Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I will do a roll call to verify which commission members are participating this evening. Commissioner Holmes. Present. Commissioner McEvoy. Present. Commissioner McCann.

Present.

Commissioner Mettler. Present. Commissioner Speck. Present. And Commissioner Winter. Let the record show that Commissioner Winter is absent this evening. We are now at Commission Communications. Commission, any communications? We are now at staff communications. Staff, any communications?

Good evening, Chair. Anna Slatinski, Planning Division Manager at the City of Beaverton. I just have two, I guess it's kind of more than that, but two categories of announcements. One of them is that there is a Beaverton volunteer fair this month on Saturday, June 6 at the Beaverton City Library. There will be a 10AM to one 1PM fair with opportunities to meet and sign up to volunteer with local nonprofits.

So that's a fun thing to check out if folks wanna get more involved in the city. We also have a few, kind of recognition weeks this month. The overall theme is kind of recognizing public service. This week is public service recognition week. We have National Public Works Week, May 17 through May 23. And then finally, we have National Police Week, May 10 through May 16. So just an opportunity to recognize the work that the kind of wide array of public service folks do in the city of Beaverton. And that is all my comments for tonight.

Excellent. Thank you. New business. The first item on the agenda is a public hearing on the application for LU 32026Dash76 South Ridge High School Storage and Ticket Booth. Case file numbers CU32026Dash73 and Doctor 3202600074. Before we move to the substance of the hearing, I will ask staff to cover the pre hearing matters.

Thank you, chair. The applicant has the burden of proving that the applications are consistent with the Beaverton Development Code, comprehensive plan, and any applicable Beaverton Code provisions. The criteria that must be addressed in the hearing are Development Code sections forty point zero three point one, Facilities Review, 40.15.15.4. C Major Modification of a Conditional Use 40.20.15.3. C Design Review three.

Testimony arguments and evidence must be directed towards these approval criteria or other criteria in the comprehensive plan or development code that the speaker believes apply to the application. Failure to raise an issue accompanied by statements or evidence sufficient to allow the Planning Commission and other interested parties an opportunity to respond may preclude an appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals based on that issue. Anyone who submits written comments or gives oral testimony has standing to appeal this decision. Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to the proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow the city to respond may preclude an action for damages in circuit court. State and local law require commissioners to make certain disclosures.

To these ends, the following questions will be asked: Does any commissioner have a potential or actual conflict of interest, ex parte contacts, or site visits to declare? Chair Adams.

No to all three.

Commissioner Holmes. No to all three. Commissioner McCann. I do have a conflict of interest as I'm currently consulting for the Beaverton School District, so I will recuse myself for this agenda item. Thank you, commissioner. Commissioner McEvoy?

No to all three.

Commissioner Mettler?

No to all three.

Commissioner Speck?

No to all three. Alright.

Thank you. Do any members of the audience wish to question a commissioner about ex parte contacts or site visits or challenge the right of any commissioner to participate in the hearing. Let the record show no response. The order of the public hearing tonight will be as follows. City staff will give a presentation followed by commissioner's questions of staff.

The applicant will be given twenty minutes for its presentation followed by commissioners' questions of the applicant. Members of the public in support of the application may speak for up to five minutes each. Members of the public opposed to the application may speak for up to five minutes each. Members of the public who are neither in support nor opposed will then have five minutes to speak. The applicant will have five minutes for rebuttal. The Planning Commission will then hear any final comments from staff. Chair, that concludes the prehearing statement. You may proceed with the hearing.

Thank you. We will now begin with the staff presentation.

Okay. I just wanna make sure. Is there a control bar blocking part of the screen up there? Can you see everything?

I think we can see everything. I don't see the bar.

Great. Okay. It's just on my screen. Thanks. Alright.

Greetings, chair and commissioners. I'm Erin Harris, senior planner, City of Beaverton Community Development Department. And my presentation this evening is for LU32026Dash00076, Southridge High School storage and ticket booth, land use application CU32026Dash00073 and DR32026Dash00074. Before I go any further, I need to address a couple discrepancies in the staff report. Firstly, the staff report states that the subject site is located within the Greenway Neighborhood Association Committee.

However, the site is actually located within the South Beaverton NAC boundaries. And the notice, for the project did reflect the correct NAC. It's only the staff report where the discrepancy is shown up. And the second discrepancy is in the staff report at page 14 in response to facilities review subsection j, which is associated with drainage. But it notes that there are no retaining walls proposed with the development.

That is inaccurate. There is a retaining wall proposed, and that is discussed in greater detail on page 39 of the staff report. Retaining walls are addressed at the guideline in the staff report for, in response to '60 o May five seven. The standard the guideline is that retaining walls over six feet in height or greater than 50 feet in length should be architecturally treated, incorporated into the overall landscape plan, or screened by landscape materials. Staff's finding is that the retaining wall proposed will measure no more than three feet in height.

It will measure approximately 66 feet in the length, and it's incorporated into the overall landscape of the site as it is located behind a berm. So it will not be of it will not be visible from the street. It would only be visible from the track, which is on-site. So with that, I will move on to the staff report, excuse me, to my presentation. This slide provides a project summary.

The applicant proposes to construct a new approximately 1,800 square foot building for use as an event ticket booth and athletic equipment storage. Site improvements include new sidewalk and lighting. The existing shot put field is proposed to be relocated to the northwest corner of the stadium area. Here are the land use applications associated with the proposal. The proposal includes a major modification of the conditional use and a design review three application.

Here's the zoning map of the site and surrounding area. The subject site is zoned residential mixed c. The properties to the North are zoned RMA and RMC. Properties to the South and to the West are zoned RMC. Properties to the East are zoned RMA, RMC, and neighborhood service.

Here's a vicinity map illustrating the site and the surrounding area. The subject site is located on the West Side of Southwest 125th Avenue. The site is approximately 32 acres, and the subject site is an existing high school. The small red boxes within the subject site illustrate the proposed locations of the new building as well as the relocated shot put area, with the new building located east of the football field and the relocated shot put area proposed to the Northwest of the football field. Properties to the north, south, and west of the subject site are residential neighborhoods.

Properties to the east are residential neighborhood and retail, and Conestoga Recreation and Aquatic Center is also immediately east, which is a public recreation facility. Here's another aerial of the site with the proposed locations of development circled in red. Here's a site plan illustrating the portions of the site where work is proposed. This slide provides elevation drawings of the proposed building. This slide addresses the major modification of a conditional use request.

The construction of a new approximately 1,800 square foot building triggers the requirement for modification of a conditional use due to an increase in the gross floor area of an existing conditional use by more than 1,000 square feet. Staff notes that the proposed location is internal to the site. It's approximately 500 feet from both adjacent right of ways. This slide addresses the design review three request. The design review three application is required because the proposal includes design elements that do not meet the applicable design review standards, the applicant has instead proposed to address the corresponding design review guidelines.

Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approves l u 32026 Dash 00076 Southridge High School storage and ticket booth, subject to the conditions identified in the staff report dated 04/29/2026. And with that, I'm happy to answer any questions that you all might have. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there any questions of staff with regard to the proposed application? Looks like no questions. The applicant will now have twenty minutes to present. Please begin by introducing yourselves and stating your names and addresses for the record.

Evening, chair Adams, member of the planning commission for the record. My name is Steven Sparks. I work for the Beaverton School District, and all my contact information is in the record. I don't have very much to say. I thank mister Harris for outlining the, proposal.

There's just a couple of things that I would like to, note that as this is an outbuilding, we are not adding any capacity to the school nor are we adding any vehicular trips to the site with this addition. The bulk of the approximately 1,800 square feet is going to be storage for athletic, equipment, and the, ticket booth is pretty small. It's about a 150, 200 square feet, of that overall 1,800 square feet and will only be used when the stadium is hosting some event. And with that, I have no more comments for you, and we'll be happy to answer any questions that you may have.

Then those in opposition to the application, then those neither in favor nor in opposition. We will take testimony from those attending in person first, followed by those attending via Zoom webinar. As a reminder, testimony is limited to the criteria that apply to the application. Now is the time for testimony in favor of the application. No yellow cards. No testimony. Okay. We have no one testifying in person. We'll move to the Zoom webinar. Via Zoom webinar, for those viewing via Zoom webinar, please communicate by using the raise hand feature in your Zoom menu bar.

If calling in, 9 to alert the chair that you would like to speak. Any and we have no communications there as well. The staff has stated that we do not have any public testimony in favor via web. Now is the time for testimony in opposition to the application In person, let's check the cards. Any cards? No. No testimony in opposition. We have now the Zoom webinar. For those viewing Zoom webinar, please communicate by using the raise hand feature in your Zoom menu bar. If calling in, 9 to alert the chair that you would like to speak.

And we have no communication via Zoom as well. Now is the time for testimony neither in favor nor opposed to the application. Any yellow cards? No. Right. Via Zoom Webinar. For those viewing Zoom Webinar, please communicate by using the raise hand feature in your Zoom menu bar. If calling in, 9 to alert the chair that you would like to speak. Do we have any there? No, we do not. Now, there will be no rebuttal. We'll move to final staff comments. Staff, any final comments?

No final comments, Chair. Thank you.

Perfect. Thank you. With final comments completed, I will close the public hearing. Now is the time for deliberation. Do any commissioners have further discussion on the proposal?

Is there a motion?

Chair Adams, based on the records and findings and conclusions in the staff report, I move to approve application for LU32026Dash00076 South Ridge High School storage and ticket booth. Case file number is CU32026Dash00073 and Doctor 32026Dash00074 subject to condition as presented in the staff report.

Thank you, Commissioner McEvoy. Is there a second?

I second.

Thank you, Commissioner Speck. Is there any discussion on the second? No. Alright. A vote will be taken by roll call. When the when your name is called, please say a if in favor or nay if opposed. Commissioner Holmes? A. Commissioner McCann is not here. Commissioner McEvoy?

Aye.

And commissioner Mettler? Aye. Commissioner Speck? Aye. And chair Adams is an a as well. The motion passes. The planning commission's decision will be memorialized and land use orders provided to all parties who testified. Appeals must be filed in accordance with the Beaverton Development Code and the LUBA rules. The second item on the agenda is a work session on the Planning Commission work plan. The order of the work session tonight will be as follows. We will begin with the city staff presentation followed by discussion and questions of the staff by the commission. We will now begin with the staff presentation presented by Planning Manager Anna Sutinsky.

Just getting logged in on the presentation here. Okay. Looks like we have successfully launched the presentation. Good evening, commissioners. I'm Anna Slatinsky, playing division manager here in Beaverton.

And this is a follow-up conversation to a work session that we had a little while ago to talk about the Planning Commission work plan. The work plan that is completed for actually, every Board of Commission does a work plan annually. This practice started a few years ago. And we talked about it, in the previous work session about the importance of, considering the council priorities, and also considering what the role is of the Planning Commission. I will also note that the time frame for developing the Boards and Commissions work plan has been something that staff has been discussing.

It is slightly awkward to be developing a work plan for calendar year 2026 when we were already well into calendar year 2026. So just so you know, in future years, we will be, considering how to maybe shift that a little bit so that it makes sense for the time frame that it would apply to. But for now, we are focusing on this current calendar year. Your package included a draft work plan, which is relatively straightforward. It reflects the role of the Planning Commission as a decision maker for certain land use applications and also, as a body which provides guidance to staff and recommendations to counsel on policy initiatives, and some of those are specifically identified in that draft work plan.

In addition, I wanted to kind of frame for, additional discussion if desired. An item on that draft work plan that is really about what you as a body would like to focus on and increase your knowledge and capacity on policy areas that are relevant to planning commission activities, but also of interest to you. And so there is the ability to have trainings, presentations, etcetera, on a variety of topics. When we last spoke about this, there was some significant interest in housing and affordable housing, as well as annexation and areas for future development. But this is a great time to identify any other items that might come to mind.

This year, I'm not going to create a schedule of all of these, all of these activities, but ahead of time, that seems a little bit rigid. But there are opportunities to incorporate many of these things into our kind of planned agendas for the year. So, I'll just pause now and see whether there are any, any things that planning commissioners would like to add to the list or talk about potentially adding?

I don't see any questions. Anyone have a question?

I'm going have a question but a comment I guess to answer your question. Last year, think you gave a presentation on statewide policy, statewide land use goals and that kind of thing. And I find that to be a really useful refresher. So at some point in the year, I think pulling back out beyond Beaverton to that sort of statewide perspective and setting that context a little bit is always helpful. That's one thing that comes to mind.

And similarly, think the conversation we had recently about some of the legal aspects of land use planning as those are relevant this commission. Those are really helpful and really interesting. So I I'm not sure I need a crash course in all land use law necessarily, but as staff feels is appropriate or would be useful for supporting future future cases. And then also any connections to Beaverton's Climate Action Plan? I feel like I haven't I've been on for about a year and I haven't heard much about that since and I know that was finalized recently.

And so again, I would refer to staff on how that fits into the scope of work. But as we think about council's goals for quality infrastructure and sustainability and quality of life and those sorts of things, I always appreciated training on that.

Thanks. The conversation on exactions was really great, actually. It good to have the information presented, but also the commission was very engaged and had a lot of really good questions.

Commissioner Speck, did you have something to add to that?

No. I mean I would love just to get updates on major projects that are ongoing. Like for example, you guys have the Allen Boulevard project that's starting to kick off wholeheartedly. I'd be interested in seeing staff presentations on how the development of that's coming along.

You kind of hit for me, you hit on several topics, housing development and affordable housing. So it'd be nice to see what the city is doing to attract more housing development and to also make it affordable for people. So I'd be interested in that.

All right. So the next question is whether the commission has any questions or comments on that draft work plan document. We already kind of touched on the potential to add additional items, But if there are any other comments on the draft that was shared, now is the time to identify those.

Commissioner Speck, did you have something? Your mic is on. So I was just asking. I apologize.

I feel like we had a pretty robust conversation about a lot of this in the last training session that we had. So things I expressed in that one still hold true today.

Alright. Happy to hear it. Sounds like I I captured what I needed to from that conversation in the draft. So next steps, will be for this work plan to be brought to counsel along with work plans from other boards and commissions to the July 7 council meeting. There's a bit of a lead time on that because we have to pull those materials together and to kind of go through an internal review process, but that is that's basically, that next step.

Because the planning commission work really kind of continues, there isn't going to be any real meaningful milestone once council kind of recognizes that work plan. But what I'll be doing is, taking what I've heard from you about things that are of interest and starting to put together, a a calendar to invite folks to make presentations, talk with folks that are leading some of the projects of interest, and figure out what the what good time frames would be for bringing those, to the commission. And the other thing I'll add is that, you know, you are, of course, free to make requests for any other presentations at any time. You don't have to only do that during the work plan conversation. So if something comes up later on, feel free to bring that up during a meeting or by reaching out to staff in identifying an interest in a particular topic, and we'll do our best to respond and bring you some information.

Great. Thank you, Anna. We are now adjourned at like 06:54 p. M. Thank you, everyone.