uh

748
00:58:13,920 --> 00:58:22,720
economic opportunity analysis and the
economic development strategy

749
00:58:18,480 --> 00:58:28,640
um just further hits on I think the nine
guiding principles that we got from the

750
00:58:24,480 --> 00:58:34,640
concept plan. Um uh and and I appreciate
the work that went into

751
00:58:31,440 --> 00:58:39,200
um giving us the different concepts and
then taking a couple of the concept

752
00:58:36,880 --> 00:58:44,480
plans and and melding them together. I
think that was uh that did a great job I

753
00:58:41,920 --> 00:58:49,040
think again of of hitting those those
guiding principles to answer your

754
00:58:46,640 --> 00:58:55,280
question. Um do the comprehensive plan
amendments hit I think yes they're um

755
00:58:53,599 --> 00:58:59,040
you know the the key elements that we
had were the land use and development

756
00:58:57,520 --> 00:59:04,000
transportation parks and natural
resource and utilities and I think all

757
00:59:01,280 --> 00:59:08,880
of those were um covered well again
under that um uh under the plan

758
00:59:06,960 --> 00:59:12,119
amendment. So, yeah, I appreciate the
work there.

759
00:59:12,400 --> 00:59:24,480
What do I want you to work on? Um,
I do have concerns over

760
00:59:21,359 --> 00:59:30,559
um the fragmented ownership and existing
uses. I think we've talked about this ad

761
00:59:27,040 --> 00:59:35,000
nauseium. Um,
I have a concern that

762
00:59:35,200 --> 00:59:42,480
without some
proactive intervention by the city, if

763
00:59:40,960 --> 00:59:46,559
we
if we wait for them to do something,

764
00:59:44,160 --> 00:59:50,920
nothing will happen. I think the city is
going to need to do something

765
00:59:47,920 --> 00:59:50,920
proactively.

766
00:59:50,960 --> 00:59:57,119
I don't know if that has to be built
into the master plan or if that's more

767
00:59:54,960 --> 01:00:05,599
of an implementation.
Um, but I do have a concern that uh

768
01:00:01,520 --> 01:00:13,680
especially the um
the um construction spaces um the

769
01:00:11,680 --> 01:00:21,520
unless we
ask them nicely to move, they won't. Um

770
01:00:16,960 --> 01:00:28,319
and and that's a concern. Uh I also am a
strong proponent of urban renewal. Um,

771
01:00:24,400 --> 01:00:33,599
and I want to make sure that that is
utilized effectively in this area,

772
01:00:31,040 --> 01:00:38,480
whether it's an expansion of the current
CPY Creek one or whether it's a new one.

773
01:00:36,640 --> 01:00:43,839
Um, I don't know what's the best way to
do that, but I think there should be an

774
01:00:40,079 --> 01:00:48,240
emphasis on using that at least to uh
fund the infrastructure.

775
01:00:46,559 --> 01:00:51,760
And then I think we've covered traffic
and and

776
01:00:50,079 --> 01:00:55,839
wildlife
mitigation.

777
01:00:54,160 --> 01:01:01,040
» I might need a little bit more work on
that myself, but uh otherwise I I love

778
01:00:59,440 --> 01:01:05,559
the work that's been done here.
>> Great. Thank you. Appreciate the

779
01:01:02,559 --> 01:01:05,559
comments.

780
01:01:08,400 --> 01:01:14,480
» I'll just add a couple things. So to
echo just the major milestone and it is

781
01:01:12,799 --> 01:01:19,599
really neat to see the culmination of
all of our conversations over yeah a

782
01:01:17,520 --> 01:01:23,839
long while come together into one
document and so that's really neat to

783
01:01:21,280 --> 01:01:29,200
see and I do think it reflects where we
landed in the conversations we had. So I

784
01:01:25,760 --> 01:01:33,200
I appreciate that and then the one area
that surprised me was just seeing kind

785
01:01:30,640 --> 01:01:36,960
of the implementation phasing is like
that first column is like the five

786
01:01:34,640 --> 01:01:41,119
within five years and most of the boxes
are checked for first five years. So I

787
01:01:39,280 --> 01:01:44,480
immediately think of just yeah capacity
to explore those things and also just

788
01:01:42,720 --> 01:01:49,040
the challenges that like these some of
these things are really dependent on

789
01:01:46,720 --> 01:01:53,680
other partners and things like that. So
I'm just keeping that in mind but

790
01:01:50,799 --> 01:01:57,680
they're good goals to set. And
uh one thing on the comprehensive plan.

791
01:01:56,400 --> 01:02:01,920
So, I think yeah, those were great
updates and yeah, some of the older

792
01:01:59,520 --> 01:02:08,480
language uh kind of surprised me just
around the I think it mentioned like the

793
01:02:05,760 --> 01:02:12,000
need for just like one industrial type,
right? And and we've gone we've kind of

794
01:02:10,640 --> 01:02:17,200
swung the other way. So, it's just
interesting to see uh that change over

795
01:02:13,760 --> 01:02:21,520
time. And then a curiosity I had was
there's a section in here on economic

796
01:02:19,359 --> 01:02:24,960
development that looks like it was it
was added and then the the flow after

797
01:02:23,599 --> 01:02:27,680
that felt a little weird. some of the
paragraphs felt just a little redundant

798
01:02:26,799 --> 01:02:31,680
or
>> I I don't know if there could just be

799
01:02:28,960 --> 01:02:38,880
some cleaning up and that was on um the
packet page 167 and 168 just felt it

800
01:02:36,000 --> 01:02:41,920
felt a little disconnected and so if
there's opportunity u to just take a

801
01:02:40,880 --> 01:02:46,880
look at that and see if there's some
refinement that can happen there. I

802
01:02:43,280 --> 01:02:50,559
think that would be a lot clearer and
I think that's all the comments I had.

803
01:02:48,720 --> 01:02:54,480
» No, I appreciate that feedback. Thank
you.

804
01:02:53,040 --> 01:02:59,520
Thank you for your hard work that went
into this. Um, I'll answer some of the

805
01:02:56,480 --> 01:03:03,520
questions u about the draft materials. I
don't I didn't I think all the great

806
01:03:01,599 --> 01:03:10,240
questions have been asked by our
brilliant commissioners here.

807
01:03:06,240 --> 01:03:13,240
It's hard to follow but um I was curious
um

808
01:03:13,599 --> 01:03:20,880
with with the coming analysis in the
future for the infrastructure right for

809
01:03:18,000 --> 01:03:27,760
the utilities and and the capacity will
that include the

810
01:03:23,599 --> 01:03:32,240
a comparison of what this master plan um
how it feed feeds into the master plan

811
01:03:29,839 --> 01:03:36,880
for the entire city as well in terms of
that cap uh capacity uh because we have

812
01:03:35,280 --> 01:03:40,880
growth happening you know, planning here
and planning there and and how it all

813
01:03:39,200 --> 01:03:45,839
fits together and what that's going to
mean for the citizens of the city and

814
01:03:43,599 --> 01:03:50,559
how it will impact them and what is
being served now and what is forecasted

815
01:03:48,000 --> 01:03:56,240
to be served in the future and and what
kind of improvements the utilities will

816
01:03:53,200 --> 01:04:01,920
need to build out. Um like will all that
be included in the next work session?

817
01:03:59,200 --> 01:04:06,240
» So the the infrastructure analysis is
pretty specific to the Basalt Creek

818
01:04:03,440 --> 01:04:12,960
planning area itself. Um we haven't
looked uh beyond that for the master

819
01:04:10,160 --> 01:04:15,760
plan specifically. No.
Is that

820
01:04:13,599 --> 01:04:19,839
» that's what would be helpful for me to
see like the big impact when you put it

821
01:04:17,760 --> 01:04:25,359
all together. Um
>> well maybe I'm not understanding that

822
01:04:21,280 --> 01:04:29,839
question either. So, I mean, so the the
Basalt Creek master plan infrastructure

823
01:04:27,280 --> 01:04:34,319
analysis, we're we're looking at within
that area, within that 847 acre area,

824
01:04:32,640 --> 01:04:36,480
what infrastructure is needed for future
development,

825
01:04:35,039 --> 01:04:41,200
» right? Water, sewer.
>> Exactly. Storm water, sewer. Exactly. Uh

826
01:04:39,200 --> 01:04:44,720
roadway buildouts, roadway widths,
sidewalks, all the infrastructure

827
01:04:42,960 --> 01:04:50,000
necessary. And then, you know, what are
the um associated costs of that,

828
01:04:47,839 --> 01:04:57,039
» right? and then trying to do so in a
organized fashion, right? Um but it

829
01:04:52,880 --> 01:04:59,440
doesn't include say Frog Pond or So is
that kind of what you're asking?

830
01:04:58,000 --> 01:05:03,200
» Yeah. But there's going to be this also
additional demand coming from all these

831
01:05:01,359 --> 01:05:09,119
other developments, right?
>> And so I'm curious how that all fits

832
01:05:06,400 --> 01:05:15,520
together and whether the like the entire
system is going to be enough. How does

833
01:05:11,839 --> 01:05:20,079
that affect our our water master plan
and our sewer master plan? And

834
01:05:18,160 --> 01:05:24,559
» yeah, commissioners, we can make sure
that um engineering staff is planning to

835
01:05:22,400 --> 01:05:29,760
attend the next meeting alongside any of
the technical um uh the consultants that

836
01:05:28,400 --> 01:05:33,599
we're working with to do the technical
analysis. Um and so we can make sure

837
01:05:31,680 --> 01:05:38,000
they're prepared to discuss that. We
even though we're planning for what will

838
01:05:36,000 --> 01:05:41,760
this system in this area like look like
and be designed like it is taken into

839
01:05:40,240 --> 01:05:46,400
consideration how does that then fit
into the broader master plans for our

840
01:05:44,559 --> 01:05:49,440
water and sewer and trans even
transportation as I discussed earlier

841
01:05:48,000 --> 01:05:52,720
when we're looking at the modeling we
don't look at just the model in

842
01:05:50,640 --> 01:05:56,000
isolation of this area but then at the
same time we're only presenting here are

843
01:05:54,160 --> 01:06:01,119
the transportation projects for this
area because the rest of the tsp covers

844
01:05:58,559 --> 01:06:04,400
everything else if that makes sense so
it we will talk about there will

845
01:06:03,039 --> 01:06:09,599
probably some discussion about any
potential downstream impacts and then

846
01:06:06,480 --> 01:06:13,119
how this is uh sized in relationship to
the rest of the system. So sometimes

847
01:06:10,960 --> 01:06:16,720
you'll have like oversized pipes because
it's needed to serve the rest of the

848
01:06:15,680 --> 01:06:20,920
system.
>> So use of the word downstream

849
01:06:21,280 --> 01:06:25,119
» that would be really helpful for if we
could cover that in the next work

850
01:06:24,480 --> 01:06:28,720
session.
>> Absolutely. Like where I was leading to.

851
01:06:27,039 --> 01:06:31,200
» Yeah, we can definitely make sure uh
engineering is prepared to discuss that.

852
01:06:30,559 --> 01:06:36,640
» Y okay
>> 100%. Thank you. Um, and I do I do think

853
01:06:34,480 --> 01:06:40,240
it reflects the vision. I think it's
really fantastic work. Yeah. And I look

854
01:06:38,640 --> 01:06:43,200
forward to seeing it continue to grow
and develop.

855
01:06:41,839 --> 01:06:47,760
» Great. Excellent. Appreciate that.
>> I I did want to make a comment about

856
01:06:44,799 --> 01:06:52,000
roundabouts. Um, the
just something to consider. I know

857
01:06:49,359 --> 01:06:57,039
there's a way to build them to allow for
free traffic, but I just worry about

858
01:06:55,520 --> 01:07:02,160
just because I this is where I work the
PG yard and not getting them gridlocked

859
01:06:59,280 --> 01:07:05,520
in the roundabouts with pole trailers.
Uh and because that's something that

860
01:07:03,520 --> 01:07:09,599
they've experienced with cities in
development and putting a roundabout and

861
01:07:07,920 --> 01:07:14,640
all of a sudden you can't maneuver it
with pole trailers and you're trying to

862
01:07:11,680 --> 01:07:19,920
go restore outages or build things and
just, you know, something to consider.

863
01:07:16,799 --> 01:07:23,920
It's really big.
>> Yeah. Right.

864
01:07:20,720 --> 01:07:25,280
» Which I don't know. Um Yeah, it could be
difficult.

865
01:07:24,720 --> 01:07:30,400
» Excellent.
>> Uh we have some Yeah, go ahead.

866
01:07:27,760 --> 01:07:39,839
» Um so this may have been answered a
couple years ago. I like didn't see it

867
01:07:33,200 --> 01:07:44,559
in any of the um materials, but um the
the guiding principles,

868
01:07:42,319 --> 01:07:49,119
two of them mentioned housing,
>> but there's no housing here, although

869
01:07:46,960 --> 01:07:50,720
some of the area butts up to housing
from Tolatin.

870
01:07:50,160 --> 01:07:56,240
» Correct.
>> Is there a reason why we were just like,

871
01:07:52,559 --> 01:07:59,760
eh, for housing?
>> Can you clarify what you mean by eh?

872
01:07:58,079 --> 01:08:04,160
» Like, well, there's there's no there's
no house. There's no housing, right? But

873
01:08:01,839 --> 01:08:05,920
like there's no housing in in this
version of the plan.

874
01:08:05,440 --> 01:08:09,520
» Correct.
>> And I mean right now there's a few

875
01:08:08,160 --> 01:08:14,079
residential areas there. So it's not
like it's completely industrial right

876
01:08:11,440 --> 01:08:19,359
now. And the new Twitin development
really abuts or is adjacent butts up to

877
01:08:17,839 --> 01:08:24,400
I don't know the correct term either.
>> Um where we have I think you know like

878
01:08:22,319 --> 01:08:28,960
high-tech employment district off of
like Boone Ferry. So, I just wondered if

879
01:08:27,040 --> 01:08:31,040
there's a reason why there's no housing.
Yeah.

880
01:08:29,359 --> 01:08:34,880
» Suggested in any of this.
>> Yeah. Thank you, Commissioner Candrian.

881
01:08:32,640 --> 01:08:37,440
So, uh, when the area was brought into
Metro's urban growth boundary, it was

882
01:08:36,319 --> 01:08:42,000
brought in for the purposes of
industrial development. During that

883
01:08:39,600 --> 01:08:44,960
time, there was a discussion by
representatives from the city of

884
01:08:43,440 --> 01:08:50,319
Toalatin
um wanting to have some additional

885
01:08:47,759 --> 01:08:54,080
residential at the northern portion of
the planning area in order to create a

886
01:08:52,560 --> 01:08:59,199
better buffer with the existing
residential neighborhood. So when it

887
01:08:56,319 --> 01:09:03,679
came into um the urban growth boundary,
the ordinance that passed it had a map

888
01:09:01,279 --> 01:09:07,679
attached which essentially uh stated
that there would be residential in the

889
01:09:06,000 --> 01:09:10,799
northern portion of the planning area
adjacent to the city of Toalatin, but

890
01:09:09,359 --> 01:09:14,960
the rest of the area was brought in for
the purposes of industrial and

891
01:09:12,880 --> 01:09:19,520
employment growth. throughout the entire
planning process with our city council.

892
01:09:17,359 --> 01:09:25,679
Uh the city council maintained their
desire for this area to be essentially

893
01:09:23,359 --> 01:09:30,000
solely and maybe I shouldn't use the
term solely but to be industrial and

894
01:09:27,759 --> 01:09:34,239
employment land as we've discussed like
with the craft industrial there might be

895
01:09:32,000 --> 01:09:41,279
appropriate times where you have either
a business um related dwelling unit or a

896
01:09:38,319 --> 01:09:46,159
um live work unit. those might be
feasible in the craft industrial area,

897
01:09:43,279 --> 01:09:50,640
but primarily the whole entire point for
us was this was an employment industrial

898
01:09:48,640 --> 01:09:54,320
area and we wanted to maintain that. It
really builds off of the Coffee Creek

899
01:09:52,239 --> 01:09:58,560
industrial area. We have that which is
going to front onto Day Road. Um we have

900
01:09:56,880 --> 01:10:02,480
the formbbased code there that's
creating this kind of business district

901
01:10:00,719 --> 01:10:07,120
and we wanted to the council wanted to
see that mirrored on the north side of

902
01:10:04,480 --> 01:10:11,920
Day to our boundary. It also didn't make
s much much sense to the council to like

903
01:10:09,199 --> 01:10:18,400
create an isolated neighborhood out
there in Wilsonville for us to serve in

904
01:10:14,480 --> 01:10:21,040
more of a residential manner um versus
adjacent to our existing residential

905
01:10:20,560 --> 01:10:26,960
areas.
>> You didn't want like Charbano North.

906
01:10:25,120 --> 01:10:31,120
» Okay, that's fair. I just wondered
because like it's called out as in the

907
01:10:28,960 --> 01:10:33,840
guiding principles, but then we don't
have anything addressed. So

908
01:10:32,320 --> 01:10:38,000
» it was primarily in those guiding
principles because of the city of

909
01:10:35,679 --> 01:10:40,880
Toalatin um and the fact that there
would be housing in their portion of the

910
01:10:39,840 --> 01:10:45,600
planning area.
>> I think it also if I could add to that

911
01:10:43,199 --> 01:10:50,880
is how if you look at the map how we've
got certain areas designated as certain

912
01:10:48,400 --> 01:10:55,679
industry classifications.
We kind of structured it such that the

913
01:10:53,920 --> 01:10:58,960
high-tech and the craft would be closer
to the homes.

914
01:10:57,120 --> 01:11:04,480
» Um and we did more of the industrial a
little bit off of that. And I think that

915
01:11:00,800 --> 01:11:09,679
was by design, but you're the guiding
principles or the the concept plan which

916
01:11:07,280 --> 01:11:13,400
includes the tool and the Wilsonville
area. So yeah.

917
01:11:15,120 --> 01:11:21,280
» Yeah. The the when Commissioner Car was
speaking it triggered a question in my

918
01:11:19,199 --> 01:11:26,400
head around um like lot when you were
talking about lot sizes. Um, I wonder if

919
01:11:24,239 --> 01:11:29,360
there's like a a sweet spot for the
different kinds of development that we

920
01:11:27,679 --> 01:11:34,640
want to see in each of these areas. And
is it different for the industrial area

921
01:11:32,800 --> 01:11:40,000
versus the craft area?
>> Um, and would that help us kind of

922
01:11:36,960 --> 01:11:44,719
inform any any action that we do take
proactively as a city to try to maybe

923
01:11:42,320 --> 01:11:49,679
maybe aggregate land or or facilitate
property owners um adjusting their lot

924
01:11:47,679 --> 01:11:53,520
sizes,
whether it's consolidating or splitting.

925
01:11:52,159 --> 01:11:56,719
That might be interesting to see.
>> Yeah.

926
01:11:54,080 --> 01:11:59,840
» Um and that that dovetailed with another
question that I had had when when we

927
01:11:58,000 --> 01:12:06,960
were talking about the natural resources
and the um the the Coffee Lake area is I

928
01:12:04,640 --> 01:12:11,360
think pretty high visibility. I think
most people that spend any time in the

929
01:12:09,520 --> 01:12:15,199
area are pretty aware of it, but the
Tapman Creek is pretty invisible to I

930
01:12:13,840 --> 01:12:18,320
think most people. Even if you're up on
day road and looking for it, it's pretty

931
01:12:17,520 --> 01:12:22,480
nondescript. It's
>> hard to find.

932
01:12:19,120 --> 01:12:27,600
» Yeah. is um has is that an area that
would need to be restored in order for

933
01:12:24,800 --> 01:12:32,880
it to be a functioning riparian area or
is it is it actively functioning that

934
01:12:30,239 --> 01:12:35,440
way right now? How much does and I guess
the the question beyond the question too

935
01:12:34,239 --> 01:12:39,920
is just trying to understand a little
bit of how that overlays with the craft

936
01:12:38,480 --> 01:12:43,840
zone because on the map it looks like
that Tapman Creek natural resources area

937
01:12:42,080 --> 01:12:47,520
overlays with almost all of the craft
zone. And so I'm kind of curious like

938
01:12:46,080 --> 01:12:52,320
how do how do how do we interpret the
craft zone with that Chapman Creek?

939
01:12:50,159 --> 01:12:55,840
» I'm happy to take this one uh because
I'm probably the only person in this

940
01:12:54,080 --> 01:13:00,239
room who's actually been down to the
creek.

941
01:12:57,520 --> 01:13:04,239
» Um so during the concept planning I was
invited by property owners in order to

942
01:13:02,239 --> 01:13:09,520
be able to go and to see Tapman Creek
and to experience what it's like at

943
01:13:06,719 --> 01:13:14,800
different seasons. Um and so it does
actually function as a thriving wetland.

944
01:13:12,239 --> 01:13:20,000
Um most of those property owners um
their property runs from um Boone's

945
01:13:18,000 --> 01:13:24,880
Ferry all the way across which is why
you see that craft designation. We don't

946
01:13:23,280 --> 01:13:28,320
really anticipate if you start
overlaying all the layers we have within

947
01:13:26,719 --> 01:13:32,560
the plan. We don't anticipate
development within that area. That area

948
01:13:31,120 --> 01:13:36,560
will end up being part of our
significant resource overlay zone. It

949
01:13:34,719 --> 01:13:40,320
will be protect that creek and the slope
will be protected. So the development

950
01:13:38,560 --> 01:13:44,480
really will only be on the front end
adjacent to Boon Ferry. But when you do

951
01:13:42,719 --> 01:13:50,080
zoning, you have to zone an entire
property a zoning designation even if

952
01:13:47,040 --> 01:13:55,120
you then have an SRZ overlay. So all of
that information is is within the plan

953
01:13:52,239 --> 01:13:59,600
itself. Um but I have been down there.
Most of those property owners can't even

954
01:13:57,199 --> 01:14:04,080
access the backside of their property.
Um, it has to be like the driest of a

955
01:14:02,000 --> 01:14:10,560
driest year for them to be able to kind
of cross or to use like a canoe or a

956
01:14:06,719 --> 01:14:15,440
kayak to cross. Um, and uh, it's a
pretty like if you get into that area,

957
01:14:12,800 --> 01:14:19,520
it turns into pure nature really quick.
Um, and they've seen lots of different

958
01:14:17,600 --> 01:14:23,920
wildlife out there. There's I think only
one property owner who has um, some kind

959
01:14:22,159 --> 01:14:28,320
of access to the backside of that
property, but that's it. So, um it is an

960
01:14:26,480 --> 01:14:33,920
area that will take and does take
significant uh storm water runoff as

961
01:14:30,560 --> 01:14:38,880
well. Um which is one of our um concerns
or or things we want to make sure we're

962
01:14:36,000 --> 01:14:42,480
managing uh properly.
>> Some of the some of the properties that

963
01:14:40,480 --> 01:14:47,040
basically the front half of it is
developable and then just kind of

964
01:14:45,040 --> 01:14:50,480
» plummets I guess drops off. Yeah.
>> Yeah. There's just steep slope. There's

965
01:14:48,719 --> 01:14:56,159
a lot of areas where you can actually
openly see the basalt. Um, which is also

966
01:14:53,760 --> 01:15:00,719
really cool because I mean that sorry
that area was

967
01:14:58,320 --> 01:15:06,000
uh you know a part of like the Missoula
floods and there's a lot of really cool

968
01:15:03,840 --> 01:15:10,239
um just features in this whole kind of
area of the region where you can see

969
01:15:08,080 --> 01:15:15,840
like the results of that and in a lot of
areas our basalt is buried um but in

970
01:15:12,640 --> 01:15:20,880
this area the name reflects it. um you
will have some basalt that's 100 ft down

971
01:15:17,920 --> 01:15:27,120
and then literally 50 ft over it could
be like 5 to 10 ft down. Um so it al

972
01:15:24,560 --> 01:15:31,280
that will also create some interesting
development challenges. Um but it is

973
01:15:29,920 --> 01:15:35,040
something that we did look at when we
were doing the concept planning.

974
01:15:32,880 --> 01:15:39,280
» Yeah. And is that if I remember
correctly that that's that informs some

975
01:15:36,960 --> 01:15:42,560
of the reason maybe why the tonkan the
ice age trail goes maybe near those

976
01:15:41,360 --> 01:15:43,600
natural features.
>> Yeah.

977
01:15:42,880 --> 01:15:46,800
» Yeah. Very cool.
>> Yeah. and our consultant that's working

978
01:15:44,960 --> 01:15:49,760
on the storm water analysis. You'll see
we just met with them a couple times

979
01:15:48,080 --> 01:15:53,840
this week. You'll see some of their you
will see their work at work session 2

980
01:15:51,840 --> 01:15:57,360
Tapman Creek and and those flows and
where that's going is all part of that

981
01:15:55,280 --> 01:16:00,480
work. So you'll in the packet you'll get
to preview that and then they'll be here

982
01:15:59,120 --> 01:16:03,840
and available to talk a little bit more
about it too.

983
01:16:01,920 --> 01:16:07,840
» Cool. Yeah. And thank you for for all
that and and just emphasizing the first

984
01:16:05,679 --> 01:16:11,760
I I packed a lot into that, but I'd love
to see more information about like

985
01:16:09,120 --> 01:16:15,280
what's the sweet spot for for lot sizes
for the expected development maybe in

986
01:16:13,840 --> 01:16:19,719
the future work session as well.
>> Okay.

987
01:16:15,920 --> 01:16:19,719
» I've got a note for it.

988
01:16:22,880 --> 01:16:26,719
» All right. No other comments? We're
good. Questions? All right. Well, thank

989
01:16:25,840 --> 01:16:28,719
you so much.
>> Thank you. Appreciate it.

990
01:16:27,600 --> 01:16:32,800
» Yeah. Thank you for your time. We
appreciate it. We'll see you in a month.

991
01:16:29,920 --> 01:16:36,080
Thank you.
All right,

992
01:16:33,440 --> 01:16:40,560
» cheer sea. I just wanted to We were
conversing back and forth. We do not

993
01:16:38,080 --> 01:16:42,960
believe. Did we address the minutes?
>> No, I was thinking dinner afterwards.

994
01:16:42,400 --> 01:16:46,960
» Perfect.
>> Yes, I did. I do know that I went

995
01:16:44,960 --> 01:16:52,080
straight to business.
>> It's okay. That's okay. Thank you.

996
01:16:49,520 --> 01:16:54,880
» Yeah, but thank you.
>> Is that Is that all right?

997
01:16:53,360 --> 01:16:59,520
» Moving forward. It didn't even
>> didn't even phase it.

998
01:16:56,159 --> 01:17:03,520
» Didn't even face that. I could be slack
this time. you know, try to keep you

999
01:17:01,840 --> 01:17:08,320
guys on your toes.
>> We can just do that work session again,

1000
01:17:04,960 --> 01:17:14,000
right? Yeah. Just start over.
>> All right. Um, our next

1001
01:17:11,679 --> 01:17:16,480
» You want to switch back and do
>> Yeah. Why don't you take care of the

1002
01:17:15,199 --> 01:17:22,239
minutes while I get the
>> Okay. All right. Sounds good. Um,

1003
01:17:19,040 --> 01:17:27,880
consideration of the minutes.
Where's my script to make sure? Do we um

1004
01:17:27,920 --> 01:17:36,480
the What was that date? May 13th, 2026.
Um, minutes were previously distributed.

1005
01:17:35,040 --> 01:17:39,600
Are there any corrections to the
minutes?

1006
01:17:37,679 --> 01:17:43,280
» No.
>> Can can I make an observation about the

1007
01:17:41,360 --> 01:17:47,280
minutes? And I don't know that this
needs to be corrected, but I know that

1008
01:17:45,440 --> 01:17:51,920
there were a lot of people in attendance
for that commented at during the citizen

1009
01:17:50,000 --> 01:17:58,640
input about the later work session that
we did. But the the minutes I don't

1010
01:17:54,560 --> 01:18:02,320
think really um capture how much we I
think made a really strong effort to

1011
01:18:00,159 --> 01:18:07,440
directly address a lot of the comments
that we had heard in the in the citizen

1012
01:18:04,239 --> 01:18:09,760
input. So I think it might be helpful to
maybe we need to revise the minutes

1013
01:18:08,719 --> 01:18:13,440
here. I don't want to I don't want to be
prescriptive, but I think it would be

1014
01:18:11,040 --> 01:18:17,280
helpful for the the citizens who maybe
didn't stick around to see the whole

1015
01:18:14,800 --> 01:18:20,640
session to maybe have some record that
we did really we really did make an

1016
01:18:18,960 --> 01:18:24,960
effort to address a lot of their
comments directly.

1017
01:18:22,080 --> 01:18:30,159
» Um I'll just make a note because so uh
the way that our minutes are structured

1018
01:18:26,400 --> 01:18:35,679
are based on some on um updates to the
Oregon public meetings law. All of our

1019
01:18:33,280 --> 01:18:40,800
recordings are available for the public
to view and um you only have to do

1020
01:18:38,560 --> 01:18:46,159
either or. We do both. So it is
available for um people to see the

1021
01:18:43,679 --> 01:18:48,320
planning commission meeting online
>> as well.

1022
01:18:46,640 --> 01:18:52,080
» Maybe that's sufficient then. Yeah.
Cool.

1023
01:18:50,239 --> 01:18:57,120
» Thank you.
That's a really good observation.

1024
01:18:55,199 --> 01:19:02,400
All right. So there's no corrections
that I needed otherwise. Okay.

1025
01:19:00,320 --> 01:19:06,040
Uh here no corrections. The minutes are
approved as distributed.

1026
01:19:09,440 --> 01:19:17,120
The next agenda topic uh is a work
session on the town center building

1027
01:19:14,560 --> 01:19:20,880
height waiver.
The work session is a chance to put for

1028
01:19:19,679 --> 01:19:25,120
the planning commission to gain
additional understanding of and provide

1029
01:19:22,640 --> 01:19:31,480
guidance on ongoing legislative projects
prior to a public hearing.

1030
01:19:28,480 --> 01:19:31,480
Um,

1031
01:19:32,239 --> 01:19:40,080
well, we took public comment. I don't
think we need to do that again, right?

1032
01:19:36,320 --> 01:19:43,120
We don't have any. But I can say as a
courtesy, the planning commission will

1033
01:19:41,520 --> 01:19:46,719
as time permits allow for limited public
comment on this topic after staff have

1034
01:19:44,960 --> 01:19:51,040
presented their report for the
commission's purpose for continuing to

1035
01:19:48,800 --> 01:19:54,480
understand the project. However, it
should be noted that this is not a

1036
01:19:52,719 --> 01:19:57,679
public hearing and any participants are
encouraged to participate in future

1037
01:19:55,920 --> 01:20:02,719
public hearings for legal standing
purposes. So, at this time, I do call

1038
01:20:00,159 --> 01:20:06,880
for city staff to uh present the
information they've prepared for the

1039
01:20:03,920 --> 01:20:11,280
work session. Thank you, Chair Seanova,
Amanda Guy, Henman, city attorney. So,

1040
01:20:09,040 --> 01:20:15,840
tonight we are continuing our discussion
around the uh town center building

1041
01:20:13,199 --> 01:20:20,159
height waiver project. So, as an agenda
for tonight's work session, I'm going to

1042
01:20:18,239 --> 01:20:24,960
start with a project update. basically
where have we been, where are we now? Um

1043
01:20:22,719 --> 01:20:29,520
then I will provide a review of the
updated and new options for the waiver

1044
01:20:27,840 --> 01:20:33,920
um for potential updates to the waiver
as reflected in your packet materials.

1045
01:20:32,239 --> 01:20:37,199
Then we'll go over the task force
feedback and recommendations

1046
01:20:35,280 --> 01:20:42,080
particularly around the preferred
alternative for the building height

1047
01:20:38,719 --> 01:20:45,840
waiver um update the discussion around
elimination of the waiver to increase

1048
01:20:44,000 --> 01:20:49,360
building height altogether versus that
preferred alternative and then the menu

1049
01:20:47,679 --> 01:20:52,719
items that are reflected in the waiver
language and then we'll end with the

1050
01:20:51,440 --> 01:20:58,400
questions for planning commission that
are reflected in the staff report.

1051
01:20:56,080 --> 01:21:04,320
So, as a project update, uh, at
council's direction, staff, uh, formed a

1052
01:21:00,880 --> 01:21:08,560
task force to look at updates to the,
um, town center building height waiver

1053
01:21:06,560 --> 01:21:14,560
provision. Uh, we've had three task
force meetings. Um, that was all that

1054
01:21:10,960 --> 01:21:17,760
was planned for the task force and, um,
absent additional direction from

1055
01:21:16,159 --> 01:21:22,320
council, we don't believe there will be
another task force meeting. So, at this

1056
01:21:19,840 --> 01:21:26,800
point, we're treating it as concluded.
Uh we had a planning commission work

1057
01:21:24,080 --> 01:21:30,640
session last month on May 13th and then
a city council work session followed up

1058
01:21:28,640 --> 01:21:34,400
on May 18th. From those two work
sessions was the last task force meeting

1059
01:21:32,480 --> 01:21:39,360
on May 19th where the task force
discussed the options and um made its

1060
01:21:37,840 --> 01:21:42,960
recommendation.
So where are we now? This is the second

1061
01:21:41,199 --> 01:21:46,400
work session with planning commission
tonight and then we're having our second

1062
01:21:44,560 --> 01:21:52,320
work session with council on Monday
where we are presenting um to each body

1063
01:21:49,360 --> 01:21:56,560
the task force's recommendation.
One item I will just note as we go

1064
01:21:54,239 --> 01:22:00,480
through the task force recommendations
uh just as the planning commission's

1065
01:21:58,560 --> 01:22:04,719
role to city council the task force role
for the planning commission is to

1066
01:22:02,000 --> 01:22:07,520
provide is to inform the decision that
you all are making which is your

1067
01:22:06,000 --> 01:22:11,600
recommendation to city council. That
doesn't mean you necessarily have to

1068
01:22:09,360 --> 01:22:15,360
accept exactly what the task force
decided. If you believe that there's

1069
01:22:13,199 --> 01:22:19,280
reasons for revisions to it, that's
totally fine. Um, I think the most

1070
01:22:17,040 --> 01:22:23,440
important thing is to the extent you
either are supportive of the task force

1071
01:22:21,679 --> 01:22:27,840
recommendation or want to make changes,
it's clear to the council what is

1072
01:22:25,600 --> 01:22:32,239
leading to that consideration
so it can um further weigh in on it on

1073
01:22:30,320 --> 01:22:36,000
its decision-m.
So just again to orient you all and this

1074
01:22:34,480 --> 01:22:40,159
is going to be helpful particularly as
we talk about the different options and

1075
01:22:38,000 --> 01:22:44,320
as the task force discussed them is
really looking at the subdists that are

1076
01:22:42,320 --> 01:22:48,320
at play in town center. So there's a
overall town center zone and within the

1077
01:22:46,719 --> 01:22:53,360
town center zone there's the four subd
districts. CMU or commercial mixed use

1078
01:22:50,719 --> 01:22:57,840
is the one that is closest to I5. It is
the area where there's the outright

1079
01:22:55,840 --> 01:23:03,520
allowed building height of two to five
stories. MU or mixed use basically

1080
01:23:00,960 --> 01:23:07,679
straddles the main street district um
and it allows for two to four stories.

1081
01:23:06,080 --> 01:23:11,600
The main street district which runs
through kind of the middle of um town

1082
01:23:09,920 --> 01:23:15,440
center allows also for two to four
stories. And then neighborhood mixed use

1083
01:23:13,600 --> 01:23:20,080
which is essentially adjacent to the
current residential area only allows for

1084
01:23:17,360 --> 01:23:24,639
two to three stories. The building
height waiver provision only applies to

1085
01:23:22,719 --> 01:23:28,800
mixeduse and commercial mixeduse
subdists. So what's not at play are the

1086
01:23:27,440 --> 01:23:35,440
main street district or the neighborhood
mixed use.

1087
01:23:32,080 --> 01:23:40,000
So getting to the options that um that
the planning or that the task force

1088
01:23:37,600 --> 01:23:43,920
looked at is basically there was of the
four initial options that they looked

1089
01:23:41,840 --> 01:23:48,239
at. We brought back two of them option
two and three with refinement. And then

1090
01:23:46,320 --> 01:23:53,040
we also added option five and option
six. where option five and option six

1091
01:23:50,480 --> 01:23:56,880
came out of arose out of really was
option five um came from a discussion

1092
01:23:55,120 --> 01:24:00,719
from one of the small groups of of the
task force and then option six was

1093
01:23:59,199 --> 01:24:08,719
essentially a further refinement by
staff kind of taking inspiration from

1094
01:24:03,840 --> 01:24:13,679
both option five and option um two uh
kind of combining them together. So uh

1095
01:24:11,199 --> 01:24:20,800
we brought these four options together
for option two and option three. The

1096
01:24:15,600 --> 01:24:24,400
main updates uh was to further um cl so
the way the building height waiver is

1097
01:24:22,880 --> 01:24:29,280
written right now essentially what it
says is a waiver can be sought regarding

1098
01:24:26,880 --> 01:24:34,400
floor excuse me building floor plate and
or building height is how it's phrased.

1099
01:24:32,159 --> 01:24:39,760
And so one of the things that we wanted
to clarify um in particular for all the

1100
01:24:37,040 --> 01:24:46,400
options but particularly for these
updated options is the expansion of the

1101
01:24:43,600 --> 01:24:50,480
floor plate is really contemplated if
the building height is going down. So if

1102
01:24:48,560 --> 01:24:55,520
you're going down to one story, you can
go wider. I don't think anybody was

1103
01:24:53,360 --> 01:25:00,960
anticipating you could go both wider and
taller. So, um, we clarified kind of

1104
01:24:59,199 --> 01:25:05,440
breaking those out that the wider
footprint really only applies if you're

1105
01:25:02,800 --> 01:25:10,639
decreasing, not if you're increasing.
So, that was, um, that update was made

1106
01:25:07,760 --> 01:25:15,440
to all the options essentially. And then
a second uh item that was added as kind

1107
01:25:13,280 --> 01:25:20,320
of in brackets for both option two and
three was separating out and this is

1108
01:25:18,000 --> 01:25:26,480
relevant also for option five and six is
separating out how the mixeduse area um

1109
01:25:24,320 --> 01:25:30,560
closer to I5 is treated versus the
mixeduse area closer to the residential

1110
01:25:28,960 --> 01:25:38,080
area is treated. So those are in
brackets for options two and three.

1111
01:25:34,320 --> 01:25:42,320
What option five did is um I don't think
I put this on a graphic. So, what option

1112
01:25:40,239 --> 01:25:48,000
five did is I'm going to go back to the
subdists as a reference is all the area

1113
01:25:45,679 --> 01:25:52,480
the CMU and the MU that is closest to
I5. What option five does is it allows a

1114
01:25:50,560 --> 01:25:57,600
building height to go up. It doesn't
allow it to go down. So, it can't go

1115
01:25:54,880 --> 01:26:02,320
down to one story in the option five.
And then on the mixeduse area closer to

1116
01:25:59,920 --> 01:26:06,400
the residential, it can only do go down.
It can't go up. So, it basically does

1117
01:26:04,400 --> 01:26:13,199
the exact opposite on each side. One
goes down, one goes up. Um

1118
01:26:09,920 --> 01:26:17,120
what option six does is it's the it
allows only a decrease in building

1119
01:26:14,960 --> 01:26:21,600
height. It keeps that only allowing the
decrease in building height for the

1120
01:26:18,480 --> 01:26:26,560
mixed use area closer to the main closer
to the residential area. But what it

1121
01:26:24,080 --> 01:26:32,320
also does is it essentially caps the um
commercial mixeduse height increase. So

1122
01:26:30,400 --> 01:26:36,080
essentially allowing only five stories
in commercial mixed use except in the

1123
01:26:34,320 --> 01:26:41,840
case of a bonus floor for affordable
housing which isn't part of the waiver

1124
01:26:37,920 --> 01:26:46,159
process. So um essentially option six is
kind of the most limiting of all of the

1125
01:26:44,159 --> 01:26:49,760
options that were that were contemplated
at this point. So this is a chart this

1126
01:26:48,320 --> 01:26:54,960
chart is basically taken out of the
staff report. So it's um a further

1127
01:26:52,239 --> 01:27:00,480
reflection of of um what I just
described and the options as the as

1128
01:26:56,960 --> 01:27:04,239
they're narrated in the um attachment.
So what we did that we'll come back to

1129
01:27:02,239 --> 01:27:08,480
this um for discussion purposes when
when you all are talking about the

1130
01:27:05,520 --> 01:27:12,560
options. So the task force feedback on
the preferred alternative for the waiver

1131
01:27:10,480 --> 01:27:17,679
is first and foremost they eliminated
option three from consideration.

1132
01:27:15,280 --> 01:27:22,239
um feeling like option three if if I go
back to this chart you can kind of see

1133
01:27:19,520 --> 01:27:26,719
it has it has the most flexibility of
the remaining options in that there can

1134
01:27:24,560 --> 01:27:32,239
be the potential for six stories. So
they ended up uh um for both potentially

1135
01:27:29,920 --> 01:27:36,480
both for a waiver or or a bonus floor.
So they eliminated option three as a

1136
01:27:34,560 --> 01:27:39,679
from consideration.
Then what we had them do is we had them

1137
01:27:38,000 --> 01:27:45,280
do a dot exercise with the remaining
three options. So op option two, five

1138
01:27:42,080 --> 01:27:49,440
and six. We gave them two dots. One is
their number one their number one option

1139
01:27:47,600 --> 01:27:54,159
and the second dot was their number two
option. Um it's laid out in the staff

1140
01:27:51,840 --> 01:27:58,960
report how those kind of played out. Um
for option two, two people put two of

1141
01:27:57,280 --> 01:28:03,360
the task force members put it as their
number one option. Nobody put it as

1142
01:28:00,719 --> 01:28:08,880
their second option. For option five, it
got the most number one options at five

1143
01:28:05,920 --> 01:28:13,840
and got one as it at one dot as the
second um favorite for one of the task

1144
01:28:11,600 --> 01:28:19,840
force members. And then option six got
one number one and seven number twos. So

1145
01:28:17,520 --> 01:28:24,639
from that um discussion you know the
feedback that was

1146
01:28:22,560 --> 01:28:30,960
portrayed from that was okay option five
seems to have the most is people it was

1147
01:28:27,600 --> 01:28:35,360
people's most the number one. Um so
there was some discussion then around um

1148
01:28:33,840 --> 01:28:39,520
people's number one options. The other
thing that we had them do in the dot

1149
01:28:36,560 --> 01:28:42,560
exercise is put a dot next to your
number one and your number two. And if

1150
01:28:41,040 --> 01:28:46,560
there's something that you would still
make changes to that option, write it

1151
01:28:45,040 --> 01:28:50,960
next to your dot. So that way we can
document what change you want. So what's

1152
01:28:48,880 --> 01:28:54,560
important is that for option five, one
of the people who put that as their

1153
01:28:52,400 --> 01:28:59,440
number one, they wrote in that they
believe that the mixeduse area closest

1154
01:28:57,040 --> 01:29:04,480
to the neighborhood um should not be
allowed to increase at all. It should

1155
01:29:01,600 --> 01:29:10,159
only stay at four four stories. The two
people who put option two as their

1156
01:29:07,120 --> 01:29:14,880
number one had that same comment. So of
the eight people who are having this

1157
01:29:11,600 --> 01:29:18,639
discussion, three indicated that for the
mixeduse area closest to the

1158
01:29:16,960 --> 01:29:22,880
neighborhood, they would want to see
that area just capped at four

1159
01:29:20,480 --> 01:29:27,280
regardless. Now what that means is is
that actually goes a bit beyond the

1160
01:29:25,360 --> 01:29:31,760
scope of this project because that then
talks about the affordable housing bonus

1161
01:29:28,880 --> 01:29:37,840
floor. But we did in excuse me include
that information but in the planning

1162
01:29:33,360 --> 01:29:41,120
commission packet um because if if that
is the ultimate recommendation that is

1163
01:29:39,840 --> 01:29:44,800
information that we'd want to share with
council about whether or not they're

1164
01:29:42,480 --> 01:29:48,560
interested in looking at um addressing
the bonus floor, the affordable housing

1165
01:29:46,639 --> 01:29:55,920
bonus floor.
So um basically when we got into the

1166
01:29:52,560 --> 01:30:02,719
discussion around option five um and
whether or not to do this limit on the

1167
01:29:59,280 --> 01:30:08,560
mixed use um capping the mixed use area
to nearest the residential area um at

1168
01:30:05,760 --> 01:30:14,639
all. Four of four of the task force
members wanted to keep option five as

1169
01:30:10,080 --> 01:30:18,639
is. So not do that cap. um three wanted
it limited so to just the four stories

1170
01:30:16,880 --> 01:30:21,600
and then one task force member was
supportive of option five had option

1171
01:30:20,239 --> 01:30:26,320
five as their number one but was
undecided whether or not to limit the

1172
01:30:23,920 --> 01:30:31,280
building height on the eastern um
mixeduse area. So I would say that so

1173
01:30:29,440 --> 01:30:35,600
the outcome really was that option five
was the number one option but this

1174
01:30:33,840 --> 01:30:39,760
discussion around what to do with the
mixeduse area closest to the

1175
01:30:37,600 --> 01:30:46,360
neighborhood there's still I mean it's
very clear there's not there's not a

1176
01:30:41,440 --> 01:30:46,360
majority consensus around that. Um,

1177
01:30:46,639 --> 01:30:53,040
so then we got into a discussion around
whether or not this preferred

1178
01:30:50,639 --> 01:30:57,920
alternative, this option five, whether
there was a preference for that versus

1179
01:30:55,520 --> 01:31:05,520
getting rid of the ability to increase
building height at all under a waiver.

1180
01:31:00,880 --> 01:31:09,679
And the vote was 6 to2 to keep to go to
recommend the option five as opposed to

1181
01:31:07,840 --> 01:31:14,800
eliminating the increase to the building
height altogether. And really the

1182
01:31:12,000 --> 01:31:19,760
conversation focused um around
flexibility and and basically not being

1183
01:31:17,520 --> 01:31:24,159
able to, you know, this being a
long-term 40-year plan, not wanting to

1184
01:31:22,719 --> 01:31:28,400
limit the options that might be
available um under the waiver process.

1185
01:31:26,960 --> 01:31:35,440
But there was a really good discussion
around this um around this preferred

1186
01:31:33,199 --> 01:31:41,520
alternative versus the elimination of
the waiver to increase building height

1187
01:31:37,679 --> 01:31:45,199
altogether. So out of um the task force
basically the recommendations that are

1188
01:31:43,199 --> 01:31:49,920
now before you is that option five was
the preferred alternative. It is also

1189
01:31:47,440 --> 01:31:53,600
the preferred alternative even compared
to eliminating the waiver to increase

1190
01:31:51,840 --> 01:31:59,520
building height altogether. There is
still an open question amongst the task

1191
01:31:56,480 --> 01:32:04,400
force members around whether or not the
mixeduse area subdist um closest to the

1192
01:32:02,960 --> 01:32:09,199
neighborhood should be kept at four
stories period.

1193
01:32:07,120 --> 01:32:13,600
Okay. So then we get into the menu
items.

1194
01:32:11,120 --> 01:32:19,360
And as a refresher, basically these menu
items, if some if a developer is seeking

1195
01:32:16,080 --> 01:32:26,880
to obtain the waiver, they have to do
one item from each of two menus that are

1196
01:32:21,760 --> 01:32:31,280
provided in um the code. One of the menu
uh one of the menus focuses on providing

1197
01:32:29,199 --> 01:32:36,560
a community benefit and the other menu
focuses on mitigating building impacts.

1198
01:32:34,239 --> 01:32:40,880
So, um there was a lot of discussion in
the prior task force meeting back in

1199
01:32:38,560 --> 01:32:45,920
April about wanting to look at these
menu items feeling like they don't go

1200
01:32:42,719 --> 01:32:49,440
far enough um to they don't go far
enough in requiring development to do

1201
01:32:47,520 --> 01:32:54,800
something for the for the benefit of
getting this waiver. And so, uh you'll

1202
01:32:52,960 --> 01:33:01,920
see in your packet we put forward the
same list of categories of menu items

1203
01:32:58,560 --> 01:33:06,560
under those two broader um those two
broader concepts. And then I also added

1204
01:33:04,400 --> 01:33:11,280
in the feedback that we had received
from if there was a particular menu item

1205
01:33:08,880 --> 01:33:16,080
where there was feedback given um that's
provided in the staff report. But one of

1206
01:33:13,520 --> 01:33:20,080
the interesting um conversations that we
had, so I would say the recommendation

1207
01:33:17,840 --> 01:33:25,920
from the task force was definitely move
forward with updating the menu items and

1208
01:33:23,440 --> 01:33:32,560
what they really focused on were menu
items where either there's permanence

1209
01:33:28,239 --> 01:33:38,159
tied to it or um it really is furthering
the what the benefit for Town Center,

1210
01:33:35,760 --> 01:33:42,400
not essentially a communitywide benefit.
They really wanted it to be you're

1211
01:33:39,679 --> 01:33:46,960
making Town Center better. Um so for
example like the one of the examples was

1212
01:33:44,719 --> 01:33:51,600
around um like local hiring like that
might be a good goal or a good thing to

1213
01:33:49,920 --> 01:33:58,560
occur but that doesn't necessarily make
Town Center better um which the idea

1214
01:33:54,880 --> 01:34:01,760
being that the waiver might um impact
how the feel of Town Center and so we

1215
01:34:00,400 --> 01:34:07,679
want to make sure that they're doing
something in in relation to making that

1216
01:34:04,880 --> 01:34:13,360
to mitigating that. Um so one of the
interesting concepts that came out to

1217
01:34:09,679 --> 01:34:19,040
basically understand um
is development doing enough was you know

1218
01:34:17,040 --> 01:34:22,719
some of these menu items one of one of
the task force members uh was talking

1219
01:34:21,199 --> 01:34:27,360
about that basically some of these menu
items they don't sh they don't have

1220
01:34:25,360 --> 01:34:30,960
equal costs and so what that drives
development to do is they're going to

1221
01:34:28,719 --> 01:34:36,000
choose the items that are the least cost
the easiest to do and so are you really

1222
01:34:34,080 --> 01:34:42,560
truly getting a community benefit and
are truly getting mitigation of building

1223
01:34:37,840 --> 01:34:49,679
impacts if they're not somehow equal or
proportionate. And so they started

1224
01:34:46,000 --> 01:34:55,679
talking about this idea of either
um developers paying a fee in lie of

1225
01:34:52,880 --> 01:35:00,880
doing one of these um you know choosing
from these menu items and that fee in

1226
01:34:58,000 --> 01:35:05,679
lie being tied to the value of the
development. So for example, when

1227
01:35:03,120 --> 01:35:10,000
developers pull their building permits,
we do an assessment of the value of the

1228
01:35:08,080 --> 01:35:15,840
development, it it ties into some of the
fees they pay. So we talked about as a

1229
01:35:13,199 --> 01:35:21,120
concept, we could use that dollar figure
as a way to figure out like a fee in

1230
01:35:17,679 --> 01:35:27,520
Lou. And that fee could also then be the
basis to say you either pay the fee or

1231
01:35:23,760 --> 01:35:32,080
your value ads have to equal that cost.
So either way, essentially, you're

1232
01:35:29,120 --> 01:35:38,159
getting at the same cost. whether it's
cash to the city or um doing these value

1233
01:35:36,320 --> 01:35:44,560
ads. And one of the things we also
talked about is that cash then could be

1234
01:35:40,159 --> 01:35:48,320
put into a fund for these projects that
are envisioned for town centers. So you

1235
01:35:46,639 --> 01:35:53,360
think of something like a parking
structure that is one of the

1236
01:35:51,199 --> 01:35:56,400
implementation or parking solutions
generally, but we've talked about a

1237
01:35:54,960 --> 01:36:00,239
parking structure potentially as an
option. You know, if you put money into

1238
01:35:58,400 --> 01:36:06,000
a fund, if development is putting money
into a fund that then the city can

1239
01:36:02,400 --> 01:36:10,639
utilize to um find, you know,
consolidated parking solutions or work

1240
01:36:08,320 --> 01:36:15,679
on some of the transport transportation
de uh improvements that um you know, we

1241
01:36:13,520 --> 01:36:19,840
legally cannot require developers to
build. That might be a good way of

1242
01:36:18,159 --> 01:36:26,560
making sure that we have like
developments also still paying for that

1243
01:36:23,280 --> 01:36:29,840
that um those improvements. So it was an
interesting conversation again not

1244
01:36:27,920 --> 01:36:33,679
something that we had um thought through
like that wasn't a concept that staff

1245
01:36:31,440 --> 01:36:37,920
came up that was um generated from the
task force. So, it was a really

1246
01:36:35,920 --> 01:36:45,760
interesting concept and one that I think
um also was good at least to talk about,

1247
01:36:41,840 --> 01:36:50,639
you know, this sort of um proportionate
um making sure that costs are

1248
01:36:48,000 --> 01:36:54,159
proportionate uh for the value that
people are that a developer might get if

1249
01:36:52,400 --> 01:37:00,159
they're utilizing the waiver and making
sure that they're basically doing their

1250
01:36:56,560 --> 01:37:06,560
part um in as a result of getting that
waiver. um that might you know impact

1251
01:37:02,800 --> 01:37:12,159
the experience in town center.
So, uh, with that, um, a few questions

1252
01:37:09,679 --> 01:37:15,920
for the planning commission is first, if
the, if planning commission has further

1253
01:37:13,920 --> 01:37:20,800
questions or clarifications regarding
the, um, four waiver options, and

1254
01:37:18,560 --> 01:37:24,159
really, I mean, unless a planning
commissioner feels like a burning desire

1255
01:37:22,480 --> 01:37:29,119
for option three to be considered, I'd
maybe say at least of the remaining

1256
01:37:25,840 --> 01:37:32,159
three. um whether the planning
commission is supportive of moving

1257
01:37:30,480 --> 01:37:38,080
forward with a recommendation to city
council and if so which option um the

1258
01:37:35,840 --> 01:37:42,080
planning commission is interest
interested in or if the planning

1259
01:37:39,679 --> 01:37:46,400
commission you know is interested in
having council further consider getting

1260
01:37:44,800 --> 01:37:50,400
rid of the building height waiver
despite that wasn't um for increasing

1261
01:37:49,119 --> 01:37:58,880
building height despite that not being
the recommendation of the task force. Um

1262
01:37:54,800 --> 01:38:02,400
and then um any any um thoughts about
the recommendations on updating the menu

1263
01:38:00,719 --> 01:38:06,719
items and some of the concepts that the
task force particularly thought around

1264
01:38:04,480 --> 01:38:11,920
that. And then what I'll just note as
next steps is while the task force has

1265
01:38:10,080 --> 01:38:14,800
made its official recommendation, you
all aren't making your official

1266
01:38:13,040 --> 01:38:20,560
recommendation tonight. This is really
just to get, you know, some feedback and

1267
01:38:18,560 --> 01:38:24,320
um some indications maybe where planning
commissioners are are falling. So that

1268
01:38:22,960 --> 01:38:29,040
way we can give that feedback to the
city council for its work sessions work

1269
01:38:26,560 --> 01:38:33,040
session. But the ultimate um
recommendation

1270
01:38:30,800 --> 01:38:38,679
decision won't happen until your public
hearing that we are currently planning

1271
01:38:34,800 --> 01:38:38,679
to occur in August.

1272
01:38:41,520 --> 01:38:47,040
where not this is beyond the scope of
this conversation but background

1273
01:38:45,360 --> 01:38:53,360
information where did we come up with
the fivetory

1274
01:38:50,159 --> 01:38:56,800
two to five in the CMU
>> Miranda do you want to

1275
01:38:54,719 --> 01:39:01,719
» because there's not there's not a city
around us that goes up the five stories

1276
01:39:01,760 --> 01:39:09,199
» I checked
>> okay um thanks commissioner car so there

1277
01:39:07,199 --> 01:39:14,080
was a lot of discussion during the
original town center planning

1278
01:39:11,119 --> 01:39:20,239
project about what kind of buildings do
we want and how tall do we want those

1279
01:39:15,920 --> 01:39:26,880
buildings to be and I would say it was a
combination of a lot of feedback and a

1280
01:39:24,159 --> 01:39:32,159
lot of discussions so we had some folks
who wanted 8 to 10 story buildings we

1281
01:39:30,159 --> 01:39:36,719
had some folks who wanted to keep it to
like threetory buildings

1282
01:39:34,639 --> 01:39:41,040
uh there was discussion about well if
we're going to have some taller

1283
01:39:38,080 --> 01:39:47,760
buildings for some of the market
economics. We'd rather have those be

1284
01:39:43,520 --> 01:39:53,119
closer to I5. Um there was discussion
about the types of projects because we

1285
01:39:50,000 --> 01:39:57,760
did you know not just visioning and
discussions with people to understand

1286
01:39:55,199 --> 01:40:02,639
what they wanted but we also did the
market analyses that helped inform some

1287
01:40:00,000 --> 01:40:06,800
of the task force's input into those
decisions around building height as well

1288
01:40:04,400 --> 01:40:12,159
in terms of the types of uses we want to
see and what they need in order to

1289
01:40:10,480 --> 01:40:16,400
actually pencil out a building and
develop it like what is feasible for

1290
01:40:14,000 --> 01:40:21,360
those types of uses. is to locate in our
town center and then um having that

1291
01:40:19,679 --> 01:40:25,119
discussion about okay so is that still
what you want because this is what it

1292
01:40:23,199 --> 01:40:30,719
would likely look like. So, it was a lot
of feedback of the visual preference

1293
01:40:27,199 --> 01:40:36,719
surveys that we had both um online in
person. Um the design workshop where we

1294
01:40:33,920 --> 01:40:41,760
had folks actually taking building
blocks and putting them on maps and

1295
01:40:39,600 --> 01:40:48,000
saying here's where we want certain uses
and we're stacking the the blocks. I

1296
01:40:45,679 --> 01:40:52,960
still have them back there.
Um I see a future use somewhere. Um but

1297
01:40:51,119 --> 01:40:57,040
st being able to stack them to say you
know we might want twotory buildings

1298
01:40:54,960 --> 01:41:01,760
here versus four or five story buildings
here. That exercise was done public

1299
01:40:59,520 --> 01:41:06,320
design workshop that exercise was done
at uh various events in the city. We

1300
01:41:04,560 --> 01:41:12,400
took those building blocks to all those
summer events where we did the visual

1301
01:41:08,400 --> 01:41:16,639
survey results uh studies as well. Um we
also did that with the task force. a lot

1302
01:41:14,400 --> 01:41:19,760
of sometimes the task force was the one
as as we're hearing now. It's like

1303
01:41:18,400 --> 01:41:23,520
they're hearing input from the
community. They're participating in

1304
01:41:21,679 --> 01:41:26,880
those and then they're kind of trying to
help

1305
01:41:25,440 --> 01:41:30,400
compromise the different things that
they're hearing and ma and make space

1306
01:41:28,639 --> 01:41:34,960
for the different uses and types of
buildings that people want to see. So

1307
01:41:32,639 --> 01:41:38,960
the two to five in some ways was a
compromise of a lot of the different

1308
01:41:36,480 --> 01:41:44,239
things that we heard. Um it was also
related to the uses people want to see

1309
01:41:41,280 --> 01:41:48,159
and how that pencils out. um allowing
things potentially in the commercial

1310
01:41:46,320 --> 01:41:52,719
mixed use that are more commercial in
nature who need like a fifth story in

1311
01:41:50,080 --> 01:41:59,520
order to make their project work. So um
envisioning that if you have a hotel or

1312
01:41:55,199 --> 01:42:02,880
if you have um a um office building, you
might need that fifth story in order to

1313
01:42:01,119 --> 01:42:07,040
really make it pencil and to work for
what it is that you're trying to do. Um

1314
01:42:05,440 --> 01:42:10,239
because if you have an office, you're
probably going to have to have some

1315
01:42:08,159 --> 01:42:13,760
underground parking or surface parking
as opposed to sometimes when you have

1316
01:42:12,320 --> 01:42:17,679
like an apartment building, you can do
like a donut where the parking's inside

1317
01:42:15,600 --> 01:42:21,679
and tuck under. So there's different
economics for different types of

1318
01:42:19,199 --> 01:42:26,080
buildings. And so that fed into the
discussion as well. um final

1319
01:42:23,760 --> 01:42:28,960
recommendation as you well not even just
final recommendation but through that

1320
01:42:27,600 --> 01:42:35,360
whole process things were going to the
planning commission and the city council

1321
01:42:30,480 --> 01:42:39,440
too to ensure um support um that that
was the vision that was being met um and

1322
01:42:37,920 --> 01:42:44,199
that that was the consensus that we
ended up with. Can we be

1323
01:42:47,119 --> 01:42:57,600
can we
be specific in what building types can

1324
01:42:54,159 --> 01:43:01,199
exceed or get a waiver? In other words,
can we say a hotel can go up to six

1325
01:42:59,600 --> 01:43:04,440
stories, but an office building can only
go to four?

1326
01:43:04,560 --> 01:43:11,360
Uh, you can make whatever recommendation
you want for a building height as far as

1327
01:43:09,280 --> 01:43:15,840
the building height waiver goes. Um,
>> but does that make sense?

1328
01:43:13,840 --> 01:43:21,199
» Well, and and I think what I would say
is not I mean

1329
01:43:19,520 --> 01:43:23,920
the planning commission should make the
recommendation that it thinks is best

1330
01:43:22,719 --> 01:43:29,360
for the community and for the
implementation of the vision of the town

1331
01:43:25,840 --> 01:43:32,719
center plan. Um that being said, the
waiver really I mean it did come out of

1332
01:43:31,280 --> 01:43:36,639
a discussion about making sure there's
flexibility for development but where it

1333
01:43:34,560 --> 01:43:42,080
started was around anchor retail
tenants. Um

1334
01:43:39,520 --> 01:43:49,679
so not to say that it I mean anybody can
apply for it currently. Um but what I

1335
01:43:45,520 --> 01:43:53,119
would say is um if anything it's that's
what it was that's at least what

1336
01:43:51,520 --> 01:43:57,920
initiated the discussion was around
anchor retail tenants versus versus say

1337
01:43:56,159 --> 01:44:01,600
let's say office space as far as the
waivers concerned versus what Miranda is

1338
01:44:00,000 --> 01:44:07,199
saying about the outright allowed
building heights

1339
01:44:03,600 --> 01:44:11,280
» because I think if if I look around like
um like as we go westland can be

1340
01:44:09,119 --> 01:44:17,360
Sherwood twatin
pretty much all three stories about the

1341
01:44:13,199 --> 01:44:23,119
closest they have. We have one
group of four stories in Mentographic

1342
01:44:20,400 --> 01:44:27,679
Seammens, right? Everything else is
lower. Everything else is threetory. And

1343
01:44:25,920 --> 01:44:31,119
so now we're going
>> I would mention that the VUA project

1344
01:44:29,440 --> 01:44:34,960
that was recently constructed is five
stories. And

1345
01:44:32,960 --> 01:44:37,280
» what's the building height on that?
>> Do you know?

1346
01:44:35,600 --> 01:44:41,600
» I off the top of my head, I don't know
the exact height. Um, I do know the

1347
01:44:40,000 --> 01:44:46,560
ground floor has a higher ceiling height
to accommodate the commercial and ground

1348
01:44:43,520 --> 01:44:51,760
floor uses um than the residential units
have. I could get you that information.

1349
01:44:49,280 --> 01:44:56,560
Uh, but it is a five-story building. And
I would say that one of the things that

1350
01:44:54,239 --> 01:45:02,560
we're looking at here is like a 40-year
plan in terms of providing capacity for

1351
01:44:59,520 --> 01:45:07,920
40 years. And so it is quite possible
that like the fivetory or even the

1352
01:45:04,560 --> 01:45:12,159
commercial mixed use might not be
a short-term development

1353
01:45:10,639 --> 01:45:16,800
um and that maybe your fivetory
buildings aren't the things that you see

1354
01:45:13,920 --> 01:45:22,239
in years 1 through 15, but it's
providing that 40-year planning horizon

1355
01:45:20,080 --> 01:45:27,360
um interest and capacity for what people
want to see. Well, then that gets to the

1356
01:45:24,719 --> 01:45:30,560
point we made where it was, okay, do we
not give variances for the first 20

1357
01:45:29,440 --> 01:45:36,639
years?
>> I Yeah. So, so a pause isn't an option.

1358
01:45:34,320 --> 01:45:40,880
A pause is not an option in land use.
Um,

1359
01:45:38,719 --> 01:45:44,560
» what just to interject real quick, like
you wouldn't be pausing building, you

1360
01:45:43,199 --> 01:45:47,760
would be pausing the granting of
waivers, right? Which would be a

1361
01:45:45,920 --> 01:45:52,560
different thing because a waiver is you
already want special treatment.

1362
01:45:50,320 --> 01:45:56,080
So under Oregon land use law if you have
something in your code that people are

1363
01:45:54,000 --> 01:46:00,000
allowed to do you have to let them have
the ability to do that. The only other

1364
01:45:57,920 --> 01:46:04,480
option is either a moratorum which we
cannot I don't think we could legally

1365
01:46:01,679 --> 01:46:09,199
justify here or you remove it and you
can remove it and say

1366
01:46:06,800 --> 01:46:11,679
t 5 10 15 years we'll come back and
decide whether or not it's something we

1367
01:46:10,719 --> 01:46:15,600
should add back in.
>> So in 20 years we could come back and

1368
01:46:13,360 --> 01:46:20,560
have the same discussion and allow for
>> you could come back and have this

1369
01:46:16,639 --> 01:46:25,600
discussion in a year. Yes. Yes. Yeah.
Now, I would say that like it's not

1370
01:46:22,880 --> 01:46:29,119
necessarily just in that horizon because
the first approval that we have is five

1371
01:46:27,600 --> 01:46:33,119
stories. I understand.
>> So, um I would say that really the

1372
01:46:31,440 --> 01:46:35,440
reason for that outright allowed us use
is because that's what we heard support

1373
01:46:34,639 --> 01:46:40,239
for.
>> If we had heard support for like ending

1374
01:46:37,520 --> 01:46:45,679
at three stories, that's the information
that would have moved forward. Well, but

1375
01:46:42,239 --> 01:46:49,920
when you did all this public
discussion, did you add a sixth floor to

1376
01:46:48,239 --> 01:46:55,040
those buildings and have them do the
stack ranking that way? Were you already

1377
01:46:53,280 --> 01:46:59,199
considering the variance when you were
doing that or were you doing the two?

1378
01:46:56,960 --> 01:47:02,480
» The variance as as we've previously
described, the variance came at the very

1379
01:47:00,880 --> 01:47:06,080
end. It was not a part of the public
discussion. The public discussion was

1380
01:47:04,639 --> 01:47:09,119
just about like what do you want to see
in Town Center and here are different

1381
01:47:07,679 --> 01:47:13,360
buildings, here are different heights,
like what are you comfortable with? and

1382
01:47:11,040 --> 01:47:17,280
the majority of people landed within
what you see ended up in the plan in

1383
01:47:15,679 --> 01:47:20,880
terms of the range of heights that are
outright allowed in each of the

1384
01:47:19,520 --> 01:47:25,119
subdists. Okay.
>> Um the waiver really was designed for

1385
01:47:23,440 --> 01:47:30,800
shorter,
>> bigger footprint retail specifically.

1386
01:47:27,840 --> 01:47:36,239
That is technically what it was the
discussion as we've shared with you came

1387
01:47:32,960 --> 01:47:41,040
from. It was actually not
>> designed to go up. um that wasn't the

1388
01:47:38,800 --> 01:47:45,679
initial intent of the discussion. How it
got written and especially as we were

1389
01:47:42,719 --> 01:47:52,000
modifying things during public hearings,
which is never great. Um the language

1390
01:47:48,800 --> 01:47:56,239
didn't end up being as specific to the
lowered building height.

1391
01:47:54,320 --> 01:48:01,920
» Yeah.
>> And I do just want to note that I think

1392
01:47:58,880 --> 01:48:04,480
I just to be clear is that when Miranda
says it wasn't part of the public

1393
01:48:03,119 --> 01:48:08,000
discussion, she's talking about the
outreach. This absolutely was part of a

1394
01:48:06,960 --> 01:48:09,280
public process.
>> Yes. Yeah.

1395
01:48:08,880 --> 01:48:12,960
» Yes.
>> It wasn't part of like the workshop to

1396
01:48:11,360 --> 01:48:17,600
talk about a waiver because at that
point we were not at that specific part

1397
01:48:15,520 --> 01:48:22,719
of code, but all of the discussion did
happen during um public meetings.

1398
01:48:20,560 --> 01:48:26,960
» Yeah. But and Miranda's right. If you
look back at those timestamps from the

1399
01:48:24,639 --> 01:48:32,800
planning commission, it it started in
August of 2018 with a particular

1400
01:48:29,440 --> 01:48:37,920
commissioner talking about um being
concerned about proh what we were

1401
01:48:35,679 --> 01:48:42,480
talking about was it was actually about
floor plate and whether it should be

1402
01:48:39,520 --> 01:48:46,400
30,000 square feet or 40,000 square feet
or 50,000 square feet. And what the

1403
01:48:44,480 --> 01:48:50,960
commissioner was concerned about is once
we put this number down, that's the

1404
01:48:48,080 --> 01:48:55,679
number, right? What happens if we have
this great anchor retail tenant that

1405
01:48:52,960 --> 01:48:59,520
wants to come in, but they only but
they're not going to do 30,000 square

1406
01:48:57,440 --> 01:49:05,600
feet. They need 35,000 square feet. They
need 40,000 square feet. And so that's

1407
01:49:02,560 --> 01:49:12,159
what started the conversation around the
waiver. And as Miranda pointed out,

1408
01:49:08,400 --> 01:49:17,840
really the language the the technical
language was not was written at the kind

1409
01:49:15,440 --> 01:49:21,679
of at the end. And I think that's what
that's why we're I mean that's why we're

1410
01:49:19,280 --> 01:49:29,080
undertaking this process is we recognize
there's um it there's refinement that's

1411
01:49:25,679 --> 01:49:29,080
needed there.

1412
01:49:29,119 --> 01:49:37,199
» Commissioner Candy.
>> Okay. Um so uh I don't know why I

1413
01:49:35,199 --> 01:49:42,159
decided to do this but I did watch the
the task force meeting. Um although I

1414
01:49:40,400 --> 01:49:45,840
watched it after it was done so I could
watch it on one and a half times speed.

1415
01:49:44,159 --> 01:49:49,920
Um,
so I was a little bit disappointed in

1416
01:49:47,440 --> 01:49:54,080
watching it because I felt like some of
the things that we addressed were not

1417
01:49:52,080 --> 01:49:58,159
accurately portrayed to the task force
during the meeting. Um, specifically the

1418
01:49:56,400 --> 01:50:02,560
the discussions we had about maybe
changing the Sher subdist because that

1419
01:50:00,560 --> 01:50:06,480
was explained to us as one of the
reasons why we had to allow for five is

1420
01:50:04,320 --> 01:50:11,600
because we already did. Um, and that
seemed to be just very curs like had a

1421
01:50:08,560 --> 01:50:16,960
cursory discussion but not much. The
second was on kind of this hiatus um

1422
01:50:15,199 --> 01:50:22,719
moratorum piece which again it was kind
of like well you know we just can't do

1423
01:50:19,920 --> 01:50:29,840
that. Um and then there wasn't also much
discussion um from what I saw again at

1424
01:50:25,840 --> 01:50:34,320
one and a half times speed on um
what we talked about even with like

1425
01:50:31,040 --> 01:50:40,000
building down um instead of up. So just
from my perspective I think um

1426
01:50:37,920 --> 01:50:46,000
I think I mean I would recommend one or
two things. One is that um it seems that

1427
01:50:42,480 --> 01:50:51,520
people are either very passionate about
not going up or they're ambivalent. Um I

1428
01:50:49,360 --> 01:50:55,760
personally ambivalent. Like I don't care
if a building's taller. Um but I know a

1429
01:50:54,560 --> 01:50:59,119
lot of people are passionate like they
do not want that at all. And it seems

1430
01:50:57,440 --> 01:51:03,679
like everybody else is just kind of like
whatever. I haven't heard anyone who's

1431
01:51:01,280 --> 01:51:08,080
like we need 10tory buildings or else
this plan's not going to work. So I

1432
01:51:06,320 --> 01:51:12,480
would suggest again to kind of what
Commissioner Carr was saying then if if

1433
01:51:10,000 --> 01:51:17,840
the cases that we either have to allow
waivers or don't allow waiverss then we

1434
01:51:15,040 --> 01:51:24,080
start off without allowing waivers and
see if there is a push in five six seven

1435
01:51:22,239 --> 01:51:28,000
years where there's some developer who's
like hey I really want to come here but

1436
01:51:25,920 --> 01:51:33,040
I have to have that six story for some
reason. Um

1437
01:51:30,960 --> 01:51:38,480
again that's just my thinking on it.
Alternatively, if we are going to allow

1438
01:51:35,520 --> 01:51:44,719
for waiverss, um I think the menu items
are still very uh subjective and they

1439
01:51:41,440 --> 01:51:49,599
need to be very objective so that you
know I mean not to be like

1440
01:51:48,080 --> 01:51:57,199
too silly, but like one of the menu
items was I think um

1441
01:51:54,320 --> 01:52:00,000
uh what was the one like um promoting
environmental stewardship. Like someone

1442
01:51:58,880 --> 01:52:03,599
could be like, "Well, I put out some
pamphlets in the foyer that said like

1443
01:52:02,639 --> 01:52:07,199
here's how you can be a good
environmental steward." And you're like,

1444
01:52:04,960 --> 01:52:10,320
"Well, in theory, someone could say that
met the standard." So, I would like to

1445
01:52:08,800 --> 01:52:15,040
see if we move forward with the
waiverss, um, that those are very

1446
01:52:12,320 --> 01:52:24,639
specific as to what each category means
and what we'd like to see from them. Um,

1447
01:52:19,040 --> 01:52:29,119
I think the fee idea is interesting. Um,
I wonder if

1448
01:52:27,760 --> 01:52:33,599
that would cause some of the same
problems that we're running into with

1449
01:52:30,880 --> 01:52:36,960
the discussion about urban renewal where
there is the discussion that, hey, we

1450
01:52:35,360 --> 01:52:41,440
need to put this infrastructure in place
because the builders aren't going to

1451
01:52:38,639 --> 01:52:45,199
want to pay for it, but we're like, but
if you want to build an extra floor, you

1452
01:52:43,280 --> 01:52:48,239
can pay us more money that we'll put
into this pot. like that that almost

1453
01:52:46,480 --> 01:52:52,480
seems to kind of defeat the purpose of
us saying you need urban renewal to do

1454
01:52:50,719 --> 01:52:57,360
this because if you're going to pay all
this extra money like maybe you could

1455
01:52:54,960 --> 01:53:01,360
use it for for for different things. So
while I think the fee idea is

1456
01:52:58,960 --> 01:53:05,599
interesting I wonder if that would just
have the effect of either look it be

1457
01:53:04,320 --> 01:53:09,679
looked upon by some people as like
paytoplay. So, if a very rich developer

1458
01:53:07,280 --> 01:53:12,560
is like, "Oh, well, sure. I'll chip in a
million bucks." And then someone else

1459
01:53:11,360 --> 01:53:16,080
who's like operating on more of a
shoestring, especially when it comes to

1460
01:53:14,400 --> 01:53:19,840
something like affordable housing, and
they're like, "Well, we can't build up.

1461
01:53:17,119 --> 01:53:24,960
We can't afford to chip in." Um, I think
that that could look problematic, even

1462
01:53:21,760 --> 01:53:30,480
though I I like I don't want to say I
like fees. Um, but in in this instance,

1463
01:53:28,480 --> 01:53:33,280
I I like, you know, the building the the
people who are developing contributing

1464
01:53:31,679 --> 01:53:38,400
to what they're developing to. So those
would just be the couple things that

1465
01:53:34,480 --> 01:53:43,119
that I saw is either we say because of
the passion from some people like let's

1466
01:53:41,440 --> 01:53:46,719
just not do waivers for a while and see
if that works or if we are going to do

1467
01:53:44,800 --> 01:53:53,040
the waivers um I definitely think we
need to have them better defined with

1468
01:53:48,880 --> 01:53:58,560
the menu items. Um, and you know, I I
it's not a I don't it's not one of the

1469
01:53:55,760 --> 01:54:01,920
five options, but again, per my
understanding from our meeting last

1470
01:53:59,760 --> 01:54:05,520
time, the reason why the MU needed to go
up to five stories was because of

1471
01:54:03,280 --> 01:54:10,000
sheries. I would like to see the sheries
moved over to the CMU and then the other

1472
01:54:08,000 --> 01:54:13,920
ones could stay at four stories.
>> So, I'll Okay, I'll answer first off. I

1473
01:54:12,639 --> 01:54:17,920
probably should have clarifi clarified
this with the menu items. The list there

1474
01:54:15,920 --> 01:54:24,000
are categories. they are not what would
be described in code. Um, also though

1475
01:54:22,080 --> 01:54:28,080
you do want to be careful about not
having what we call clear and objective

1476
01:54:25,920 --> 01:54:32,880
standards in discretionary criteria
because then you basically negate the

1477
01:54:29,679 --> 01:54:37,280
ability to have discretion. So while it
it won't say promote environmental

1478
01:54:34,960 --> 01:54:41,840
stewardship, that is the concept of one
of the ideas because right now like one

1479
01:54:39,599 --> 01:54:47,119
of the waiver um one of the menu items
talks about um getting lead certified or

1480
01:54:45,040 --> 01:54:50,400
um earth advantage getting the earth
earth advantage certification and one of

1481
01:54:48,960 --> 01:54:53,679
the things we talked about is basically
under Oregon energy code right now you

1482
01:54:52,320 --> 01:54:59,360
can almost you can basically get it
without with just meeting code. So what

1483
01:54:56,800 --> 01:55:02,960
that for example that category what we
would look at is if that's a category

1484
01:55:01,119 --> 01:55:08,320
people are interested in is going and
finding what are the programs that

1485
01:55:05,040 --> 01:55:13,280
actually require them to do more than
what our building code is and put that

1486
01:55:10,719 --> 01:55:20,480
in as the language. So a certain level
of a certification something like that.

1487
01:55:16,560 --> 01:55:24,639
Um and then I will just say so part of
this also is kind is informed somewhat

1488
01:55:22,560 --> 01:55:27,920
from the task force discussion is
informed also by the council discussion

1489
01:55:26,320 --> 01:55:33,119
that happened on the 18th the day
before. One of the things that we

1490
01:55:29,920 --> 01:55:40,080
discussed with council is
so we are um the prompt from council is

1491
01:55:36,400 --> 01:55:46,080
look at the waiver provision and in
discussing with council about the sherry

1492
01:55:42,639 --> 01:55:53,760
site in particular that will require
other legislative processes that go

1493
01:55:50,800 --> 01:55:58,000
beyond this and also what we talked with
council about is if you think the waiver

1494
01:55:55,840 --> 01:56:00,880
is bad policy the way it's written it
doesn't matter matter that somebody has

1495
01:55:59,119 --> 01:56:07,840
already gotten it then it should be it
should just be changed and council was

1496
01:56:04,960 --> 01:56:12,080
um generally I think supportive of that
of like of and that's why what was

1497
01:56:09,679 --> 01:56:17,360
brought forward to the task force was
should the waiver for building height

1498
01:56:14,000 --> 01:56:22,800
increase just go away um a moratorum is
not a mechanism that can be used and if

1499
01:56:19,520 --> 01:56:28,480
it is at least at this juncture bad you
know something that we don't think that

1500
01:56:25,760 --> 01:56:32,560
the policy makers think is not in the
best interest of the community and for

1501
01:56:29,840 --> 01:56:36,400
town center. Then the decision should be
get rid of the building height increase

1502
01:56:34,480 --> 01:56:42,239
and then kind of like with our
industrial formbbased code have staff

1503
01:56:38,719 --> 01:56:47,520
come back in five years and present on
whether or not it's something that

1504
01:56:43,360 --> 01:56:49,360
should be reconsidered to bring back in.
>> I appreciate the clarification. I think

1505
01:56:48,880 --> 01:56:54,000
that's good.
>> Yeah.

1506
01:56:51,760 --> 01:56:59,520
» Which one would you win first?
>> I don't know. Did I Okay. Um, but I

1507
01:56:57,440 --> 01:57:03,440
appreciate the questions from the the
fellow commissioners and the responses

1508
01:57:01,280 --> 01:57:08,320
and clarifications. I think one of the
things that is

1509
01:57:05,840 --> 01:57:12,800
um, one of the things that commonly
comes up is is whether Wilsonville is

1510
01:57:10,880 --> 01:57:16,800
doing something that is abnormal for a
city like ours. You like when we when we

1511
01:57:15,199 --> 01:57:21,440
when we have a plan that says we can
build buildings up to five stories, are

1512
01:57:18,800 --> 01:57:26,080
we an outlier? Um, I don't think we are.
When I look around at cities like

1513
01:57:23,280 --> 01:57:29,679
Toalatin, Happy Valley, I think Tiger
and Oregon City also these are the

1514
01:57:28,159 --> 01:57:34,159
competi these are the cities that
developers are also looking at to build

1515
01:57:32,239 --> 01:57:37,199
um developments right alongside
Wilsonville. So if Wilsonville is

1516
01:57:35,760 --> 01:57:41,520
looking for a developer to come in and
build um in our town center, we're we're

1517
01:57:40,159 --> 01:57:46,080
competing against other cities like
that. All of those cities have plans on

1518
01:57:44,400 --> 01:57:51,040
the books, if I understand correctly,
that also allow for buildings up to five

1519
01:57:48,400 --> 01:57:55,440
stories or or greater. Um, so I don't
think we're an outlier in this regard. I

1520
01:57:52,719 --> 01:58:02,080
don't think that the core of the plan,
especially in the highest concentration

1521
01:57:58,000 --> 01:58:06,000
zone that we have, is an outlier. Um, I
think we're we're in good company with

1522
01:58:03,520 --> 01:58:09,520
the cities that are around us. It
doesn't mean that we mean mean

1523
01:58:07,760 --> 01:58:13,360
» that I'd like that validated because my
research found that was not the case.

1524
01:58:11,440 --> 01:58:17,119
Three stories was the highest and I
think like us, we had four.

1525
01:58:15,520 --> 01:58:18,880
» Let's look into it. It'd be interesting
because it's just Chris research on my

1526
01:58:18,639 --> 01:58:22,560
part.
>> That does make sense. um and and not

1527
01:58:20,880 --> 01:58:26,159
what exists today. If you go around and
look today at at what what exists in a

1528
01:58:24,320 --> 01:58:30,480
lot of these cities, you're going to see
three and four stories are are common or

1529
01:58:28,639 --> 01:58:34,639
the maximum in some cases. And I think
that's that's where we're at right now.

1530
01:58:32,639 --> 01:58:39,760
But we're looking 20, 30, 40 years in
the future. And I I think it'd be

1531
01:58:37,040 --> 01:58:42,400
interesting to to for staff to help with
this narrative a little bit about is

1532
01:58:41,199 --> 01:58:48,159
Wilsonville doing something that's
abnormal here or is this very much in

1533
01:58:45,040 --> 01:58:52,560
line with how development is headed in
our region. Um and I I think we've heard

1534
01:58:50,800 --> 01:58:57,360
a little bit of it. I think director
Bashel, you've you've um you've said

1535
01:58:55,840 --> 01:59:03,679
this a couple times that where I've
heard that the sweet the sweet spot has

1536
01:59:00,400 --> 01:59:08,480
changed. It used to be a a four over one
was the sweet spot and and it's shifted

1537
01:59:06,560 --> 01:59:13,440
and it'd be interesting to understand
why has it shifted. Is it that those

1538
01:59:11,760 --> 01:59:17,760
developers need to build they're
considering economies of scale and as

1539
01:59:15,440 --> 01:59:21,599
costs go up they need to build bigger in
order for it to make to be worth their

1540
01:59:19,679 --> 01:59:26,800
while? Is it something else? Is there a
different factor at play here? Um, I

1541
01:59:24,320 --> 01:59:30,880
think that would help with with framing
the conversation so that we can

1542
01:59:28,719 --> 01:59:35,199
understand we we as the commission but
also as uh we as the public can

1543
01:59:33,040 --> 01:59:40,000
understand why the building heights were
recommended at the at the at at what

1544
01:59:37,760 --> 01:59:45,280
they are and not just not not solely
based on u maybe the arbitrary public

1545
01:59:42,320 --> 01:59:49,760
input of six or seven years ago. Um is
there something more concrete that we're

1546
01:59:46,960 --> 01:59:54,480
using to to base these building height
targets at? Um, I think that would be

1547
01:59:52,320 --> 01:59:57,360
helpful. Um, but then when it comes to
waiverss, one of the other things I

1548
01:59:55,920 --> 02:00:02,800
think would be helpful for us to
remember is that this is a discretionary

1549
02:00:00,320 --> 02:00:08,159
process. Um, we we're saying the target
is one to four or two to five. And

1550
02:00:06,719 --> 02:00:11,840
that's that's what we're expecting
developers to build here. And if they

1551
02:00:10,080 --> 02:00:16,639
can come to us with a good argument for
why there is exceptional circumstances

1552
02:00:14,080 --> 02:00:21,599
for them to go above that, then we can
consider that and we can we we being the

1553
02:00:18,960 --> 02:00:25,760
city or or um our planning director or
the city council or the ones that are

1554
02:00:23,040 --> 02:00:30,080
making that discretionary call based on
qualitative

1555
02:00:27,360 --> 02:00:34,320
um guidelines, right? So, this isn't
meant to be an objective standard. the

1556
02:00:32,080 --> 02:00:40,480
objective standard is baked into the the
the non-waver process and it's only if

1557
02:00:37,520 --> 02:00:44,639
somebody needs to um through through for
some exceptional circumstances to to to

1558
02:00:43,119 --> 02:00:47,360
increase the height. I think that's
where the waiver process comes into

1559
02:00:46,000 --> 02:00:50,880
play. Is am I understanding that
correctly?

1560
02:00:47,840 --> 02:00:55,199
» Yeah. Yes. Exactly. Um we have our
essentially our objective criteria which

1561
02:00:52,719 --> 02:00:59,520
is the outright allowed building heights
and then the waiver is the discretion.

1562
02:00:57,360 --> 02:01:02,880
And one of the things that um is not
necessarily unique to Wilsonville in its

1563
02:01:01,119 --> 02:01:07,679
waiver process, but we have we have
what's called essentially a better meat

1564
02:01:05,119 --> 02:01:11,760
standard that basically says if you're
asking for a waiver in our discretion,

1565
02:01:09,920 --> 02:01:17,119
we have to determine that you better
meet the policy objectives of whatever

1566
02:01:14,719 --> 02:01:20,719
that that outright allowed uses is
trying to get at that you better meet

1567
02:01:19,040 --> 02:01:25,280
that through your waiver. Which is why
we also call out these menu items to

1568
02:01:22,639 --> 02:01:29,840
say, okay, you not you need to better
meet and also what we want how we want

1569
02:01:27,440 --> 02:01:34,800
you to better meet is by benefit to the
community and mitigating your building

1570
02:01:32,000 --> 02:01:37,599
impact by getting a height waiver
essentially.

1571
02:01:35,840 --> 02:01:42,639
» Yeah. So I I think there's a lot of
opportunity for us to use those menu

1572
02:01:39,520 --> 02:01:47,440
items as as a higher bar for for making
sure that whatever the qualitative

1573
02:01:44,639 --> 02:01:52,320
discretionary decision that goes into
granting or considering a waiver is

1574
02:01:50,000 --> 02:01:57,760
guided by a very high bar for what those
menu items are. um rather than it being

1575
02:01:55,040 --> 02:02:02,320
I I think the the task force I think uh
hit hit on something really valuable

1576
02:01:59,280 --> 02:02:06,080
that if the if the menu items are cheap
then developers will see that as a as a

1577
02:02:04,320 --> 02:02:10,400
loophole to go through if they if
they're trying to abuse the waiver

1578
02:02:07,840 --> 02:02:14,639
process or game it. Um, so can we c can
we protect the waiver process to protect

1579
02:02:12,880 --> 02:02:20,239
the qualitative and discretionary nature
of the waiver process by establishing

1580
02:02:17,679 --> 02:02:23,599
menu items that are reflective of the
high bar that we expect developers to

1581
02:02:21,920 --> 02:02:26,599
meet if they're going to even ask for an
exception.

1582
02:02:28,000 --> 02:02:33,840
» Can I continue on with that? Yeah. And I
think that's why the fee and loo option

1583
02:02:32,320 --> 02:02:36,880
was interesting to me at first and then
I think about that high bar of like,

1584
02:02:35,520 --> 02:02:40,880
okay, what are specific things we want
to see? even if we just say, "Oh, you

1585
02:02:38,560 --> 02:02:44,719
can pay a fee." I don't know if that
really gets at what we're trying to

1586
02:02:42,639 --> 02:02:48,239
achieve. So, that's why, yeah, my my
first reaction was I'm not I'm not so

1587
02:02:46,320 --> 02:02:53,920
sure about the fee and loop for this for
this case. I I I do think where the task

1588
02:02:52,000 --> 02:02:57,360
force landed overall with the option
five seems appropriate. I think the one

1589
02:02:55,840 --> 02:03:03,840
thing that I'm struggling with a little
bit is the there is a section in there

1590
02:03:00,880 --> 02:03:08,639
with the CMU option of so six stories.
It's the waiver or a bonus floor. And

1591
02:03:06,639 --> 02:03:13,679
I'm really struggling realistically with
like in what case would a developer

1592
02:03:11,119 --> 02:03:19,360
choose a bonus floor? Like financially
when does that how are we going to

1593
02:03:15,520 --> 02:03:24,639
incentivize them to choose in my mind is
like affordable housing or an extra

1594
02:03:22,159 --> 02:03:29,119
story based on like meeting those menu
items. And so that part I think is where

1595
02:03:27,760 --> 02:03:33,119
I kind of lean more towards I think
option six in the CMU. It just says only

1596
02:03:31,440 --> 02:03:38,639
bonus floor. So you can only get that
six story, right?

1597
02:03:34,719 --> 02:03:42,239
» Yes. if if it's affordable because if
you give them the option of the waiver

1598
02:03:40,080 --> 02:03:46,320
or the bonus floor,
I don't I don't see why they would

1599
02:03:43,920 --> 02:03:49,840
choose the bonus floor. Um, and maybe
that's a policy discussion for council

1600
02:03:48,239 --> 02:03:54,000
is how much are we really wanting to
push affordable housing opportunities

1601
02:03:51,679 --> 02:03:58,800
because if they really want that as an
opportunity, then I don't think you

1602
02:03:55,440 --> 02:04:03,360
should give uh the the choice. Um, so
that's just something for for additional

1603
02:04:00,719 --> 02:04:11,840
discussion. Um, but I I I'm supportive
overall of that option five. And then

1604
02:04:08,639 --> 02:04:16,880
so just to get into specifics, so
attachment C for the code draft

1605
02:04:14,639 --> 02:04:22,239
language. I'm I'm wondering if there
should be an asterisk. Is that how you

1606
02:04:19,679 --> 02:04:29,119
say it? Asterric a little. Yeah, sure.
Sure. Not quite. Sorry. Um, so on the

1607
02:04:25,440 --> 02:04:35,599
the building story height row, the
maximum, so for CMU it says five, but

1608
02:04:32,320 --> 02:04:40,400
really should that little note say well
it could be six if you meet a certain

1609
02:04:38,400 --> 02:04:44,000
just to note it in that table that's in
there um just for clarity because then

1610
02:04:42,320 --> 02:04:48,400
you you'd have to go in and kind of read
through to understand that like oh

1611
02:04:46,000 --> 02:04:51,520
actually it could be six in certain
situations. So there just might be

1612
02:04:50,320 --> 02:04:54,080
opportunity depending on how
conversations go for clarity on that

1613
02:04:53,599 --> 02:04:59,119
table.
>> Are are you talking specifically about

1614
02:04:55,840 --> 02:05:05,280
the affordable housing bonus floor or
>> just generally for that table when I

1615
02:05:02,239 --> 02:05:09,280
look at it I see like maximum story fee
for CMU says five but it could be six,

1616
02:05:08,719 --> 02:05:15,679
right?
>> Yeah, we do have a note for it that

1617
02:05:12,560 --> 02:05:19,119
» Oh, it just not on the same page. I see.
>> Yeah,

1618
02:05:16,560 --> 02:05:23,280
» thank you. Yeah, I I missed that. So
that let me just read it really quick.

1619
02:05:21,920 --> 02:05:27,679
Yep, that makes sense.
>> And that and that is one of the items

1620
02:05:24,800 --> 02:05:32,400
that we talked I'm again talking about
scope of the project.

1621
02:05:30,639 --> 02:05:38,480
Staff has tried to make it clear
throughout that talking about the bonus

1622
02:05:34,880 --> 02:05:41,920
floor isn't within the waiver. But if
you're truly going to talk about what is

1623
02:05:40,159 --> 02:05:45,440
an what is a building height that may
occur, you have to talk about both. You

1624
02:05:44,159 --> 02:05:48,239
have to talk about the outright allowed
use. You have to talk about the bonus

1625
02:05:46,800 --> 02:05:53,599
floor where it's allowed. and you have
to talk about the waiver. So, it's it

1626
02:05:51,679 --> 02:05:59,119
» it's basically out of full transparency.
And what that did lead to is the task

1627
02:05:56,239 --> 02:06:05,440
force having some discussion around
>> should there be places where it's only

1628
02:06:02,159 --> 02:06:09,599
bonus floor or in places like um some of
the planning uh the staff task force

1629
02:06:07,520 --> 02:06:12,880
members saying, you know, in the
mixeduse area closest to the

1630
02:06:11,280 --> 02:06:17,440
neighborhood mixeduse, you shouldn't get
a bonus floor or the waiver to increase

1631
02:06:14,960 --> 02:06:20,800
building height. Um that was all
discussion that was had around the bonus

1632
02:06:19,599 --> 02:06:23,199
floor in particular.
>> Okay.

1633
02:06:21,679 --> 02:06:28,000
» And I would say like I said that's kind
of an open question still.

1634
02:06:25,920 --> 02:06:34,000
» Okay.
And then shifting kind of to the menu of

1635
02:06:30,800 --> 02:06:38,320
options. So there were a lot of comments
in the task force conversation around

1636
02:06:36,480 --> 02:06:43,199
kind of trying to maintain a small town
feel and the sense that you know the

1637
02:06:40,800 --> 02:06:46,480
higher the buildings go we lose I the
sentiment I get is that the the higher

1638
02:06:44,639 --> 02:06:52,320
the building the more of that small town
feel we we lose and so I'm wondering if

1639
02:06:49,440 --> 02:06:56,960
there's a way in like the menu items to
get really specific about a bar set of

1640
02:06:54,880 --> 02:07:02,880
are there certain design elements or
ways to encourage a small town feel um

1641
02:07:01,040 --> 02:07:08,079
and require that or somehow kind of
incorporate that feedback into the menu

1642
02:07:05,440 --> 02:07:11,119
of options. And I I'm I'm not Yeah, like
I don't know how that would look

1643
02:07:10,000 --> 02:07:15,599
specifically, but
>> like maybe even a different set of menu

1644
02:07:12,960 --> 02:07:20,800
options for the different zones maybe
too to kind of reinforce the the idea

1645
02:07:18,880 --> 02:07:24,400
about like there being a slope.
>> Um if that's something that we we end up

1646
02:07:22,560 --> 02:07:27,440
wanting to go with.
>> Could be. Yep.

1647
02:07:25,920 --> 02:07:30,159
» Yeah. I'm having flashbacks to the
planning commission discussion where it

1648
02:07:28,719 --> 02:07:32,159
was all around how do we make it feel
cozy?

1649
02:07:30,960 --> 02:07:35,520
» Yeah.
>> I don't know how cozy works into a

1650
02:07:34,000 --> 02:07:37,599
development code, but we'll try our
best.

1651
02:07:35,920 --> 02:07:42,320
» Well, and yeah, I mean there are certain
ways like you think about like I don't

1652
02:07:40,239 --> 02:07:46,239
know your little pocket parks or I think
there was conversations about just even

1653
02:07:44,159 --> 02:07:51,280
outdoor seating or covered areas like
certain opportunities to run into people

1654
02:07:49,199 --> 02:07:56,400
and have conversations and know each
other and that's what creates people

1655
02:07:53,360 --> 02:08:02,079
create the small town feel, right? So
the cozy feel. Sorry. Okay, I'm done.

1656
02:07:58,880 --> 02:08:07,760
Um, so yeah, that was just a thought.
And then

1657
02:08:04,639 --> 02:08:14,239
so I guess I'm unclear then
for the conversation around

1658
02:08:11,599 --> 02:08:18,079
the MU East, right? So closer to the
neighborhoods and the fourstory

1659
02:08:16,000 --> 02:08:22,000
conversation. So that's something that's
not within the scope of the work that

1660
02:08:20,560 --> 02:08:25,679
we're doing or is that something that we
can say, "Yeah, we want to talk about

1661
02:08:23,360 --> 02:08:29,679
more later down the line." So we have
got so the the affordable housing bonus

1662
02:08:28,239 --> 02:08:34,639
floor is not part of the waiver
provision that is directed for that

1663
02:08:32,320 --> 02:08:39,280
council directed staff to look at okay
through this process. That being said,

1664
02:08:37,199 --> 02:08:48,000
we staff in our last work session with
council did flag that this bonus floor

1665
02:08:42,320 --> 02:08:52,880
is part of the conversation and um so
we've continued to talk about it. And

1666
02:08:50,320 --> 02:08:56,239
so, um, we flagged for the task force
that it was outside the scope, but also

1667
02:08:54,719 --> 02:08:59,599
wanted the task force feedback because
if the feedback really is, hey, we

1668
02:08:58,000 --> 02:09:02,800
understand it's outside the scope, but
council, we really think you need to

1669
02:09:01,119 --> 02:09:07,040
look at this in conjunction with the
waiver, then that's the feedback we're

1670
02:09:04,480 --> 02:09:13,119
going to tell council. Um and so that's
where the discussion around maybe no inc

1671
02:09:10,719 --> 02:09:18,560
no increases allowed either through a
bonus floor which would change the table

1672
02:09:16,639 --> 02:09:22,719
» um note
>> or the waiver was something that was

1673
02:09:20,960 --> 02:09:25,840
discussed within the task force and so
it's part of the planning commission

1674
02:09:24,480 --> 02:09:30,119
discussion and will be part of the city
council discussion as well.

1675
02:09:27,119 --> 02:09:30,119
» Okay.

1676
02:09:30,159 --> 02:09:35,440
So if people have particular thoughts
about that, I'm happy to report those to

1677
02:09:34,400 --> 02:09:42,320
the council.
>> So what's the what's the purpose or

1678
02:09:38,320 --> 02:09:47,679
definition of a bonus floor?
>> So um

1679
02:09:45,280 --> 02:09:51,679
if I remember right,
so the purpose I mean the purpose is it

1680
02:09:49,840 --> 02:09:53,520
was to promote affordable housing. I
mean that's the purpose behind the bonus

1681
02:09:53,119 --> 02:09:59,040
floor.
>> We're using those two as counterp

1682
02:09:56,800 --> 02:10:03,599
proposals. You're saying you can have a
bonus floor but not or you can do

1683
02:10:01,360 --> 02:10:07,360
variable or affordable housing but not a
bonus floor. So you can't we can't use

1684
02:10:05,679 --> 02:10:11,040
affordable housing as a definition of a
bonus.

1685
02:10:08,239 --> 02:10:15,679
» So in all of the in all of the options
that were presented to the task force,

1686
02:10:14,000 --> 02:10:20,480
the bonus floor is not being removed
because it's not part of the waiver

1687
02:10:17,440 --> 02:10:24,880
provision. What the task floors task and
the bonus floor is only tied to

1688
02:10:22,480 --> 02:10:29,760
providing 25% of affordable housing for
the number of units that would equate to

1689
02:10:26,800 --> 02:10:34,560
that bonus floor. So if the bonus if you
think about a com a residential complex

1690
02:10:32,480 --> 02:10:37,920
that has 12 units on each floor and they
want a bonus floor they can put an

1691
02:10:36,239 --> 02:10:41,520
additional 12 units but four units need
to be affordable housing and those four

1692
02:10:39,679 --> 02:10:44,320
units could be spread they don't
necessarily have to be on the top floor

1693
02:10:42,639 --> 02:10:50,639
they can be spread throughout.
>> So that's how that concept would work.

1694
02:10:47,520 --> 02:10:56,400
Um that is part of the t that's part of
the table for what's outright allowed.

1695
02:10:53,040 --> 02:11:01,360
Um, and then this waiver allows for, you
know, building heights to change um, up

1696
02:10:58,960 --> 02:11:07,520
or down. And so what the t what some of
the task force members talked about was

1697
02:11:03,360 --> 02:11:10,320
discomfort in um, you know, this idea of
if the taller buildings are supposed to

1698
02:11:08,880 --> 02:11:15,280
be closer to I5 and it's supposed to
taper down as you get closer to the

1699
02:11:12,880 --> 02:11:19,199
residential area. does a five-story
building that is five stories because of

1700
02:11:17,280 --> 02:11:24,000
the bonus floor, not because of a
waiver, but is five stories because of a

1701
02:11:21,360 --> 02:11:27,760
bonus floor, like even if we limit the
waiver and don't allow an increase of

1702
02:11:25,920 --> 02:11:31,760
building height um because of the
waiver, there's still the opportunity

1703
02:11:29,840 --> 02:11:36,159
for a five-story building. And is that
something that we want to see that close

1704
02:11:34,320 --> 02:11:40,800
to the residential area? And it was
split. I mean, it was basically four

1705
02:11:38,639 --> 02:11:45,040
were fine with option five leaving in
that bonus floor, three were not, and

1706
02:11:42,480 --> 02:11:49,599
one was undecided. So we didn't have a
majority you know which would be five.

1707
02:11:47,920 --> 02:11:54,079
We didn't have a majority consensus
coming out of the task force about what

1708
02:11:51,599 --> 02:12:00,719
to do with I mean if you just think
about it in number of floors for the

1709
02:11:56,000 --> 02:12:06,239
mixed use area on the eastern side
should it be four should it be or should

1710
02:12:02,719 --> 02:12:11,119
it be five essentially
and four is what's outright allowed

1711
02:12:08,239 --> 02:12:15,280
» and if we say four then we can't be
prescriptive that 25% has to be

1712
02:12:13,199 --> 02:12:18,960
affordable housing.
>> Correct. That's what's outright allowed

1713
02:12:17,440 --> 02:12:20,880
right now regardless of affordable
housing.

1714
02:12:19,280 --> 02:12:24,560
» So the the two to four that's outright
allowed has nothing to do with afford

1715
02:12:22,719 --> 02:12:25,119
has no clause for affordable housing.
Okay.

1716
02:12:24,800 --> 02:12:28,000
» Correct.
>> And are we allowed to require more

1717
02:12:26,480 --> 02:12:31,280
affordable housing to get the bonus
level?

1718
02:12:29,440 --> 02:12:33,280
» If that is feedback that planning
commission would like me to take to

1719
02:12:32,320 --> 02:12:36,239
council. I can take that.
>> I mean because it seems kind of I don't

1720
02:12:34,480 --> 02:12:41,760
know. It seems almost like a cheap out
again if you're like well if there's 12

1721
02:12:38,000 --> 02:12:44,800
12 oh now on this one you get eight full
rent and you get four. I mean that's

1722
02:12:43,760 --> 02:12:48,239
kind of
>> it. That doesn't really seem fair to me

1723
02:12:46,719 --> 02:12:51,679
to be like I would say like the whole
floor would have to be like affordable

1724
02:12:50,400 --> 02:12:55,599
and then you're like okay cool like you
can have an extra floor. I mean

1725
02:12:54,560 --> 02:12:59,360
» maybe they wouldn't want to do the whole
floor but like

1726
02:12:56,880 --> 02:13:04,400
» you I would see it should be more
>> 12 out of 48 units would be

1727
02:13:01,520 --> 02:13:07,840
» as opposed to just four out of 48. When
again coming back to that idea of like

1728
02:13:06,239 --> 02:13:13,440
let's let's make sure that the bar is
high for like for people that want to

1729
02:13:10,079 --> 02:13:17,760
exceed what our vision is. Um they need
to be they need to meet a very high bar

1730
02:13:15,760 --> 02:13:23,040
and it may and it is meant to discourage
people from just

1731
02:13:20,400 --> 02:13:25,280
on a whim wanting to exceed the the the
vision that we set.

1732
02:13:24,400 --> 02:13:29,040
» Yeah. I mean I guess that was my point
on the waiver items, right? Is if

1733
02:13:26,560 --> 02:13:32,159
they're not more prescriptive, then that
can set the bar pretty low and people

1734
02:13:30,480 --> 02:13:36,880
can try to find loopholes. Same thing
with the the housing affordable housing

1735
02:13:34,639 --> 02:13:41,040
bonus floor is like if it's only four
units. I I would assume most developers

1736
02:13:39,760 --> 02:13:44,480
would want to do it because they're
getting eight more. You get an extra

1737
02:13:42,719 --> 02:13:48,960
floor, you get an extra, you know, you
get an extra 2/3 um to rent out, but so

1738
02:13:47,199 --> 02:13:56,840
I would like to see that to be higher if
it's something we consider. Um

1739
02:13:52,159 --> 02:13:56,840
and then yeah,

1740
02:14:00,159 --> 02:14:03,920
» that's okay. I have all sorts of
thoughts running in my head.

1741
02:14:03,360 --> 02:14:07,679
» Yeah.
>> Nothing I put words to you.

1742
02:14:05,599 --> 02:14:13,920
» I mean, just in that the the phrasing of
the question of it's it's kind of a

1743
02:14:09,040 --> 02:14:17,840
choice of four or five for the the east
area. In my mind, it's still the policy

1744
02:14:16,159 --> 02:14:22,239
question of like how much do we want to
push affordable housing or not? Like

1745
02:14:20,400 --> 02:14:27,520
that is kind of the direction I would
want from council is if you're really

1746
02:14:25,280 --> 02:14:33,599
passionate about getting more affordable
housing, you would allow for this bonus

1747
02:14:30,239 --> 02:14:37,599
floor. So the five story option. Um and
if you're not, then

1748
02:14:35,760 --> 02:14:40,639
it's then it would be four. That that's
how my mind's working right now.

1749
02:14:38,880 --> 02:14:44,159
» But then would you make it 25% of the
total building? Well, and this this goes

1750
02:14:42,560 --> 02:14:49,599
back to the question earlier that I
mentioned of like if they have options,

1751
02:14:46,800 --> 02:14:53,040
I I feel like and I I don't know all of
the

1752
02:14:51,119 --> 02:14:56,719
financials around this, but I imagine
the reason that we would offer the

1753
02:14:55,040 --> 02:15:00,560
option of a waiver or bonus floor for
the other area is because like the

1754
02:14:59,119 --> 02:15:05,280
affordable housing probably doesn't make
a lot of sense financially for these

1755
02:15:01,920 --> 02:15:09,840
folks. So if it's a smaller barrier just
to get at least four more affordable

1756
02:15:07,679 --> 02:15:17,199
housing, I would rather have that than
none, right? So but I don't know I don't

1757
02:15:13,840 --> 02:15:22,400
know what the demand or I I guess I'd
need more information on like what that

1758
02:15:19,920 --> 02:15:25,920
looks like. Um
>> yeah, I mean I think they would still be

1759
02:15:23,760 --> 02:15:29,840
able to qualify for like some of the tax
incentives even if they were going up to

1760
02:15:27,840 --> 02:15:32,079
going up to four stories, right? like
just

1761
02:15:30,400 --> 02:15:35,360
» or I meant like four units or whatever
we were talking about for the Yeah.

1762
02:15:34,079 --> 02:15:40,000
» But if you know we said there were just
no bonus if we suggested that there were

1763
02:15:37,679 --> 02:15:44,800
no bonus floors like that doesn't mean
that there wouldn't be affordable

1764
02:15:41,199 --> 02:15:48,159
housing. Um if right because there's
still a lot of tax incentives for

1765
02:15:46,079 --> 02:15:55,760
affordable housing to be built. It would
just mean that it wouldn't go above

1766
02:15:50,880 --> 02:16:00,719
» four levels in certain areas. Um,
>> yeah. I just I question how much

1767
02:15:57,280 --> 02:16:04,960
incentive there is generally.
>> Yeah.

1768
02:16:03,280 --> 02:16:11,599
» Yeah. And I and I think balancing that
against the the like the apparent will

1769
02:16:08,880 --> 02:16:14,719
of the the people of Wilville, too. Like
there's the the incentive for the

1770
02:16:13,360 --> 02:16:19,040
developers to come in and build and
there and and we want to get affordable

1771
02:16:16,639 --> 02:16:24,320
housing, but we also have a very loud
group of of of the population. um a

1772
02:16:22,800 --> 02:16:29,440
substantial group of the population that
seems to be really

1773
02:16:26,400 --> 02:16:32,800
uh strongly opinionated as councelor
Gandrian said that's that's like a lot

1774
02:16:31,280 --> 02:16:35,120
of people seem to be kind of like me
ambivalent

1775
02:16:33,519 --> 02:16:39,519
» either ambivalent or passionate about
not going too high right like I don't I

1776
02:16:37,760 --> 02:16:44,160
mean I I could be wrong but I don't
think anyone is like super passionate

1777
02:16:41,280 --> 02:16:47,679
about like we have to go higher um so
that's kind of like I said

1778
02:16:45,920 --> 02:16:51,200
» you know to me if if someone wanted to
come build like the Burj Khalifa

1779
02:16:49,679 --> 02:16:56,080
Wilsonville
and it and they were going to finance

1780
02:16:53,040 --> 02:17:00,800
it, I'd be like, I mean, cool, I guess.
Um, but I'm probably in the minority on

1781
02:16:58,399 --> 02:17:05,040
that opinion. Um, it just seems to me
most people are like either ambivalent

1782
02:17:02,719 --> 02:17:10,399
or against going too high. So, if that's
the case, like we have a lot of options

1783
02:17:06,880 --> 02:17:13,200
to make most people somewhat happy,
right? Because the ambivalent people are

1784
02:17:11,599 --> 02:17:16,080
just be like, "Oh, whatever." Like, but
the people who are very passionate are

1785
02:17:14,319 --> 02:17:19,840
going to be like, "Oh,
thank you." like we get that extra like

1786
02:17:18,080 --> 02:17:28,719
you know 10 minutes of sunshine because
of how the rays will hit or something.

1787
02:17:24,319 --> 02:17:33,280
» Yeah. And I and I would say um
if anything at least um from some of the

1788
02:17:31,920 --> 02:17:37,599
task force members how they talked about
it was not necessarily that about height

1789
02:17:35,200 --> 02:17:42,319
but around flexibility.
That being said, I go back to the point

1790
02:17:39,920 --> 02:17:48,479
about where this arose where this whole
language even arose from from the prior

1791
02:17:44,719 --> 02:17:53,120
planning commission was around um
flexibility for anchor retail tenants

1792
02:17:51,120 --> 02:17:57,439
was how that discussion started back
then. That's not to say it can't be

1793
02:17:55,679 --> 02:18:00,880
different than that. Um but that's
really where I mean if you think about

1794
02:17:59,120 --> 02:18:04,319
where this originated from was from that
flexibility discussion around anchor

1795
02:18:02,399 --> 02:18:08,399
retail tenants. And then I would suggest
if that was kind of the genesis of this

1796
02:18:06,559 --> 02:18:13,920
is to have the flexibility to have a
larger footprint

1797
02:18:11,280 --> 02:18:18,719
if needed, right, for a specific waiver
for specific reasons as opposed to going

1798
02:18:15,920 --> 02:18:23,120
up. like if you want to go out, if that
was the genesis, then that seems like

1799
02:18:20,800 --> 02:18:26,479
that makes more people happy or less
upset than well, if you're going to go

1800
02:18:25,280 --> 02:18:30,040
out, you have to also be able to let
them go up. Like

1801
02:18:34,240 --> 02:18:40,960
I I
want to make sure we're clear because I

1802
02:18:38,559 --> 02:18:46,479
think I heard Amanda earlier say we
wouldn't allow

1803
02:18:43,040 --> 02:18:52,559
out and up together.
Um, so that is not a consideration. I

1804
02:18:49,439 --> 02:18:58,160
think that that probably the discussion
point we're talking about is that when

1805
02:18:53,920 --> 02:19:02,800
we put in um building footprint or
height could you could get a waiver for

1806
02:19:00,559 --> 02:19:08,639
that. The idea was to be able to go out
shorter and wider. We just failed at

1807
02:19:05,840 --> 02:19:14,319
saying you could get a height waiver to
reduce because I we didn't really

1808
02:19:11,920 --> 02:19:22,000
anticipate the situation of somebody
asking for a height waiver to go taller

1809
02:19:17,760 --> 02:19:28,319
at the time that it was written.
>> But you but the what's proposed is not

1810
02:19:24,719 --> 02:19:31,120
out and up together. Correct.
>> I just want to make sure that was clear.

1811
02:19:29,599 --> 02:19:34,960
» Yeah. No, I just meant that like if the
original genesis of this was that people

1812
02:19:32,800 --> 02:19:40,559
could go out and then because of how it
was written, you could go out or up, but

1813
02:19:38,479 --> 02:19:43,359
really the point was that you could go
out. Then maybe

1814
02:19:42,719 --> 02:19:47,280
» we allow
>> not having up waiverss.

1815
02:19:45,599 --> 02:19:52,399
» We allow out but not up.
>> Yeah. We would allow out but not up and

1816
02:19:49,439 --> 02:19:56,080
then it can be revisited if in five,
six, seven years, you know,

1817
02:19:54,640 --> 02:19:57,200
» and allowed down then.
>> Yeah.

1818
02:19:56,399 --> 02:20:03,040
» Yes.
>> Yeah.

1819
02:19:59,040 --> 02:20:09,280
So option seven
is option six but limit the CM to five

1820
02:20:07,840 --> 02:20:13,359
limit the MU.
>> I feel like I I don't know if everyone

1821
02:20:10,960 --> 02:20:17,040
has expressed what their thoughts are in
terms of

1822
02:20:15,280 --> 02:20:21,040
» I was just stating another option.
>> Yeah. So what what you're saying is

1823
02:20:18,960 --> 02:20:25,280
option seven is essentially the
conversation that was had around

1824
02:20:23,280 --> 02:20:29,040
eliminating building. So the discussion
that once the task force got to its

1825
02:20:27,680 --> 02:20:32,880
preferred alternative they then
discussed eliminate the building height

1826
02:20:30,880 --> 02:20:36,640
waiver to increase height not eliminate
it alto together. Your option seven is

1827
02:20:35,200 --> 02:20:38,880
» yes that's my option seven. Yes.
>> Yes.

1828
02:20:37,200 --> 02:20:44,319
» And this was their vote.
>> Yes. It was it was 62. But again that's

1829
02:20:42,080 --> 02:20:48,479
that's to inform the planning commission
you know about

1830
02:20:46,640 --> 02:20:53,600
about how you want to then inform
council. So,

1831
02:20:51,359 --> 02:20:58,560
» does everybody want to kind of state
what their recommendation is?

1832
02:20:56,880 --> 02:21:02,399
» Well, and just for clarification, just
to be super clear, that vote was saying

1833
02:21:00,560 --> 02:21:07,920
that of the task force participants,
six, it was a 6 to2 vote in favor of

1834
02:21:04,880 --> 02:21:14,000
keeping a waiver for increasing. Okay.
>> Correct. That where there was not a

1835
02:21:11,120 --> 02:21:19,840
clear consensus. So, option five was the
consensus. Um

1836
02:21:16,960 --> 02:21:28,319
what was not a consensus was whether or
not in mixed use east should there be no

1837
02:21:25,120 --> 02:21:33,439
ability to increase building height. Um
but option five was the preferred over

1838
02:21:31,120 --> 02:21:36,720
eliminating the the ability to increase
building height altogether.

1839
02:21:35,600 --> 02:21:44,840
» Yeah. Thank you.
>> Which option seven would be option five

1840
02:21:39,200 --> 02:21:44,840
but limit the ability to up. Yes. Yes.

1841
02:21:50,319 --> 02:21:58,319
If if it helps maybe where we start is
kind of how we started with the task

1842
02:21:54,240 --> 02:22:02,399
force of do people have a preference if
you had to choose between we'll save

1843
02:22:00,319 --> 02:22:09,760
option seven if you had to choose
between two five and six is there a

1844
02:22:05,520 --> 02:22:12,479
consensus around preference on that or
and it doesn't even have to be a

1845
02:22:10,800 --> 02:22:16,319
consensus I can literally report to
council one person like this one, one

1846
02:22:14,560 --> 02:22:19,120
person like this one, so on and so
forth.

1847
02:22:18,080 --> 02:22:22,560
» Yeah, I don't know if we're going to
have consensus,

1848
02:22:21,359 --> 02:22:26,479
» but that's okay.
>> But that's what I was saying. I was

1849
02:22:23,920 --> 02:22:28,560
maybe we do, you know, kind of I'll
state what

1850
02:22:27,359 --> 02:22:34,560
» I I recommend.
>> I do I like option five of these four

1851
02:22:31,520 --> 02:22:38,720
options presented. I like option five.
>> Yeah, I agree.

1852
02:22:35,920 --> 02:22:42,560
» But I like option seven better.
>> We'll get to that one.

1853
02:22:39,439 --> 02:22:46,080
» We'll get there. Um yeah, I guess I
think

1854
02:22:44,240 --> 02:22:51,920
well I guess actually I would prefer
option six

1855
02:22:48,560 --> 02:22:56,160
um just because I don't think the waiver
uh up to six stories. Um I I think if

1856
02:22:55,040 --> 02:23:01,280
we're going to have it larger, there
should be some community benefit and I

1857
02:22:57,760 --> 02:23:06,000
think that the the um affordable housing
would be um something that would be a

1858
02:23:03,920 --> 02:23:11,760
good community benefit. Um, so I guess I
would go with option six, but I'm also

1859
02:23:09,040 --> 02:23:18,080
with Commissioner Carr in that I feel
the community is more pushing towards an

1860
02:23:14,240 --> 02:23:23,120
option seven. Um, and so I guess I would
lean towards that.

1861
02:23:21,439 --> 02:23:26,240
Yeah. I mean, the only reason I lean
more toward five because I I see what

1862
02:23:24,880 --> 02:23:30,399
you mean and I I really agree with the
sentiment there. The the only reason I

1863
02:23:27,920 --> 02:23:33,280
tend to lean more toward five is um
well, I guess there's two. one is that

1864
02:23:32,000 --> 02:23:36,640
they seem to be the one that was a
little bit more favored in the task

1865
02:23:34,479 --> 02:23:40,800
force. But the main main one personally
why I'd lean more toward that is just

1866
02:23:38,000 --> 02:23:44,399
the flexibility that it affords. Um be
because we don't know what's going to

1867
02:23:42,160 --> 02:23:51,359
come down the pipe five or 10 or 15
years from now. Um allowing for that

1868
02:23:47,760 --> 02:23:55,120
waiver in in the CMU gives us a little
bit more flexibility and it's still a

1869
02:23:53,120 --> 02:23:59,280
discretionary process. So we have to we
have to trust that the bar is high

1870
02:23:56,720 --> 02:24:03,680
enough and and and will be respected.
Um, but I think that flexibility gives

1871
02:24:01,840 --> 02:24:09,399
us it leaves the door open for us to be
able to accept more options when it

1872
02:24:06,080 --> 02:24:09,399
comes to developers.

1873
02:24:09,680 --> 02:24:16,000
» I would agree. I would agree with that.
And then I'm also thinking almost

1874
02:24:13,359 --> 02:24:19,600
reversely of we can start with these
option option five, the waiver or the

1875
02:24:17,680 --> 02:24:24,880
bonus floor, but if it's really if the
waiver is not panning out the way that

1876
02:24:22,080 --> 02:24:28,000
we had intended it to, then it's like,
well, maybe we need to re reevaluate if

1877
02:24:26,640 --> 02:24:31,920
we need to remove the waiver or not,
right? And I think yours was kind of the

1878
02:24:30,160 --> 02:24:35,760
the opposite of like don't start with
the waiver um and then we can evaluate

1879
02:24:34,080 --> 02:24:38,800
and see if we need it later, right? Is
that what you were suggesting?

1880
02:24:36,800 --> 02:24:42,000
» Well, yeah, because I think right if
like using kind of Sherry's almost as an

1881
02:24:40,479 --> 02:24:44,960
example,
>> one of the reasons we said we have to go

1882
02:24:43,359 --> 02:24:49,040
to five now is because we already kind
of like let a building go to five. And

1883
02:24:46,880 --> 02:24:53,840
so if we're saying so, you know, so say
someone comes in, they build a six-story

1884
02:24:50,399 --> 02:24:58,080
building and for whatever reason like
there's like pitchforks in the streets

1885
02:24:55,520 --> 02:25:02,880
and like riots because that was like the
worst thing ever. But now we've already

1886
02:24:59,439 --> 02:25:06,880
allowed a six floor sixf flooror
sixstory building to be built, right? So

1887
02:25:05,200 --> 02:25:08,399
then it's hard to put the genie kind of
back in the box there. I see what you're

1888
02:25:08,160 --> 02:25:13,680
saying
>> where

1889
02:25:10,160 --> 02:25:18,960
I'm kind of saying okay it sound again
my personal opinion aside on how tall

1890
02:25:15,920 --> 02:25:23,040
the building should be. Um, if we say,
well, let's see what happens over the

1891
02:25:20,560 --> 02:25:27,920
next five, six, seven years. Is four
stories, maybe a fifth working for

1892
02:25:26,640 --> 02:25:30,160
people, are we getting development?
Like, are we having people come in?

1893
02:25:29,040 --> 02:25:34,160
Like, we have all these projects lined
up. Then maybe it's almost like a moot

1894
02:25:32,640 --> 02:25:39,600
point, right? But if like people are
like, hey, it just does not work at all

1895
02:25:36,000 --> 02:25:43,760
unless I have six floors, you know, then
maybe we can revisit that. But I think

1896
02:25:41,520 --> 02:25:48,399
if we allow it to start, then you're
kind of setting the precedent that like,

1897
02:25:45,040 --> 02:25:51,840
hey, you know, we already let people do
it at this height. So then you're going

1898
02:25:49,840 --> 02:25:54,240
to kind of have a harder time saying
>> we're not going to let anyone else. And

1899
02:25:52,880 --> 02:25:58,000
then you have like this one albatross
building, you know, the white whale of

1900
02:25:56,800 --> 02:26:03,920
Wilsonville.
>> Well, except for to to the point earlier

1901
02:26:01,600 --> 02:26:08,319
from Amanda, I think we can always take
the waiver away. Just because there is a

1902
02:26:05,840 --> 02:26:12,399
building that that has met some previous
standard doesn't mean we always have to

1903
02:26:09,600 --> 02:26:15,600
have that standard. Um I think that
where I where I would agree with you

1904
02:26:14,000 --> 02:26:20,880
though is that once a building is built,
it's built and it's there. And so um it

1905
02:26:18,640 --> 02:26:23,920
might disrupt the if we do decide in the
future to say actually we want our

1906
02:26:22,000 --> 02:26:28,319
building heights to be lower and we've
already got a six-story building, then

1907
02:26:25,920 --> 02:26:33,200
now we've got a unicorn and it's it
changes the feel of the whole area. So

1908
02:26:31,200 --> 02:26:37,200
um yeah, we we we commit to it once we
get a building built. That's cement in

1909
02:26:35,439 --> 02:26:39,359
the ground that's not going to go away
for a long time.

1910
02:26:37,840 --> 02:26:43,280
» But that also gets to your point is what
are the surrounding city what are what's

1911
02:26:41,439 --> 02:26:44,560
our competition allowing
>> so to speak.

1912
02:26:44,160 --> 02:26:48,800
» Yeah.
>> Right. What are the what are the cities

1913
02:26:46,240 --> 02:26:52,800
around us allowing as far as because if
you drive down the I5 corridor, right?

1914
02:26:51,280 --> 02:26:56,479
The tallest buildings you're going to
see is four.

1915
02:26:54,800 --> 02:27:01,359
» I don't see any five story until you
start getting into downtown. Right. But

1916
02:26:58,560 --> 02:27:05,359
all along the corridor there's there's
nothing. I mean, I I work in a building

1917
02:27:03,520 --> 02:27:08,960
that's right by I5. It's a four-story
building. It's in Lake Lake Grove, Lake

1918
02:27:07,920 --> 02:27:12,479
Asiggo.
>> Mhm. For Yeah.

1919
02:27:10,800 --> 02:27:16,479
» Looks just like Metroraphics building or
CEO's building.

1920
02:27:13,439 --> 02:27:19,680
» And Yeah. And I think um I think that's
where

1921
02:27:18,080 --> 02:27:26,720
I think it's good to be aware of kind of
what what what are the surrounding

1922
02:27:22,479 --> 02:27:30,240
cities like us? Um what are what do they
have planned? What are they doing? what

1923
02:27:28,399 --> 02:27:33,920
is the what does the landscape look like
if we're trying to attract development?

1924
02:27:31,680 --> 02:27:37,120
How what are we competing against um so
to speak? That's probably not quite the

1925
02:27:35,280 --> 02:27:42,640
right language to use in planning
circles. But um but then also there's we

1926
02:27:41,120 --> 02:27:46,399
also don't want to go too far down that
road. Like we don't want to compromise

1927
02:27:45,040 --> 02:27:51,200
we we don't want to compromise our
values as a city in order to win

1928
02:27:48,800 --> 02:27:55,680
development at at all cost. So there is
a there is a threshold that we need to

1929
02:27:52,880 --> 02:27:58,080
establish and respect as far as and I
think that's kind of the what's

1930
02:27:56,720 --> 02:28:03,359
communicated a lot of times in the
sentiment of like the the Wilsonville

1931
02:27:59,760 --> 02:28:09,280
feel or the the feel of the city. Um
there's a balance between the two

1932
02:28:04,880 --> 02:28:12,640
because we we we we need to anticipate
growth. We need to attract the kind of

1933
02:28:10,640 --> 02:28:16,800
growth that we want. We also need to
kind of the whole purpose of a plan is

1934
02:28:14,960 --> 02:28:21,040
to put shape around it so that we can
guide what kind of development comes in.

1935
02:28:18,880 --> 02:28:25,680
Um but if we put too much shape around
it then the developers will go somewhere

1936
02:28:22,800 --> 02:28:29,200
easier. Um if we say you can't build two
stories or you can't build above two or

1937
02:28:27,120 --> 02:28:32,880
three or four stories but it's not
economically viable to build anything

1938
02:28:31,040 --> 02:28:37,520
lower than five then we get no
developers unless we change our our

1939
02:28:35,439 --> 02:28:42,880
format drastically
um as I understand it. So I think just

1940
02:28:40,720 --> 02:28:46,880
the that I think the idea of option five
and option six that both of them are

1941
02:28:45,040 --> 02:28:52,080
appealing to me even if I'm leaning a
little bit more toward option five or

1942
02:28:48,960 --> 02:28:55,359
option seven maybe eventually um is just
the flexibility it gives us a little it

1943
02:28:54,000 --> 02:29:00,960
leaves the door a little bit more open
for us to be able to navigate what may

1944
02:28:58,319 --> 02:29:08,640
be a really shifting environment over
the next decade or more

1945
02:29:05,040 --> 02:29:12,399
» since it's come up uh quite a bit I
would like to address for the commission

1946
02:29:10,399 --> 02:29:16,880
that
Wilsonville's plan was really guided by

1947
02:29:14,720 --> 02:29:22,560
Wilsonville. And so I think it is
important to some degree to acknowledge

1948
02:29:19,280 --> 02:29:25,840
that to acknowledge our neighbors, but
maybe also not put too much weight on

1949
02:29:24,399 --> 02:29:29,120
our neighbors because Wilsonville is
Wilsonville. And if there's one thing

1950
02:29:27,280 --> 02:29:33,280
I've learned being here, Wilsonville is
Wilsonville and we don't compromise our

1951
02:29:30,960 --> 02:29:38,240
way related to what our neighbors are
necessarily doing. That being said, we

1952
02:29:35,520 --> 02:29:42,240
do want to be cognizant of it and
understand it for the very reasons that

1953
02:29:40,080 --> 02:29:47,520
you all are talking about it. I can
offer a few things. You know, I haven't

1954
02:29:44,240 --> 02:29:53,120
been um studying up on my neighbors
exclusively. I've been pretty busy here.

1955
02:29:49,840 --> 02:29:58,000
Uh but I can say like I'm pretty sure
the Tiger Triangle um has and maybe

1956
02:29:56,319 --> 02:30:04,319
somebody else in the room can help me,
but um I believe the height limit there

1957
02:30:00,399 --> 02:30:10,160
is like 75 ft. um so allows six and
sevenstory buildings and is planning for

1958
02:30:06,399 --> 02:30:15,840
that. Um I know that Beaverton I believe
that down in there like the round in

1959
02:30:12,319 --> 02:30:19,680
downtown also allows fivetory buildings.
Um I can't remember if the building

1960
02:30:17,600 --> 02:30:22,479
that's in the round is four or five but
it's around the same height as the

1961
02:30:21,280 --> 02:30:26,640
buildings that we're talking about in
our town center. Um, you know, Lake

1962
02:30:24,399 --> 02:30:30,080
Owiggo, I don't know the limit, but I
know that the buildings right now that

1963
02:30:28,160 --> 02:30:34,240
were redeveloped were four stories, but
I think it's also four stories over a

1964
02:30:32,160 --> 02:30:39,920
parking garage. So, the height there
might be a little bit taller um than a

1965
02:30:36,640 --> 02:30:43,680
standard fourstory. So, I think from my
perspective, a lot of what we're doing

1966
02:30:41,600 --> 02:30:48,160
and planning for is consistent with the
types of plans that we're think seeing

1967
02:30:45,280 --> 02:30:53,680
throughout the region. Um, Hillsboro uh
definitely allows fivetory buildings.

1968
02:30:50,240 --> 02:30:58,720
They may even allow taller um in certain
areas including their downtown and I

1969
02:30:56,479 --> 02:31:04,720
believe Amber Glenn might even allow up
to seven or eight um which is another

1970
02:31:01,439 --> 02:31:10,160
town center area of theirs. So um
Gresham I don't remember but it probably

1971
02:31:07,520 --> 02:31:13,840
also is around five stories. So kind of
what we're doing here in terms of our

1972
02:31:11,680 --> 02:31:18,479
town center is comparable to other town
centers in the region. Um but also a lot

1973
02:31:16,880 --> 02:31:22,800
of what's in the plan is unique to what
we heard from this community which I

1974
02:31:20,319 --> 02:31:27,760
also think is valuable. The other thing
too that I would note um and um I think

1975
02:31:25,600 --> 02:31:31,760
this is I think this is understood is
there there's a difference between what

1976
02:31:29,520 --> 02:31:36,399
is already been built and may have been
built many years ago when the economics

1977
02:31:34,240 --> 02:31:40,479
were different versus what is allowed or
what has been I mean we

1978
02:31:38,880 --> 02:31:44,240
» if you look at I mean like if you drove
around town center right now you'd think

1979
02:31:42,000 --> 02:31:48,960
we don't allow anything over two story
maybe three stories right

1980
02:31:45,840 --> 02:31:54,800
» but we do and so it's that built
environment versus what is on the books

1981
02:31:51,600 --> 02:32:00,560
And the other thing that um what was the
other thing that I was going to note,

1982
02:31:57,840 --> 02:32:06,200
if I remember it, I'll say it.
>> It's it's already 8:30, so my brain's a

1983
02:32:02,560 --> 02:32:06,200
little fried. So,

1984
02:32:06,800 --> 02:32:09,840
» okay.
>> Did you want to say something else?

1985
02:32:09,280 --> 02:32:13,680
Okay.
>> Well, I So, okay. I have three

1986
02:32:12,080 --> 02:32:16,800
commissioners at least on the option.
And Commissioner Hendricks, you

1987
02:32:15,359 --> 02:32:19,200
previously you went back and forth
between five and six. So I'm wondering

1988
02:32:18,399 --> 02:32:22,720
if you
>> I'm still I'm still in the middle there.

1989
02:32:21,200 --> 02:32:29,040
» Okay. Middle of five and six,
>> which is not helpful. I um

1990
02:32:26,080 --> 02:32:33,520
» is maybe this is helpful. Uh Chair
Seanova, are you a firm option two

1991
02:32:31,520 --> 02:32:37,040
person?
>> Can I at least tell council we've

1992
02:32:35,200 --> 02:32:41,600
narrowed it down to maybe five and six
or are you a

1993
02:32:38,160 --> 02:32:47,280
» You can say that. I would um I I I don't
have a strong preference between five

1994
02:32:43,040 --> 02:32:53,840
and six, but a part of me does want to
keep the waiver for going down, but stop

1995
02:32:49,760 --> 02:32:59,120
the waiver from going up until we get
more defined criteria on what that

1996
02:32:55,680 --> 02:33:02,720
waiver criteria is that needs to be met
to set those high standards. I think

1997
02:33:00,720 --> 02:33:06,479
everybody's in like the renderings
showed you know two three story

1998
02:33:04,319 --> 02:33:10,640
buildings the coziness and then
everybody with the with these waiverss

1999
02:33:09,120 --> 02:33:16,240
are envisioning all these sixstory
buildings popping up everywhere and and

2000
02:33:13,760 --> 02:33:21,280
where do you you know draw that line and
then on on the mixeduse east like in

2001
02:33:19,760 --> 02:33:26,000
Vibal we already have I think some
fourstory buildings going up right now

2002
02:33:23,760 --> 02:33:29,680
and it I drove by it today just to
specifically see how that feels and and

2003
02:33:27,520 --> 02:33:35,600
it's a lot that little area all of a
sudden becomes comes really closed in

2004
02:33:31,840 --> 02:33:41,520
and like one more story and you like the
sky falls out of your peripheral vision.

2005
02:33:38,240 --> 02:33:45,760
Um, so that's that ambiance that feeling
really gets impacted if you're

2006
02:33:43,600 --> 02:33:47,439
surrounded by anything above four
stories.

2007
02:33:47,040 --> 02:33:53,920
» So
>> I would note Oh, go ahead. just um for

2008
02:33:50,720 --> 02:33:57,680
folks to know that with the waiver,
I can't remember if it's with the waiver

2009
02:33:55,040 --> 02:34:03,359
or if it's four stories and above um
there's a required step back. Um and

2010
02:34:00,720 --> 02:34:08,240
that's an important design aspect from
an urban design element in order to help

2011
02:34:06,160 --> 02:34:14,160
that light and air to still be able to
perminate permeate an area. So, for

2012
02:34:10,880 --> 02:34:17,680
example, the um Sherry's building would
have required a step back. I think it

2013
02:34:15,840 --> 02:34:22,960
was either between floors three and four
or between four and five. Um, they ended

2014
02:34:20,399 --> 02:34:27,040
up opting to do it lower on the first
between the first and second floor,

2015
02:34:24,240 --> 02:34:32,080
which actually is even better. Um, and
so I just wanted to kind of provide that

2016
02:34:29,280 --> 02:34:36,000
information that where we do even call
for some of our taller buildings, there

2017
02:34:34,000 --> 02:34:42,399
is a requirement for a step back in
order to help offset some of that

2018
02:34:39,520 --> 02:34:48,560
height.
>> So, can you go through

2019
02:34:46,240 --> 02:34:51,600
examples maybe of the difference between
five and six.

2020
02:34:49,520 --> 02:34:58,240
» So the main the main difference between
five and six is on the CMU. So on the um

2021
02:34:55,760 --> 02:35:02,080
in the CMU for option five, it can go up
to six stories either through a waiver

2022
02:35:00,080 --> 02:35:07,120
or through that bonus floor that's
allowed for affordable housing. In

2023
02:35:03,840 --> 02:35:11,760
option six, it can CMU can only go to
six stories can get that additional

2024
02:35:08,880 --> 02:35:15,520
floor through for affordable housing. It
can't get the waiver to go up

2025
02:35:14,399 --> 02:35:20,160
» and the waiver you
>> for the CMU.

2026
02:35:16,319 --> 02:35:21,040
» So the waiver would apply the items
>> the menu item.

2027
02:35:20,800 --> 02:35:22,479
» Correct.
>> The menu items.

2028
02:35:21,760 --> 02:35:25,600
» Correct.
>> Yes.

2029
02:35:22,960 --> 02:35:28,800
» The option six would not allow for any
of the menu items. It would only allow

2030
02:35:27,439 --> 02:35:34,240
it for affordable housing
>> for for CMU.

2031
02:35:31,040 --> 02:35:38,319
» Right. And then the other uh MU West and
MU East are the same for option five.

2032
02:35:36,800 --> 02:35:42,560
» Between option five and six, they're the
same. So the the main discussion or the

2033
02:35:40,720 --> 02:35:47,600
main so option six was developed by
staff after we developed option five. So

2034
02:35:45,520 --> 02:35:52,479
option five arose out of the task force
discussion and then as we were talking

2035
02:35:49,680 --> 02:35:56,720
about the this discussion okay we what
was coming out of it is option five

2036
02:35:54,240 --> 02:36:01,280
allows for six stories potentially in
CMU that's the area closest to I5 either

2037
02:35:59,520 --> 02:36:04,160
through a waiver or bonus floor. And so
one of the things that we talked about

2038
02:36:02,479 --> 02:36:08,319
as an additional because you know we
just love providing options as an

2039
02:36:06,640 --> 02:36:16,160
additional consideration is well
everywhere else the max is five stories.

2040
02:36:12,960 --> 02:36:20,720
So then um what we talked about was
maybe what we offer is essentially the

2041
02:36:18,399 --> 02:36:24,960
max will be everywhere
five stories and the only exception

2042
02:36:23,040 --> 02:36:26,560
would be if you're providing affordable
housing

2043
02:36:25,760 --> 02:36:33,280
» in CMU
>> in CMU where it could go up to six. So

2044
02:36:30,319 --> 02:36:41,520
that's option six is a more is more
restrictive than option five because of

2045
02:36:35,840 --> 02:36:45,280
the CMU. Otherwise it's all the same. Um
yeah that's

2046
02:36:42,640 --> 02:36:49,760
» and even then even within CMU you can't
do that right next to I5 if I understand

2047
02:36:48,080 --> 02:36:53,680
correctly. Right. I thought it had to be
I thought it had to be right next to I5.

2048
02:36:51,200 --> 02:36:56,800
» It's on the close side of I5. Correct.
>> But that was something I think needs to

2049
02:36:55,120 --> 02:37:01,280
be defined, right? Is what because it
says adjacent to I5 and I think adjacent

2050
02:36:59,120 --> 02:37:03,760
was never defined as to what we were
describing as there.

2051
02:37:02,960 --> 02:37:07,439
» Yeah.
>> Yeah.

2052
02:37:04,720 --> 02:37:11,040
» It's a pretty narrow strip that allows
that they would ever allow for a sixth

2053
02:37:09,359 --> 02:37:17,760
floor even even with all these
restrictions. So that definition I'm

2054
02:37:13,840 --> 02:37:23,680
probably more on option six than five
>> but more so option seven.

2055
02:37:20,960 --> 02:37:28,000
» Okay. So I think I have good enough
notes to talk about the options with

2056
02:37:25,600 --> 02:37:33,680
council. So may from planning commission
and um to be respectful of time let's

2057
02:37:30,720 --> 02:37:39,600
get to the option seven eliminating the
waiver to increase. Um again you're not

2058
02:37:37,280 --> 02:37:45,359
making a your recommendation now. This
is feedback and generally I think what I

2059
02:37:42,479 --> 02:37:50,080
would say is if you think that this is a
worthwhile discussion um about

2060
02:37:47,760 --> 02:37:53,600
eliminating the waiver to increase if
you think that's a worthwhile discussion

2061
02:37:51,680 --> 02:37:58,479
that should go to council that is
feedback that we can give them is that

2062
02:37:56,560 --> 02:38:03,359
however many of either a consensus or
however many of the planning commission

2063
02:38:00,000 --> 02:38:07,439
at least felt like this is this option
of looking at eliminating the waiver to

2064
02:38:05,200 --> 02:38:12,720
increase building height altogether um
should be further explored.

2065
02:38:09,120 --> 02:38:16,960
My dot number one is seven. My dot
number two is six.

2066
02:38:14,240 --> 02:38:21,760
» Okay.
>> And I'll concur from from the standpoint

2067
02:38:19,200 --> 02:38:27,280
of I think that's the most likely option
to get the public support needed

2068
02:38:24,240 --> 02:38:33,040
» to get it funded. Um again because I I
just feel like the passions on the lower

2069
02:38:29,920 --> 02:38:35,200
side outweigh
I haven't seen any passion for the high

2070
02:38:34,960 --> 02:38:40,560
side
>> for the high. Yeah. We we have

2071
02:38:38,319 --> 02:38:44,880
» so I would go same seven and then six.
>> I I think there's a there is a lot of

2072
02:38:42,960 --> 02:38:48,399
passion for for lower building heights.
I I do think there is passion in the

2073
02:38:46,960 --> 02:38:55,200
community for higher building heights
but they're rather quiet lately and for

2074
02:38:50,880 --> 02:38:58,720
whatever reason. So um but I think
regardless I think that it's worth

2075
02:38:56,960 --> 02:39:03,760
respecting where the people who are
being very vocal right now and and the

2076
02:39:01,920 --> 02:39:06,560
sentiment that seems to be pervasive in
the community. I think it's very

2077
02:39:04,880 --> 02:39:13,120
important to recognize that and respect
it. And so for that reason, I I would

2078
02:39:08,880 --> 02:39:15,680
totally agree with you. Um
>> yeah, just

2079
02:39:13,760 --> 02:39:18,240
» does that mean you would prefer
>> Sorry. Does that mean you would I just

2080
02:39:17,040 --> 02:39:24,479
want to make sure we're clear for our
recommendation. Are you preferring um

2081
02:39:21,520 --> 02:39:28,080
that the height be removed altogether?
That would be your first choice and then

2082
02:39:26,479 --> 02:39:34,720
option five would be your second choice
or the reverse?

2083
02:39:32,399 --> 02:39:39,280
I guess I'm a little bit confused about
what the task force is saying on this

2084
02:39:37,040 --> 02:39:43,200
slide still because it feels like what
this slide is saying is that when you

2085
02:39:41,680 --> 02:39:46,479
ask the task force if they want to
remove the ability to increase,

2086
02:39:45,200 --> 02:39:50,000
» they said no. Correct.
>> There's a 6 to2 vote saying we should

2087
02:39:48,319 --> 02:39:53,840
keep the ability to increase.
>> So I would not I wouldn't go against the

2088
02:39:52,080 --> 02:39:57,280
task force on that. I think that that
and so that would that would be more in

2089
02:39:55,359 --> 02:39:59,040
support of five, right?
>> Correct.

2090
02:39:57,520 --> 02:40:02,479
» If I'm understanding that correctly. So
I'm I' I'd remain more aligned with

2091
02:40:00,800 --> 02:40:05,920
five.
So, and and I don't want to put words in

2092
02:40:04,880 --> 02:40:10,800
your mouth, so I want to make sure that
I'm being accurate in how I talked to

2093
02:40:07,439 --> 02:40:15,920
council on Monday. Is um more supportive
of option five

2094
02:40:13,760 --> 02:40:19,200
open to consideration of the option
seven that we're talking about?

2095
02:40:17,280 --> 02:40:26,720
» Yeah. Recognizing that maybe option
seven wasn't uh offered as a as um as an

2096
02:40:24,960 --> 02:40:31,200
explicit option to task force, but it
seemed to be reflected in their notes,

2097
02:40:28,880 --> 02:40:34,080
right? Is that what I'm hearing? This
item was specifically discussed.

2098
02:40:32,720 --> 02:40:37,359
» That was specifically discussed.
>> We didn't call it an option.

2099
02:40:35,200 --> 02:40:43,200
» We didn't call it option seven, but we
specifically asked, do you want

2100
02:40:40,399 --> 02:40:46,240
» if if there was an option cuz that
wasn't the option that we were given

2101
02:40:44,800 --> 02:40:49,439
really from council, the direction
originally given to council, but we

2102
02:40:47,760 --> 02:40:53,920
heard some people saying, I don't want
any height increase. So essentially we

2103
02:40:52,240 --> 02:41:01,840
specifically asked them to go through
that the option voting but then after

2104
02:40:57,840 --> 02:41:06,399
that said would you rather have an
option where there's we eliminate the

2105
02:41:04,399 --> 02:41:12,319
waiver altogether to increase building
height or stick with the option you

2106
02:41:09,760 --> 02:41:16,240
voted for essentially options one
through six

2107
02:41:13,520 --> 02:41:20,880
» and they said we would six of them said
I would stick to my top choice in the

2108
02:41:19,120 --> 02:41:25,920
options one through
and two of them said, "I would rather

2109
02:41:23,439 --> 02:41:27,760
have us get rid of the waiver to
increase."

2110
02:41:26,640 --> 02:41:32,560
» Yeah.
>> They didn't call it option seven, but

2111
02:41:30,240 --> 02:41:37,439
Commissioner Carr has kind of coined it
option seven. I mean, it wouldn't be

2112
02:41:34,880 --> 02:41:43,920
forever. words until we define the
waiver criteria like we like and maybe

2113
02:41:41,200 --> 02:41:46,640
do what what is the I don't know if I'm
assuming there's going to be a study for

2114
02:41:45,280 --> 02:41:50,720
each of these buildings that get get
approved as to what the impact is to the

2115
02:41:48,720 --> 02:41:54,560
community services you know all the
things that are the citizens are

2116
02:41:52,160 --> 02:41:59,200
concerned about like is it going to put
a strain on the police the fire the

2117
02:41:56,800 --> 02:42:03,439
school whatever and and how is that
going to be mitigated like like putting

2118
02:42:01,200 --> 02:42:06,880
more um defined criteria on on the
waiver and the study of of the approval

2119
02:42:05,520 --> 02:42:12,000
of each building.
>> I mean, my understanding is that um we

2120
02:42:09,439 --> 02:42:15,280
would be updating the waiver menu during
this process,

2121
02:42:13,920 --> 02:42:20,560
» not at a later date.
>> Yeah. So, the direction So, two items

2122
02:42:18,479 --> 02:42:23,040
that really weren't contemplated, well,
several items weren't really

2123
02:42:21,680 --> 02:42:27,840
contemplated when we started all of
this. one was looking at the menu items

2124
02:42:25,280 --> 02:42:31,680
that that I mean it's part of the waiver
language but originally when we were

2125
02:42:29,920 --> 02:42:35,040
talking with council about this the wa
the menu items weren't something we were

2126
02:42:33,680 --> 02:42:40,240
discussing that arose out of the task
force planning commission said yes we

2127
02:42:38,319 --> 02:42:43,840
want that looked at council said yes we
want that looked at so that has now been

2128
02:42:42,240 --> 02:42:49,280
incorporated into this project even
though it initially wasn't and refined

2129
02:42:46,399 --> 02:42:53,600
language would come before you um if the
waiver I mean we're well the waiver will

2130
02:42:51,520 --> 02:42:57,439
stay in place it I mean the waiver is
going to stay in place in some capacity

2131
02:42:54,960 --> 02:43:01,280
at least to go down and out. So those
menu items will be refined

2132
02:42:59,600 --> 02:43:06,240
» as part of this process.
>> And then the bonus floor also got

2133
02:43:03,600 --> 02:43:10,160
incorporated. And then this discussion
about eliminating the increase

2134
02:43:07,920 --> 02:43:16,160
altogether came out of the council work
session on May 18th that they wanted the

2135
02:43:14,560 --> 02:43:20,399
um task force to weigh in on that
question. What we did do, what we talked

2136
02:43:18,720 --> 02:43:25,680
with council about and this is why we
did the process of choose your preferred

2137
02:43:22,399 --> 02:43:30,960
alternative and then do the elimination
discussion is because if ultimately the

2138
02:43:29,200 --> 02:43:37,040
decision is eliminate the building
height increase and then 3 years, 5

2139
02:43:34,720 --> 02:43:42,240
years staff comes back and says actually
this waiver is needed then we have a

2140
02:43:40,160 --> 02:43:47,920
preferred alternative already documented
as a recommendation from the task force.

2141
02:43:45,120 --> 02:43:53,520
» Yeah. Um and so that was the impetus
behind behind why we had them go through

2142
02:43:50,319 --> 02:43:57,279
the exercise of the 2356 and then say
okay now that we have that how does that

2143
02:43:55,520 --> 02:44:00,680
compare to an elimination of the
increase altogether.

2144
02:44:00,960 --> 02:44:06,479
And essentially that's what we're doing
with you all now too is is is that same

2145
02:44:04,800 --> 02:44:10,960
discussion because then we have that
documented for the record

2146
02:44:08,640 --> 02:44:15,840
» if ultimately the decision is to get rid
of the increase that we have that for

2147
02:44:12,640 --> 02:44:20,800
the record if we ever come back to it.
So my my obser I guess what I'm trying

2148
02:44:18,319 --> 02:44:25,279
to reconcile is the notes on the dots
for option five and six were

2149
02:44:23,359 --> 02:44:30,479
specifically saying that they that they
would want to remove any any increase

2150
02:44:27,279 --> 02:44:32,479
allowances for east for MU East.
>> Yeah.

2151
02:44:30,800 --> 02:44:36,560
» But then later they were asked would you
would you be in favor of removing the

2152
02:44:34,080 --> 02:44:41,200
waiver altogether across the board or
having a preferred alternative

2153
02:44:38,560 --> 02:44:43,359
» and so they weren't really given like an
am I correct in understanding

2154
02:44:42,560 --> 02:44:48,880
» 78?
>> Yeah. Is there seven and a half or eight

2155
02:44:46,800 --> 02:44:53,200
» or would seven just be like let's let's
acknowledge the the notes that we heard

2156
02:44:51,520 --> 02:44:56,399
and say like let let's remove the
building waiver alto together and the

2157
02:44:54,880 --> 02:45:00,560
building and and in the building
allowances altogether for MU East but

2158
02:44:59,520 --> 02:45:02,000
keep them for
>> well the waiver up.

2159
02:45:01,680 --> 02:45:05,920
» Yeah.
>> Yeah. The waiver up. Yeah.

2160
02:45:03,200 --> 02:45:10,720
» So that was um to your Yes, you are
absolutely correct that there was not a

2161
02:45:08,080 --> 02:45:15,200
consensus one way or another around
around that discussion from the task

2162
02:45:12,399 --> 02:45:22,319
force. they did not um come to a
consensus around that. Um so that is

2163
02:45:19,359 --> 02:45:27,279
what so the um so of the three people
who made that note two of the three are

2164
02:45:24,479 --> 02:45:32,399
the no are the are the two in the six
to2.

2165
02:45:28,399 --> 02:45:36,319
» So one of the people um voted for option
five over the elimination of the waiver.

2166
02:45:34,560 --> 02:45:40,560
That is also the same person who put
option five as their number one but with

2167
02:45:38,800 --> 02:45:43,920
the note. So, the two people who voted
no were the two people who put option

2168
02:45:42,240 --> 02:45:45,040
two as their number one.
>> So,

2169
02:45:44,479 --> 02:45:48,319
» gotcha.
>> Um,

2170
02:45:46,240 --> 02:45:53,040
» were those the task force people that
were in the public for our discussion?

2171
02:45:51,760 --> 02:45:58,800
Because I believe there were either two
or three task force people here that

2172
02:45:55,439 --> 02:46:03,080
spoke on the topic and told us they only
want four floors.

2173
02:46:00,080 --> 02:46:03,080
» Yes.

2174
02:46:04,880 --> 02:46:09,120
» Do you have recommendations from
everybody?

2175
02:46:07,359 --> 02:46:13,520
» I think I have Well, okay. So, the only
thing is about option seven. I think I

2176
02:46:10,880 --> 02:46:17,920
still need to hear I I think I still
need to hear Well, Chair Seanova, I

2177
02:46:15,520 --> 02:46:22,640
think you're I'd like to hear from both
Chair Seanova and Commissioner Hendricks

2178
02:46:20,160 --> 02:46:26,640
where you two land between
>> eliminating the waiver to increase

2179
02:46:24,479 --> 02:46:30,600
altogether versus
option five, option six.

2180
02:46:30,800 --> 02:46:39,600
» First, go ahead. I I think where I'm
leaning is towards where the the task

2181
02:46:36,319 --> 02:46:44,160
force votes kind of landed, which is
would which would not be option seven,

2182
02:46:42,399 --> 02:46:47,040
right? So because that would eliminate
the waiver. Sorry, my brain's getting

2183
02:46:45,680 --> 02:46:53,600
foggy now because it's getting a little
later. Um so so yeah, I I would prefer

2184
02:46:51,200 --> 02:46:58,960
to kind of lean where the the task force
landed. How however I think it's worth

2185
02:46:57,520 --> 02:47:03,120
the council disc like what I'm hearing
here. That's I think it's worth for

2186
02:47:01,040 --> 02:47:06,720
council to discuss. I think that makes
sense. Um

2187
02:47:04,479 --> 02:47:09,920
» yeah, obviously it's not clear, right?
Like there's no consensus. Like

2188
02:47:08,080 --> 02:47:12,640
everyone's kind of like
>> So that's where that's why council makes

2189
02:47:11,840 --> 02:47:15,640
the big bucks,
>> right?

2190
02:47:16,720 --> 02:47:21,080
» Those dinners at the council meeting

2191
02:47:21,439 --> 02:47:29,200
» and chair, where where are you?
>> I'm leaning more towards

2192
02:47:26,080 --> 02:47:34,560
option seven.
for reasons stated, but if it the goal

2193
02:47:32,000 --> 02:47:38,720
is more affordable h is like what are
the priorities? If it is more affordable

2194
02:47:36,479 --> 02:47:42,560
housing for the council, then that's
going to have higher weight. So, you're

2195
02:47:40,160 --> 02:47:48,240
going to have to go through, you know,
value mapping in a way. uh they should

2196
02:47:46,240 --> 02:47:53,279
as to like what is the higher priority,
but I I do worry about having these

2197
02:47:50,800 --> 02:47:57,359
waiverss and then having a town that
doesn't feel like Wilsonville and being

2198
02:47:55,520 --> 02:48:03,000
different from what we see in renderings
versus what ends up being built and

2199
02:48:09,040 --> 02:48:14,800
» cozy.
>> Okay,

2200
02:48:10,160 --> 02:48:21,120
» cozy. I was on the cozy. Um, I feel like
I have good guidance for our discussion

2201
02:48:17,439 --> 02:48:24,960
with council on Monday. Um, and I'm also
very aware we are well beyond the time

2202
02:48:23,120 --> 02:48:28,960
that was allocated for this discussion
item. Um, but I'm happy if there's any

2203
02:48:27,120 --> 02:48:31,920
other feedback that um, planning
commission wants to make sure is

2204
02:48:30,080 --> 02:48:37,439
conveyed to city council. I'm happy to
take any final I think we got I think we

2205
02:48:35,040 --> 02:48:41,760
got through all the questions that were
the prompts. So,

2206
02:48:39,200 --> 02:48:46,800
» I think the the menu items I'm a little
still a little

2207
02:48:43,040 --> 02:48:50,240
» so concerned with going with Rob about
the

2208
02:48:48,640 --> 02:48:56,240
» they're not prescriptive enough, but
they're designed not to be prescriptive.

2209
02:48:52,479 --> 02:48:59,760
So, that's a little hard for me to say
these are valid menu items when I don't

2210
02:48:58,000 --> 02:49:02,080
know what the menu items really mean.
It's like

2211
02:49:00,479 --> 02:49:04,800
» here's a big bucket.
>> Do you like this? Do you like the red

2212
02:49:03,359 --> 02:49:07,680
bucket or the yellow bucket? Well, I
don't know what's in them, right? So

2213
02:49:06,880 --> 02:49:13,279
» yeah, that's
>> more clarity around that.

2214
02:49:08,880 --> 02:49:19,520
» Um, so depending, so we do need to draft
language around the menu items. And I

2215
02:49:15,439 --> 02:49:23,600
think, um, unless anybody, so I'll I'll
just run through them really quick. So

2216
02:49:21,439 --> 02:49:28,160
these are the categories that we would
use to inform how we write the code

2217
02:49:26,000 --> 02:49:33,359
language is that what we heard from the
task force. So this is basically tell me

2218
02:49:30,000 --> 02:49:39,760
if you disagree is don't do a menu
option for local hiring for development.

2219
02:49:36,399 --> 02:49:43,920
Do include an option for a plaza with
some programmed improvements. So it's

2220
02:49:42,080 --> 02:49:47,359
basically active space that can be
utilized. I like that.

2221
02:49:45,600 --> 02:49:51,840
» Uh they were not in favor of a public
rooftop amenity mainly because they felt

2222
02:49:49,279 --> 02:49:56,319
like um that would be exorbitantly
expensive and highly unlikely to occur.

2223
02:49:54,240 --> 02:49:59,760
So essentially
>> agree

2224
02:49:56,720 --> 02:50:04,240
» why include it. um they currently public
art is something identified at the time

2225
02:50:01,520 --> 02:50:10,160
that the um menu items were written. Our
um arts, culture and heritage commission

2226
02:50:06,000 --> 02:50:13,920
did not exist. So what we um put as an
option is to further refine that to say

2227
02:50:11,840 --> 02:50:18,080
that the public art would run be
approved through our public our arts,

2228
02:50:16,000 --> 02:50:24,000
culture and heritage commission.
Um, we talked about inclusive design and

2229
02:50:20,560 --> 02:50:28,960
in particular this was um, this was
motivated by what we're seeing our parks

2230
02:50:26,080 --> 02:50:34,240
department do in that they don't just
make a park meet ADA standards, they

2231
02:50:31,680 --> 02:50:39,200
make inclusive design for all abilities
and ages to engage in our parks. And so

2232
02:50:37,200 --> 02:50:44,319
what we talked about there was looking
at some design some design elements that

2233
02:50:42,240 --> 02:50:47,840
would be inclusive beyond what is
required by ADA. Um so they were

2234
02:50:46,640 --> 02:50:53,120
generally supportive of that
particularly if it was paired with you

2235
02:50:50,479 --> 02:50:57,120
know an active open space.
Um so where the supporting existing

2236
02:50:55,439 --> 02:51:00,160
local business and town center came from
is so one of the items that we hear all

2237
02:50:59,040 --> 02:51:05,600
the time is that people want
restaurants. Well tenant space needs to

2238
02:51:03,359 --> 02:51:09,600
be built a certain way to be able to
support food preparation and cooking.

2239
02:51:07,760 --> 02:51:13,760
And so one of the items that we put here
was um that the development would either

2240
02:51:12,000 --> 02:51:17,920
have to make tenant construct their
tenant improvements to allow for those

2241
02:51:15,840 --> 02:51:21,920
types of uses or that they would provide
a subsidy for tenant improvements to

2242
02:51:19,920 --> 02:51:25,359
occur because that is a very high cost
barrier for tenants to go into um

2243
02:51:24,560 --> 02:51:30,160
commercial space.
>> Was that the same for like child care

2244
02:51:27,760 --> 02:51:35,040
establishments or is that a
>> consideration? That's our next

2245
02:51:32,000 --> 02:51:38,640
» category. Um so the next bullet point
was eliminated because uh the task force

2246
02:51:37,040 --> 02:51:45,120
didn't move forward with option three.
So on m mitigating bu building impact

2247
02:51:42,640 --> 02:51:50,960
um we talked about best practices for
ground floor design for pedestrian

2248
02:51:47,680 --> 02:51:56,080
experience. Um best practices on
building form to create more air light

2249
02:51:53,200 --> 02:52:00,479
and air. Um so those would be again
getting to design standards. Those are

2250
02:51:57,600 --> 02:52:04,399
more design standard type of elements.
um creating a community gathering space

2251
02:52:02,960 --> 02:52:08,399
internal to the building. One of the
things that we particularly talked about

2252
02:52:06,080 --> 02:52:12,160
was that would need to be structured in
a way to make sure that that stays in

2253
02:52:10,560 --> 02:52:14,960
place and is available to the whole
community. So essentially it's like

2254
02:52:13,600 --> 02:52:19,760
don't have a community room that only
the people in the building can use

2255
02:52:17,520 --> 02:52:22,800
» like an atrium that's accessible by
everyone.

2256
02:52:20,720 --> 02:52:26,720
» Yeah. um promoting environmental
stewardship by already highlighted this

2257
02:52:24,640 --> 02:52:30,800
is basically change the language that
talks about have a lead a lead

2258
02:52:28,080 --> 02:52:36,000
certification or earth advantage look at
the actual categories and get to like

2259
02:52:33,279 --> 02:52:40,080
list out the high probably you know the
highest category that you can achieve

2260
02:52:38,080 --> 02:52:44,240
and put that in as the standard and then
to your point um commissioner car is

2261
02:52:42,080 --> 02:52:48,960
building tenant ready spaces for desired
businesses particularly restaurants um

2262
02:52:46,800 --> 02:52:52,880
smaller spaces for local businesses that
don't that can't afford you know a

2263
02:52:50,720 --> 02:52:58,240
larger footprint and then child care
facilities. So I think everyone was

2264
02:52:56,720 --> 02:53:01,120
supportive of the things that we talked
about in the mitigating the building

2265
02:52:59,680 --> 02:53:06,240
impact. There was just some things that
got eliminated from the community

2266
02:53:02,800 --> 02:53:12,399
benefit one. Um so that is where we
would write code language around. Now to

2267
02:53:09,120 --> 02:53:16,720
your point um we don't have another work
session currently planned for the

2268
02:53:14,240 --> 02:53:21,279
planning commission. So it may be, you
know, if it makes sense that what we may

2269
02:53:18,800 --> 02:53:25,600
do is instead of having a public hearing
on at your August meeting is that

2270
02:53:23,520 --> 02:53:29,520
depending on the direction from council,
it may be that um that turns into a work

2271
02:53:28,080 --> 02:53:34,640
session to talk about the menu item
language and then the public hearing

2272
02:53:31,680 --> 02:53:40,080
gets pushed to September.
>> And I don't mean to restart any debate.

2273
02:53:37,600 --> 02:53:44,319
» Um just putting that out there, but a
comment maybe for council and or maybe

2274
02:53:42,240 --> 02:53:48,000
it doesn't work. But the first one that
was eliminated was like hiring um local

2275
02:53:47,520 --> 02:53:52,240
local
>> people which would probably be pretty

2276
02:53:49,840 --> 02:53:56,000
hard to enforce, right? Because you know
if you can't hire somebody like you know

2277
02:53:54,880 --> 02:54:02,640
you're just you're going to go out of
business. On the flip side, could there

2278
02:53:58,479 --> 02:54:08,000
be a requirement or a waiver for renting
apartments, not lowinccome, but to like

2279
02:54:06,800 --> 02:54:10,800
people who are teaching at the high
school, people who are on the police

2280
02:54:09,120 --> 02:54:14,640
force here, people who are on the fire
department here, so that it makes them

2281
02:54:13,040 --> 02:54:18,240
more part of our community as opposed to
having to live farther away and commute

2282
02:54:16,160 --> 02:54:21,439
in. And then that also solves some of
the congestion problem. like is there

2283
02:54:20,160 --> 02:54:26,800
something where they could put in like
preferential leasing to people who are

2284
02:54:24,800 --> 02:54:30,240
employed in Wilsonville in the public
sector?

2285
02:54:28,319 --> 02:54:34,720
» Um I'd probably have to look into that
because that might run a foul with um

2286
02:54:32,399 --> 02:54:42,120
the Fair Housing Act, but but it's
something we can look at. Mhm.

2287
02:54:38,640 --> 02:54:42,120
» talking to a lawyer.

2288
02:54:42,160 --> 02:54:50,319
» I think um one of the one thing I'd like
to throw out there around the rooftop

2289
02:54:47,920 --> 02:54:54,880
bar, I while I agree that that's
probably pretty unlikely to be selected

2290
02:54:52,880 --> 02:55:00,160
as an option because it's prohibitively
expensive. I I would suggest that we

2291
02:54:57,760 --> 02:55:04,560
should be looking at raising the bar for
the minimum of our menu options and not

2292
02:55:02,800 --> 02:55:09,600
negotiating against ourselves for the
maximums. So, like I I wouldn't remove

2293
02:55:07,439 --> 02:55:12,960
that from a menu option. If a developer
comes along and they just really like

2294
02:55:10,960 --> 02:55:17,040
rooftop bars and they want to build one,
even if it's exorbitantly more expensive

2295
02:55:14,640 --> 02:55:21,840
than the other options, awesome. Like,
cool. Why would we why would we remove

2296
02:55:18,800 --> 02:55:26,399
that from a menu option? Um, unless we
don't want rooftop bars in Wilsonville.

2297
02:55:24,479 --> 02:55:30,160
Like, I I think that that's I don't
think I would recommend removing menu

2298
02:55:27,840 --> 02:55:33,359
items on the basis of us speculating
that a developer wouldn't want to choose

2299
02:55:31,680 --> 02:55:37,200
it because it's too expensive. I think
we should be looking the other direction

2300
02:55:34,560 --> 02:55:42,040
and elevating our menu options that are
maybe a loophole for a developer to

2301
02:55:39,040 --> 02:55:42,040
exploit.

2302
02:55:43,279 --> 02:55:50,720
So, and just to be clear, so we would
talk more about menu of options and like

2303
02:55:48,080 --> 02:55:56,080
this kind of discussion
if only if

2304
02:55:54,240 --> 02:55:59,120
I'm trying to figure out like so
>> cancel.

2305
02:55:57,120 --> 02:56:04,720
» Yeah. So, but but if like if we move
forward with option seven, then we

2306
02:56:01,920 --> 02:56:10,479
wouldn't need to have that conversation.
>> I think that if council's if if the

2307
02:56:07,520 --> 02:56:15,439
direction coming out of council is um
what they want to advance is language

2308
02:56:13,040 --> 02:56:18,399
that eliminates the increase for
building height. I the other question

2309
02:56:17,439 --> 02:56:20,560
would be
>> do you want us to still

2310
02:56:19,760 --> 02:56:25,840
» okay
>> adjust the menu items or do or not?

2311
02:56:24,160 --> 02:56:29,200
Because I think a lot of these a lot of
these items really do contemplate a

2312
02:56:28,319 --> 02:56:32,399
taller building.
>> Yes, that's what Yeah.

2313
02:56:30,479 --> 02:56:36,359
» So,
>> rooftop bar on a two

2314
02:56:36,640 --> 02:56:42,120
» looking looking into the windows of the
neighboring building.

2315
02:56:42,880 --> 02:56:50,479
So, so it would be a question for for
council if and and I guess um I'm trying

2316
02:56:48,160 --> 02:56:57,439
not to repeat the mistakes of the past
and then give the planning commission

2317
02:56:53,279 --> 02:57:01,359
the language on you language that may
need some adjustments during a public

2318
02:57:00,000 --> 02:57:07,120
hearing that we're trying to address on
the fly. So that's where I say if if we

2319
02:57:05,279 --> 02:57:12,160
need to further refine menu item
language that we may need to push back

2320
02:57:10,319 --> 02:57:15,680
some of the actual public hearing so
there can be dialogue around that.

2321
02:57:13,600 --> 02:57:19,600
» Yes. Thank you.
>> I don't want that addendum as we're

2322
02:57:17,520 --> 02:57:25,840
doing a public.
>> It is very challenging to write code in

2323
02:57:22,080 --> 02:57:30,560
the middle of a public hearing.
>> It's been done before.

2324
02:57:28,479 --> 02:57:34,720
» Sounds good. So look, sounds like we've
had our discussion and

2325
02:57:32,960 --> 02:57:39,600
» can I do
>> I think so. There's one one little like

2326
02:57:37,279 --> 02:57:43,680
clerical recommendation I'd make is sure
between options five and six if the MU

2327
02:57:42,640 --> 02:57:49,040
West
>> uh like ver if the verbiage is different

2328
02:57:46,640 --> 02:57:52,000
but the meaning is the same. So if if
they're meant to be the same, can we

2329
02:57:50,720 --> 02:57:56,560
make sure that the verbiage actually
matches between the two?

2330
02:57:53,279 --> 02:57:56,560
» We'll do definitely.

2331
02:57:58,160 --> 02:58:05,920
Any other comments or questions?
Okay. All right. Uh hearing no further

2332
02:58:04,000 --> 02:58:12,439
discussion. Thank you so much. That
concludes our work session. Thank you.

2333
02:58:09,439 --> 02:58:12,439
Okay.

2334
02:58:12,720 --> 02:58:19,359
Next we haveformational
item

2335
02:58:17,439 --> 02:58:23,359
our agenda and that's city council
action meetings.

2336
02:58:21,359 --> 02:58:28,000
Uh there's no staff presentation on this
one. Um,

2337
02:58:26,720 --> 02:58:35,279
did anybody have any questions or
discussion about the council meeting?

2338
02:58:30,479 --> 02:58:40,560
No. No. Okay. All right. In the 2026 PC
work program, planning commission work

2339
02:58:37,359 --> 02:58:41,840
program. Things are good.
>> Yep.

2340
02:58:40,800 --> 02:58:47,279
» Yeah. Looks good to me.
>> All right.

2341
02:58:43,600 --> 02:58:50,520
Then I motion to adjourn our meeting.
Thank you.